« A Teacher Runs in Foxborough | Main | "Give. Me. A. Break." »

November 29, 2005

Tim Murray in the Lt. Gov. race?

Mariposa at Beyond 495 calls our attention to a most interesting tidbit in a holiday party invitation sent out by DDemDispatch: the invite notes that Worcester Mayor Tim Murray has confirmed his attendance in the capacity of candidate for Lieutenant Governor.

Well, well, well!  This has been rumored for some time, but nothing official has appeared on it yet.  And one can't really call this invitation an official statement of Murray's candidacy for the no. 2 job on Beacon Hill.  Nonetheless, it's pretty good evidence that, as everyone has been anticipating, Murray is indeed planning a run for Lt. Gov.

If Murray does join the race, it will shake things up substantially.  He has been Mayor of Worcester since 2001, so his experience in public office is substantially greater than any of the three declared candidates, and he's obviously got a substantial base of support in a major city.  Beyond that, I honestly don't know much about him.  But hey, the more the merrier!

Posted by David at 07:16 PM in Massachusetts, Vote 9.16.2006 | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83456d93f69e200e55078b2848834

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Tim Murray in the Lt. Gov. race?:

» Tim Murray's Plans from The Eisenthal Report
Beyond 495 has come across an indication that Worcester Mayor Tim Murray intends to run for Lieutenant Governor of Massachusetts. (HT: Blue Mass Group). Apparently, a holiday party invitation notes that Murray plans to be present at the event in [Read More]

Tracked on Nov 30, 2005 5:40:22 AM

Comments

Nothing official? He filed a change of purpose form with the Office of Campaign and Political Finance last week (or so) so he can start raising money. Yeah, he hasn't made an announcement yet, but that's certainly a telling step in the right direction.

If Murray runs, he becomes the instant frontrunner.

Posted by: sco | Nov 29, 2005 10:59:48 PM

FWIW, Kate Donaghue told me (and other people) several weeks ago that he was going to run. I got the impression that she likes him, though I don't know if she's made any official statement of support, I wouldn't be surprised if she did.

Posted by: Cos | Nov 30, 2005 12:43:21 AM

Former state Sen. Dave Magnani introduced me to Murray at a metrowest dems event a week ago as a candidate for L.G. It may not be official, but he is out pressing the flesh.

Posted by: RevDeb | Nov 30, 2005 9:35:37 AM

From the OCPF website, it looks like he has about 100K in the bank as of 11/15/05. Silbert has around 200K and Goldberg has 130K. Kelley has around 7250. Looking at a couple of Murray's recent donations, he's gotten some money from Local 103 and some lobbyists. I'd imiagine he's looking to make a splash with an end-of-year fundraiser (or at least that's what he should do. IN fact, all the candidates should do that, and presumably they are, so that they can claim front-runner (w/ money) status going into the Feb Caucuses. Interesting to see if Murray positions himself to be chosen by one of the Gov. Candidates. He could add something and help with 495-belt voters I suppose. But despite he clear record of interesting urban work, he's still whitey-white Timmy Murray and a Reilly-Murray ticket sounds a bit boring to me. Patrick-Murray? Maybe, but I think if Patrick wants to have impact with his Lt. Gov. choice he'd probably go w/ Silbert. I think Goldberg's biggest asset is her personal wealth - and that's where it ends. She's got that StopnShop skeleton in her closet too (i.e. low paying workers, etc...).

In terms of SCO's assertion that Murray is the front-runner? That depends on whether he can make inroads into the work that Silbert and Goldberg have done to lock up delegate support. THey'll all get their 15% on the first ballot, though (except, maybe, for Kelley), and then I do think that Murray would be a more formidable contender. Unfortunately, after the convention is over, it's all going to come down to who has the monst dough, and if someone partners w/ Reilly, that could tip the scales. (Although wouldn't it be fascinating if one of the Gov Candidates picked someone and that person didn't win the Lt. Gov. primary? Hilarious... but also scary for dems trying to shed the disorganized label and cement the unity label...)

Anyway, it'll be interesting to see how things go and how people get organized for getting delegates at the caucuses...

Posted by: da clerk | Nov 30, 2005 9:39:08 AM

re: Goldberg. I saw her last night in Belmont, and while her checking account is definitely her biggest asset, but I was also impressed by her ability to speak the language of local politics -- 40B fights, 2 1/2 overrides, zoning, etc etc. That's an advantage that disappears if Murray enters the race.

If I were running for Governor, I would not pick my LG before the primary. I want the one who can win the most votes with their organization in September, so that I can count on that organization to help me in November. Of course, if I were running for Governor, I'd end up with maybe 15 votes statewide, so what do I know?

Posted by: sco | Nov 30, 2005 10:07:40 AM

I was just listening to WBUR and they just said that Murray has announced. There's nothing on the WBUR webpage though, so I'm going to see if I can track some more info down.

And...?

Neener, neener, neener.. :-P

Posted by: Mariposa | Nov 30, 2005 12:16:57 PM

SCO, good point about Goldberg's local politics/issues stuff. But why does a Lt. Gov. candidate have to know about that? Is that what's going to get them elected? (I'm not challenging, I'm actually asking the question.) The Lt. Gov's job is so absent any job description (except as ex officion on the Gov's Council). I suppose when campaigning, talking about local issues makes sense because most people at town comte. meetings have just heard from a Gov candidate speak about loftier issues, so there's no one talking about local issues - except the treasurer candidates who often talk about lottery $$ and its effect on local issues. Silbert's tactic is interesting - talking about jobs. Kinda lofty for a lt. gov. candidate, but who knows... Unfortuntaly, it's all likely to come down to who has the most $$, and, in turn, the best ads.... sad to say...

Posted by: da clerk | Nov 30, 2005 12:24:50 PM

Okay, I know this won't post for a while but here ya go. Tim Murray for LG

Posting limits are no fun. :-( I know you gotta do what ya gotta do, but it messes with my instant gratification. :-P

Posted by: Mariposa | Nov 30, 2005 12:30:45 PM

Hey, it worked! I take it all back. :::hugs to BMG:::

Posted by: Mariposa | Nov 30, 2005 12:31:24 PM

This is a great discussion and I wished I had more time right now, but I'm off to pick my kid up from school. Here's my impression: Tim Murray seems like a nice guy, he has a lot of support out here in central MA and he will probably be able to fundraise like a MF.

But, having said that, I would rather see Silbert, or even Goldberg on the ballot because first, I think Silbert is a great candidate especially and second, I'd like to see some gender parity on the ballot.

Posted by: Mariposa | Nov 30, 2005 12:44:11 PM

For those not FROM Worcester, being Mayor there is no big deal (hell, Jordan LEVY was Mayor!).

The Mayor is not directly elected, he is just chosen as chair of the City Council by the Council members.

Unless he ran at-large, instead of from his ward, he may not even have city-wide support.

Posted by: Caution | Nov 30, 2005 2:01:58 PM

Well, it's a bigger deal than being a Selectman from Brookline. Murray got roughly 10,000 votes in 2004, which is more than three times what Deb Goldberg got in her last election in 2001. The other two candidates have no electoral experience that I'm aware of.

Given the field, Murray probably starts out with the biggest electoral base and highest name recognition of the LG candidates. Yes, that's not saying much, but I think it's accurate.

Posted by: sco | Nov 30, 2005 2:31:38 PM

Tim is a nice guy. Won't win as LG though. Too inexperienced, although that has never stopped anyone before nor should it necessarily, however, the field will be very crowded, this season inspires great plotting and come early next year, you may see some eastern mass candidates with larger name recognition. In that case, murray is hurt because he becomes a regional candidate. Watch for Representative Martin J. Walsh of Dorchester (huge statewide labor support instantly, bright & a great organizer)

Posted by: John Galway | Nov 30, 2005 3:53:16 PM

I am from Worcester and for the record, the mayor is directly elected and is not "just chosen as chair of the City Council by the Council members."


Posted by: WormtownDem | Nov 30, 2005 4:03:20 PM

SCO may have gotten the process wrong, but the result is the same, being "Mayor" of Worcester is really a misnomer, as there is a professional city manager and staff that do the managerial work that most real Mayors do.

Tim Murray has been a good Democrat and is a good person with a bright future, but he is not seasoned enough to be a step away from the Gov's office. But, as the so-called "Mayor" of Worcester and his insider connections, he will be in the mix right away.

I do believe that it is now a two-candidate race between Andrea Silbert and Tim Murray and in that race, Andrea has much more to offer by way of plans (her clear vision for the LG job as economic development czar; jobs as the route for housing, healthcare and education; leveraging her federal experience at Center for Women and Enterprise), experience (founder/ceo of astatewide public service organization and Harvard MBA) and campaign resources (she's proven herself to be an excellent fundraiser). She is also the best ticket balancer for either Deval or Reilly against Kerry Healey.

Debbie Goldberg is passionate, and it comes across as braying, but she has less government experience than Tim Murray despite being alot older. Strikes me as a rich kid looking for something to do.

Sam Kelley should go back to doctoring and free up the Kerry money folks for a real candidate.

Marty Walsh would get union support, but he is also very young and despite being a guaranteed vote on any labor issue (whether it is right or wrong, and labor is never wrong with Marty), he has a very short list of accomplishments as a rep and is hardly statewide candidate material at this point in his career.

Posted by: Ira | Nov 30, 2005 4:27:04 PM

Ira, if the 2-term mayor of worcester isn't "seasoned enough" to be a step away from the Gov's office, why back a candidate with no government experience at all? Also, I'm not sure it's fair to criticize Murray for not having as fully-developed a "vision" of the LG's office as Silbert, since he hasn't even officially announced yet.

FYI, I'm not fer or agin anyone in this race yet - just wanted to raise those questions.

Posted by: David | Nov 30, 2005 4:45:32 PM

Ira, if the 2-term mayor of worcester isn't "seasoned enough" to be a step away from the Gov's office, why back a candidate with no government experience at all? Also, I'm not sure it's fair to criticize Murray for not having as fully-developed a "vision" of the LG's office as Silbert, since he hasn't even officially announced yet.

FYI, I'm not fer or agin anyone in this race yet - just wanted to raise those questions.

Posted by: David | Nov 30, 2005 4:48:16 PM

Tim Murray is strong where Democrats are weak in MA (the central). DG and AS can't help Dems geographically. I think that's why every Dem has to give him consideration regardless of how qualified/visionary/etc. you might think he is.

In the end, he has a lot of catch up to do to raise money, as Silbert is cleaning house and Goldberg could self fund. Does anyone think that the LG race is won on anything else but the air campaign?

Posted by: noho-missives | Nov 30, 2005 5:03:45 PM

Noho,

Re. the airwaves: no. No LG candidate can do an election day effort that will make any difference. Also, re. the CentralMass thing, based on past elections,I am skeptical, but I think this year could be different due to the increased #s of EMass folks who've moved west and commute into the Boston area. But I still think that this Lt. Gov. primary election will be won by whoever wins in the Milton/Brantree/Quincy area.

Posted by: da clerk | Nov 30, 2005 5:20:36 PM

The Murray move towards Lt. Gov. has been in the works for months and months--before the Deval Patrick candidacy was announced--and has caused no small amount of tension for the Young Turks of Central Mass Dem politics. Murray's candidacy makes it difficult for some to commit to Patrick over Reilly because Murray has been angling for an annointment from Reilly. People like Chandler and Augustus are hedging, waiting for some signal from Reilly about where he's heading. It's difficult.

Posted by: lightiris | Nov 30, 2005 7:42:04 PM

If Augustus and Chandler are "hedging", they have a funny way of showing it as both are listed on Murray's Host Committee invite for his official announcement in mid December.

Augustus and Murray are close friends and combined with Rep. McGovern's support Murray ought to run strong in Central Mass and beyond.

Posted by: WormtownDem | Nov 30, 2005 8:28:20 PM

Augustus is a piece of wood that is a puppet for anything leftish; does he have an original thought? Go Marty Walsh for LG

Posted by: John Galway | Dec 1, 2005 7:15:18 AM

The answer for Andrea Silbert being seasoned enough is simple - she started and built a statewide public service organization that has served thousands and had a huge, multi-million economic benefit for needy families and the state's bottom line. She did it by working with state, federal and local government officials. She did it by working with the private sector. She did it by sheer effort and great intuition. Andrea Silbert has been a statewide public servant in the truest sense for many years - she just didn't get elected to serve.

As for the regional pull, Andrea has rounded up support on the Cape, as she is the first statewide candidate from there in quite some time. She opened CWE offices in Boston, Worcester and Providence (which served Southeast MA as well), which gives her a base of organizers in not one, but 4 key regions, more than any other candidate can say by far, including ones that are key in a general campaign, such as the Cape and Central MA.

Also, someone please stop the Marty Walsh foolishness.

Posted by: Ira | Dec 1, 2005 12:30:57 PM

"If Augustus and Chandler are "hedging", they have a funny way of showing it as both are listed on Murray's Host Committee invite for his official announcement in mid December."

No, no, no.....I didn't mean hedging about Murray, that's silly. I said hedging about committing to Patrick over Reilly given that Murray is openly courting Reilly.

Murray will have--and has had--all the support in the world from McGovern and Augustus. That won't change.

Posted by: lightiris | Dec 1, 2005 6:42:05 PM

Cos is correct. I am supporting Tim Murray. I believe that he has the experience we need in a candidate for LG. Please stop by the Holiday Party in Westborough on Sunday and meet him. December 4 from 2 to 6 PM. If you want to subscribe to the DDemDispatch, send an e-mail to me at KateDonaghue@aol.com.

Posted by: Kate Donaghue | Dec 2, 2005 2:05:51 AM

The comments to this entry are closed.