A resident found this bundle of election door hangers at their Ward 2 home over the weekend. Although this would not the first time I’ve seen a group of Newton candidates running as a slate (if indeed that’s what this is), it is the earliest I can recall seeing a slate emerge publicly. Traditionally, we don’t see these things until a week or two prior to Election Day.)
It’s also rare in Newton to see incumbents joining forces with challengers. Does this mean Brian Yakes and Jim Cote are endorsing Chris Pitts and Julia Malakie over their incumbent colleagues Deb Crossley and Ted Hess-Mahan?
Also, note that the bundle includes a Newton Villages Alliance hanger as well. Is it fair to assume that all five candidates embrace the NVA’s “no growth” mantra?
And finally, it’s worth noting who isn’tincluded here: Most notably Jake Auchincloss and Jess Barton, the two challengers in next month’s Ward 2 run-off. Does that mean that neither has this group’s blessing, even though the NVA’s Kathleen Kouril Grieser had previously endorsed Achincloss? Or that the two candidates declined to participate?
It would be great to hear from the five candidates here. Are you running as a slate? Or am I reading too much into this?
Well, I suppose it could be a coincidence that the five candidates were each canvassing at the exact same time as NVA and they all left their doorhangers. But I highly doubt it.
Here are a couple of my questions: Who did the canvassing? Does the note from Chris Pitts mean that he (or someone campaigning for him) put these on doors? If so, does Brian Yates realize that he subliminally endorsed Chris Pitts? I’d ask the same of Jim Cote regarding Ted HM but I don’t know him so I have no idea if he’d be likely to endorse against an incumbent in his ward.
Greg, there is an election going on. This sort of blog drives me crazy. It promotes misinformation.
Your questions are directed to the wrong audience. If you want to know if there is a slate, ask the candidates directly. If you want to know the candidates’ positions on a particular topic, look at their websites. Chances are that someone who likes all 5 candidates decided to save time and deliver door hangers for all 5. It is no big deal.
The candidates should not have to respond to your blog to defend their uniqueness. Most people honestly present their positions on their websites.
Also, people support candidates of various reasons. I have never found a candidate who perfectly dovetails with my positions. Candidates should be evaluated based on what they say, not on the positions of those who support them.
It seems to me that you are being unfair to challengers. I appreciate how critical they are for democracy in Newton. They already face an uphill battle. Last week, I received an email for a get-together sponsored by 5 or 6 high ranking city officials to support two incumbents who have the misfortune of facing a contested election. Are you going to start a blog that questions whether these people are conspiring to form slate?
@Jeffrey: Of course I realize that there’s an election going on! That’s the point.
I also realize that some folks are fascinated by the political maneuvers behind an election, while others profess to be purists and want to only talk about issues.
I’m part of that first group and have been since I was a kid. You maintain that you’re part of the second. Good for you.
Lucky for both of us we engage in both here on this blog. There’s plenty of issue-related threads and many campaign-tactics/horse race threads here too. That’s not going to change between now and November.
And although you view this thread as anti-challenger, I don’t. I don’t think slates are good or bad, only that they can both have intended and unintended consequences. (For example, someone who really admires Brian Yates may now decide to vote for Chris Pitt. But someone who really admires Deb Crossly may now decide to not vote for Yates or Pitts.)
Finally, it’s gratifying that both challengers and incumbents participate here. I see nothing wrong with inviting them to clear up and misconceptions anyone who would have received those six door hangers bundled together may have reached.
Whoops one more thing: My fascination with these things is agnostic. If you or anyone else observe something unique to how this election is unfolding, share it(that’s how this came to my attention). You can use the “contact us” section on the top right of this blog.
Huh?
Aren’t Marcia Johnson and Susan Albright running as as a slate? Jeffrey Pontiff hits the nail on the head with his commentary. Please stop making up stuff that is not there… Otherwise someone may start a rumor saying Gail Spector is running on a $100 ‘maximum expenditure’ slate for Charter Commission with Paul Coletti and Ken Parker!
Johnson and Albright have endorsed each other, that’s not surprising. These six cards arriving with an elastic band around them at people’s door steps this weekend is a new development.
Was the paperclip,in the photo with the note from Chris Pitts, on the bundle hanging from the resident’s door handle? If so, that makes them seem to be bundled together by Pitts’ campaign. Or someone wants it to look like that way.
@Marti: My understanding is that they came clipped together but I did not see them firsthand. Did anyone else who is reading this receive anything similar? Or different?
I hadn’t thought much about “Slate-Gate” (or the Alderman races in general,) until a casual conversation came up at the Farmer’s Market today.
It’s obviously a slate- and I couldn’t care less. As Greg pointed out, Albright and Johnson have endorsed each other and are probably cooperating with each other. Run with whatever strategy works for you.
What is odd and perhaps troubling is that the “Slate” appears to be organized and perhaps financed(?) by the NVA, a group that continues it’s secretive ways and unknown treasury while the candidates tout “TRANSPARENCY”.
Malakie website header, ” Making Government more Transparent”.
Pitt website header: “Transparency in Government”.
Leblanc quote, “Keep our schools strong for our future with transparent oversight.”
One of the candidates told me the other day that they “…had an army behind them.” Without mentioning a name or an organization.
It’s just plain wierd. Why the secrecy? What’s the big deal? Shout it to the stars… Here’s where you stand and with whom, and who’s supporting you. Otherwise, get the word “Transparency” off your literature and keep your secret handshakes to yourselves.
What Terry said. Why the NVA continues to remain so mysterious, is well, mysterious.
@Chris Pitts, Julia Malakie, Lynne LeBlanc, Brian Yates, Jim Cote: Care to help clear this up?
@Janet: Who told you?
Points to Terry for “couldn’t care less”.
Terry,
You are flattering the NVA by attributing them to ‘government’. The NVA isn’t running for office. These candidates are.
“Most people honestly present their opinions on their website.” Maybe. In this case a main issue on these candidates’ websites is TRANSPARENCY but they appear to be running their campaigns enveloped in secrecy.
Andy Levin says in his Tab Blog post today that the NVA has endorsed Jake Auchincloss on V14. Anyone know if that is true?
I guess Andy Levin was referencing the email endorsing Jake Auchincloss and Lynne Leblanc posted on V14.
Whats the big deal??? You guys keep saying how small NVA is, why care? I don’t believe you guys really care about transparency, you only care when it suits you not to care.
Which “guys” are you referring to? I’ve never speculated on the size of the NVA. And Tom, of all people, I’m surprised you don’t understand why transparency matters. Hasn’t that been one of the cornerstones of every campaign you’ve run?
Greg, I don’t understand you’re point. Please reread my post.
If you want to see where the alliances are, drive around and look at the lawn signs. It’s all out there. Rarely will you find an S.Albright sign without a Johnson. Drive around Newton. It’s all very transparent. Just like it was clear that V. Danberg and G. Schwartz teamed up to squash dissident C.Shapiro. The political truths were all in the lawn signs– the tarot cards of our Newton election outcomes.. Things will no doubt amp up after the preliminary election. The establishment has identified Jake Auchincloss as the threatening antibody and attacked his progressive credentials. That just makes me want to pay more attention and see this contest play out in a meaningful way. I’m hoping that this race will be framed as it should be: a vote about the future of development of the city– NOT whether someone once supported a progressive and incredibly popular MA Republican governor. Newton voters are smart. If this could just be a vote about Austin Street (common good and long term vision vs. corporate profits and short term returns) to my mind, it would be a vote about how we want to see the limited and valuable land in our city developed. I want development, but I want the city to lead with a policy, not just react and comply to strong commercial interests. This ward 2 race is a real indicator of how our city wants to proceed. Are we complacent sheep or will more than 20% of us actually vote? Keep your eyes on the meaningful issues, folks. Not the superficial politics and alliances.
@Karen: Exactly! So why have I seen so few Barton/LeBlanc lawns? Really I’m asking because I don’t know. It would be great to hear from lawn owners who have one or both in their yards.
And the rest of your comment is right on.
Because either Barton or LeBlanc won’t make it onto the next ballot. It isn’t in J. Auchincloss’ interest to team up with either one of them and no benefit for Barton and LeBlanc to align. Lynn has been on the right side of Newton issues for the past 10 years. JA is an exciting candidate. I want to see those two face off against the Johnson/Albright slate.So, I’m going to vote for them, but that’s not my final vote. I’m not a “throw the bastards out” voter. I’ll vote objectively for an incumbent that makes a promise about a vision for and policy about
development.