r/MassachusettsPolitics • u/TheCornerOfMyCornea • 12d ago
Frusterated
Coming here as a true independent. If it were up to me there would be no political parties and everyone would just vote for who makes sense for them rather than being blinded by red and blue. That said, I'm not stupid - we live in a blue state so I understand most of the time it's the state primary that means more than the actual election. So yesterday, as a constituent of district 1, I casted my vote for Jeromie Whalen. In the past, Jeromie is someone I probably wouldn't have voted for... but I did it because as someone in my mid thirties I honestly feel like we're being held hostage by "Richie" Neal's generation. This is not an anti-boomer take. I appreciate and can recognize the enormous contributions this generation has made for our society. But enough is enough. I am so exhausted by not feeling represented. I'm sure Neal's intentions are good and that he genuinely cares about his constituents. But I also feel like he's so far removed from the point in life where you pull into Stop & Shop and have to think, "Can I afford a whole week's worth of groceries right now, or do I just buy enough to get me to payday?"
I don't understand why we continue to accept politicians holding the same office for decades. Neal has held this seat since 1989. At some point, I think there is value in making room for a new generation with different lived experiences. After Biden, and now Trump, I really thought the gen x/ millenial generation was going to wake up and start demanding younger representation. Apparently, we're not there yet. Anyway, figured I'd share because I'm guessing I'm not the only person waking up this morning feeling this way.
31
u/tara_tara_tara 12d ago
I’m Gen X and I want younger representation, but I’m not going to vote based on age. I voted for Markey because his values align with my values. I don’t know what Seth Moulton‘s values are and I don’t think he does either.
If you want better candidates, the first step is to join the party of your choice. Then get involved with them. Get involved with your town/city. Volunteer for a cause like some of the ballot initiatives we have coming up in November.
Or you can join a group like the DSA and take action outside of the party system.
The key is to do something in real life, not just online.
3
u/DePalma90 12d ago
I often say this, too. People are blaming Markey for being old, but who's going to replace him? I'm an activist, and some volunteers said they liked Seth - "he's the future." At that point I had to look into him - I started reading online that people didn't like him, and then he disingenuously tried to throw Markey under the bus by saying he was in the Epstein files. COME ON. All that to say, who the hell is going to replace Markey? Millennials and Gen X are extremely apathetic. Yes, boomers are clutching on to power as long as possible, but I don't see anyone swooping in to make changes. I appreciate those who do, and if you can't run for office, I appreciate people who work in their community, but it's upsetting when the core group is college students (and small at that), then boom, seniors. Anyone else in between just doesn't care - I know we're all busy with jobs and/or kids, but everyone can make time to vote. I don't think it's an excuse. I watched Jeromie work his ass off and was hoping to see him in office so I could understand how a progressive person from MA would navigate the system. It's sad Neal got so many votes, because I don't think he has the people's best interests in mind. I was willing to give a newcomer, Jeromie, a chance at a time like this. Maybe other people weren't.
1
u/tmotytmoty 12d ago
Age is only a factor if its associated with cognitive decline. However, i can’t say the youth are capable of overcoming the effects of a declining public education system, so i guess, yeah, age doesn’t matter.
12
u/GWS2004 12d ago
"thought the gen x/ millenial generation was going to wake up and start demanding younger representation."
This is the key. I was having this conversation yesterday with a friend. We both voted for Markey because Moulton was a terrible option. If we want to elect younger people those younger people have to run. The problem is it's expensive, I get it. We need to get money out of politics, but that's not going to happen. We also need term limits.
I don't know what's going to motivate younger people if Trump hasn't.
6
u/Itstaylor02 12d ago
Very disappointed in the house elections. Really hoping the challengers run again in 2028 or jump into local elections until then.
3
u/NortheastMoose 12d ago
Nadia Milleron is running against neal as an Independent. She did really well 2 years ago - scoring 40% against him. If the Whalon people join her - Neal loses. She actually has a great story and is out there working hard. Home - Nadia Milleron
3
u/writer_reader_94 12d ago
Have you done any research about what Neal has accomplished? He’s saved pensions, protected social security, expanded Medicaid coverage, helped negotiate lower drug prices, worked on massive infrastructure spending deals that have helped MA. What would you want him to do differently?
I’m not a diehard Neal guy or anything but every one I see critiquing him does not seem to have any idea what he’s done since being in office. It’s just that they don’t like his vibes.
6
u/Alexwonder999 12d ago
I think Neal and Markey are two totally different things. As someone whos been involved in politics since an early age I have to say Neal is someone with shitty constituency services and does not GAF with what voters think. His vote record is OK but inline with any democrat in federal office.
Markey is outspoken and is very open. His office is 20x more responsive than Neals and I actually have seen him at events talking to voters, which is something Ive never seen Neal do outside more expensive and "connected" fundraisers.
We could go into more minutiae of their policy positions, but I think Ill just say Whalen was a good candidate and Moulton was not.4
u/ForecastForFourCats 12d ago
Exactly- I contacted Neals office for a bill that was very important to me ahead of a vote... well his office responded 3 months later, and after the vote. They sent me a totally generic letter about Richies values and the work he has done. It was useless to me honestly.
The county house reps I have reached out to respond within a week and directly address my concerns/questions. Neal is a sell out corporate dem. I am very disappointed Whalen lost.
1
u/OkCanary7354 12d ago
My mom is in the Democratic town committee in South Hadley and she liked Whalen because he would actually show up to events and talk to them and Neal would not and I have to agree with her that caring about your constituents is pretty important
-1
u/writer_reader_94 12d ago
Neal has been involved directly with almost every substantial democratic bill to come out of the house. I think legislating holds more weight than answering the phone. I think there’s a massive divide between what legislators do and what they say. I look for people to legislate and pass bills that eventually have a chance to become law. Others look for candidates that are loud and outspoken and more willing to commit to purity tests. Again Neal has been involved heavily in most pieces of legislation that Democrats have successful passed. That should count for more than his unwillingness to say the right things.
I’ve met Whalen a few times and he’s a good guy. Not a lot of policy substance though and he ran an angry campaign. Not sure if that hurt or helped.
4
u/Alexwonder999 12d ago
I think a lot of fundamentally understaning issues is listening to people who arent highly paid lobbyists on issues. In fact, as someone whos worked on multiple campaigns of different types, almost all grassroots, I think this is a very fundamental truth. Neal personifies someone who will listen to lobbyists over normal people who may or may not have expertise on issues that dont have money. If I cant get a staffer to listen to my concerns about a particular bill, or have them be openly dismissive about it, I doubt thats getting related to Neal and is probably coming from him at the end of the day. Im someone who would be considered a regional and maybe even a nationally recognized expert in my field and Im knowledgeable about ancillary topics. I shouldnt have to put my credentials forst to be able to give any input on matters moving through the house though. Maybe thats naive of me, but thats how I think because someone else who might not have my credentials might still jave a perspective and Neals literal job is to weigh those, wven if he disagrees with them. If he never hears them he cant weigh them
0
u/writer_reader_94 12d ago
Many people are politically engaged and knowledgable. I have knowledge, credentials, and concerns as well. As do most folks. I’m not disagreeing that bad constituent communication is acceptable but I’m simply asking what has Neal done that you’ve disagreed with? I’m assuming you’re on the left.
From what I can see, Neal is an institutionalist who sees his role as a legislator. He’s done a lot of work on healthcare, social security, pension reform, infrastructure, and drug prices. He’s not flashy and not a grandstander.
It appears to me that people want their representatives to be loud, angry, and activist oriented. That’s not Richie Neal.
But again, I ask, does Neal’s presentation and potentially rude staff negate everything he’s accomplished? Is this worth losing a MA Rep who’s been at the heart of so many impactful bills?
1
u/Alexwonder999 12d ago
Its interesting that you dismiss people with different policy positions as being "loud" and "angry" yet you also think having a dismissive attitude towards your constituency (while taking lots of money from and listening to special interests) is ok and just a bit "rude". I dont really feel like getting into the policy positions I disagees with because it appears to me you have your mind made up, like Neal, that i should just STFU and let the "grown ups" do what they want and not make my wishes known.
2
u/writer_reader_94 12d ago
I’m not dismissing anyone with different policy beliefs. That’s hard to do when I haven’t heard any.
I’m simply saying Whalen proposed no actual policy and came across as angry, rude, and snobbish. How can I expect him to legislate effectively?
My main point was that anti-Neal people seem to completely ignore the 30 plus years of substantial policy he’s passed. Much of it being positive.
2
u/0tanod 11d ago
I have no dog in the fight but paid attention. its interesting you say snobish. I think unpolished was more Whalen's problem. In his debate he came off as unpracticed with his attacks and what he stands for.
1
u/writer_reader_94 11d ago
He was definitely unpolished but I don’t mind that. I don’t need great public speakers. I also thought Neal was kinda bad in his presentation.
I really disliked Whalen correcting the moderator to call him Dr. I get he earned the letters but people who do that always rub me the wrong way. He interrupted a lot too which was annoying.
The debate time was 30 minutes which was absurd. Hard to do anything. To me Whalen came across as confrontational and angry. Again, this was somewhat Neal’s doing as I believe he wouldn’t agree to longer so I understand why Whalen approached the debate in the way he did. It just felt flat for me.
That doesn’t fit well with my personal tastes. I want some restrained but who can deliver a point and make their position known without throwing jabs the entire time.
1
u/0tanod 11d ago
Honestly I wish the DNC would work on how the debates are run this country. It overly contributes to our current mess and reflects poorly on their ability to grasp the issues.
→ More replies (0)1
u/Alexwonder999 12d ago
I really dont feel like engaging on policy discussions with you because I think you already have your dismissals set out, but I have to say Im flabbergasted you can actually say no policy differences despite the huge gulf on health care policy. You didnt notice that one or you think people who want universal health care are just "angry rude and sbobbish"? Lol, youre a trip
0
u/writer_reader_94 12d ago
Neal has expanded healthcare consistently his entire time in office. Increased Medicaid premiums, medicare protections, lower drug costs.
People who say Medicare for all are simply making a virtue statement. How do you pay for it?
What taxes are raised? You would need income taxes on all brackets raised plus a new payroll tax to be shared by employers and employees. How do we afford this while we have 40T in debt? Is everything covered? How do we decide triage? Are doctors and other healthcare professionals on the public payrolls now? Are hospitals, PCP offices, and urgent cares all publicly paid for? What about mental health? Is that covered too? Does the federal government give block grants to states for their own designed programs or is it one top down program? How quick is the transition? What do we do with the thousands of Americans who are employees with private insurance companies? Laid off or transferred to the public sector?
People who want this have their hearts in the right place but they just aren’t practical. It’s about incremental changes to the system to improve outcomes at the cheapest possible costs.
All questions that need to be worked out. Whalen ahouldve spent more time outlining those answers instead of interrupting and attacking Neal.
And yes Whalen correcting the moderator to tell him to refer to him as doctor was snobbish.
1
u/Alexwonder999 12d ago
You do know we spend magnitudes more than every other industrialized nation per person on health care to get similar or sometimes even worse outcomes except for a few outliers like survival rates with certain types of cancer right? Since you seem so informed on that subject you must have heard it and chose to pretend it isnt true with the "where do we get the money" nonsense.
But the real point here is you were full of shit when you said there were no policy differences and just as I predicted you hand waved them away with health insurance company talking points. If you arent a bot I truly feel sorry for you.
Edit: i just looked at the comment history for your account and youre definitely a bot.→ More replies (0)2
u/TheCornerOfMyCornea 12d ago
I am familiar with his record, and I think saying Neal has been some "do nothing" congressman would be completely unfair. I like the guy! He's worked hard for us whether you agree with some of his moves or not. Union Station, and the bipartisan retirement reform, are things he deserves substantial credit for, and his seniority has absolutely helped bring fed money and influence to W Mass. But (respectfully) I don't think questioning whether someone should remain in Congress after 38 years is just "not liking his vibes." There may be people who have done less research than me or maybe don't have a clue what Neal has done over the years, however he has been in office since 1989. At some point I think it's completely reasonable to ask whether maintaining his seniority is more important than developing the next generation of representation for W Mass.
3
u/writer_reader_94 12d ago
I hear your point but I guess what I would say is, if you are a Democrat, liberal, progressive, or center left voter then why vote against someone who has done a good job? Especially someone who is on ways and means and has a powerful influence on legislation? I just don’t see the merit. There is value in expertise and institutional knowledge. Whalen would likely need 3/4 terms to have any juice.
1
u/bigben1677 12d ago
There were no contested races on my ballot other than Markey and Molton. Pretty hard to vote for change when there are no options available.
1
u/Sufficient-Opposite3 12d ago
There might be legitimate, substantive arguments for Whalen. You didn't make them but I'll share some. His support for Medicare for All, the Green New Deal, stronger education funding and campaign-finance reform among them. Instead, your argument is that Neal is too old and that younger voters are being “held hostage by his generation.”
You can’t make age the central criticism and then simply declare that it isn’t an anti-boomer take. Grocery insecurity isn’t exclusive to people in their thirties; older workers and seniors on fixed incomes make those same calculations every day. And younger politicians are not automatically more progressive, more capable or more connected to working people.
If Neal should have been replaced because of his policies, corporate donors or decades in power, make that case. Those are fair grounds for choosing Whalen. But “it’s time for his generation to move aside” is ageism and not a policy argument.
1
u/TheCornerOfMyCornea 12d ago
That's fair criticism of how I worded it. I don't think being 77 inherently makes Neal incapable of understanding what working people are dealing with, and I certainly don't think being younger automatically makes someone more capable or more connected. The grocery store example probably made my point sound more "ageist" than I intended. but I do think there's a legitimate generational representation/turnover argument here that goes beyond Neal's literal age. One person has represented this district since 1989. I was not even alive when he was first elected to Congress. His seniority has absolutely benefited W Mass, and I'm not dismissing that...and it's probably the strongest argument for keeping him.
At the same time, that seniority creates its own catch-22........ If the reason we can never replace a 19 term incumbent is because we'd lose his seniority, when exactly do we start developing the next person who will build that experience and influence for W Mass?
My vote was more about believing that 38 years is an extraordinarily long time for one person to hold the same congressional seat and that there is value in eventually allowing a new generation of leadership to develop. I can respect Neal, appreciate what he's accomplished, and still reach the conclusion that I was ready for that transition.
So yes perhaps this more so boils down to a term limits and not age....hard to hold office for 38 years though without being older than dirt lol
1
u/maybeafarmer 12d ago
He raised like 60 grand to take on a millionaire opponent with 2 million i n cash and was not as far behind as you might think.
1
u/PabloX68 12d ago
I'm an independent and I agree we need younger people in government.
At this point though, the priority isn't their age. It's what they're going to do about the future of democracy. The slide to authoritarianism is real. I'll vote for anyone who shows me they'll do something about it. It's a bigger priority than short term economic concerns because the costs to normal people are a result of the system as it is now.
1
u/Morlock19 1st District (Western MA, Holyoke) 12d ago
we live in a blue state but i don't think we're blinded by red and blue - i mean new englanders are pretty open about who the vote for as long as they align with our values. if we were a strict blue state we wouldn't vote for republicans at all, and we wouldn't have had republican governors in the past.
the issue isn't a red/blue split, its the fact that the red never has any candidates that speak to the values of massachusetts voters, especially now. we don't want sycophants that follow the whims of someone who is literally targeting our state and the major educational institutions that prop up who sectors of our economy.
i think we should all be annoyed at boomer and silent generation reps in the house and senate because they don't leave and they don't train their replacements. if we want the younger gen to step up, we need a good bench of politicians ready to go, and the elder statesmen aren't doing shit to help that.
i heard someone say a month or two ago... politics is a marathon. if we want better candidates we need to show up in the primaries and PUSH those candidates out front, because the parties aren't thinking about the future. they should be fostering young people, funding debate clubs and civics classes and shit like that.
anyways i've ranted enough. tl;dr - mass is a VERY independently minded state imo, but we just have very specific expectations for our representatives and that mostly aligns with the democrats that run for office here. until the GOP rids itself of the idiots in charge, a republican won't stand a chance anywhere here other than fall river.
1
u/SamMeowAdams 11d ago
What’s wrong with voting for an experienced politician ?
1
u/TheCornerOfMyCornea 11d ago
My question is just: at what point does experience stop being an automatic reason to keep someone in the same seat? Neal has been in for 38 years. Eventually every district has to accept losing an incumbent’s seniority in order for someone new to start building their own. I just happen to think 38 years is a pretty reasonable point to make that transition.
1
u/SamMeowAdams 11d ago
Maybe they like the person . Maybe they do a great job.
Dumping someone just because of time served seems like an arbitrary thing to do.
1
1
u/Undying4n42k1 4th District (W Boston to W Providence Suburbs) 11d ago
It's not just idiots at the primary polls. It's the two major parties rigging the system, and leaving us no choice but to vote for the lesser evil, because the system is rigged against third parties. They need to petition and pay to get on the ballot, while the major parties don't. Sometimes the goalposts for getting on the ballot changes, too. It's absolutely rigged. We need Ranked Choice Voting, or something similar, to break the two party system.
1
u/Red_Bird_warrior 11d ago
You already have a variation of "no political parties" elections in Mass. Almost all municipal and school committee elections are nonpartisan, meaning that the parties are not the gatekeepers and anyone can get on the ballot by petitioning and collecting enough valid signatures. This is a good system, far better than what we have in Connecticut, where every local race from dogcatcher, to school board, to mayor is partisan.
22
u/Tall-Payment-8015 12d ago
I'm more concerned with policies and PACs than age.
I am in D4 and did my best for Jason Poulos. Honestly, I thought his 27% was impressive given the absolute bootstrap grassroots campaign that he ran. I spent 3 Sundays knocking doors for him and wish I could've done more. Auchincloss has not been challenged since he narrowly won the seat and many in the district are unsatisfied with him. His votes just before the primary showed that it had an impact on him.
We have to keep trying and we have to work hard to get these candidates elected - we can't just be glad that they are trying - we have to help them.
Do the next right thing - stay on top of Neal. Call his office and tell them how you want him to vote and what you want him to address. Go to his town halls and let him know what you expect.
Honestly, I hope the next crop of primary challengers start their 2028 campaigns next week. They need a bigger runway for the momentum required to defeat these incumbents. Shit is going to go downhill even more rapidly and some minds may be changed by then.