Who will be Governor of Maryland after Hogan?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Perez’s whole strategy is to what exactly? Carry MoCo establishment liberals, hope for a WaPo endorsement and prey that’s enough?

He’s only every won 1 election in his career and it was for a District 5 council seat in 2002 where he got under 10k votes. He then only served one term in elected office. Takes a lot of chutzpah to think he can be governor.

It worked for Terry McAuliffe! (Running DNC then run for Gov)

Different people, different states and different times.

McAuliffe ran as a pro-business, pro-economic growth candidate who had credibility that he could deliver on that. Beyond that, McAuliffe actually did a good job at the DNC while Perez did an objectively bad one marked by incompetence. At a time when Democratic donors were opening their pocket books in record numbers to candidates, DNC fundraising lagged. He also provided to be an incompetent manager, for example who can forget the Iowa caucus? The lack of competence is something that has followed him throughout his career. The most significant thing he did in his time at DOL was issue an overtime rule that was done at the last minute and so poorly crafted that it could not pass extremely easy agency deference test for rule making.

Just look at his campaign, even that is a joke. His stated reason for running is”

✅ Every child to have the best education.
✅ Every person to have quality, affordable health care.
✅ Everyone to have access to good jobs.

It’s like the campaign platform of a child. And he still misses the most important message that all Marylanders want to hear, because he never spent any time thinking about why Hogan won, which how do we get our state to be a vibrant and growing? The candidate that owns that message with credibility will be the candidate that wins.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

It’s like the campaign platform of a child. And he still misses the most important message that all Marylanders want to hear, because he never spent any time thinking about why Hogan won, which how do we get our state to be a vibrant and growing? The candidate that owns that message with credibility will be the candidate that wins.

I'm a Marylander, and that's actually not the most important message that I want to hear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It’s like the campaign platform of a child. And he still misses the most important message that all Marylanders want to hear, because he never spent any time thinking about why Hogan won, which how do we get our state to be a vibrant and growing? The candidate that owns that message with credibility will be the candidate that wins.

I'm a Marylander, and that's actually not the most important message that I want to hear.

And you apparently also have spent zero time thinking about why Hogan won twice and has sky high approval ratings. By all means, continue to learn nothing and go out and nominate another party insider dud (Kennedy-Townsend, Brown) or another liberal activist and you will be wondering in 2022 how Maryland elected another Republican governor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It’s like the campaign platform of a child. And he still misses the most important message that all Marylanders want to hear, because he never spent any time thinking about why Hogan won, which how do we get our state to be a vibrant and growing? The candidate that owns that message with credibility will be the candidate that wins.

I'm a Marylander, and that's actually not the most important message that I want to hear.

And you apparently also have spent zero time thinking about why Hogan won twice and has sky high approval ratings. By all means, continue to learn nothing and go out and nominate another party insider dud (Kennedy-Townsend, Brown) or another liberal activist and you will be wondering in 2022 how Maryland elected another Republican governor.

You're conflating multiple issues here. O'Malley was a party insider who won. Jealous was a party outsider who lost. "Marylanders" are a diverse group of voters who don't all want exactly the same thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It’s like the campaign platform of a child. And he still misses the most important message that all Marylanders want to hear, because he never spent any time thinking about why Hogan won, which how do we get our state to be a vibrant and growing? The candidate that owns that message with credibility will be the candidate that wins.

I'm a Marylander, and that's actually not the most important message that I want to hear.

And you apparently also have spent zero time thinking about why Hogan won twice and has sky high approval ratings. By all means, continue to learn nothing and go out and nominate another party insider dud (Kennedy-Townsend, Brown) or another liberal activist and you will be wondering in 2022 how Maryland elected another Republican governor.

You're conflating multiple issues here. O'Malley was a party insider who won. Jealous was a party outsider who lost. "Marylanders" are a diverse group of voters who don't all want exactly the same thing.

You say that I’m conflating and then lump O’Malley in with Brown and Kennedy-Townsend, like there is no other useful information to distinguish them.

Marylanders are a diverse group, but thank god Montgomery County politics has limited influence over state politics, which might be another datapoint worth thinking about too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It’s like the campaign platform of a child. And he still misses the most important message that all Marylanders want to hear, because he never spent any time thinking about why Hogan won, which how do we get our state to be a vibrant and growing? The candidate that owns that message with credibility will be the candidate that wins.

I'm a Marylander, and that's actually not the most important message that I want to hear.

And you apparently also have spent zero time thinking about why Hogan won twice and has sky high approval ratings. By all means, continue to learn nothing and go out and nominate another party insider dud (Kennedy-Townsend, Brown) or another liberal activist and you will be wondering in 2022 how Maryland elected another Republican governor.

You're conflating multiple issues here. O'Malley was a party insider who won. Jealous was a party outsider who lost. "Marylanders" are a diverse group of voters who don't all want exactly the same thing.

You say that I’m conflating and then lump O’Malley in with Brown and Kennedy-Townsend, like there is no other useful information to distinguish them.

Marylanders are a diverse group, but thank god Montgomery County politics has limited influence over state politics, which might be another datapoint worth thinking about too.

Democratic gubernatorial candidates in Maryland in the 21st century

1998: Parris Glendening (won)
2002: Kathleen Kennedy Townsend (lost)
2006: Martin O'Malley (won)
2010: Martin O'Malley (won)
2014: Anthony Brown (lost)
2018: Ben Jealous (lost)

You have a sample size of 5, and you want to differentiate further among them?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It’s like the campaign platform of a child. And he still misses the most important message that all Marylanders want to hear, because he never spent any time thinking about why Hogan won, which how do we get our state to be a vibrant and growing? The candidate that owns that message with credibility will be the candidate that wins.

I'm a Marylander, and that's actually not the most important message that I want to hear.

And you apparently also have spent zero time thinking about why Hogan won twice and has sky high approval ratings. By all means, continue to learn nothing and go out and nominate another party insider dud (Kennedy-Townsend, Brown) or another liberal activist and you will be wondering in 2022 how Maryland elected another Republican governor.

You're conflating multiple issues here. O'Malley was a party insider who won. Jealous was a party outsider who lost. "Marylanders" are a diverse group of voters who don't all want exactly the same thing.

You say that I’m conflating and then lump O’Malley in with Brown and Kennedy-Townsend, like there is no other useful information to distinguish them.

Marylanders are a diverse group, but thank god Montgomery County politics has limited influence over state politics, which might be another datapoint worth thinking about too.

Democratic gubernatorial candidates in Maryland in the 21st century

1998: Parris Glendening (won)
2002: Kathleen Kennedy Townsend (lost)
2006: Martin O'Malley (won)
2010: Martin O'Malley (won)
2014: Anthony Brown (lost)
2018: Ben Jealous (lost)

You have a sample size of 5, and you want to differentiate further among them?

Look dude. Just last year, the number one issue for all Marylanders is job growth. 93% said it was a priority. I understand that a strong and vibrant state economy is not your priority but that puts you in the minority and that makes you out of step with Marylanders, just like Tom Perez.
https://criticalissues.umd.edu/sites/criticalissues.umd.edu/files/Questionnaire%20August%202020%20Poll%20Report.pdf

[Anonymous]

Beyond that, McAuliffe actually did a good job at the DNC while Perez did an objectively bad one marked by incompetence. At a time when Democratic donors were opening their pocket books in record numbers to candidates, DNC fundraising lagged. He also provided to be an incompetent manager, for example who can forget the Iowa caucus?

I am not a fan of Perez and I’m supporting another Democratic candidate for governor, but during Perez’s tenure at the DNC, Democrats took back the House, the Presidency, and the Senate. And the DNC does not run the Iowa caucus, the locals in Iowa run it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Beyond that, McAuliffe actually did a good job at the DNC while Perez did an objectively bad one marked by incompetence. At a time when Democratic donors were opening their pocket books in record numbers to candidates, DNC fundraising lagged. He also provided to be an incompetent manager, for example who can forget the Iowa caucus?

I am not a fan of Perez and I’m supporting another Democratic candidate for governor, but during Perez’s tenure at the DNC, Democrats took back the House, the Presidency, and the Senate. And the DNC does not run the Iowa caucus, the locals in Iowa run it.

Just to add, now that I’ve looked it up, McAuliffe was in charge of the DNC during W.’s first term. In 2002, the Democrats didn’t win back the House and lost control of the Senate, and in 2004 the Democrats lost all three.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Beyond that, McAuliffe actually did a good job at the DNC while Perez did an objectively bad one marked by incompetence. At a time when Democratic donors were opening their pocket books in record numbers to candidates, DNC fundraising lagged. He also provided to be an incompetent manager, for example who can forget the Iowa caucus?

I am not a fan of Perez and I’m supporting another Democratic candidate for governor, but during Perez’s tenure at the DNC, Democrats took back the House, the Presidency, and the Senate. And the DNC does not run the Iowa caucus, the locals in Iowa run it.

The idea that you are going to credit Tom Perez for candidates raising record cash and being able to run against Trump is ridiculous. It’s so ridiculous that you are the first person I have seen claim this.

[Anonymous]

Democrats in the MD House of Delegates and Senate often have safe seats and take them for granted.

We only get outreach from them right before a primary.

When a non-crazy Republican comes by to ask for our vote, we're much more willing to listen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Democrats in the MD House of Delegates and Senate often have safe seats and take them for granted.

We only get outreach from them right before a primary.

When a non-crazy Republican comes by to ask for our vote, we're much more willing to listen.

Let me know when you find one.
- someone who used to vote for them when they existed

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Democrats in the MD House of Delegates and Senate often have safe seats and take them for granted.

We only get outreach from them right before a primary.

When a non-crazy Republican comes by to ask for our vote, we're much more willing to listen.

Let me know when you find one.
- someone who used to vote for them when they existed

larry hogan

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Democrats in the MD House of Delegates and Senate often have safe seats and take them for granted.

We only get outreach from them right before a primary.

When a non-crazy Republican comes by to ask for our vote, we're much more willing to listen.

Let me know when you find one.
- someone who used to vote for them when they existed

larry hogan

He has twice voted for dead people for president.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Democrats in the MD House of Delegates and Senate often have safe seats and take them for granted.

We only get outreach from them right before a primary.

When a non-crazy Republican comes by to ask for our vote, we're much more willing to listen.

Let me know when you find one.
- someone who used to vote for them when they existed

larry hogan

He has twice voted for dead people for president.

gov. phil scott of vt