Talking the talk

Following Tuesday evening’s debate of the senatorial special election candidates at Chelsea City Hall some things become self-apparent.

First, this is a contest being waged against three main contenders – and of that number, two are locked in the battle more so than the third, who is gaining in recognition.

Attorney Tim Flaherty scored a hit in the debate. He was senatorial in every way. He answered all the questions absolutely with firmness and he was at all times unambiguous about where he stood. He used a every second allotted to him and never went over – and at all times, his answers were clear and unequivocal, informative and well thought out.

Bottom line – he looked and felt like the next senator.

In addition, Flaherty supporters mobbed the outside of city hall before the event. Signs do not vote but Flaherty had more of them than DiDomenico and Albano combined. He also has more money to spend than either of the others.

Everett City Councillor Sal DiDomenico is one of the two main contenders. Even though his people didn’t come out to the extent that Flaherty’s did, there was still a pretty solid and frankly impressive crowd of sign holders

His performance although not quite as pretty or assertive as Flaherty’s, was well done and he kept to his own beliefs, even if they weren’t popular with the crowd inside the Chelsea Council Chamber. DiDomenico has come to appear like the guy who knows what to do on Beacon Hill because he’s already been working there. He didn’t use anger as a crutch and he was knowledgeable about all the questions asked, although not as eloquent as the others.

Albano spoke with great passion and intelligence. His deep and distinct voice was mesmerizing and for many people inside the hall, Albano seemed a bit like someone from Hollywood’s Central Casting studio.

Each time he spoke people listened. Each time he spoke his voice was like great music – compelling and rich, resonating throughout the hall.

He asked why things on Beacon Hill can’t change – and he did it in such a way that others were left wondering, why can’t things change?

Albano showed some force outside of the city hall before the event with a few dozen sign holders.

This senate seat special election race has about 34 days remaining.

It is an impossibly short time for the candidates to mount meaningful campaigns, or to create a district wide campaign apparatus or to raise money.

Flaherty, it appears, will be able to raise more money than DiDomenico and Albano.

Advantage Flaherty.

Advertising leading to wider name recognition and visibility among voters throughout the sprawling district is absolutely necessary.

Looking and sounding senatorial carries its own benefit.

Flaherty, DiDomenico and Albano are all very different candidates and bring different levels of recognition to the table.

Despite rumors of polling done by DiDomenico apparently showing him way ahead, Flaherty’s name recognition throughout the district should not be underestimated.

For polling to be useful, it must have cost at least $15,000 to do throughout the district. Otherwise, polling is useless for the purpose of the sake of reality.

Albano has only 34 days remaining to catch up in order to score.

This is much easier said than done.

Advantage Flaherty-DiDomenico.

This election will be one by the candidate working the hardest and smartest; whose advertising outdoes all others; and whose message and ability to get out the vote on Election Day surpasses all the others.

Who is that person?

I’m not sure but I know it will be between Flaherty, DiDomenico and Albano if all things are equal.

But they rarely are.

4 comments for “Talking the talk

  1. Mary Gorman
    March 11, 2010 at 4:19 pm

    I thought that Simmons performed best. She also has a record of delivering from her time as Cambridge Mayor and City Councilor. Talking is easy – getting the job done is the hard part.

  2. Frankmccarth
    March 14, 2010 at 4:02 pm

    I remember seeing all those Howard Dean supporters and sign holders out there years ago, followed by articles like this one that focused exclusively on the horse-race between him and Sen. Kerry.

    I remember seeing all those Coakley supporters that dwarfed all other supporters in the opening weeks of the general election against Scott Brown. And, again, all the articles focused on the horse race, with no helpful information about what kind of legislator Coakley or Brown might be.

    Since we didn't get a President Kerry or a Senator Coakley, I've increasingly realized that any articles that focus exclusively on the horse-race aspect of a race are essentially a waste of time and space. You're calling this race for three candidates, without assessing where they are on the issues, or who would be the most effective legislator on Beacon Hill.

    Out of all the candidates, who has been the most effective at making a difference in the community? Who has the clearest grasp of the issues in the district? Money or polling numbers aside, who is going to best represent me…?

  3. 4cryinoutloud1
    March 24, 2010 at 3:48 pm

    Flaherty……Are you kidding? Electing this guy would be like the fox guarding the hen house. His father, disgraced House Speaker “Good Time” Charlie Flaherty has been a registered lobbyist on Beacon Hill since he was tossed out for ethics violations. Do we really trust that he is the one who will end corruption on Beacon Hill. PLEASE! Just what we need , another defense attorney who makes his money defending drug dealers and violent offenders responsible for making our laws. Wake up peoplle!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *