Question 5 is a doozy. I doubt there are many people in the state that could read question 5 as is, and have a perfect grasp of its full implications. I’ve been hit in the head a lot so I need to dig into the simple ones too. After researching who is behind question 5, it’s painfully obvious to see what their intent is.

Massachusetts’s richest residents and corporations are laundering funds through the dark money group Massachusetts Opportunity Alliance to fund the ballot committee for Question 5. This group was set up after the passage of the Fair Share Amendment. While no one can prove who is in this dark money group (I would wager good money that Robert Kraft is one of them), it’s clear they want to undo the work of the Fair Share Amendment.

Question 5 imposes a stricter revenue cap on the state, meaning that it will be harder for the state to invest and harder for the state to respond to economic downturns. With a stricter revenue cap, working families would pay the price through reduced public services and fewer investments in their communities. Child care could get more expensive, health care less accessible, and higher education out of reach for more Bay Staters. With steep federal cuts looming next year to health care and more, the cuts Question 5 could trigger will be dire. 

Happy to discuss this in depth with all takers.

From Mike Deehan at Axios

Question 3 drew about $5.2 million in combined spending as of Oct. 19, the most of any question this cycle.

Why it matters: The "Yes" side has outraised the "No" side about 25 to 1, according to state filings.

• The campaign to ditch party primaries has raised about $7.8 million, compared to around $317,000 for the campaign to keep them, according to campaign finance records.
• About 23 donors gave $100,000 or more to the "Yes" campaign, roughly 79% of the total. The top 10 account for about 58%.
• Small-dollar donations are minimal, with only 244 donors giving $1,000 or less for a total of around $30,000.

Yes, but: The "Yes" money is local. Over 90% of donations came from Massachusetts addresses.

The intrigue: The largest donors are David Peeler of Berkshire Partners (about $1.05 million), Andrew Balson of Cove Hill Partners ($790,000), Mark Nunnelly (about $650,000, listed as not employed) and Joshua Bekenstein of Bain Capital ($500,000).

• Nine donors listing Bain Capital as their employer gave about $1.1 million, and at least six listing Berkshire Partners gave about $1.5 million.

Of note: The "Yes" committee also supports Question 1 on this year's ballot, so its fundraising total isn't exclusively focused on the party primary topic.

The other side is mostly organized labor.

• Voter Rights MA, the "No" group, reported $316,822. $245,000 was from unions and union-affiliated committees.
• The largest donors are 1199 SEIU's Massachusetts PAC ($100,000), the Massachusetts Teachers Association (about $97,700) and the Massachusetts Democratic State Committee (about $63,300 in cash and in-kind).

Between the lines: Both sides are pointing fingers at the other's donors.

• The "No" side argues wealthy interests would gain influence under a top-two system. Just look at who's donating.
• The "Yes" campaign says party organizations, incumbents and their loyal labor unions hold too much power.

RIP to a legend

39 Clark's Rd, Amesbury, MA 01913

The previous shared video only showed 6 of the 8 finalists.

https://www.voiceoflogan.com/Voting

You know, this year I was wondering wtf the MA GOP was doing running Minogue against Healey. I guess those shady conservative think tanks really do know their stuff, and know how to get results.

Question 9 will guarantee conservative turnout in an otherwise blue year in a blue state. We know how this sub feels about it, but we all know in our hearts it will pass Yes. Question 5 is a little more complicated. But if you read 5 carefully, it really is well written, IF your goal is to entice voters who are planning on voting blue across the board, and guaranteeing republican turnout who will likely almost all vote Yes on 5.

Even better for conservatives, the ballot starts with question 1, which clearly should pass and is nonpartisan. That will get voters thinking fiscally for the remainder of the questions.

The billionaires will get what they truly want, which is to take the first step in handicapping the billionaire's tax. I promise you, they don't care about 9 in the same way the average conservative voter does, they just want 5 to pass.

I think dems have a really bad habit of not learning from their mistakes. However I am hoping that when 1 and 5 inevitably pass, and 9 inevitably fails, voters remember that in coming years. Federal funding cuts, combined with capped revenue, will decimate public infrastructure and education. But hey, we all get a $50 check (which will drive up inflation again in this state) so I guess that's a win for most folks.

LPonyhenge is a very whimsical outdoor art installation of rocking horses in a field in Lincoln, Massachusetts, near the much less whimsical deCordova Sculpture Park.

My wife had never seen Ponyhenge, so we swung by after leaving the deCordova. As usual, there were several cars of gawkers like us, stopping just to admire the ever-changing array of hobby horses.

But a tall woman, clad in a very elaborate, very expensive, bespoke, leather, metal, and latex horse costume, stood almost statue-still among the rocking horses.

A man, I don't know if they were a couple, walked over to her and they said a few quiet words, and then he wandered away while she stayed in place.

No clue if she was a performance artist, or a person working out some personal issues, or what.

She was still standing there when we pulled away.

After weeks of debating and leaning to 'Yes' in ballot question 3, I'm flipping my vote on 'No' to jungle primaries, but Massachusetts Democrats (and Progressives) need to do better. Their laziness is what made the Commonwealth be divided in this question. Massachusetts Dems need to stop being reactionary and start being proactive. They waited till they got cornered to start rallying against a new style of voting because people are tired of the lack of competition and action coming from a supermajority. The arguments from opposition have been terrible to say the least. I hope we (as Democrats and Progressives) have learned from this and start taking action and be more productive. Start collecting signatures and endorsements for a ranked-choice voting (RCV), campaign, ask the State Leg to legalize party alliances to start lifting up third-party voices who we might find common ground on different issues.

I'm voting 'No' because this is not the correct option for a new electoral system in Mass, but I'm voting 'Yes' when the times comes and they ask me about RCV.

Just trying to expose who was responsible for trying to make cannabis illegal in massachusetts.

PLEASE VOTE NO ON QUESTION 8

In Chelsea, MA – the community with the highest percentage of foreign-born residents in the state – ICE has become a frequent presence. "They took my husband" is an intimate look at the human toll of the federal immigration crackdown.

When Milton Mejia is abruptly detained and sent to a Louisiana detention center, his wife Brenda takes the reins of his construction business, faces looming homelessness and does her best to maintain normalcy for their three daughters, even as she wrestles with the terrifying prospect of Milton being deported to face the deadly violence they both fled in Honduras.

As Milton’s detainment stretches from weeks into months and Brenda confronts increasingly difficult circumstances, she finds her voice as an immigrant rights advocate fighting for her family — and for a community in the crosshairs of a federal immigration crackdown.

Produced by GBH News

Legitimate question - we've all seen and discussed the possibility that Question 3 could theoretically result in a scenario where say 8 Democrats split the vote such that 2 Republicans advance to the general election. It's a real concern with the system.

However, it does sound like a pretty edge case scenario relying on the Republicans and Democrats respectively splitting their votes pretty evenly among their candidates.

Looking at past examples, the MA-04 congressional district primary in 2020 had nine candidates on the Democratic ballot and two on the Republican one, and in the Democratic primary progressive vote-splitting caused Auchincloss to win with only 22% of the vote. However, looking at vote totals, Auchincloss and Mermell (the Democratic runner up) received more votes (35k and 33k total, respectively) than Julie Hall, the winner of the Republican primary (19k). As a result, under the Question 3 system, the general election would have been Auchincloss vs. Mermell, with no Republican on the ballot. This is presumably why the state GOP is publicly against Question 3.

Perhaps it is more a concern for state rep and senator races with lower engagement/spending, but already few people run for those positions. Again, thoughts appreciated.

For anyone else looking to save on energy costs this winter!

My friend recently moved to Winchester, NH, just over the MA border and I’m going to visit this weekend. I’m from NE but not that area. Are there any Halloween events going on in any adjacent towns? Willing to drive a bit. We’re both mid 20s so NOT looking for child friendly events.