In our district Massachusetts Senate race, there are major differences between the candidates
In August, Adam Hinds campaign reported $75, 067 in donations; spent $54,681 versus Christine Canning reporting $3,185; spending $2,922. (OCPF for MA). A financial “Goliath?” Is Adam Hinds the next senator?; “the” Democratic machine designate. Another Goliath? Adam Hinds has the Democratic “nod” but does he have a detailed plan of action on issues? Will he take his “marching orders” from the party and donors?
Christine Canning’s supporters are “just folks” not money people, corporations, media, or unions. She is a widow/single mom of two teens, a former teacher, small business owner, author who is currently working on her UMass doctorate in education policy. Politicians espouse campaign finance reform but raise big money and influence. Christine’s goal is to run a financially responsible campaign, without incurring debt and beholden to no one: no paid special interests, not even the Massachusetts Republican Party. She, like David, is not skilled in the art of political “war.” Christine is a proven champion of the disenfranchised standing in the fray and winning. She will dig into financial fraud, waste and abuse. Her policy is solving problems, not platitudes. She supports small business; less regulation, less taxes; more real jobs.
Christine is concerned about the AG’s Second Amendment overreach. She has the endorsement of GOAL; a “A” NRA rating. She is a pro-life Catholic. She is pro veteran, education and law enforcement. She listens! She sees each person, not as labels. She is a “David” with smooth pebbles and good aim. She is not a seasoned politician. She certainly cannot be influenced or controlled.
Christine Canning has challenged the Goliath of the Democratic machine’s money and influence. I ask you to vote for Christine.
Kathryn Mickle
Dalton