PLANET VALENTI News and Commentary

(FORTRESS OF SOLITUDE, WEDNESDAY, OCT. 19, 2011) — Welcome, earthlings, to the Day After Election hangover. It was a pathetic day yesterday in the 3rd Berkshire District, with barely more than 20% bothering to vote and the “winner” taking a plurality of that tiny number of only about one third.

TRUE STATEMENT: The next state rep for the 3rd will be going to Beacon Hill with 93% of the electorate having either voted for someone else or not bothering to vote at all. What a republic! Viva Special Interests. Viva the Death of Rationality.


Just as THE PLANET predicted, for the second election in a row and with uncanny accuracy, Tricia Farley-Bouvier took the special election in a close contest yesterday.


* THE PLANET predicted a turnout in the 3rd Berkshire District of 6, 380. Unofficially from the city clerk’s office, 5,922 cast ballots. We were optimists on turnout, but not by much.

* THE PLANET predicted a TFB, Mark Miller, Pam Malumphy, Mark Jester order of finish. We were spot on, as we were in Pittsfield’s preliminary election last month.

* THE PLANET predicted TFB with a plurality of 42 percent. She took but 32%. Miller we had at 30%. He won 29.5%. We called Malumphy with 18%. She got 25%. Jester registered “low single digits” (us) and 16% (actual).

The quick armchair analysis showed a few obvious things:

* The relative unpopularity of TFB. To limp to Boston on a plurality of of less than one-third of the votes cast — a miniscule 0.078% of the total electorate — makes a mockery of the electoral process.

* It’s clear Malumphy cost Miller a victory, for she as third place candidate drew a large portion of the “anyone but” vote from him. No Malumphy in the race, and Miller is the next state rep.

* This now makes four straight electoral defeats for Malumphy: city council, state rep, mayor, and state rep. At some point, if she’s not willing to becoming a walking electoral punch line, she has to realize: It’s over, politically. Her scorched-earth policy, her long enemies list, her inability to take a punch, her thin skin, and her petulance makes her a political non-starter. It’s a shame and a waste, because she has innate talent.

* TFB goes to Boston without a mandate. That being the case, what makes her anything more than (a) a back bencher or (b) a political pawn of the larger interests that sent her to Beacon Hill in the first place? THE PLANET will hold fire and give her a chance to perform. We hope (against hope?) that it will be a performance fiery as it is integral, representative as it is admirable. We’re from Missouri at the moment. We have “Show me” on our license plate.

In the next few days, THE PLANET will be meeting separately with mayoral candidates Peter Marchetti (today in a Secret Location far above the City) and Dan Bianchi. We will keep you informed.

Meanwhile, forget polls and conventional wisdom. If you want to know what’s going to happen on Election Night in November, you’re going to have to get THE PLANET. Free everyday day, and priceless to boot!






  1. Leona
    October 19, 2011 at 7:10 am #


  2. Jim Gleason
    October 19, 2011 at 7:10 am #

    You can thank ruberto and Linda Tyer for the low turnout at the polls. From what I understand they both called secretary of state Galvin to make sure the two final elections, the ones for state rep. and Municipal election, weren’t held concurrently. They wanted a low turnout to assure Blah Blah a victory, something she may have had a hard time getting with a larger turnout. Once again Pittsfield voters blew it, putting the lease qualified candidate in office. Pam Malumphy was by far the most qualified to take this office. If Mumbles Miller had gotten it, there would have been a new revolution in Boston every time he got up to speak, the legislators being in as much pain having to listen to him as we all were. Way to go Pittsfield, a laughing stock once again.

    • baby baby
      October 19, 2011 at 10:51 am #

      Like Pam wouldn’t have pissed everyone off inside of the first week. She is amwrecking ball gone wild.

    • steve wade
      October 19, 2011 at 5:29 pm #

      So are all you Blogg Heads going to move out of town like you said you would if TFB won? BYE BYE

  3. Richard
    October 19, 2011 at 8:19 am #


  4. Still wondering
    October 19, 2011 at 8:24 am #

    And the state democrat party. 20 grand is 20 grand.

  5. Ron Kitterman
    October 19, 2011 at 9:37 am #

    Congratulations TFB !! Save some of the $$ to hire a political consultant for the next election. I thought they were going to call Obama next to tell us how needed she was. Good luck to all of the challengers in what was basically a tie vote, considering the Gov and the Mayor and the GOB’s used all the ammo they had to get out the vote for TFB.

  6. Shakes His Head
    October 19, 2011 at 9:44 am #

    What a travesty, and awful voting numbers. At least more people came out than in the primary. Of course JR ordered a special election, that’s how they roll. Divide and win.

    I thought of a million subtle references to make about Marchettis and Stracuzzi working together, but realized that the humor is just infantile. I’m voting for Bianchi (as if it wasn’t obvious).

    PM’s supporters claim that he has a vision for Pittsfield, but I don’t see any evidence of such dream. Unicorns and Rainbows are the stuff for the White House, not the corner office. Bianchi articulates a fiscal responsibility, not necessarily austerity, that I identify with- adequately funding public safety and education. Hands down, Pittsfield does not continue to grow if the current administration’s policies and actions in those areas are not strengthened. I know what’s what. I’ve been there and made it work, I’ve also seen it falter. If Ruberto were to be here two more years, I believe that North Street would be empty, another 5% unemployed, and massive disrepair coupled with bailouts from Beacon Hill.

    PM’s environment is not something that attracts employers. Business does not want uncertianty, and there are dozens of communities across the counrty with cultutal and economic assets that rival or exceed Pittsfield’s. Industry is the major player in the County and we need to do a better job of inspiring ionnovation.

    • Ray Ovac
      October 19, 2011 at 1:30 pm #

      On the subject of attracting corporate entities to Pittsfield: Until citywide toxic chemical contamination is completely remediated — so that living or working in the city does not in itself pose a danger of coming down with an exotic Cancer, until that time, as a business prospect, Pittsfield will simply be a nice place to visit, the equivalent of a cul-de-sac on a one-way street going the wrong way. Medical costs and health insurance premiums being what they are, American corporations simply ain’t knocking down the door to set up shop in a place where their people are going to be poisoned.

  7. ambrose bearse
    October 19, 2011 at 10:11 am #

    Turnout didn’t matter – if it wer 100% the vote would have been the same – Sandwich lady can still walk down north street and see six people coming toward her and know that 4 of them don’t want her. There is a need for runnoff elections when one can’t gather 50% of the votes. she’s heading to boston to “work for” people who don’t want her there. she’s promised to “hit the ground running” (waddling)

  8. Jim Gleason
    October 19, 2011 at 11:04 am #

    Dan, what’s the difference between your pointing out the fact that Marchetti is gay and calling it all fair in politics and Pam questioning BLT’S kids, at taxpayer expense of around $12,000, going to Lenox schools? A bit hypocritical on your part, methinks.Pam was raising a valid point while your bringing out a lifestyle someone can’t help or control.

  9. Silence Dogood
    October 19, 2011 at 12:06 pm #

    @Jimmy G….you can’t control your inclinations only your actions.

  10. Dave Bubriski
    October 19, 2011 at 12:56 pm #

    Congratulations to Tricia and thank you to Pam, Mark and Mark for running. But with 5,922 voters making it to the polls out of 18,869 registered voters the real winner was apathy. If your unhappy with the result and you didn’t vote I can only recommend silence until you see fit to take a few minutes out of your day and make a black dot on a piece of paper. I won’t hurt I promise.

  11. Dave Bubriski
    October 19, 2011 at 1:01 pm #

    IT won’t hurt

  12. Ron Kitterman
    October 19, 2011 at 1:47 pm #

    @ Jim G I don’t think DV brought out the gay issue, it was PM that stated it when he announced his Candidacy for mayor of Pittsfield. His comment was that his sexual preference would probably cost him 10-15% of the vote. That was his opinion, not DV’s. It could cost him anywhere between 0 and 100%, that is just the way information works. I’m wondering why the school choice didn’t get traction also, but that is what issues are all about.

  13. rick
    October 19, 2011 at 2:18 pm #

    the silver lining on this election your all missing is the fact that millers party almost won against the big bad highly funded dems and the gobs. looks to me people are waking up and smelling the rotten apples in local politics. green rainbow might just have given the blue bloods a big scare.

    • Joetaxpayer
      October 19, 2011 at 3:26 pm #

      same thing happened last election big deal.Berkshire county is kool aide drinking,tree hugging,must protect the unions at all cost,this is how it has always been,lets not rock the boat mentality.Get us to it will not change the people just dont have the balls

  14. Joetaxpayer
    October 19, 2011 at 3:35 pm #

    Dan and any of your readers, what kind of difference can TFB or any canidate make in a one party system that MA. has.

  15. beezer
    October 19, 2011 at 3:46 pm #

    …a BIG difference.

    • Jim Gleason
      October 19, 2011 at 3:55 pm #

      Yeah, at weigh in time.

  16. steve wade
    October 19, 2011 at 5:34 pm #

    Dan I believe the voters would have voted for Jester if PM was not on the ballot. By the way could your ego get any bigger? Where do you find hats big enough for your head?

  17. beezer
    October 19, 2011 at 5:36 pm #

    she gets Bosley’s seat.

    • GEE Whiz
      October 19, 2011 at 6:30 pm #

      Can she fit in it?

    • Ray Ovac
      October 19, 2011 at 6:59 pm #

      DV, what are the mechanics of petitioning for a recall election? This 3rd District contest should never have been held as a special election with only one month to go before the regular November election day. The whole thing was a gimmick to guarantee Democrats held the seat. It wreaks of official corruption especially cause the governor himself was obviously in on it. It’s a real travesty.

      • Mr. Bossman
        October 20, 2011 at 6:37 am #

        There WAS official corruption there. I know, because I was cc’d in on the deal. It was a well-planned chain of events from Patrick to Ruberto to Speranzo to Farley-Bouvier. The special election was key to the plan.

  18. A Cheshire Cat
    October 19, 2011 at 7:21 pm #

    According to the BB the low turn out was because some people “didnt know there was an election” or “didn’t like anyone who was running”. Thats not good news for the BB because they had been running the election on page 1. No one is reading. My take on it is that people just don’t care about the state rep.. Do we really need one? I mean we have congressmen, senior senators, junior senators, councilors, mayors, town supervisors, county supervisors ect.. Maybe just a little less goverment steps to get things done would be good. I just wonder what voter turn out would be if there was a question to get rid of the state rep post ?

    • Steve Wade
      October 20, 2011 at 4:19 am #

      I guess thats not good news for THE PLANET. It must mean that the voters don’t check this web site either. Every day there was some talk about the elections. Not good news for Mr Valentis Blog!

      • scott
        October 20, 2011 at 5:42 am #

        I probably would have never voted if it wasn’t for this blog and I’m trying real hard through my fb account and other avenues to spread the word to other people my age to get out and vote it really is important.

      • danvalenti
        October 20, 2011 at 6:41 am #

        THE PLANET thanks Steve for finally admitting what our growing readership attests: That we have as much if not more pull than the Boring Broadsheet.

        • Steve Wade
          October 20, 2011 at 9:04 am #

          Dan your so full of it!

    October 19, 2011 at 7:50 pm #

    Come on did election surprize anyone!!!! From Govenor down this was rigged for her to win. As I said before people in this area, this state vote for perverts, idiots, and democrats and the GOB and they always will.

    Oh by the way the demo leader Reid says the private sectors jobs “are doing fine” its government jobs that need help. What planet do these idiots live on ??????

    • scott
      October 20, 2011 at 5:48 am #

      So Speranzo sought another term knowing he was gonna be appointed Magistrate and would have to resign leaving the battle for his seat an impromptu scramble for likely candidates? Tell me this didn’t leave people who voted for him jaded.

    • danvalenti
      October 20, 2011 at 6:42 am #

      No surprised at all, Concerned. This was the most rigged, corrupt election of recent times.

      • Still wondering
        October 20, 2011 at 7:33 am #

        Glad you wrote that Dan. This election was rigged from the beginning.
        First, there was the ruling that the election HAD to be a special election and could not be combined with a regular election just 2 weeks later. This ensured a very low turnout which always favors the democrat machine candidate.
        Second, TFB was selected to appear on the top of the ballot.
        Third, the democrat party decended on Pittsfield with money, lots of money and “volunteers”. Few if any of these volunteers were from Pittsfield. We who were outside the polls supporting Pam talked to the TFB people (when there were any) and NONE of them were from Pittsfield. None of the MM people were from Pittsfield either.
        Fourth, The Boring Broadsheet did not print letters to the editors from several well known local Pittsfielders who supported Pam. The BB repeatedly misrepresented Pam in its news stories and specifically made her to look beligerent when Pam brought up valid issues regarding TFB.
        Yup, the Dems stole this election alright. Bastards.

        • danvalenti
          October 20, 2011 at 8:00 am #

          Yes. See the posting for today (Oct. 20). I agree with the BB’s slamming of Miller and especially Malumphy. They gave front page, big-treatment story to when Pam slammed TFB for her pro-life stance. It made Pam comes across as shrill and out of control. Just what they wanted! They were terrified of Miller and knew he had a 50-50 chance of pulling off the upset of the century. Malumphy was the key to preventing that.

          • dusty
            October 21, 2011 at 8:04 am #

            The BB was not the only one to slam Pam. Dan has been carrying a grudge and dropped his bomb just before the election. Pam does not talk to you does she Dan? Does that make you feel a tad insignificant?

            Wonder if that helped Tricia get elected.

          • danvalenti
            October 21, 2011 at 1:53 pm #

            Thanks. No, I don’t let matters that I can’t control affect me. Pam’s unfortunate petulance, however, has wrecked what could have been and what should have been a decent career in public service. Now, having lost four straight elections and each time coming off more shrill and angry, she’s finished politically. Ironically, that may be the best thing to happen for her. As to your second point, Pam did get Tricia elected. Pam had no chance but she took votes away from Miller.

        • Steve Wade
          October 20, 2011 at 9:06 am #

          cry baby !!!!!

        • Steve Wade
          October 20, 2011 at 9:08 am #

          All you blog heads sound like Heller now!

      • Steve Wade
        October 20, 2011 at 9:05 am #

        Dan you sure are a sore LOSER1111

  20. Serius
    October 20, 2011 at 10:52 am #

    I was intrigued by the title of Dan’s article, so I proceeded to read it and then some of the comments afterward. I’ve never gone on a site to see any blogs before…..and now I know why.