How does a Democrat progressive masquerading as a blue dog democrat behave when he thinks he has a friendly journalist on the line? Does he stick to his rhetorical handholds—his veneer of Reagan-esque statements—or does the face crack and reveal other opinions hidden beneath the surface?
I spoke to Dave Robertson tonight to find out.
If you don’t want to hear me babble on, go ahead and scroll down to the clip below. But first, here’s a teaser:
Robertson is currently running for a state representative seat in Massachusetts’ 19th Middlesex District. The district, which consists of two towns, Wilmington and Tewksbury, is a conservative one. When voters go to the polls, there’s little doubt in anyone’s mind that the majority of residents will end up voting for the Republican candidate for Senate.
So how will Robertson, who is very much a progressive, manage to fit his messaging in with such a crowd? Can a candidate for state rep really deceive conservative voters just by invoking the name of Ronald Reagan?
There are a lot of reasons to take interest in this local race. Foremost among those are statements that Robertson let slip on his own. He’s received wide condemnation for comments demonizing agents in Immigration and Customs Enforcement as “disgraceful.”
Members of his political party, including the chairwoman of the Democratic committee in Wilmington have launched a series of attacks on the livelihoods of Republican candidates—by falsely framing them as bigots without cause and launching boycotts on their stores. Along the way, these Democrats managed to boycott at least one unrelated business, causing collateral damage during their campaign of economic terrorism.
As you can see, this race has been back breaking for the beleaguered poster-boy for progressive misfit-ery. Robertson can’t afford to vote or endorse Democrat candidate Elizabeth Warren. He also can’t afford to admit that he’s probably voting for Geoff Diehl.
Caught between a rock and a hard place, I offered him an opportunity to speak candidly on a number of issues. He consented to the recording posted below in which he discusses a “millionaire tax” that would actually target people earning just over $150,000. He attempted to champion the policies of Ronald Reagan, but when pressed on the issue, admitted the only place he sees eye to eye with Reagan is on amnesty.
Robertson has repeatedly claimed he does not support sanctuary cities. That may be true, but with a blanket amnesty program that he seems to hold dear in his heart of heart, any sort of sanctuary city program would be pointless.
I’ve described myself as a progressive during the course of our conversation. For all intents and purposes, let’s assume my views had evolved just before I made the call and devolved immediately following it.
Without further adieu, I invite you to listen to the conversation in whole and decide for yourself if Robertson is a conservative Democrat or a progressive in disguise.
This article will be updated with select segments for the lazy and time constrained. I will try to roll those out later this evening or by tomorrow morning at the latest.