Make that another $1 million: Dueling Super PACs in Boston mayor's race rake in more cash
Taken together, the outside groups reported pulling in $973,101 between their newly filed reports. The contributions pushed the total raised by the two super PACs to more than $3.9 million through mid-June, with 'Your City, Your Future' — and its $3.16 million in contributions — accounting for the vast majority of that.
Advertisement
The 'Bold Boston' super PAC first formed in 2023, when it spent nearly $100,000 supporting a trio of Wu allies in their successful bids for city council.
Advertisement
It effectively re-emerged in mid-March, roughly a month after Kraft
Mike Firestone has worked under Wu since she took the mayor's office in 2021. Karen Firestone has been a longtime contributor to Wu, whom she first donated to in 2013, and other state Democrats, including Governor Maura Healey, campaign finance records show.
Efforts to reach Karen Firestone were not immediately successful Thursday. Spokespeople for 'Bold Boston' and Wu's campaign also didn't immediately comment.
'Bold Boston' also received $175,000 in early June from the Environmental League of Massachusetts Action Fund Independent Expenditure PAC, whose only donation so far this year was $150,000 in March from billionaire
A slate of labor-aligned groups also donated heavily to the Wu-aligned group, including the 1199 SEIU MA PAC, which gave $100,000, and the Unite Here Tip State and Local Fund, which gave $150,000. The Green Advocacy Project, a Bay Area-based 501c(4) organization that gives heavily to
The group took a variety of smaller donations, too, including $10,000 from Barbara Lee, a Cambridge philanthropist who's worked for decades helping get women elected office, and $25,000 from William Lee, a partner at WilmerHale, which
Super PACs are allowed to raise and spend unlimited amounts of money, and, unlike candidates themselves, they can take donations directly from businesses. They are barred, however, from coordinating with any candidates or their campaigns.
Advertisement
The attacks 'Bold Boston' has launched against Kraft echo the arguments Wu and her allies have made on the campaign trail: that Kraft, the son of
Kraft, a longtime nonprofit leader, is loaning his campaign $2 million from his own wallet.
The Kraft-aligned
'Your City, Your Future' super PAC has taken $1 million from New Balance chair and billionaire Jim Davis, as well as billionaire businessman
Paulson, who gave $100,000
Matt Stout can be reached at
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
19 minutes ago
- The Hill
House Rules Committee advances Trump megabill as potential GOP revolt looms
The House Rules Committee advanced the GOP's 'big, beautiful bill' early Wednesday morning after an hours-long meeting, sending the legislation to the floor for consideration as its fate in the chamber remains unclear. The panel adopted the procedural rule in a 7-6 vote, with two Republicans — Reps. Chip Roy (R-Texas) and Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) — siding with Democrats against the measure, showcasing their opposition to the underlying legislation over deficit concerns. The hearing ran for nearly 12 hours, with Democrats needling Republicans about the bill, GOP lawmakers largely praising the measure and some hardline conservatives criticizing its contents. The panel convened at 1:30 p.m. EDT on Tuesday and gaveled out just after 1 a.m. EDT on Wednesday. Despite the successful vote, the legislation is far from being out of the woods. The full chamber must now debate and vote to adopt the procedural rule, which could get dicey as a handful of hardline conservatives vow to oppose the effort. If the rule fails, legislative business in the House would be brought to a standstill, threatening to thwart leadership's goal of sending President Trump the package by July 4, which is Friday. Republicans can only afford to lose three votes and still clear the procedural hurdle, assuming full attendance and united Democratic opposition. The House is scheduled to convene on Wednesday at 9 a.m. EDT, with debate first, then a vote. Two of those defectors, however, are already called for: Norman and Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.), the chair of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, say they will vote against the rule on the floor — and Harris said others will join them. 'That's exactly why a group of us are not going to vote to advance the bill until we iron out some of the deficit problems with the bills,' Harris said on Fox News when asked about Elon Musk's criticism of the bill. 'Look, Mr. Musk is right, we cannot sustain these deficits, he understands finances, he understands debts and deficits, and we have to make further progress. And I believe the Freedom Caucus will take the lead in making that further progress.' 'I don't think the votes are there, just like they weren't for the Senate initially until some concessions were made,' he added. 'I believe that the rule vote will not pass tomorrow morning, and then the Speaker's going to have to decide how he gets this back into the House framework.' Rule votes have historically been routine, mundane occurrences, with the majority party voting in favor of the effort and the minority party voting against it. In recent years, however, those on the right-flank have used the procedure to express displeasure with specific legislation or leadership. Despite those threats, attendance issues may scuttle the right-flank's plans. A number of members from both parties are having trouble returning to Washington, D.C., amid inclement weather in the D.C.-Maryland-Virginia area. Several lawmakers have said their flights back to the city were canceled. Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) on Tuesday night said those conditions could influence when the bill comes up for a vote. 'We're having weather delays getting everybody back right now, but assuming we have a full House we'll get it through the Rules Committee in the morning, we'll move that forward to the floor and hopefully we're voting on this by tomorrow or Thursday at latest, depending on the weather and delays and all the rest, that's the wildfire that we can't control,' Johnson said on Fox News' 'Hannity' when asked about timing for the legislation. Regardless, the megabill's future in the House is on thin ice as a number of Republicans — from hardline conservatives to moderates — stake opposition to the legislation, threatening leadership's goal of enacting the bill by Friday. Conservatives are upset with the amount of money the bill would add to the deficit, while moderates are concerned about Medicaid cuts and the rollback of green-energy tax credits. The lawmakers prefer the original House bill, which they passed in July, over the Senate bill, which included a number of changes to their initial legislation. Despite the lingering qualms, Johnson is showing no interest in changing the bill — which would require it to head back to the Senate for a final stamp of approval, a reality that most members have little appetite for. 'We knew we would come to this moment. We knew the Senate would amend the House product. I encouraged them to amend it as lightly as possible. They went a little further than many of us would have preferred, but we have the product now,' Johnson told reporters in the Capitol. 'As the President said, it's his bill. It's not a House bill, it's not a Senate bill, it's the American people's bill. And my objective and my responsibility is to get that bill over the line. So we will do everything possible to do that, and I will work with all of our colleagues.'
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
What Centrist Democrats Need to Learn From Zohran Mamdani
I covered New York City politics for quite a few years in my younger days, but instead of instilling in me a continuing passion about the city, it generally left me feeling as if I'd paid that check, as it were. New York politics hasn't interested me deeply for many years. This is partly because New York Democrats, once a mighty machine that set the direction for and helped transform the national Democratic Party, are a shadow of their old selves. The city once produced mayors who were, per the old cliché, larger than life. The last couple have been smaller than life. So Zohran Mamdani is the first interesting thing to happen in New York City politics for a long time. He's fresh, he's energetic, and he has swagger. I've been thinking a lot about that last word—swagger—because the national Democrats have none of it whatsoever. They have anti-swagger. They're as exciting as a knitting society. Mamdani makes for a breathtaking contrast with them collectively. I have some reservations about Mamdani, the assemblyman who topped Andrew Cuomo among many others in last week's Democratic primary for mayor. Questions about his lack of experience are entirely legitimate. I don't know how large a staff he has; I did see another New York assemblyman's website listing that that fellow has a staff of seven people. The mayor of New York runs a bureaucracy of more than 300,000. The mayor is also properly thought of as the CEO of several multibillion-dollar public corporations or trusts: one running housing, another schools, another colleges and universities, another hospitals, and a few (depending on how you categorize them) dispensing contracts and social services. If Mamdani wins this fall's general election—a contest that will include Mayor Eric Adams and possibly Cuomo, again—and becomes mayor, he's going to need to appoint highly competent and knowledgeable (more than ideological) people to run these operations, and he's going to have to be ruthless in ensuring that they do their jobs well. People see a mayor as the day-to-day manager of the city. Between now and November, Mamdani should be asked to speak in detail about these matters. Then there's the question of some of his rhetoric with regard to Israel-Palestine, most specifically around his refusal to renounce the phrase 'globalize the intifada.' He said recently on a Bulwark podcast that to him, the phrase means 'a desperate desire for equality and equal rights in standing up for Palestinian human rights.' OK. But given that both intifadas did entail violence by Palestinians (in the face, of course, of constant Israeli violence against Palestinians), others, in a city with 1.3 million Jews, might reasonably hear the phrase more darkly. It's not a mayor's job to make foreign policy. It's a mayor's job, in a city with dozens of ethnic groups, to lead them all fairly, both in tangible terms—the awarding of community service contracts, which is a huge deal in New York—and rhetorical ones; to lower the temperature when things get hot through the force of his moral example. Mamdani has many prominent Jewish supporters. I've known Congressman Jerry Nadler and trusted his political judgment for 35 years, so when Nadler endorsed him, that got my attention. But Mamdani will need to go into Jewish neighborhoods between now and November and build some bridges. And having said all that … it infuriates me to see centrist Democrats, including the party's leaders in the House and Senate, keep their distance from him, or worse. The guy won (presumably—the official canvass is Tuesday). He did something absolutely stunning. He went from literally 1 percent to 43 percent. That never happens. When somebody pulls that off, people don't need to be fretting about it or attacking it; they need to ask why and see what they can learn from it. It didn't happen because he denounces Israel. And it didn't happen because New York Democratic voters are suddenly a bunch of Jeremy Corbyns. It happened because he focused aggressively and entertainingly on the only real issue, the issue that has a lot of perfectly normal people at the end of their ropes: the insane cost of living in New York. And he didn't just throw out a bunch of policies. He told voters a story that had good guys (everyone struggling to make ends meet) and bad guys (corporations and the overclass). He promised some things that will make their lives a little easier. No, Mamdani probably can't follow through on a lot of these things. He'll need the governor and the state legislature to agree on a number of them, and that's very unlikely. But let's judge that if and when he becomes mayor. For now, let's just consider how what he did worked. He told some very simple truths. He said: You're getting screwed. And it's not some invisible and undefinable hand of God that's screwing you. It's specific actors, and the politicians who are their handmaidens. He told people something that they already knew—but that they too rarely hear politicians, even Democratic ones, say. Right now in Washington, the Republicans are on their way to passing a bill that, as I wrote last Friday, will deposit $68,000 IRS checks into the bank accounts of people making more than $900,000 a year while it will cut billions of dollars in health care to Americans of few to moderate means. At every public university in the country right now with an in-state network of hospitals, the higher-ups are in a panic wondering how they're going to replace the many millions of dollars that are being picked out of their pockets—money that funds health care for those who can't pay, mind you—and dropped into the wallets of millionaires. The national Democrats talk about this at Capitol Hill press conferences and in cable news interviews. But they don't seem to be able to tell a story about it for the life of them. Why is it so hard? Democrats of all stripes, especially the centrist ones, need to think about this. Mamdani, like anyone, has flaws and shortcomings. But he has swagger. He's unafraid—unafraid of the 1 percent and their wallets, unafraid of offending those people once in a while, unafraid of maybe making a mistake, unafraid of taking a punch. His positions by all appearances are what he actually believes, not what focus groups told him to believe. He's not exactly in-cautious. He wants to win, so he hedges some bets. But he absolutely is anti-cautious: against caution as a first reflex. National Democrats should take note.
Washington Post
31 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Democrats grapple with the party's ‘defund the police' past
Good morning, Early Birds. How did you celebrate Bobby Bonilla Day? Send tips to earlytips@ Thanks for waking up with us. In today's edition … Democrats grapple with policing headed into 2026 … All eyes on Susan Collins … You give us your views on being American … but first …
