Markey v. Gomez: Welfare for Political Consultants

The Markey-Gomez race was NEVER in doubt, but don’t expect folks who make their living selling their services to candidates for office to admit that. This Politico article by a consultant who worked for Gabriel Gomez is a textbook example of “motivated reasoning.” The author confidently asserts, “Let’s be clear, this was a winnable race.”

Let’s be clearer, this was not a winnable race for Gomez, Brown, or any other mere mortal with an R after his or her name. What it was, was welfare for political consultants (on both sides.)

About Jerold Duquette

Jerold Duquette is an associate professor of political science at Central Connecticut State University. He is the author of Regulating the National Pastime: Baseball and Antitrust and has published articles and book chapters on campaign finance reform, political parties, Massachusetts politics and political culture, public opinion, and political socialization. Professor Duquette lives in Longmeadow, MA with his wife and four children.
This entry was posted in Mass Politics, U.S. Politics and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Markey v. Gomez: Welfare for Political Consultants

  1. Ryan says:

    Being paid for services rendered is welfare?

  2. John C. Berg says:

    It was never winnable for Gomez IF Markey campaigned. I do believe he might have lost if he did absolutely nothing. (This is the flaw in the whole “campaigns don’t matter” literature–it really means campaigns cancel each other out.)

    As for Gomez, he made himself into a leading Republican, so he got something out of this as well.

  3. Pingback: Headlines for Monday, July 1, 2013 » MASSterList

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *