Tag Archives: Charlie Baker
Scot Lehigh has a very important piece in today’s Boston Globe, What are Markey, Lynch promising to interest groups?: The Democratic Senate candidates are making promises, but won’t make them public. Lehigh argues that the Democratic candidates are making “covert commitments” in order to secure the backing of interest groups including unions (mostly) and refusing to make public the “questionnaires” these groups require of candidates.
I was gently chided by a reader after my last post on the upcoming special election where I suggested that Senator Brown might not be the odds on favorite. This reader reminded me that despite his loss, Senator Brown remains enormously popular in the state with approval ratings the envy of most politicians. WBUR confirmed this yesterday.
The news that Susan Rice will not be the next Secretary of State has reignited speculation that we will have another US Senate special election. We have already chronicled Some of Scott Brown’s obstacles to winning another special election. The state’s bench on the GOP side, which is deep enough to throw a primary fight in Brown’s path, is another one.
When I posted Your Next Senator Will Be … last week I was having some fun with the larger point that supposed experts and insiders may enjoy forecasting political events but are often wrong because of the “unknown unknowns” that attend our lives. Two days ago in Algebra of “Your Next Senator Will Be …” I provided a formula evaluating the outcomes of the 2006 gubernatorial, 2010 senate special, and 2012 senate elections. Simple as that equation was I can simplify it further and this time I have the work of a Nobel Prize winner behind me.
Your next senator will surely be (your guess here) and that will set things up for (who knows?) to be your next governor. There is a lot of speculation about how the next two years of politics will play out and it is this sort of expert attention that boosted the successes of Governor Tom Reilly and Senator Martha Coakley, as well as the inevitable re-election of the unbeatable Senator Scott Brown.
The opportunities to link 2012 presidential election politics to Massachusetts politics, particularly to Massachusetts gubernatorial politics, are plentiful and not just because a former Massachusetts governor is the presumptive Republican nominee.
So why do Republicans have such success at winning the governor’s office while facing ritual disaster in contesting other seats (putting aside the Brown victory for the moment). For one thing, as my colleague Professor Duquette has pointed out, the GOP apparatus has largely served as a talent agency for someone who can win the governor’s office (and its patronage) from the Democrats. But it’s more because we only trust a manager to be governor.
So how is it that Republicans are so competitive at the gubernatorial level instate politics and so overwhelmed when contesting most other offices? In part, as my colleague Professor Duquette puts it, the party basically has functioned as a talent recruitment agency for someone who can wrest the corner office (and its patronage yield) from the Democrats. But the Republicans almost always have a shot at the governor’s office because it appeals to the managers while distancing itself from Legislature Party.