Contributor Post Created with Sketch. A Republican Surprise in Massachusetts?


Of the 10 men who have won either the Democratic or Republican presidential nominations since 1988, three (Michael Dukakis, John Kerry, and Mitt Romney) have been Massachusetts officeholders. The trend, of course, goes back much further, with the Commonwealth always over-performing in presidential politics. Massachusetts, you might say, has a bad habit of imposing its elected leaders on the rest of the country.

With that in mind, it’s worth keeping an eye on the state’s most prominent politicians. Senator Ed Markey is too old and explicitly left-wing to be of much danger (thank goodness). His colleague, Elizabeth Warren, is more worrying because she can spout lefty nonsense and sensible advice in similar tones. Governors, however, are usually the most obvious presidential candidates, and the Bay State has an open seat now that Deval Patrick is retiring.

Martha_Coakley_cropThe Democratic nominee to succeed Patrick is state Attorney General Martha Coakley, one of the few political types that genuinely scares me: the self-sure and aggressive Leftist prosecutor. While working at the District Attorney’s office in Boston’s Northeastern suburbs, she oversaw the final stages of the prosecution of the Arimault family, who were falsely — and preposterously — accused of molesting and violently raping children at the daycare they ran. Since then, she’s spearheaded a number of prominent cases that smell and feel much more like activism than law enforcement. As one rather minor (though unsettling) example, she’s used her office to effectively outlaw private ownership of post-second-generation Glock handguns in the state on specious safety grounds … despite the fact that they’re apparently safe enough to be standard issue for most police officers in the state.

The good news is that Coakley is not a great politician. You may remember her, for instance, as the Democrat that assumed she was a shoe-in to take Ted Kennedy’s seat four years ago, only be be trounced by Scott Brown. Much like Hillary Clinton, “likable enough” is the most she can hope for … on a good day.

357px-CharlieBakerFeb2010On the Republican side is Charlie Baker. To get a sense of Baker, imagine a 2002-era Mitt Romney, but without the movie star looks or whistle-worthy resume. He’s been appointed to various state offices, and ran one of the state’s largest healthcare providers, both with success. Baker’s first run for elective office was in 2010, when he lost badly to Governor Patrick.

Ideologically, Baker is New England squish with above-average FiCon credentials. He’s pro-choice and pro-SSM, but also favors more school choice, and helped co-found the Pioneer Institute, a Boston-based FiCon/Free Market think tank (yes, you read that right). He’s the kind of conservative who prescribes moderate exercise and diet when others might order a gastric bypass.

The latest polls show show that the race has tightened since the primaries earlier this month, with Baker and Coakley neck-and-neck; this race was never a completely foregone conclusion, and it’s now more uncertain than ever.

Coakley has the Democratic machine behind her. That’s no small thing: Democrats currently hold all statewide offices, a super-majority in both houses of the legislature, and every single seat in the state’s congressional delegation. She’s also got a thoroughly demoralized Republican Party that’s lost any of the momentum it thought it had following Brown’s victory in 2010.

All’s not lost for Baker, however. Coakley isn’t very appealing and Massachusetts has a reputation for not being terribly enamored of lady politicians. Moreover, Baker is exactly the kind of Republican Bay Staters tend to elect: the inoffensive, socially liberal, competent, establishment type. He’s also got the benefit of much better name recognition than he had during his first run.

Given the state’s history, you’re likely to hear from one or the other of these two again in the future. Here’s hoping we turn the state’s deep blue into something ever-so-slightly purple.

Images: 1) Martha Coakley crop” by Martha Coakley speaking at Faneuil Hall.jpg: Fogsterderivative work: Abovedrew23 – This is a retouched picture, which means that it has been digitally altered from its original version. Modifications: cropped. The original can be viewed here: Martha Coakley speaking at Faneuil Hall.jpg 2) “CharlieBakerFeb2010” by Gingerbella282 – Rappaport Center for Law and Public Service. Licensed under CC0 via Wikimedia Commons.

There are 8 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Fricosis Guy Listener

    The Globe poll was a shocker, but the two follow-on polls confirm that this one will be tight. Coakley can’t get close to 50 percent…and she’s the incumbent for all intents and purposes.

    Really hope that Baker and Foley (in CT) pull through.

    • #1
    • September 30, 2014, at 12:22 PM PDT
    • Like
  2. Ben Inactive

    With our current roster, I hope team commonwealth (red, blue, or otherwise) refrains from becoming presidential candidates for a while.

    • #2
    • September 30, 2014, at 1:16 PM PDT
    • Like
  3. Dipsy's PAL Member

    Baker’s defeat in 2010 was facilitated by Cahill – the life long Democrat and Patrick cabinet official who suddenly discovered that he was an “independent”. As a spoiler/stalking horse, he helped Patrick win reelection without breaking 50%. Baker is a better candidate this time, though still far from polished, and doesn’t face a similar spoiler.

    • #3
    • September 30, 2014, at 2:23 PM PDT
    • Like
  4. SEnkey Inactive

    I think Baker is smart. He is running ads touting his socially liberal positions while also highlighting how his brand of fiscal conservatism worked in helping the state. He’s taken away the left’s normal go to bashing topics, an lo and behold it’s a close race.

    We need more candidates like Baker, I don’t care if we disagree on a lot of things, if they can bring voters into the Republican/Conservative tent, you have my full backing.

    • #4
    • September 30, 2014, at 2:34 PM PDT
    • Like
  5. Paul A. Rahe Contributor

    Hope springs eternal. Myself, I do not worry that Taxachusetts will ever again provide us with a President. I am far more concerned with the Senate races.

    • #5
    • September 30, 2014, at 3:57 PM PDT
    • Like
  6. Profile Photo Member

    Dude looks like love child of Roger Goodell and Greg Kinnear.

    • #6
    • September 30, 2014, at 5:08 PM PDT
    • Like
  7. dittoheadadt Inactive

    I’m trying to figure out why we care whether a Republican wins the governorship in Massachusetts, especially another New England squish. What do we have to show for the Weld, Cellucci, and Romney eras?

    Do we really think Baker would accomplish anything positive given that “Democrats currently hold all statewide offices, a super-majority in both houses of the legislature, and every single seat in the state’s congressional delegation?” Look how consequential Scott Brown’s defeat of Martha Croakley was.

    It wasn’t.

    Don’t count on Massho-, er, Mass. residents, shifting rightward in the least, and certainly don’t count on Mass. politicians doing so.

    All this is is cotton candy political news. Temporarily sweet, and utterly worthless.

    • #7
    • September 30, 2014, at 5:56 PM PDT
    • Like
  8. Lash LaRoche Inactive

    Mister, we could use a man like Calvin Coolidge again.

    • #8
    • September 30, 2014, at 9:08 PM PDT
    • Like

Comments are closed because this post is more than six months old. Please write a new post if you would like to continue this conversation.