Entries in MassPoliticsProfs by Jerold Duquette

Massachusetts Senate Republicans want Governor Patrick to fire Jonathan Gruber from the Health Connector Board because he said voters were stupid, which they argue, will only perpetuate distrust in government. They also want him gone because he is an advocate “for an ideology founded in deceit” that “should have no place in our government.”Globe ArticleSince the majority of Massachusetts voters (not to mention Massachusetts state senators) subscribe to this ideology, it seems clear that these Senate Republicans aren’t any more impressed with the intelligence of voters than is Gruber.

Professor Jonathan Gruber’s explanation of the legislative language in the Affordable Care Act was neither shocking nor a secret. ALL legislation is framed for maximum political acceptability and minimum pushback. ALL legislation includes spin intended to short circuit opposition spin. The incredibly phony outrage of conservative pols and pundits is pitiful. The effort to take umbrage on behalf of “The American People” is comical evidence of moral and intellectual bankruptcy.

Massachusetts is a liberal state where bona fide conservatives cannot win statewide office. If a Republican candidate for governor is perceived to be “a conservative” he or she will almost certainly come up short on Election Day. For this reason Republican candidates must win the battle to frame the media narrative. To do so, they have to succeed in making the race about the candidates, not about public policy.If a gubernatorial race turns on policy disagreements, an uphill climb becomes an impossible journey for a Republican candidate in Massachusetts. Instead, Bay State voters have to be convinced that what they need in the corner office is a proven manager, not a politician. Win or lose on Tuesday, Charlie Baker has won the battle to frame the media narrative.

Akilah Johnson’s piece in today’s Boston Globe nicely describes the political debate over Charlie Baker’s reintroduction of the welfare reform “issue” into the race for the corner office. Democrats argue that it’s a classic dog whistle intended to rally the base in the home stretch of the race, while Republicans argue that welfare reform has been and is an important issue of great concern to their constituents.  Who’s right?  Both sides are right.

Several commentators have speculated that the good economic news of late is too late to save the Democrats from defeat in the midterm elections next month. While this may be the case in US House and Senate races, it may not be true of two very competitive New England Governor's races. Connecticut governor Dan Malloy and Massachusetts' Democratic gubernatorial nominee Martha Coakley are nursing very small leads in the latest polls and are ramping up their "get out the base" operations for the final stretch.

Charlie Baker needs this election to boil down to a personal choice; that is to say a choice between two people, not two policy agendas or governing philosophies. This tricky but necessary tact for Bay State Republicans requires very careful attention to good behavior on the campaign trail. When Baker committed the "sweetheart" gaffe it was a relatively containable slip, but a slip nonetheless. The latest SuperPAC attack ad on Martha Coakley, however, is a bit more complicated.

The subtitle of a Globe article last week caught my eye. It was “Martha Coakley dragged down by national trends.” In the article, the Globe’s Jim O’Sullivan explains that “a new Globe poll shows that national political conditions may be hobbling [Coakley’s] chances for victory.” Say what!?!