.

Massachusetts’ Democrats Propel Romney …

Lessons learned dealing with Democrats as Governor in Massachusetts politics have propelled Mitt Romney into the lead for President.

The election is still a week away, far too soon to spike the ball.  However, it is time to acknowledge that this has been a very surprising – and revealing –election, especially for Bay Staters.

 

President Obama has already spent more than $1 Billion dollars trying to convince the voters of primarily three things:

 

  1. He has done a great job as President and deserves a second term.
  2. Republicans – specifically George W. Bush - were responsible for the mess that he inherited and that America faces.
  3. Mitt Romney is little more than a corporate marauder, no better than an anti-women’s rights pretender, a retro - not forward – thinker, and a super-rich guy who pays low taxes.

 

It’s amazing how little you get for a billion bucks these days.  Despite all the money and the messaging, America has increasingly been tuning Obama out.  After all, no amount of money could blind We the people to what we saw during the debates.  One of the candidates stood tall and spoke intelligently.  The other candidate interrupted frequently and had no teleprompter.  One candidate’s appearance was confident and Presidential - more than was expected.  The other’s appearance seemed different from what we have seen, petulant and arrogant – less than desired.   One spoke with great love of America, and respect for the Presidency.  The other showed disdain for his opponent, and an entitlement to the Presidency.

 

As Lincoln said, “You can fool some of the people some of the time, and you can fool all of the people some of the time, but you can’t fool all of the people all of the time.”  Win or lose, Obama has been exposed for what he is, which is so much less than people four years ago wanted him to be. His “brand”, so important after the last election, is shattered.  Should he win, how can he possibly lead going forward when the people now know he is too little at a time when the Country needs so much more?

 

The net effect is this: Romney is gaining by the day; Obama is shrinking by the hour.   Romney is talking about the big picture; Obama about Big Bird.  Romney is connecting with sincerity.  Obama is disconnecting with desperation.  Romney has a plan for all America; Obama a plan to tax the wealthy. Romney talks about leadership;  Obama about his presidency. Romney’s closing is about his optimism for America’s future; Obama’s is that Romney is only for the rich.

 

And, hovering above Obama’s sullied likeability is the ghost of Presidents past.  What did he know about Libya?  When did he know it?  Why is he hiding it?  Why didn’t he take action?  Perhaps he’s waiting for Donald Trump to offer him $5M more to answer these questions.

 

But, there is a bitter irony to Mr. Romney’s run that is grossly upsetting to Massachusetts liberals, a one-party rule bully majority that has been in political denial for more than 50 years when they began mindlessly confusing the values of Edward Kennedy from his brother John.  As a result, and even to this very day when the Boston Globe not so shockingly endorsed Elizabeth Warren, and yet another Kennedy, Massachusetts’s Democrats have been completely out-of-touch with the rest of America – at least the rest of America that lives more than 100 miles away from Cambridge.  But, it’s not just that Massachusetts’ Democrats are so different, it’s that they are so misguidedly and arrogantly hubristic about it.

 

In fact, Massachusetts’ reputation as a political wasteland and radical fringe outlier is perhaps the major reason for Romney’s end of campaign surge.  Consider a little recent history.  Michael Dukakis, a governor who taxed anything that moved, and regulated everything else that didn’t, was soundly trounced by George H.W. Bush in 1988.  His candidacy remains a joke to this day. His demise was repeated in 2004 by another tax and spender, his former Lt. Governor, now Senator and tax evasion advocate John Kerry.  Add in the other faces of Democratic Massachusetts like Kennedy, Barney Frank, three consecutive imprisoned Speakers et als, and you have a State that is routinely dismissed and disregarded by most of America.

 

Think about it.  America has rejected Massachusetts Democratic liberals Dukakis, Kerry, and even Ted Kennedy in 1980, yet is whole-heartedly embracing Republican Mitt Romney, of whom Massachusetts liberals can offer few kind words, and even less respect.  That should speak volumes about the political thinking in this State. 

 

That Mitt Romney was able to get elected Governor in Massachusetts, then have significant legislative and fiscal success with a legislature composed of 87% Democrats, has only added enormous stature – and credibility - to his potential to govern among Independent voters across the Country. It’s as if he has passed the political acid test of actual governing – the ability to bring reason to the certifiably unreasonable, sense to the insensible.

 

So, what’s the message?  We the people want practical, common sense solutions, not ideological polarity.  We want – and desperately need – government to work.  We need someone to lead, not read from a teleprompter.  Romney has the track record of being able to do exactly this in the most unreasonable of jurisdictions. 

 

And, we can credit Massachusetts Democrats with helping him develop those skills.

 

Once again I ask Unenrolled voters. “Who is the best candidate?”  For this Country? At this time?  Is it going to be more of the same from a diminishing President, or a new beginning with a bi-partisan-oriented leader?  History can be made if – at least just once in our lifetime – Massachusetts’ voters do not behave so radically different from the rest of the Country.   This is the time.

This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

Jim Hatherley November 10, 2012 at 08:23 PM
Pardon the error ... Obviously Obama won and so did Warren, not Brown (and I might add, so did Eldridge, Dykema and Gregoire).
Ron Goodenow November 10, 2012 at 09:26 PM
Jim. Thanks. It was my prediction I would be giving you some grief as the wheels came off the campaign -- which they did, and which I did not until after the election. I was only referring here to the words YOU used in your response to Max and earlier and not whatever somebody else or a bunch of people said about Romney. My own reading of the many newspapers and other on line sources I read daily does not confirm what you said about name calling. I'm sure that we could do a content analysis of area Patches and I'll bet you a nice civil lunch somewhere that the comments calling Warren and Obama virtually anything under the sun would outnumber attacks on Romney by a ratio of 20-1. Anyhow, I did read a lot of your posts and give you credit for standing up for your views. I would have made many of them shorter and focused on little briefs about specific issues where you guys would make the country better -- immigration, environment, infrastructure, healthcare, education, military spending, etc -- and not just attack Obama relentlessly. As Ronald Reagan, who had very admirable qualities, knew, one has to be positive, hopeful and always pointing the way to a happier future. Future historians will see your campaign, whatever one wants to say about Obama's, as too steeped in gloomy depression and resentment, trapped as Peggy Noonan sez today, by a crummy primary system and some near crackpot competition. Anyhow, good luck and, as they say, lessons learned.
Jim Hatherley November 10, 2012 at 11:42 PM
Ron, no need for lunch, but I would bet that you are very wrong about the smears. So many went Romney's way that it was embarrassing for Obama. Now, when it comes to the Indian shots leveled at Warren, i would agree there but the whole affirmative action is such a sin (my personal view) that I believed that by itself should have disqualified Warren. Again, that is just me. Two other points. The first is that this election was all about Obama. You liked him or did not like him and that was the deal. Papers about entitlements? Forget it. Studies show that Democratic voters want free stuff which is why they do not vote Republican. The second point is that women are said to dislike negative Ads - and punished Brown for making a point of the Warren situation. If that were true, why didn't women detest Obama for referencing Romney, an entirely decent and accomplished man, as being a felon, murderer, tax cheat, woman hater etc. when none of this was true? Bottom line - the Country has changed. We are softer and entitlement oriented. Sadly, when more than 50% of the population is either paying zero income tax or on the dole (not counting SSN and medicare or military), the Republic is doomed, even if Democrats feel the leg thrill of somehow feeling superior to Republicans even as the Country goes broke. No matter what you say or think, this is not a good thing,
Ben Jackson November 10, 2012 at 11:50 PM
I call shenanigans. "Studies show that Democtatic voters want free stuff which is why they do not vote Republican." I defy you to back this up with an actual, academic or peer reviewed study. A comprehensive google search of all .edu and .gov sites, as ell as an InfoTrac database search show nothing even remotely close.
Paul Bishop November 11, 2012 at 12:27 AM
Ben, we all know Jim lies and makes up "statistics". Nothing new.
Paul Bishop November 11, 2012 at 12:35 AM
What Jim fails to understand is that his constant partisan dishonesty has and will do more damage to the Republican party than any Democratic opponent. It's a microcosm, really- Brown lost not because Warren beat him, but because the dishonesty and misconduct of his campaign staff. Mr Brown can thank Jim and those like him for his defeat. Sad, really, as I think Mr Brown's losing is a significant blow to the state. Now, go ahead Jim. Just post the link ben asked for, or simply admit you have once again made up statistics and studies.
Ron Goodenow November 11, 2012 at 12:50 AM
OK Jim, here is my ‘over and out’: Mitt Romney showed himself to be an unremorseful fibber of the first degree over the Chrysler moving jobs to China issue and so many others where the man took all sides of an issue and his campaign staff said they would not be hemmed in by fact checkers. Mitt proved himself to be a mendacious pandering phony repeatedly, starting with his first run for Senator and claims he has made about his governorship. How can you can state so boldly that Obama is not trustworthy? LOL Politics ain't beanbag goes the old saw. Boo hoo about the attacks on Romney. The Dems finally learned from the 88 and 04 elections - define your opponent before he defines you. I have no sympathy for your complaints here. It makes you sound like Karl Rove - who made the absurd and laughable claim that Obama's campaign actively tried to suppress the vote. Oh - and racism? Go back and listen to John Sununu's commentary about Colin Powell's endorsement of Obama, or Sununu’s suggestion that Obama become an American, and then complain about racism. There were endless stupid comments from Michelle Bachman and many others which challenged our president’s ‘Americanisms’, which you guys do not own. You constantly deride liberals but some of us have run successful businesses, raised and educated great families, and served our state and country in many ways. We don't need condescending crapola about wrecking our country from Republican spinners. Bye
Jim Hatherley November 11, 2012 at 02:24 AM
This is so typical - a liberal gang rape by a bunch of angry, sore winners. Pathetic as always. Heather McDOnald provided a scholarly piece in the National Review noting that the Hispanic popullation - in particular - did not vote for the Democrats based on their immigration policy, but for their safety net of social services - i.e., free stuff. Nobody is making anything up. It is what it is - very pavlovian. That's the Democratic Party in a nutshell. Forget individual liberty. Bring on government. But, before i completely digress, let me repeat that the Democrats won. The Republicans did not do a good enough job in conveying their message. However, when the leaners outnumber the lifters there is a problem in River City. So - rejoice in your victory, Democrats. But a little class would be a positive sign of evolution. Hopefully you have this in you. And smile - your candidate won - freee stuff for all (except the people who must pay for it). And Ron - if you want to talk racism then you must talk about Chris Matthews and MSNBC who find racism under every rock. Very pathetic. But, there you go again, dragging me back in while I was trying to demonstrate no sour grapes. Ugh.
Max Walker November 11, 2012 at 03:31 AM
I'll leave aside every racist insulting implication in your post and simply say this. It might serve your interests better to figure out why you lost instead of figuring out why we won.
Max Walker November 11, 2012 at 03:34 AM
Actually scratch that. I have no interest in giving your party any advice. I just feel sad that this is what the party of Abe Lincoln has come to. Until there is a complete top to bottom review and deep introspection there is just no point even trying to engage your party in a conversation. Maybe a few more cycles of electoral loss will provide the necessary impetus. I thought this drubbing might be enough, but I am realizing that more punishment might be called for. Good luck with all that.
David Nolta November 11, 2012 at 03:43 AM
Hi Jim--I am proud and grateful to live in a country in which the majority of voters confirmed their support for a President who believes in basic health care for all Americans. I am proud to have supported a President who has helped to remove us from a costly and bloody war in Iraq, a war which Americans were tricked into undertaking (the best term) by the former Republican regime. I am grateful to the President for continuing to work to recognize the equality of ALL Americans--as he said, men and women, of every race, able-bodied and disabled, old and young, gay and straight, poor and rich--and their equal right to justice and opportunity. I do not believe the terrible predictions you have long been making on this site about the future of our country under the President's leadership. I wonder if you are willing to work--to examine your motives, to empathize, to compromise--in order to ensure that your predictions of ruin do not come true. By the way, I am a Democrat and I am not asking for "free stuff" and I believe it is my American duty to help to maintain my fellow Americans. I challenge you, with all respect, to join your fellow citizens in working for a fairer future--a fairer distribution of our god-given resources, fairer access to opportunity and education and especially to the basic necessities of life. My model in making this challenge is the American soldier--willing to give everything for the greater good of all. It's very hard. And worth it, if anything is.
Max Walker November 11, 2012 at 03:52 AM
Here is something else to mull over. It's easy to demonize Hispanics and Blacks. But there is one other ethnic group, granted much smaller that voted overwhelmingly for President Obama. These were the wealthy Asian American families. In fact I read some statistical analysis that they ensured his win in Prince William county and thus the state of Virginia. These were the highly educated and well paid Asian Americans who work in DC and have bought expensive town homes and single family homes in Prince William county. They made the difference and put Obama over the top in Virginia. Now if this welfare theory is true, why would well educated and wealthy Asian Americans prefer Obama? And in case anyone is interested, here is a statistical estimate of the support for Obama amongst welfare recipients. Talk is cheap with no numbers to back it up. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-altman/obama-welfare_b_1835061.html
Ron Goodenow November 11, 2012 at 04:04 AM
You're losing it Jim. I've been a 50 year reader of the Nat Review and Wm Buckley would choke on what you call 'scholarly' there.' I had the pleasure of meeting him and knowing he would throw up if he saw what the GOP is now -- a big pile of know knowing anti-intellectuals depending on their Southern and redneck evangelical base. I watch MSNBC and as a scholar of the subject of racism must agree with much of what they say. Dunno you qualifications except as chair of a suburban party that lost everything. Most serious studies show that Hispanics and Asian-Americans are among the most entrepreneurial people in our culture, and probably 95% of them are working harder than you are right now. Here's the skinny Jim. Many years ago there was a California gov named Pete Wilson. He made comments exactly like yours about Hispanics, and indirectly, Asian Americans. Guess what? Your Grand old Grumpy Party is just about cooked in that state. Gone. Guess what Jim, the kind of racist comments you have just repeated or made up will do the same thing nationally. Just look at the numbers. 90% of Asians voted for Obama. Are they lazy and just looking for handouts? Hells Bells Jim, you are probably taking more in Social Security and healthcare, or will be soon, than the vast majority of those 'moochers'. So pack it in Jim. Turn your office over to some smart person who can actually read numbers and get away from crap about how many of us don't want liberty or paths to success.
Jim Hatherley November 11, 2012 at 04:09 AM
David, welcome back. Where have you been? I actually inquired of someone if something had happened to you>. As. You know I have been consistent in my belief and positions since you have been following me. But my side lost the election. I accept that. Several people, however, seem to believe there is an amount of gloating that needs to occur. Fine with me, but no sour grapes or rationalizations from me. We lost. Nevertheless, I retain my belief about small government, loer taxes, individual liberty etc. I am depressed by the soft culture of increasing entitlement. We'll see what Obama can do with four more years. I hope it is better that the first four. Welcome back - good to know that you are still around. All the best.
Paul Bishop November 11, 2012 at 04:11 AM
BACK UP THE "FACTS" YOU MADE UP.
Jim Hatherley November 11, 2012 at 04:12 AM
Enough already, Max ...we get it. Too much bait and too little bite. We are where we are ... Let's hope that things improve. Fast.
Max Walker November 11, 2012 at 04:12 AM
73% of Asian Americans (that also includes Indian Americans who by some measure are responsible for 15% of the startups in the San Francisco bay area) voted for Obama in this election. Source: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-election-20121111,0,2275455.story
Paul Bishop November 11, 2012 at 04:17 AM
Folks, by the way, please don't mistake Jim for an actual Republican (like Mr Brown for example). He shames the title and the party by behaving like this, and clearly harms the interests of the party in doing so. Attempting to sway people by simply making up "facts" to support your viewpoint only backfires these days, as verification can be asked for from blowhards.
Ron Goodenow November 11, 2012 at 04:20 AM
David, Jim is in his most unctuous mode. Having gloated for months about the sweeping tide of creeping meatballism (as Jean Shepard once said) he now takes great puffed up pride in attacking the winners who feel good. He may say there are no rationalizations, which is horse pucky coming out the rear end of a sick elephant in little slices and talking points he scoops up as he follows along. It is good to know that he has given up his Social Security and Medicare, but most of us in the 47% of slackers, moochers, and Hispanics (there is one in my family who probably makes more money and works harder than Jimbo could believe) who hate liberty and the successes of our families and friends should be grateful for his wishing us well. God bless GOP Geezers. That said, it is good to see you here.
Jim Hatherley November 11, 2012 at 12:36 PM
Well, this has been a very extraordinary experience to say the least. This latest string began with a "gloat note" ... We won, you lost, to which I agreed and offered no sour grapes. The election was over, it is what it is. And yet that is not enough for several of you who seem to be angry when you are trailing and unhappy when you are winning. And why so personal and lacking in grace? There is a very deep division in the Country right now on the role of government. While Obama won, his margin was just over 2M out of over 118M votes cast. This does not make the "losers" racists, or disgraces, or blowhards or make-up artists; it only shows that there is no consensus on the appropriate direction of the Country, nor any mandate for what do do. All of this is troubling. But this is what I derive from this "conversation". How are the sides ever going to come together to productively lead with such post partisan attacking? We must move on from what was said during the process because that chapter has been written. It's going to take some class and grace, and believe it or not, acceptance that the other side is on the right side of the issue - both ways. If the appropriate balance is not found between the responsibility of government to provide social benefits and the financial responsibility of government to pay for them, we and all our heirs are doomed. And no self-serving name calling of me will change that. Stay classy Patch commenters.
Max Walker November 11, 2012 at 01:05 PM
The country is divided and does need healing and a rapprochement across the political divide. How about this -- you stop calling Obama voters welfare dependents (not supported by actual evidence) and moochers and I'll stop calling your side racist?
Jim Hatherley November 11, 2012 at 01:17 PM
Sure, but why would you even stoop to call Republicans racists to begin with? Where is the proof for that, or does that overused slur just automatically extend to those who disagree?
Ed Bertorelli November 11, 2012 at 01:18 PM
I've read ,in horror, some of the blogs on other articles. It's frightening that some of these people can even vote given their illiterate, semi- nutty ramblings and insults- one of these crazies even took on the editor. Anyway I think some of you are missing a central fact Presidential candidates from Massachusetts do not do well in recent elections - Dukakis,Kerry,Romney( JFK was 52 years ago and a close one at that). We've been the birthplace to four Presidents- two Adams, JFK and George HW Bush, but don't look for it to happen again. We are a political backwater with fewer and fewer electoral votes.
Max Walker November 11, 2012 at 01:19 PM
And one last time, let me post this data and get off this topic unless there is reason to come back due to some other kind of provocation. Those of you who seem to firmly believe that it is Obama voters who receive the most government benefits, please take the time to explore this wonderful data-laden map: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/02/12/us/entitlement-map.html It is a color-coded map of various govt benefits -- welfare, social security, medicare, medicaid, unemployment etc. for the year 2009. Now look at this map and think of the states that Obama lost and won, What do you see and what do you conclude? It is not cool in this day and age when you can verify information to hang on to pre-conceived notions of group behavior. Actual data can be very enlightening. I am not insulting anyone, I am simply asking you to look at data.
Max Walker November 11, 2012 at 01:59 PM
Jim you ask, "Sure, but why would you even stoop to call Republicans racists to begin with? Where is the proof for that, or does that overused slur just automatically extend to those who disagree?" What else do you call the assertion without proof that Hispanics voted overwhelmingly for Obama because they are welfare recipients? Also, the entire conservative radio talk show enterprise which despite your protestations, hold sway over Republic politicians and Republic voters.
Jim Hatherley November 11, 2012 at 02:16 PM
You know Max, these maps are always interesting and sometimes they say as much about the person who promotes than as they purport to reveal. So ... This topological map is dated 2009, essentially pre-Obama which means that it is pre-50% increase in food stamps, and increasing/expanding unemployment claims etc. But I take your point. Still, I will not bore you with the topological red/blue vote in 2012 by County/precinct across the Country. The map is minimally 80% red, but the population centers are blue. In 13 Philadelphia precincts Obama is said to have received more than 99% of the votes. The same questions can be reversed back to you in terms of interpretation etc. The point is that there is much more to this than looking at the topology. That's the equivalent of "studying" history by memorizing the dates of events. That the Country is changing, and changing rapidly seems undeniable. For better or worse? Time will tell, of course, but there is a very real difference of opinion and both sides have validity to their arguments. By the way, if the purpose of your sending the charts is to show that government dependency is a multi-ethnic issue, I certainly agree - that is what I have been saying all along. We have grown soft as a culture and need government to step back a bit.
Concerned Citizen November 11, 2012 at 02:17 PM
What isn't getting a lot of press is the huge amount of money that was spent on "data-crunchers" by the Obama campaign, aided by Hollywood celebrities, to gain the young vote, the women's vote, and the Latina vote. The Obama campaign even used Facebook on a mass scale to get out the vote. I believe this highly sophisticated "data-driven" campaign was the secret weapon that won the election for the President. The TIME magazine article appended tells how it was done. http://swampland.time.com/2012/11/07/inside-the-secret-world-of-quants-and-data-crunchers-who-helped-obama-win/2/
Christine Corkery November 11, 2012 at 02:18 PM
Paul- your response here is rude, insulting and unnecessary. While Jim seems kind enough to have allowed your commentary to persist, I feel compelled to interject. Blogs allow plenty of opportunity for you to politely disagree and engage in healthy banter and debate. Comments that are defaming and nasty in nature, however, do little for the debate and say more about you than they do about anything else. Sorry-- it had to be said.
Albert Besee November 11, 2012 at 02:25 PM
Jim: Why do I suspect that if your guy had won by just a couple million votes, you would have considered it a powerful mandate for change? The fact is that we had a president overseeing an economy with nearly 8 percent unemployment, a tempest-in-a-teapot scandal in Libya that Republicans let distract them from a very focused economic message and a lot of unkept promises from the incumbent yet "we the people"--all the people--said no thanks to the Republican's offer of social regression and economic self-destruction. A win by a single vote is a mandate, so stop poking at the margin and start explaining how you're going to do your part to work as one--which is no doubt what you'd say to Democrats if your side had won, regardless of the margin of victory.
Jim Hatherley November 11, 2012 at 02:59 PM
Albert, thanks for your comment and for raising a good point. Let's look at the situation holistically. What changed? Several seats in the Senate but a divided government still. Had there been a mandate the people would have reversed the 2010 elections and put the Democrats in sole control again. Could it be that the people like the stagnation in that "no action" is perceived as being better than too much partisan action? That's a question out there - especially since Obama's main message this time seemed to be four more years of the same. I would probably raise a different point. Do politicians erroneously connect mandates to their victories? Absolutely. Let me point out the 2008 election. America voted for hope and change, but did they really vote for transformation? I would argue, and the 2010 snap back election would seem to support, and the 2012 election suggests, that the Nation was tired of Bush and the Republicans, but they did not especially like one-party government. Bush made the same mistake after his re-election, thinking he had a mandate to partially privatize social security. When he introduced this the measure was attacked by the Democrats and flamed out quickly (though the issue is still raised today against the Republicans). Bottom line for me - interpreting mandates is very complicated.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »