Live-blogging the Gov debate

We’re minutes away from tonight’s debate.  Chris Wallace is now introducing the format.  He asks a question; 1 minute answer; each candidate then gets 30 seconds to rebut.  Also, voters get to ask questions (not sure how that will work).

Holy sh*t.  Fox just completely smeared Deval Patrick before they even started the debate by saying he’s “opposed to any new tax cuts.”  Of course, Patrick supports cutting the property tax.  Who wrote these intros, and did the candidates get to approve them?

Hmm.  This is going too fast for me to live-blog.  So far, Patrick is doing well, giving as good on property tax as he’s getting on income tax, and Mihos is generally hitting Healey harder than Patrick.

I’m going to drop in observations here and there rather than trying to live-blog the whole thing.

Oh, Mihos is going to town on Healey – pointing out that even Republicans vote to override the Romney vetoes.

Grace Ross is talking about how she will raise the money for her (expansive) social programs.  And regardless of whether you agree with what she’s saying, she’s remarkably well spoken.

Voter question on MCAS.  Patrick says he backs MCAS, but says it’s not enough just to say that more testing is going to fix the problems.

Ross says MCAS is the problem.  Looking forward to hearing Mihos….

Yup, he’s still against it.  Says local aid cuts have led to cutting necessary support for passing the test.  “It was a tool, now it’s a weapon.”  Good line!

Healey is glad to hear Patrick supports MCAS – was afraid the teacher’s unions were swaying him.  Thanks Kerry!  Standards are important.

Illegal immigration – in-state tuition.  Wallace screws up by saying Romney vetoed it (in fact, it was never passed).  Says we should use the money to lower tuition for citizens.

Patrick: we differ, but both sides have a point.  We need to come down hard on employers.

Mihos: slamming Healey again – “your husband gets a federal position, and suddenly you’re with George Bush!”  And again: “you’re a Republican, stand up for him!” 

Now illegal aliens and drivers licenses.  Patrick: yes, issue licenses because of security issues.  Want to know names and addresses, deal with insurance.  “But let’s be clear: people are not coming here to get drivers licenses, they’re coming to get jobs.”  Have to crack down on employers hiring undocumented workers.

Mihos.  “The Democrats want their votes, the Republicans want cheap labor.”  Now to Healey – he says “everyone knows illegal immigrants are working here in the Commonwealth.  How many corporations have you investigated and fined?”

Healey: says she’s been urging the AG to do it.  Mihos: so zero.  Healey: opposes issuing licenses.  It’s your most basic form of ID – can go on an airplane.  Dangerous to issue them.

Now to Mihos: would you give arrest power to state and local police?  Mihos: first bill: change driving w/o license, reg., insurance into a felony.  And ask Staties to enforce, be in touch with the INS.

Healey … sorry, not sure what she said.

Patrick: it’s a matter of priorities.  There’s a whole lot else we should have State Police and other law enforcement engaged in, like gang violence.  Backs McCain/Kennedy.

Ross: wants law enforcement to deal with drugs.

Now another voter question – from Curt Schilling’s wife, I think!  Gosh, d’ya think she’s a Republican?  Anyway, the question is about merit pay.

Healey’s for it.  Incentives for good teachers to work in underperforming schools.

Mihos: against merit pay.  For Prop 1 – let cities and towns at local level decide how to run their school committee.  Don’t let Beacon Hill decide how to teach in the schools.

Ross: pretty much the same as Mihos.

Patrick: agree with Healey’s idea to get teachers to move to underperforming schools.  Support merit pay, but the right way is to encourage collaboration by the whole school.

Another question from Wallace.  “A first for Massachusetts.”  Race is a divisive issue in MA.  What has changed so that MA is ready to elect an African-American Gov?

Patrick: wouldn’t win on just being the first black Gov.  But that’s not the case – successful businessman, led in gov’t, brought agencies together, worked in nonprofits, etc.  Quick resume rundown.  Also, run a grassroots campaign.  That’s why we’ve come so far.

Ross: says Patrick has never held elective office.  Says she’s spent more time with legislators than Patrick.  “Of course, race is going to be a factor.  Gender is also.” 

Mihos: MA is a fair state – “they understand what’s going on here.”  Says he represents 50% of registered voters.  People are leaving the parties because there’s no difference between them.

Healey: “there is going to be history made in this race, and that’s a good thing.”  But the reason people support me is they think I can make MA more affordable.

Next question: how closely do you want to be identified with Romney?  What do you agree, disagree with him?  Huge softball for Healey.

Healey: differ on choice.  Agree on fiscal discipline.  We had to make tough choices when we came into office, and we did.

Patrick: fiscal discipline is the responsibility of any Governor.  It’s one thing to hear the words, another to hear that your administration proposed $985 million in new fees.  Took the legislature to say no to $200 million of them.

Ross: too many people sitting in prison awaiting trial.  Shelters instead of real housing also costs money.  GOP has been wasting our money.

Mihos: echoes Patrick.  Fees, taxes skyrocketing under this administration.

Commercial break…..

Question to Mihos: aren’t you just a spoiler?

Mihos: we’re the laughingstock of the nation because of the Big Dig.  People are fed up with both parties – that’s why people are checking out.  I speak truth to power.

Healey: important to have balance in politics.  If Patrick wins, we’re back to Dukakis era when there’s only one party on Beacon Hill.  GOP holds corner office so that there’s balance and democracy.

Patrick: balance people want is insider/outsider – with broad experience, who didn’t grow up on Beacon Hill.  Big Dig a good example.

Ross: everyone else is rich.  I’m not.

Wallace asks Ross why she’s in the race, since she can’t win.

Ross: we need to talk to real people about real issues.  Not about tax breaks for the rich.  Trying to rebuild democracy. 

Patrick: if you think our campaign is just about millionaires, you’ve been missing something.  Grew up on public assistance, and the whole campaign is about reaching out to everyone.  Everybody has a stake.

Healey: balance is about to be lost on Beacon Hill.  About to go back to closed-door decisionmaking on Beacon Hill.  (What does this have to do with the question?)

Mihos: “I’m spending my children’s inheritance running for office right now.”  He’s not taking $$ from lobbyists, state workers, state contractors.  Staying away from corrosive effect of money.

Question from voters … important that government try to attract business to the state.  What can you do?

Ross: most tax breaks go to big corporations.  Need real universal health coverage – existing health care plan is not going to do it.

Healey: focuses on unemployment insurance.  Roll back income tax to help small businesses, and work on permitting.

Mihos: “I’m a small business person.”  He knows how hard it is to run a business.  Gotta roll back the property tax – Prop 1 does it.  Too expensive to live here, whether we’re businesspeople or not.  Very divisive issues.

Patrick: have to speed up permitting and approval.  Have to connect good ideas with capital – public/private investment partnerships.  Have to reinvest in infrastructure – roads and bridges are essential to successful business.

Wallace now onto Big Dig.  Asks Mihos what responsibility he has.

Mihos: “I got fired from that board.”  Voted for independent oversight group, peer review.&n
bsp; Also, took Amorello and general counsel to court because they wouldn’t give him documents.  Romney/Healey allowed Big Dig manager to sign off on behalf of Commonwealth so that the connector that failed would be open.  Did everything I could, was vilified.

Healey: we’ve tried to merge Turnpike with MassHighway.  Wanted control – had no idea about safety concerns.  Went to legislature repeatedly.  Took a tragedy to do it.

Patrick: That stem to stern review was promised and owed when you ran for Governor.  The question always comes back to your not taking responsibility when it is your responsibility.  My plan is to appoint an independent inspector general to give a professional analysis.

Vigorous cross-talk – Patrick calls it a “shocking shame” (or something like that) that it took a tragedy to get the independent investigation started.

Now Mihos is hammering her too.

Healey says “we didn’t have the power.”

Mihos still going after her.  He’s really worked up.  “Two people are dead today because you did nothing, you remained silent.”  Wow.

Healey: the facts are wrong.  People are very pleased that Romney is in charge today.

Wallace: Romney was very late to get into Big Dig.

Healey: “we have been working on this every single year.”  “We got that power the afternoon after the tragedy, but not before.”  On the right track now.

Patrick: I commend Gov, LG for taking control since June.  What you are doing since the tragedy is hard to quarrel with.  But leadership means you take responsibility from day 1, not explain it away.  The job is to get the control you need.

Ross: it goes beyond this.  Patrick and Healey took money from Big Dig contractors.  (Patrick says it’s wrong – I’m not aware of any such contributions.)  She wants to shut off permitting for any Big Dig contractor.

Mihos: this administration has had all reports, financial statements, etc. since July 2004.  It is the state’s project.  Everything has to be voted by their highway department, and paid with state funds.  They could have done something in Jan 2003.  Intentional indifference to blame everyone but themselves is what has caused this mess.

Wallace: heard for years about abuses at Turnpike, Massport re sick time, etc.  As gov, what will you do to stop these abuses?  [A softball for Patrick!]

Patrick: Just that: stop all these abuses.  These benefits are out of place in a public setting.  Another example of what could have and should have been done if people were paying attention.

Ross: we have moved away from collaborative leadership, have to learn how to work with local officials, legislature, workers. 

Mihos: independent are poster child for everything that’s wrong with state gov’t.  Back to Turnpike: this administration allowed Amorello go back for 2 weeks after he quit – gave all his patronage hacks free ride.

Healey: independent authorities are supposed to take politics out, but instead became patronage haven for legislature.  [This, of course, is not really true.  The judiciary is the patronage haven for the legislature.  Massport and Turnpike are much more popular among the executive branch!]

Question from typical voter Jasper White: how to protect farming and fishing?

Mihos, Ross – sorry, I missed what they said.

Healey: I’ve worked hard for fishing industries, including fighting against new regulations that will ruin fishing industry.  Also, don’t like Cape Wind – in the wrong place, will hurt fishermen.

Patrick: likes Jasper’s cooking.  Commend LG for getting engaged in regulatory fights on fishing regulations.  Also cites drug, alcohol problems among fishing industry – backs treatment on demand.

Wallace: final question?  “Politics ain’t beanbag” – shouldn’t you be ready for attacks in a campaign?

Patrick: I was in DC when Congress changed to aggressive Republicans.  But public is not served by hurling insults, trading soundbites.  We should talk about differences in policy, and vision.  But we should do it respectfully.

Ross: agree completely with Deval. 

Mihos: [Wallace refers to "heads up asses" ad.]  I want to give people a chance to listen to issues.  Sick of Karl Rove Republican ads, refers to Swift Boaters. 

Healey: the impact of 527s is bad.  Asks Deval to disassociate himself from 527s.  He does. 

Now final statements.  Ross first.

Ross objects to polling only “likely voters.”  (Not sure I understand her point on that one.)  Policies have to become about all the people.  We have the money – we can do it.

Healey: we have heard two different visions of what MA should be like.  I believe in higher standards, more charters, merit pay.  Patrick opposes.  We can and must lower taxes.  Under Patrick, taxes would only ever go up.  Believe in tougher criminal laws, Patrick is soft on crime.  [This is a big mistake on her part to waste her closing on attacking Patrick.]

Mihos: I love this state.  I just can’t take the way it’s being managed right now.  Born in Brockton, went through public schools, built a business here.  People are leaving the state in droves.  Go to my website and look at Prop 1.  Massachusetts is worth the fight.

Patrick: Every election is about choice.  This time it’s about whether we stay on the path we’ve been on, or whether we make a change.  Current path is fear, neglect.  Every candidate has good ideas, but they’re going nowhere w/o leadership.  I have experience as a prosecutor, led as corporate executive, nonprofits.  No one else in this race has that range of experience.

And that’s it!

This post was originally published with Soapblox and contains additional formatting and metadata.
View archived version of this post


130 Comments . Leave a comment below.
  1. WRKO 680 AM

    RKO has the debate on right now, you can tune in and listen.  Thanks to Susan for the tip.

  2. Re: Fox just completely smeared Deval Patrick

    Let's get Clinton on the case!

    PS How funny is it that Wallace got creamed 1 day ago and now he's out there refereeing Deval and Healey!

  3. So far so good

    So far I have heard Healy refer to "My opponent Deval Patrick"  like she has been totally coached to ignore Hihos and Ross.  I hope this is self-defeating enough to tick them off even more against her.

  4. Christy Mihos

    Wow; look at Christy go after Kerry Healey (who looks tonight even scarier than Uma Thurman in "Kill Bill.")

  5. Hahahah

    "Shonda Schilling from Medfield."

  6. They are spending an inordinate amount of time on this issue

    Considering Fox and Wallace are running the debate it doesn't surprise me.

    This is a hot-button issue that may work to Healy's benefit by virtue of the amount of time spent on it.  On the other hand the other candidates did a good job beating her on debating points

    Shonda Schilling asking a question!!  WTF the wife of the most famous Massachusetts Republican blowhard.

    • Too Bad Curt is Busy...

      I thought "Jack Welch, voice of the fan" was bad, but "Schonda Schilling, voice of the electorate"?  Gimme a friggin break. 

  7. Romney DID veto in-state tuition

    In 2004.  The Republicans then tried to sue it against Dems in legislative races in the 04 election.

    And as we know, the Dems actually picked up seats in that election.  This raises the question of why Dems continue to allow themslves to be intimidated out of supporting in-state now.

    • this issue has been percolating

      My principled side would like them to come right out and say that it is ok, but I think that would be a loser.  It would give the Republicans what they want - which is to spend as much time on the immigration issue as possible.  The way Deval took it to the employers was a more effective deflection.

      • Yeah, but sadly...

        While candidates deflect and position, young adults and teens are suffering.  I'm not too concerned with what Dval says in the debate, as he's made his position in support of in-state clear (as did Tom Reilly, so please don't say that it's a far-left stance).  But I'm bothered that there's been so little movement on the issue over the past year, and that the sponsor of the  in-state bill, Marie St. Fleur, did very little to promote it.

  8. She is taking credit for budget surplus

    Jane Swift and Tom Finneran pared down the budget.

    If Healy was honest she would give credit to Jane Swift and Tom Finneran.

    I wish she would.  Can you imagine how Mihos would jump on her then

  9. Ross comment about drugs??

    Did Ross really say that she wantedlaw enforcement to focus on drugs??  That seems odd from a party that's pointed out how pointless and arbitrary the drug war is.  David, I don't mean to be critical, but are you sure you got that one right?  It wasn't that she wanted law enforcement to focus on crime (as opposed to immigration)?

  10. more time

    I hate this format. The 60 seconds/30 second format doesn't give any candidate enough to SAY anything, especially Patrick who speaks with care and deliberation (read: slowly).  How can there be anything other than soundbites when you give them such a short time.  120/60 would be better.

  11. Mihos is our Ross Perot

  12. ...

    Is that reminder bracelet Deval's wearing for Jon Lester, you think?


    • nope

      It's a Katrina relief bracelet.  The story goes something like, he was at some event and some little boy tugged on his coat sleeve and gave it to him and told him that it was lucky or if he wore it he'd win or something like that.

      By the way, that Lester bracelet site is pretty weird.  It doesn't say where the money is going. 

  13. Healy is a little shaken

    She just suggested that she is facing defeat.

    When she advocated keeping balance Republican/Democrat she said

    "We are about to lose one of the two voices"  - referring to Romney and herself

    • Good Pickup

      She does look a little unhinged at times, and returns to her bread and butter "We need BALANCE!!!".  Is this Healey '06 or Romney '08?

      Also, looks like Patrick's people had him move his earpiece.  Good work fellas.

    • Wouldn't the $quot;one of two voices$quot; lost refer to Romney?

      I'm not watching on TV, so I can't tell.

      • dems vs. repubs

        No, she was comparing Repubs in gov seat vs. Dems in Legislature.  She corrected herself after she said it..."we'll lose 1 of those 2 voices IF Deval Patrick wins".

        It was a great mistake though.

  14. Has Wallace enforced the rules or time with Healy?

    He has enforced time against Patrick and Mihos

  15. Patrick the Statesman

    Love how Patrick is sitting there calmly while Ross and Mihos tag team on Healey!!

    Couldn't work better for him.

  16. WOW!

    The gloves are off and Healey is taking it on all sides for the Big Dig.  Ross with a lucid and well presented attack, Mihos more or less yelling in the background.

    Did Wallace just say "you'll all get a swing"??? Hahaha.

    • Ross is good

      She knows the issues

    • Mihos knows more than anyone about the Big Dig

      He's not taking any guff on this issue

    • Ross rocked

      That was a beautiful moment, when everyone was yelling at Muffy.  She looked like a deer in the headlights.  I'll be surprised if her numbers improve all that much tomorrow.

      Christy, by the way, is my new hero.  Let's just hope he keeps his campaign centered on eviscerating Muffy.

  17. .

    Deval was smart to stay quiet during the Healey pummeling.

  18. The $quot;Criminal Theorist$quot; dig was genius!

  19. Spin tomorrow

    This is a Fox/ Herald sponsored debate--I wonder how they will spin it.

    I also wonder more about the Globe. 

    In my opinion the Globe (A-front section and City/Metro section) have been shilling for Healy  so far

    The columnists have individual opinions but the paper has really been slanted to Healy.

    • Globe spin

      The Globe is trying to ignite a race, and Healey is down so far in the polls and ridiculed by folks by Howie Carr, that they need to give her a little pep up. They don't want it to remain 2-1 in the polls.But dont' worry they'll be hammering away on the subjects of tonight's debate that favor Patrick, like the Massport expose.

  20. Interesting

    When asked about agriculture and fishing, Mihos and Healey mentioned opposition to Cape Wind.  Patrick didn't say a word about Cape Wind - talked about how fishermen are drunks and addicts and need treatment on demand instead (thanks, Deval!).

    Christy is channelling Carla Howell!  EVERYTHING goes back to his Prop. One!  When asked about road surfaces...PROP ONE!

    Grace Ross did a GREAT job - another debate like this, and she'll take as much away from Patrick and Christy might from HEaley!

    At the end, Kerry FINALY mentioned abolishing the MDC!  The independent authorities are exactly that - and Christy told more than one actual falsehood (check it out, reporters who are reading!).  Look at the outside sections of the 2005 budget, when they ASKED for oversight!  When they went to the SJC, and were told there was 'no compelling necessity' for the administration to have a determination of oversight.  No rewriting history!

    • Speaking of which

      What IS Prop 1?  I've moved out of state, so I haven't been paying that much attention to Mihos' proposals.  It sounds vaguely familiar, but I'm not sure what it is.

    • Deval talked about the importance of fishing

      to the economic health of Fall River and New Bedford.  I think that was the context.  Like Gloucester, those cities are very much affected by a economic and attendant drug problems when they are having trouble with the fishing industry

    • The MDC thing is a joke!

      They fired one guy (David Balfour) and changed the name to DCR.  If all she has to hang her hat on is the MDC/DCR name change she is toast!

  21. post debate interview with Stephanos

    Suggests Healy did well with everyone against her.  That will probably be the way they will spin it to minimize damage to Healy

    • Bad Mic

      Healey's mic was either faulty or poorly placed in the post-debate interview.  Muffled (muffied?) and almost inaudible.  She also got the shaft going second in the final statement and first in the interview.

  22. Did Tim Cahill

    just walk by in the background why Grace Ross was talking in the post game interviews?

  23. An out of state view

    Well, I live down in Connecticut, but I've been following the race since at least April, 05.  I've met Deval and like him a lot.  I really didn't know much about the other candidates, other than a little bit here and there.

    I watched the streaming video, with interruptions for dinner and streaming problems.  What was my take?

    I thought Deval Patrick did very well, as I expected he would.  I was interested to see Grace Ross.  I didn't know anything about her coming in and I was very impressed with how she did.

    I know some peole in the comments were cheering for Christy Mihos for his attacks on Kerry Healey.  I found Mihos insufferable.  To those who compared him to Perot, I didn't really like Perot that much, but I liked Perot much more than Mihos.

    Healey came across a little worse than I was expecting, and I didn't have especially high expectations for her.

    So, in summary, +2 for Ross, +1 for Patrick, -1 for Healey, -2 for Mihos.  Leaves Patrick still way ahead of the rest.

    • Christy

      Christy is actually a really interesting guy.  I really didn't know how serious he was about this race, but based on tonight's performance it seems that he's in this race 100% as to spoil Kerry Healey's chances.  As you probably picked up on, he was the turnpike chief, and was actually attempting to clean the place up.  Then Jane Swift needed a patsy, and he got fired for no real reason.  And he's pissed, boy is he pissed.

      I think he did exactly what he meant to do, and I think he did it well.

  24. Wow, the commentators weren't impressed with Muffy

    I missed most of the post-debate coverage, but during the last 10 minutes or so the commentators were only talking about how Kerry Healey really flubbed just about everything.  Interesting.

    • Herald photo

      The photo the Herald chose is pretty telling too:

      Ross and Mihos are yelling at Kerry, who manages to look simultaneously snotty and defensive, while Patrick is just keeping out of it.

  25. the best line in the debate

    was Mihos, regarding immigrants: The democrats want their votes and the republicans want their labor.

    I disagree with the conclusion (arrest 'em and toss 'em out) but not the observation.

  26. So who thinks women will break for Healey,

    ...after having 3 overbearing men gang up on her all night?

    (disclaimer, I didn't watch it, only read the comments)

    • 3 --> 2. /nt

      • 2 vs. 2

        The debate was evenly matched: 2 men, 2 women.  2 nuts (Healey, Mihos), 2 well spoken, thoughtful particpants (Patrick, Ross).

        If there are women for whom gender is a big issue, maybe they will go with Ross, who comported herself quite impressively.

        • Agreed.

          Ross did well providing a nice counterbalance to Healey, and proving all the while, by her presence on stage, that's it's possible to be a thoughtful, competent female in politics. 

    • Grace is a woman.

      Two men, one woman. 

      Why on earth would women break for a woman who, by her own performance, comes across as both haughty as well as weak and ineffectual?  She's the LG running for governor.  Her gender is a non-issue, imho.

    • Um, not so much...

      As a woman, I don't think Healey is exactly a shining example of our sex.  I don't really know how she got where she is: her resume is pretty pathetic for someone who's running for governor, her manner is snotty, and she doesn't seem to have any ideas of her own.

      • it's because

        The Republican Party has fully corroded in this state. Without trying to compete - at all - it's tough to field competitive opponents every election. They would have been much better off with a guy like Charley Baker, who's head of Harvard/Pilgram, a town selectman in Swampscott and was formerly the head of the Board of Ed. He at least could have played up his (highly overrated) tenure at the BoE and his health care credentials. He'd have been a much stronger opponent... but another lousy Republican governor, so I'm glad he didn't run. Plus he's wimpy; if he was afraid of facing Kerry Healey in a primary, serves him right.

    • Grace Ross is a woman

      It's 2 men and 1 woman up against Kerry Healey, and Patrick was by far the nicest and most polite to her. It looked like Mihos was coming on a bit too strong, but it was all substance and never crossed any lines, Rick Lazio-style.

  27. That was fun!

    Healey got her ass handed to her in short order. Wow.  Mihos is doing all the Democrats' work for them, which is nice for a change.  He was like a bulldog, and she just had nowhere to go.  Healey, I think, came off as icy, haughty, and ill-prepared.  She was tagged early and often with the Romney administration's failure to provide leadership and to take responsibility.  She looked weak and ineffectual.

    Mihos was a hoot.  I don't care how abrasive he is as long as he keeps doing what he's doing.  He's only alienating potential Healey voters, and that's just fine. 

    Ross, well, whatever.  Doesn't really damage anyone with her points, legitimate as they may often be.

    And Patrick did very well.  He came across as rather statesmanlike, patient, and above the fray.  He was strong and firm, in command, it seemed, at all times.  He nailed Healey with the criminologist crack and scored megapoints over the course of the night by pointing out the Romney's chronic inability and failure to lead.  The negligence angle is a winner. 

    That was a big Patrick win. 

    • Houston, Healy has a problem!

      Christy just took the taxes and immigration issues off the front pages tomorrow, which is a more important victory for Deval than winning the actual debate.

      Now Healy has to get past Christy first then Deval and she only has 7 weeks to do it.

  28. anyone else think that Christy...

    looked a lot like an Oompa Loompa?  Turn the tan down man.

  29. Weird choice by the Herald


    In their poll for who won the debate, Healey is blue, Mihos Red, Patrick Green, and Ross orange.  Anyone else think that is beyond strange, given the obvious ties that three of the candidates have to colors?  Would I have to believe that aliens shot Kennedy to believe they made Healey blue to trick inobservant viewers who thougth Patrick won into voting for what they think is the blue/dem/Patrick bubble?

    • of course it is an attempt to mislead

      Good Pick up!

      I voted for Patrick. 

      Note that they put her on top and also posted a picture of her looking tough above the poll. 

      Get your friends to vote up Patrick- or anyone else you like. 

      • not to mention

        The biased article and headline that accompany it.  It's the Healey Cheerleading Herald.

        • on the other hand

          it could be an alphabetical listing, and they could always do colors in that order, because they are in that order for their "did the results of the debate surprise you" poll. (I haven't seen a Herald poll that I can remember, because I don't really, you know, read the Herald).

          • I think it's a theme...

            ...when I voted in the Primary, I joked with the poll workers not to get confused, because the GOP ballots were blue, and the Dem ballots were red.  (Now, deep in recount land, that ain't so funny...)

            IS this all a subtle plan by Bill Galvin?  :)

            • I noticed that too...

              Anyone know why that is? In my last primary election the republican ballots were red and dem ballots were blue, so I assumed that was normal. Can't we do it the same from one election to the next??

      • You're overthinking things

        if you believe the color choice on the poll is some sort of plot to hurt Deval Patrick.

        • you're overstating my comment

          Not actually to hurt Deval, just to spin a little thing that is within their power to do.  But I did put the alien reference in there for a reason.

    • lots of subtle bias tonight by Fox and Herald

      I don't think any of this really changes the outcome, most points are piddly in and of themselves, but taken together I think they add up to discernable bias.

      1. point just made above about Herald's online poll with favorable Healey picture

      2. online poll on Fox 25 site begins with a dot ALREADY placed next to Healey's name, you can change the selection or just go with that pre-selection!

      3. most importantly - the first 3 questions were about taxes then questions on immigration - don't get me wrong, they are legit issues and big issues, but they are also Healey's 2 big issues, other important stuff like big dig and patronage came much later.

      4. the Schilling wife softball to Healey

      5. why was Deval the only one with constant earpiece difficulties - he began the debate with that thing hanging out of his ear - preventable?

      6. Did you notice the 3 bullet points thrown up about the candidates at the beginning of the debate?  I don't pretend to remember them all, but all I can remember about Deval's was that he refused to roll back tax cut, about Healey that she supported the tax rollback and that she supports stem cell research - like Patrick doesn't?  That seemed biased to me.

      All of the above MORE than outweighed by the favor to Deval in having the 2 third party candidates there - ironically that format on the original insistence of Healey, and Deval's solid performance tonight.  Healey was OK, but she needed a win and didn't get one.

      • I'm glad they are showing their bias now

        Now anyone that has any doubt of what we are up against in the media shouldn't be surprised.  It is going to get worse I think.  I expect it from the Herald

        If there is a Healy spin to this debate in the Globe we should really complain to the Globe adminstration, the Patrick campaign and the ombudsman. 

        It wouldn't hurt to complain to the Herald either--for some reason I don't think they will listen but you can't let this crap go unchallenged.

      • Earpiece

        Do they all have earpieces? Why?


  30. Voices of the people

    I mean those four everyday average working men and women that Fox randomly picked to ask those questions.

    Who were they?

    I did recognize Jaspar White, who is (or was) a big Romney booster.

    • One of them

      was Shonda Shilling, wife of Curt, who clearly must have a strenuous working life as she labors to supplement her husband's $13M/yr salary so that they can afford to raise their children in the mansion that Bledsoe built.

      She does, however, do very nice work for charity.  And her husband can pitch one hell of a game.

      I wonder if Fox went for her because they know she's a Republican or because they wanted to show off their pull with E-list celebrities.

    • Rife w/ Republican Supporters

      IIRC, Summer Shack (by the Alewife T stop) had a MASSIVE Bush billboard in either 2000 or 2004.  White's political affiliation is fairly well known.

      • fishing?

        I didn't know fishing was such a hot issue in the governor's race.  However, it appears that Kerry Healey did, as she seemed to have a nicely rehearsed answer to Jasper White's question. 

        '}}}}  '}}}}  '}}}}  '}}}}  '}}}}  '}}}} very FISHY debate questions!

    • GOP

      Mrs Schilling is a Republican.  Apparently Jasper White is a Republican (according to comments below).  Afterwards, the businessman from Winchester said he was a Republican.  I missed the first half so I'm not sure about the other person... but 3/4 or 100% Republican is not representative of Mass at all.  I don't think it was a coincidence.

  31. great debate

    Deval was great, calm and moderate, using Grace's presence exactly the way he did at the housing forum I went to: let her give the left-wing argument, then agree with it and pivot to present the centrist arguement as well (allowing to make a full argument in half the time). He treated all the candidates with equal respect, while Kerry seemed ignore the two people sitting between her and Deval. On the other side, Christy was free to go on offense against Kerry whenever she tried to strike out against Deval. He is our wild and angry shield. Deval sits comfortably, presents his visions and talks calmly about the issues. He's got the "broadest range of leadership experiences" and statesman and ready to be a leader.

    Kerry came out way down. Christy boosted a lot. Deval sat comfy and rode up a nudge. Grace got her first wide exposure and came out well.

    After the debate there was an online poll that showed up on the screen of who people thought won the debate. Obviously not scientific, but I wouldn't be surprised if the next poll looks similar: Deval 58%, Christy 22%, Kerry 18%, Grace 3%. (yes that's 101%)

  32. Copies available?

    Does anyone know if the debate is available? Perhaps in a handy, internet-friendly, format (.mp3? .mov? .avi?)

    • I'm converting now

      go to and you can stream it

      i'm copying audio and will try to post mp3 somewhere online tonight. any suggestions where I can host this thing?

  33. It only makes sense...

    to have Shonda Schilling be one of the questioners. I mean, she has lived in the state a whole two years.

  34. Grace & Mihos

    ..are a sideshow, and didn't really belong there. Grace was vapid and uninformed. And Mihos didn't sound all that stable to me.

    My guess is that Healey will propose one-on-one debates with Patrick. But he will insist on being "inclusive", because the unelectable nitwits set up a distraction that benefits him.

  35. Grace Ross Makes the Case for Public Financing

    More than one post notes -correctly- how well spoken and informed Grace Ross is on the issues. The only reason she won't be on people's radar come November is that she doesn't have millions of dollars to buy media time.

    If this election were truly about ideas instead of personality (Deval) or money (Mihos and Healey), Ross would be in serious competition for votes.

    Jill Stein proved four years ago, as Eileen McNamara noted in the the globe that "G stands for grown-up in Massachusetts politics."

    While folks such as Deval's departed primary rival and now Healey I expect, will argue that we should roll back the income tax to 5% because it is the expressed will of the people, no one is clamoring for restoring the Clean Elections Law which was also the will of the people.

    I don't for a minute believe that Kerry Healey or Deval Patrick or Christy Mihos have their finger on the pulse of education, poverty, health care, tax issues, or sustainable development the way Grace Ross does. Not to mention that Grace Ross is the only one who actually lives and works everyday with people in Massachusetts who live in poverty.

    When Grace speaks about expanding politcal polling to include more than "likely" voters she means the failing of the political system, and people who read and produce blogs to understand that people who are unlikely voters might have drastically different points of view on the races and the candidates if contacted, drawn back into the politcal process and actually asked their opinion. All too often these people live in poverty, are people of color, and are recent immigrants, and/or face language barriers.  The reality is most politicians, forget what they say in public, don't want unlikely voters participating in the process.

    This is another reason staunch party supports both Democrat and Rebublican get the "spoiler" candidacy myth wrong.  Many times non Democratic and Republic candidates do not cost Dems and Repubs elections because a lot of the votes that say, a Green-Rainbow candidate  or an Independent candidate receives are from unlikely voters, or people who would not voted in the election at all had they not had a non Democrat or non Republican to vote for this cycle.

    There is also a simple solution to broader candidate paricipation. It is called Instant Run-off or Rank Choice voting. It makes every election a run-off election with only one trip to the polls and guarantees a winner with a majority support. Instead of voting for one candidate of your choice, voters rank all candidates on the ballot in order of preference. Candidates with the least amount of first place votes are eliminated and those ballots recast as votes for the second choice until there is a majority winner.  These bills keep dying in the statehouse, so no spoiler talk please.

    • Yes, but in reality...

      Disclaimer: I don't mean to be rude. However, there is an important aspect to the points you make above:

      - They are all possible ways of doing things. However, they are not the way things are done today; and that is the environment in which candidates are judged.

      As to run-off voting: yes, it may be a smarter system, and it may prevent 3rd-party candidates from being spoilers in future elections. But in most actual elections today, quite often they are spoilers. Period.

      And similarly for how wonderful a candidate Grace Ross would be with public financing of elections - well, if she really wanted to implement her ideas, she would start by raising a bunch of money to campaign and win under today's rules; and once elected, then worry about changing public financing. Until then, she is an issues candidate, getting the word out and speaking her ideas, and that's great. But I won't go along with anyone who says she should be or would be a good governor, because as far as I am concerned she is not even seriously asking voters for the job.

    • wait just one moment...

      If this election were truly about ideas instead of personality (Deval) or money (Mihos and Healey), Ross would be in serious competition for votes.

      Who wants an election solely about ideas?  Personality, defined as "the visible aspect of one's character as it impresses others" isn't to be disparaged, nor confused with popularity or mere charm, as I suspect you are so doing.

      Not only do I value Deval Patricks' ideas, his personality is such that I believe in the earnestness and toughness with which he will turn them into public policy.  The same cannot be said for Healey; in point of fact, my reading of her personality suggests, much like her mentor Romney, both a want of sincerity and an indifference to their eventuation as public policy...  So by all means, let us turn this race into a comparison of personalities; that is to say, character.

      • Sure, personality is a part of leadership...

        But George W Bush is generally described as quite personable.  And Reagan's communication style was fabulous.  I still don't like the fact that either was President--because of their ideas.

  36. body language

    Was no one else taken with the body language?

    Patrick on the left facing the others and listening to everyone, respectful, a gracious host. Ross and Mihos kind of squished in the middle, but also part of the conversaton, Ross smaller, Mihos more front and center.

    Then Healey with her whole body turned away from the others, as if there was someone else she needed to talk with on the right - physically not associating with the others, distancing herself and her energy, until Mihos gets to her and she turns, but she is still separate, as if she distains them and thinks it is inappropriate for her even to be there.

      All the candidates should have seen a debate, the discussion of real issues, as honorable - all the candidates should have, in my estimation, treated the occasion with respect.

    • yup

      I think Healey's position was very consciously chosen to try to deliberately snub Ross and Mihos.  She wanted the debate to be Healey vs. Patrick, so she turned her body (and her attitude) to pretend the other candidates weren't there.

      Until, of course, Mihos got so in her face that she forgot who her real opponent was.

      • some points earned

        I do give her some points for keeping her cool last night - she had a tough night, it's hard to stand there and get beaten up like that, particulary from a guy just inches away from you and who you are trying your best to avoid.

        • keeping her cool?

          No, that's who she is.  Maybe not cool.  Cold.  Snide.  That "You're my hero, Christie" remark is classic Kerry Healey.  That's who she is. 

  37. conservatives hated the debate

    Been listening to some right wing talk radio this morning, they are pissed off at Christy for throwing the debate to Deval.  Reassuring...

    Made we wonder though - how come we in the left/center don't have an early morning call in show?  Surely there'd be a large enough audience in the Boston market???

    • That's easy...

      Made we wonder though - how come we in the left/center don't have an early morning call in show?  Surely there'd be a large enough audience in the Boston market???

      The liberal imagination moves towards generosity, peacefulness and hope... but doesn't, as a rule, arrive there much prior to  10:30 in the AM. All seriousness aside, I find talk radio, of whatever stripe, to be too brash by half for morning engagement.  For me, I like to wake, commute and begin the day to either classical music, light jazz or NPR.  It isn't until noon or better that I feel able to engage with talk radio...

    • sorry, they haven't asked

      That's because nobody asked me to do a talk show.  Unfortunately, I have the face for radio and the voice for print.  I'm too liberal for the Globe, so all I have is this silly blog.

      "Peter Porcupine from the cape, you're on the air."

    • speaking of talk radio

      NEWS FLASH!  The Boston Globe is reporting Jay Severin's return to Boston, starting October 9.

      Severin coming back to Boston By Carol Beggy & Mark Shanahan, Globe Staff  |  September 26, 2006 Turns out night time is not the right time, at least not for Jay Severin. Less than a year after signing a syndication deal that put him on the air from 7-10 p.m. in some 50 markets nationally, Jay's coming back to Boston. Greater Media Inc. is announcing today that the libertarian loudmouth is giving up his much-ballyhooed syndication deal with CBS Radio to again do drive-time at 96.9 FM Talk , a.k.a. WTKK. And Severin's so committed to Boston this time that he's signed a seven-year contract, and is even selling his Sag Harbor, N.Y., home and moving to the North Shore.

      "This is where I want to be," the highly rated talk jock told us yesterday. "This is where I do my best work. I am greatly excited about becoming a `legal alien' of Red Sox Nation." Starting Oct. 9 , Severin's show will be broadcast from 3-7 p.m. -- the time slot he occupied before moving to nights last January. Entertainment lawyer George Tobia, who negotiated Severin's new deal, said nights just didn't agree with Jay. "He's ready to start talking at 3 p.m.," said Tobia. "He's digested all the day's news and he's torqued up and ready to go." CBS Radio wasn't eager to let Jay walk, Tobia said, so Greater Media made it worth their while, buying out the balance of his contract for $500,000. "We're looking forward to Jay producing the most exciting, locally based talk radio show ever," said Greater Media GM Phil Redo.

      "Jay's going to be a major part of the WTKK family for a long time." Of course, Severin's second act will have consequences for some of the station's other hosts, including Michael Graham, who'll be bumped to nights, and there are whispers that others in TKK 's line up, including morning man Mike Barnicle, may not be long for the job.

    • We're not angry or threatened enough

    • Because we wouldn't call

      We're listening to Bob Oakes.

  38. Am I the only one

    who thinks Deval looked uninterested and did not show the passion that we have seen him show in prior debates and speeches. To me I think he looked like he did not care and that why bother let me let everyone else do the attacking for me. Or was it just the format that did not let the candidates really answer the questions. Or does everyone think Deval did so good because Healey looked so bad?

    I think the clear winner of the Debate was Christy Mihos, he was the only one that showed the passion and want for the job.

    Deval should be thanking Christy today for making it easier for him to get elected.

    • Yes, you are. ;-)

    • Just the first debate

      I think (and hope) that he will show more passion in the future debates, particularly any one-on-ones with just Healey.  I think he was trying to look above the fray, which worked for me but may have backfired with some voters.

      The other thing he should try to counter is the allegation that he is too vague.  It might be enough to point out that he has very detailed proposals on his web site.

        - Dan

  39. transcript posted at


    • Globe spin

      As I figured the Globe puts the best (indirect) spin on it to favor Healy.  They found the 5 "voices of voters"  people to quote.  2 democrats out of the 3 they quote said that the debate has them favoring Healy.  I wonder how many they had to ask to get them to say they were for Healy. 

      It is in the print edition City/Metro section page B4

      I have less problem with Shond Schilling -- at least that is blatant bias

      The Globe PRETENDS to be objective, but the new department spins unchecked for Romney and Healy

« Blue Mass Group Front Page

Add Your Comments

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Fri 24 Feb 2:31 PM