The Massachusetts GOP held its convention yesterday, in which predictably, Charlie Baker got the nod for governor. However, internationally-notorious anti-gay bigot and “100% pro-Trump” pastor Scott Lively received 27% of the delegates. So, this guy will be on the ballot, hanging around until September’s primary. Trump state chair Geoff Diehl got the nod for Senate, so Trumpism is alive and well in the MA GOP.
Baker’s repudiation of Lively was apt:
“There’s no place and no point in public life — in any life — for a lot of the things Scott Lively says and believes, okay?” said Baker, with Lieutenant Governor Karyn Polito at his side.
Baker’s acceptance remarks sounded fairly anodyne, even as he pointed up areas of supposed conservative agreement :
He reminded delegates that he backs the death penalty for those who kill police officers, he vetoed a huge legislative pay raise, and he opposed making Massachusetts a sanctuary state.
He highlighted his differences with Democrats over immigration issues, drug trafficking penalties, and taxes, and got the best applause of his speech.
“The short story on this one is they believe in a bigger, more intrusive, less accountable state government. We don’t,” Baker said of his Democratic foes. “We need a strong, united Republican Party to serve as a check on those Democrat majorities.”
The fact that Baker is perfectly willing to play ball with the inhuman, child-imprisoning, family-destroying ICE, is chilling — talk about normalization.
This rightward tendency within the GOP, even here in Massachusetts, is not naturally self-correcting. If anything, with the promised influx of Mercer dark money, far-right voices in our Commonwealth may well be emboldened this year. They’ll still probably lose, but it raises the stakes: If a Scott Brown/black swan situation emerges, the consequences are even more dire.
The Democratic convention will be June 2. It will likely be the Elizabeth Warren Show, given the state of the Governor’s race. (There’s another ordained minister in the governor’s race, by the way: Bob Massie.) If the GOP convention is sending some disturbing signals, that gives us an opportunity for a much more positive, inclusive, just, and forward-looking message.
Charley on the MTA says
By the way, unpopular opinion here: Legislators *should* get a pay raise. Also ADAs, public defenders, etc.
jconway says
I am not against legislative pay raises, I am against the legislature voting itself a raise after voting against much needed revenues for the T, education, and housing. I support raises indexed to inflation and attached to stringent lobbying reforms that end the revolving door of legislators to State Street, many of whom quit in the middle of their terms to immediately take on new lobbying positions. Also standardizing what extra duties and per diems are allotted and taking those decisions out of the hands of the Speaker would be a huge reform.
Christopher says
I also like the 27th amendment to the federal Constitution requiring that changes in compensation take effect after the next election.
Trickle up says
Horse race comment: This is a plus for Baker (though no doubt annoying for him too).
He will beat Lively and emerge as the moderate Republican everyone longs for. Voters, including dems, will swoon.
Pablo says
I agree with Trickle up – Scott Lively presents an excellent foil for the governor. Baker can point to Lively and say, “That’s the fringe. That’s not me.” It allows Baker to put Lively’s cardboard cutout into his comparison, rather than the GOP convention’s designee Geoff Diehl, an enthusiastic Trumpster.
rcmauro says
Two comments: reality and horse-race.
In reality: it is frightening that 626 Massachusetts residents, presumably representing others that were not in attendance at the GOP convention, voted for this person. The particular type of hate politics that Trump has latched on to is a cancer on our society and I don’t expect to see it defeated without a lot more violence. The rage seems to me fueled by intense envy (as Handel’s Saul puts it, “Eldest born of Hell!”). I’m also inclining more and more toward agreeing with those who see it as a reaction to threats to white privilege.
Horse race: I agree with Pablo and trickle-up, adding the following observation: it could also affect the Democratic primary in unforeseen ways. I think some Democratic insiders really overestimate the current interest in state politics among average Massachusetts voters. People are fired up, but it’s about Trump, and they feel frustrated by not having a direct shot at him unless it’s through out-of-state races. I could see a lot of independent voters gravitating toward the Republican state primary in order to take a stand against Trump-surrogate Lively. This would affect the universe of Democratic primary voters (assuming that we have two candidates on the ballot).
Charley on the MTA says
+1 for referencing a Handel oratorio.
methuenprogressive says
Not the first deplorable, merely the latest.
Jimmy Lyons of Andover, for instance.
johntmay says
The local press calls Lively a “fringe candidate”. Getting more than 25% of Republicans to back one does not make one a fringe candidate.
SomervilleTom says
Mr. Lively IS a “fringe candidate”. Getting more then 25% of Republican delegates to back him provides yet more evidence that the Massachusetts GOP is itself a fringe party.
Bizarre things happen in the extremes of any distribution. When the sample size is tiny than, huge swings happen (5 times a tiny number is still a tiny number).
This convention demonstrates again that the Massachusetts GOP is a tiny and moribund party that cannot field anything except fringe candidates. Charlie Baker got the nomination the same way he got elected — by being the NOT-GOP Republican candidate. The 2,400 of the “party faithful” who showed up are a tiny fraction of the 1.04M voters who put Mr. Baker in the corner office (0.23% to be precise). The 665 of those who voted for Mr. Lively are an infinitesimal portion of Mr. Baker’s 2014 voters.
Scott Lively is a fringe candidate, supported by fringe delegates to the annual convention of a fringe party.
johntmay says
No, it is a racist party, at its core. No fringe.
SomervilleTom says
I suppose it depends on the definition of “fringe”.
For me, a party with not even 11% of the total registered voters is a “fringe” party.
doubleman says
And a sexist one, too!
Here’s a pic of the Elizabeth Warren barf bags being passed out around the convention.
SomervilleTom says
More statistics — February 2017 registration totals:
Unenrolled: 54.01%
Democrats: 34.02%
Republicans: 10.68%
Libertarian: 0.19%
Seems to me that less than 11% of registered voters is pretty “fringe”.
hesterprynne says
And in the race for the Attorney General spot, Dan Shores (the candidate favored by Bristol County dungeon keeper Tom Hodgson ) lost to Jay McMahon, in a contest to see which could demonstrate the more slavish devotion to the Second Amendment.
It may have seemed a couple months ago that Shores, supported by the owners’ rights group “Guns of Massachusetts,” had the lead, what with their “Don’t F’#@ with Chuck” Facebook video depicting Chuck Norris firing a rifle and appearing to mow people down. But after the Parkland shooting, Shores began urging his supporters to avoid inflammatory rhetoric, and yesterday he lost a close race to McMahon, who promised the Worcester crowd that no one would ever accuse him of “being a nice guy.”
jconway says
I guess this shows us why most major Democrats with a statewide portfolio are playing the waiting game. Baker may look invincible now, and he is likely going to be re-elected in a landslide, but the future of the party is clearly in the hands of people in the mold of Scott Lively and Geoff Diehl and not Charlie Baker or Karyn Polito.
thegreenmiles says
1) Charlie Baker wants to fix transit & make your commute better! And to solve opiods! And to improve schools! And clean energy!
2) Charlie Baker wants lower taxes & smaller government!
Until Democrats start pointing out this contradiction instead of taking about how handsome & charming Baker is, we’re in for another four years of no progress on anything.
petr says
The problem isn’t Baker and it surely isn’t the Democrats to solve. The problem…
Bill Well got 1.1 million votes in the CommonWealth in 1990 and 1.5 million in 1994.
Mitt Romney go 1 million votes in the CommonWealth when he ran for Governor
George Bush got 1 million votes in the CommonWealth in 2004.
John McCain got 1.1 million votes in the CommonWealth when he ran for Pres.
Mitt Romney got 1.1 million votes in the CommonWealth when he ran for Pres.
Charlie Baker got 900,000 votes in 2010 and 1 million votes in 2014.
Donald Trump got 1 million votes in the CommonWealth in 2016.
The problem is that there are approximately 1 million CommonWealth voters who, like the purported ‘yellow dog democrats’ of yore will vote an orange clown, so long as he’s Republican, before even pausing to give thought. The numbers are so very solid on this point as to be inarguable.
Or put another way, these “Orange Clown Republicans” don’t think this is a contradiction, so well versed are they in navigating the byways of cognitive dissonance.
With the sole exception of Bill Weld in 1994, no Republican has received more than 1.1 million votes in the CommonWealth AND this number has never represented more than 50% of the vote. Trumps million was, in fact, was less than a third of the number of people who came out to vote.
Charlie Baker has a ceiling of 1 to 1.5 million votes. If every Democrat who gave even the slightest damn about the thing came out to vote the Democratic ticket Baker would be history. Luckily (for Baker) Democrat candidates have their own contradictions: they have to raise enough funds yet pass a purity test to get on the ballot…
SomervilleTom says
Voters in Massachusetts are as addicted to magical thinking as voters anywhere else. We are, if anything, more hypocritical.
Massachusetts has been spiraling into third-world status since we passed proposition 2 1/2 in 1980. The notion that reducing taxes does anything but destroy government services is delusional Republican lunacy. It has NEVER worked anywhere. It doesn’t work nationally, even though the federal government is under no obligation to balance an annual budget. It is even more absurd in Massachusetts, where our state constitution requires a balanced annual budget.
Civilization costs money. Taxes are the price we pay for civilization. Our “Democratic” legislature is as wrong-headed as any red state. Our “Democratic” voters who refuse to raise taxes — especially on the wealthy — are as wrong-headed as any Republican.
Magical thinking is non-partisan disorder that is just as rampant among Democrats as Republicans.
Christopher says
I agree with you on taxation, but some time on Daily Kos is enough to remind me that we’re actually pretty well governed compared to many other states.
SomervilleTom says
Understood, there’s a world of difference between Massachusetts and — say — Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, etc.
I’m talking about Massachusetts because we’re talking about putting a bigot on the gubernatorial ballot here.
While it’s true that our governance is better than some states, it is still terrible today compared to when I arrived in 1974. Our state is in far worse condition that it was then. Our commuter rail service is abysmal, our subway service is worse, our bridges are much worse, and our highways are worse. I don’t have the same first-hand experience with our education system, but I believe it is similarly declining (leaving aside the whole busing fiasco that was active when I arrived). Our social services are terrible today compared to then. Today, we don’t even try to help our most endangered residents.
We are in a power-dive (a “controlled flight into terrain” incident). At least some of those other states have already crashed. I’d like us to avoid their fate.
gmoke says
Ya know, if Scott Lively just admitted his gay panic is because he’s afraid he’s gay and went back to smoking weed, he just might win the Republican nomination and maybe even become Governor. /snark