It’s the hottest game in town: listing the winners and losers from Tuesday’s election.
My pick for one of the losers: Charlie Baker.
Sure, the election can be seen as an ominous warning to Deval Patrick. But, first of all, that’s a good thing for Deval. It’s an unmistakable signal that Patrick has to be on his A-game from now through November. By most accounts last night’s state of the state was a good step in that direction.
But the big reason Charlie Baker was a loser on Tuesday is that both Tim Cahill and Christy Mihos have a better shot at tapping into what propelled Scott Brown to victory than Baker does. Baker is the ultimate establishment candidate. He worked for years on Beacon Hill. He’s worked for years as the CEO of a major health insurance company. He’s surprisingly uncharismatic — witness his latest foray into YouTube, in which he grouchily complains about Governor Patrick.
Good grief. Talk about an “eat your spinach” candidate. Talk like that may bring in the $500 donations from the CEOs, but it doesn’t seem likely to inspire a statewide grassroots mobilization like Brown’s campaign did. (Plus, what’s with the bizarre music choice?)
Even Charlie seems to get this:
“I’m Charlie Baker. I’m from Swampscott. I drive a Pacifica. It’s not quite the same,” he said, riffing on Brown’s campaign refrain: “I’m Scott Brown. I’m from Wrentham. I drive a truck.”
Mihos and Cahill, by contrast, are much more adept at playing the regular guy. They’ve both got the populist touch, as Brown does, and Baker doesn’t. They’ve both got the accent, as Brown does, and Baker doesn’t. Baker will probably still beat Mihos in the primary, especially if Mihos continues to show signs of being totally disorganized. But my guess is that Brown’s win has seriously energized Cahill, who starts out with a lot of money, and who now stands to benefit substantially from the populist, anti-tax, anti-Democratic establishment voters who like what they just did and who are looking for their next project. Enough to win? I still doubt it. But enough to pull a lot of anti-Deval votes that probably would otherwise have gone to Baker. If there’s anything approaching a three-way split in the independents, it’s hard to see Baker’s path to victory.
stomv says
listen to the instrumental at the end. It really sounds like the Dropkick Murphys.
<
p>Think the DMs gave Charlie Baker’s campaign permission to use their song? Despite that the DMs are from Quincy, like nearly all punk musicians they loathe Republicans* and even appeared on the “Rock Against Bush, Vol. 2” compilation CD in 2004.
<
p>You’ll note that Republicans have a long history of using musician’s songs (without payment nor permission) for campaigns, only to be told to knock it off.
<
p>
<
p> * yeah, a few punk bands are much more libertarian-ish, but even those bands hate ’em. It’s kind-of a part a the punk ethos.
davesoko says
The song Charlie played clips from in the intro and outro parts of his address is “The State of Massachusetts”, a great ditty by the Dropkicks off their 2007 album “The Meanest of Times.” The song was a US top 100 radio hit that year, and was the lead single off the album.
<
p>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T…
<
p>They play it quite a bit to get the crowd pumped up at Sox games too, in between sing-alongs of “Sweet Caroline!”
<
p>If the Dropkicks hadn’t given permission or been compensated for the use of their intellectual property, good ‘ole Charlie might be in some hot water. You can’t just use someone else’s music to try and shill your product or your self without their permission.
<
p> Hey, if the guy started using MY intellectual property to try and win votes for himself, I’d be looking for a good intellectual property lawyer.
<
p>Just sayin’.
<
p>
trickle-up says
choice of opponent.
howland-lew-natick says
I think it was the disappointment of the people in the Chief Executive that caused the loss of the seat to the Republicans. Imagine the wonder to read this. Does he mean it? Can politicians overcome the greed and do something for the country?
<
p>Musn’t get our hopes too high…
ryepower12 says
Baker would have a huge uphill climb to win. I think the only chance he has, in fact, is if Cahill drops out (and probably Mihos, too).
lightiris says
switch parties.
peter-porcupine says
ryepower12 says
Is there an article you’re referring to, specifically? Or was this snark because you’re a Mihos supporter?
huh says
It does bear repeating: Baker has to get through the primaries. Whatever the recent election showed, the commentary over on RMG during it says the GOP base is as socially conservative as ever.
nopolitician says
Baker says “state spending has skyrocketed”.
<
p>I could be wrong, but I checked the state budgets online. The first Patrick budget went up from Romney’s last budget, but the next two decreased.
<
p>These are the numbers I found:
<
p>FY2005: $22.2bn (Romney)
FY2006: $24.3bn (Romney)
FY2007: $26.2bn (Romney)
FY2008: $28.1bn (Patrick)
FY2009: $27.7bn (Patrick)
FY2010: $27.0bn (Patrick, projected)
<
p>Am I wrong? Am I missing something?
<
p>How can Baker claim that spending has “skyrocketed”?
<
p>That’s a claim that needs to be put to bed fast. The Herald has been advancing this hollow claim that Patrick has hired thousands of workers. In reality, he has filled positions as they became vacant. Yet people believe that Patrick created thousands of new positions. It fits their meme.
mr-punch says
Disagree. Cahill’s a loser, because his theory was that a known though disaffiliated Dem could win where a Republican couldn’t. Romney’s a loser because his party hates health care reform, especially the individual mandate.
<
p>Capuano’s the hidden winner — too aggressive? Really?
sabutai says
As the head of the DSCC, he was invisible. I miss Chuck Schumer already.
alexswill says
I won’t be missing Majority Leader Reid.
<
p>I like the ring of Majority Leader Durbin MUCH better.
charley-on-the-mta says
Yeah, the intro music makes it sound like Baker’s running for Hazzard County sheriff.
<
p>”Three years ago … we had a $1 billion surplus; now, we have a $3 billion deficit.”
<
p>Gosh, Charlie, what happened in the meantime? Can you think of anything? Like, THE WORST FINANCIAL CRISIS IN THREE GENERATIONS? Maybe the health insurance CEO missed out on that.
<
p>And as NoPolitician points out, spending hasn’t skyrocketed; the difference between those budgets is mostly due to … health care reform subsidies — which Baker presumably supports!
<
p>These ought to be easy claims to poke holes in. And to echo again, they need to be dealt with aggressively … preferably with mockery!
lightiris says
HCHP is, bar absolutely none, THE best health insurer on the market. HCHP (in spite of his leadership?) has forged the most progressive path in health care and is unparalleled in its humane approach, its proactive interventions, and its supportive measures for new mothers and the chronically ill.
<
p>No one even comes close.
<
p>Can’t we convert him?
petr says
Sit still Charlie, fercyrinoutloud. You look like an effen Pez dispenser on the dash of a semi, eastbound on the the Pike.
<
p>
<
p>That sounds entirely rational… ‘Course, in a rational world, Sarah Palin would be an over-the-hill hostess at the Wasilla Denny’s, smiling sweetly at the twice yearly visit of black folks from Nome while, behind their backs, dishing her own brand of sauce to the short order cook behind the counter. In a rational world Scott Brown actually be required to drive his truck for a living. In a rational world, George Bush would be the pleasant, if oft sozzled, husband of the Texas Librarian of the Year ten years running…
<
p>The big winner, no matter the losers, was the GOP. They built a template for an underground stealth operation that’s outdone in its mastery by its venality. Push-polls, negative adds, whisper campaigns, tea-baggers.
<
p>You thought this campaign was bad (and it was…) just wait.
<
p>Frankly, the GOP picked a lock they’ve long wanted to get past: how to get Massachusetts voters riled up and unthinking. Anger is always and wholly a destructive emotion. It never helps. It always hurts. It is the opposite of clarity of mind. It only and always works to the advantage of the troglodytes in the race. It is almost never justified and even on the rare instances in which it is righteous it is never controllable.
<
p>We get all red in the face and release a bunch of adrenaline and call this ‘satisfaction’ all the while seeking proximate vengeance: rip the nearest thing not angry nor adrenalized and call ourselves sated for having done something energetically.
<
p>Our job… our task and focus… is to resist anger and to get people to think. Win win for them and for us.
hoyapaul says
<
p>…if Patrick didn’t already know he had to be on his A-game from now through November, he’s in worse trouble than we thought.
david says
But now it’s SUPER clear. đŸ™‚
cater68 says
Mihos is a car wreck. Cahill is an overtly calulating opportunist. It’s Deval vs. Baker for all the marbles.
david says
Um … is that supposed to mean he can’t compete? Au contraire — that’s a pretty good formula for a solid campaign! đŸ˜‰
cater68 says
Agreed, overty calculating doesn’t disqualify anyone.
<
p>However, as I’ve stated previously, Cahill’s big problem is gonna be bucks. Frank Phillips said every winning gubernatorial campaign since 1998 has spent a minimum of $10 million. Cahill has $3M in the bank and has been treading water fundraising-wise since jumping in. I think Deval spend 19M in 2006. Deval and Baker will suck up the “hard” money and be lavished with soft money from their respective parties. Where does Cahill’s money come from? I think he suffocates by summer.