As some have asked on this blog, what is the up side for Reilly in picking Chris Gabrieli? Aside from money, which he has plenty of and can get access to, the answer is: not much. What are the downsides? Well, aside from further alienating himself from the core activists and widening that alienation to supporters of three established Lieutenant Governor campaignsâ¦he again proves by timing this whole thing right before the Caucuses, that he has questionable political instincts and may give the 750,000 or so primary voters pause about his ability to win in November.
On the point of money, not only does Reilly have $3.6 million in the bank, but he proved he knows how to raise it, by raising $2 million last year. Certainly he has the capability of raising at least $3 million this election year. So that positions him with about $8.5 million to run a primary and general election campaign in MA. Plenty, given that the highest price tags Iâve heard are in the $5 to 6 million range.
So does he want to go the easy route and have Gabrieli write a check and not worry about fundraising? Again, other folks have written about how far Gabrieliâs money brought him in the past (0 for 2). While he obviously has a talent for venture capitalism and is a thoughtful policy wonk, he brings nothing to the ticketâexcept money. Money that Reilly has proven he can find elsewhere.
Reilly is already going to get swamped in the caucuses next week and if he keeps stumbling as he has been doing (THE phone call, flip flopping on Capital Punishment, ignoring the activists) he is giving pause to a lot of neutral players in the party (labor in particular who, as I read the tealeaves, tolerate him but certainly donât love himâ¦I mean who, aside from paid employees in his office, really love Tom Reillyâs quest for the Corner Office.)
If he makes this move, heâll lose lots of support in Worcester County, Barnstable County and moderates in the delegate rich areas of Brookline and Newton where the LG candidates have been organizing (the liberals are already lost for him). If he does this, Reilly is basically telling the other LG candidates to have their supporters vote for Patrick in June. Now maybe one LG candidate will drop out (Dr. Kelley) but the rest have the resources to stay until June, and theyâll spend whatever they need to get 15%. So if Silbert, Murray and Goldberg get their 15% (Gabrieli will certainly have to fight hard for his delegates), that means at least 45% of the delegates will not like Reillyâs move.
Does Reilly really want to piss off 45% of the delegates (a minimum)? Does he want a scenario of getting the Convention endorsement with anything less that 70% of the vote? Because that is the threshold the media will set for him. If Reilly gets less than 70% he loses the perception war and Patrick gets a boost in money and media and lives to give him a primary fight, all the while Reilly needs to make sure Gabrieli wins his race.
But it could be even worse. Patrick is already very well organized for the caucuses and this could be a tipping point for enough delegates to give him a victory at the convention. No one really knows how much Patrick is worth and certainly one fundraiser with Bill Clinton will buy Patrick a media blitz for the September primary. Reillyâs potential move could give Patrick the boost he needs to be credible.
And what happens if Reilly wins the September Primary but Gabrieli continues his losing streak? How will that help our chances in November?
Can you say quagmire? Maybe now you can understand the comparison to Bushâs rash decision to invade Iraq without careful thought and planning to the potential decision Reilly is making this weekend?
Iâll make another comparison: When Al Gore endorsed Howard Dean in December 2003, a full month before the Iowa Caucuses and the New Hampshire Primary. At that moment everyone thought the game was over. The front runner in the polls and in money just got the mother of all endorsementsâthe Dean momentum was overwhelming. In reality, and only in hindsight, this was the beginning of the end for the Dean campaign. What looks like a great move today (by some in the Reilly camp at least) may in reality be the beginning of the end.
A gamblerâs move is to pick a running mate. The safe move is to let the current crop of LG candidates, all accomplishedâa couple of whom provide the right balance to Kerry Healyâand make them run competitive campaigns in which the victor will have proven chops to help in November.
And if any Reilly people are reading this, Iâll close with this: You may feel youâre in the cat birdâs seat as the front runner and you can afford to take chances. But here is a trivia questionâname the last Attorney General from Massachusetts who was directly elected Governor of this state? Here is a hintâit is the same basic answer to the question: Which President is on the $10 bill?
The lessen to learn from the answer is that arrogance will defeat you.
One thing that I will add is that it will be virtually impossible for Deval Patrick to win the convention. Last year the DSC stacked the deck in favor of the insiders and now a larger percent of the delegates are ex-officio or appointed than ever before. While Patrick will get the support of some of those delegates, the bulk of them will go to Reilly, the insider candidate.
<
p>
For that same reason, I doubt that Gabrieli will have much problem getting on the ballot if that’s what Reilly wants.
…about the ex-offico’s and appointed. Although Reilly’s support from them seems to center on his “inevitablity” and not their warm relations with him. (Heck, his two best political friends are Republicans–Wayne Budd and Ralph Martin.) Reilly could loss some of their support from if these self inflicted paper cuts keep happening…they may result in political death.
<
p>
Nor did I mean to imply that Gabrieli will have a problem with achieving 15%. He’d get that with his own resources, even if he were not matched with Reilly.
I am big fan of this site and read it all the time. I have never posted anything, but had to write back to you today. That was a very in-depth analysis about Reilly & Gabrieli, but I must say it is quite a stretch to compare that with Bushâs decision to go to war. I don’t think they have anything in common.
<
p>
But I wanted to write because I actually thought this was a good idea. I think Reilly has a lot to gain by adding someone who has experience running for LG. I certainly donât think it was Gabrieliâs fault that we lost last time. And even though Reilly has done a good job fundraising, Iâm afraid Healey or even Mihos will be able to dump huge amounts of cash into their campaigns.
<
p>
The other LG candidates all seem like good candidates, but I think if Gabrieli jumps he moves to the front of the group. He could add a lot to Reillyâs campaign.
there’s nothing in common, and lets get a little perspective here, the choice to go to war and the choice to select a running mate before the convention of political party and so different its absurd to even start listing them.
<
p>
As to Gabrieli, he’s not a bad guy, but he is not a good pol. If Tom Reilly came out tomorrow and said, “I want to run with Tim Murray” … I’d be the happiest citizen in this commonwealth (other than Tim Murray … and I’m pretty sure Rep. Jim McGovern might have his head explode trying to figure out if he should be happy or said)
…to get people to read the. But the point (and the very long stretch) still stands. Reilly’s taking a gamble here that he does have to take. It’s an optional choice…he can raise the money he needs to take on Healy and/or Mihos. And this optional choice has some real downsides. The safe bet is to continue the fundraising, don’t do anything stupid to help Patrick and let the very best LG candidate emerge (the winner) to join his ticket.
<
p>
Gabrieli is a good guy and has made not only monetary contributions to progressives, but does offer thoughtful ideas. Fine, let him run on his own.
Proofing is not my strong point. Should read, “Reilly’s taking a gamble here that he does NOT have to take”
Remember, winning the convention is not the be-all end-all measure of success. Yes, Shannon and Chris won it in 02, but in 98, Pines won it and look what it got her: a close race in a tight election against Reilly, and then a losing LG campaign 4 years later. Remember also the Silber 1990 event, when he barely got on the ballot, but then won the primary.
<
p>
But I guess with the new convention rules and a 2-person race, there will be a “winner” after one ballot, so there will be less horse-trading of delegates and perhaps there can be more of an impression of “winning” that gets conveyed by the media.
<
p>
In the LG’s race, if Gabrieli is in, the story will be whether he gets 50% on that first ballot. I think it’s unlikely, in which case he has to go to a 2nd ballot (assuming he’s in the top 2 – since only the top 2 after the 1st ballot move on!).
<
p>
If Gabs isn’t in the top 2 on that first ballot, but still gets 15%, yes, he’s on the primary ballot, but he’s clearly a lame-o. If Andrea wins the convention with Gabs in the race (a possibility given the support I’ve been hearing about ( from sources in places elsewhere than this site – which gives a skewed view of Silbert support)), that would be huge and would make both Reilly and Gabs look weak as can be. If Murray wins, it’s a non-event, because it’s his city, he’s a pol-insider, yada yada, but Gabs is still waekened. If Deb wins, that’s a bit of a surprise, but again, not as much of a surprise as if Andrea wins it. If Kelley wins, that’s an earthquake.
<
p>
As I said before, Silbert winning would be a stunner, because she’s really come out of nowhere to impress with her resume and fundraising. If her fundraising keeps moving along at a solid clip, it would take a Bloomberg-ian amount of ads from Gabs to blow her out of the media water. Likewise, Tim and Deb could also be right up there in terms of $ for an ad buy, so Gabs would have to spend gobs of $$ to win.
<
p>
Again, all of the above reinforces the fact that it’s just not a win-win situation for Gabrieli or the party to get in. He’d be much weaker than 02, the novelty of an early ticket for dems has worn off and worn out its welcome, and there’s a much stronger LG field this year. Plus, there’s less of a need to distinguish oneself in the Gov race, as there are only 2 candidates, as opposed to the 4 in 02.
<
p>
I hope this is only a trial balloon and that at the Convention we all look at eachother and say “Wait, wasn’t Gabrieli going to get into this thing? Thank god he didnt, because Andrea/Tim is much better.”
<
p>
(FYI, I’m also considering Deb, but think Andrea and Tim have the most to offer.)
Does that make Gabrieli Blair to Reilly’s Bush (lapdog partner in a rash escapade based on faulty premises) or Saddam (subject of the adventure) or OBL (lurking presence without a clear role) or maybe even Dick Cheney (running mate and money-man). Just wondering.
I don’t want to make Gabrieli a bad guy here.