Math MCAS #2.
What lessons can be derived from 2002 Democratic primary poll data?
June 23 Herald Poll
O’Brien 31 %
Reich 19 %;
Birmingham 12 %
Grossman 6 %
Tolman 3 %
Undecided 28 %
September 10 Herald Poll
O’Brien 28 %
Reich 28 %;
Birmingham 17 %
Tolman 21 %
September 17 ACTUAL RESULTS
O’Brien 31 %
Reich 25 %;
Birmingham 24 %
Tolman 18 %
The CW might start this way: O’Brien and Reilly were the establishment middle class; Reich and DP were the Clinton libs. But Gabs doesn’t easily fit here. Tolman ran on “Clean Elections” – Mihos is probably the closest thing to that “I’m sick of it” message.
Reilly probably stays with straightforward message, just tries to execute better. Having sown up progressive base, does DP tilt away, push some centrist ideas, emphasize Clinton’s “third way” moderate agenda, win over Scot Lehigh? Reich never did, disavowing positions he’d made in Wall Street Journal years before on education reform, in part b/c his big volunteer operation was so far left. Will DP be helped or pinned by his roots help? Which voters does Gabs target?
(MCAS reminder: please respond in complete paragraphs).
Patrick isn’t going to tilt right – I actually think that he’s far less “liberal” (whatever that means) than he’s been painted by the media and his opponents thus far, and that will continue to become clearer as time goes on. If working for Coke, Texaco, and Ameriquest hasn’t scared away his lefty supporters thus far, nothing will. If Lehigh starts paying attention to what Patrick actually says, rather than what his opponents say he says, he (Lehigh) might be more interested.
<
p>
You’re right on Reilly. It’ll be the same message he delivered (pretty well) in the DCU Center, just hopefully without additional St. Fleuriascos. “I’m a regular Joe, just like you, and I’ll fight for you every day I’m in the Governor’s office.” It’s an appealing message.
<
p>
Gabrieli is a technocrat – Vennochi is right today that he’s trying to revive the old Dukakoid “competence, not ideology” mantra. The buzzword of his campaign has been, and will be from now ’til September, “results.” Nothing inspiring here, just a play for the folks who want government to do stuff without making a fuss about it.
<
p>
Three very interesting, very different campaigns. If they can avoid tearing each other apart, it should be a fascinating race.
I think the 2002 results are actually most encouraging for Patrick, in the primary if not the general. You would think that he starts with Reich’s entire share of the primary electorate, right? The Patrick enthusiasm at the Amherst caucuses this year was not at the level of the Reich enthusiasm in 2002, but the latter was contested in a way that the former wasn’t — there was the late surge to get Reich on the ballot and other candidates were trying for Amherst delegates in a way they weren’t this year. (One person in the Amherst caucus spoke in favor of Reilly — there was no organized presence, while both O’Brien and Birmingham had people at the 2002 caucus.)
<
p>
So 25% firm support is a good start in a three-way race. In addition, I think a lot of Birmingham’s and Tolman’s voters will go to Patrick. Birmingham had lots of teacher union support. (I voted for him, in fact, though in retrospect I wish I had voted for Reich.) And Tolman’s clean-elections platform is best identified with Bonifaz’ secretary of state candidacy this time around, and all the Bonifaz supporters I’ve run into are also behind Patrick. (Of course nearly everyone here is behind Patrick, which skews my perception.)
<
p>
Does anyone remember which way Mayor Menino went in 2002? It might have been Birmingham, which would argue against my point above a bit, since Menino this year is backing Reilly.
<
p>
The main thing Patrick has going for him is that he has better personal charisma and broader potential appeal than did Reich. I think he will stand out from the other two to the extent that he will get to 40%, which will be enough to win.
<
p>
The big question is whether the composition of the primary electorate will be significantly different from that of 2002. Gabrieli and Reilly both need to attract voters less self-identified as Democrats, if they are right that the independent centrist voters who will decide the general are more likely to go with them. (I don’t buy this premise necessarily, but it’s clearly the basis of Reilly’s campaign and to some extent Gabrieli’s — they will each spend a lot of money to paint Patrick as the traditional big-spending high-taxing liberal Democrat.)
Menino was with Birmingham in 2002, and was a stronger supporter of Birmingham at the 2002 Convention than he was of Reilly at the 2006 Convention – many more Boston delegates were able to vote for the non-Menino-endorsed candidates this year than in 2002. It was actually scary in 2002 the way that Menino’s whips menacingly hovered over Boston delegations. Although Menino worked hard for Birmingham at the 2002 Convention, I don’t think he worked that hard in the 2002 Primary, so it remains to be seen whether Menino will put in a token effort or a real effort for Reilly in the 2006 Primary.
While most of the City support did go to Tom Birmingham at that convention (and why not, he had been good to Boston as Senate President), there were also switches of votes to help both Warren Tolman (another strong supporter of the City) and Steve Grossman get 15%.
I think it is wrong to paint Deval as being to the left, and there isn’t a great of value in cmparing the dynamics of this race to the last. I make the following assumptions 1.) Gabrielli will try and make this an air war. 2.) Patrick is committed to a true grassroots effort (which Riech never was) and he will capitalize on the convention victory and the Obama” factor to quickly catch up to Reilly in the fundraising race. 3.) Reilly is now in panic mode and will spend his dwindling resources irresponsibly, and watch his institutional support continue to erode (or become less relevant.
<
p>
So the question will come down who can develop a message that resonates, and then use given strategy to get that accross. G. and his air war is the easiest approch to that success – but I don’t think his message is likely to resonate and he is unlikely to develop and penetrating feild organization. DPatrick showed some guts yesterday with using his “politics of cynicism” to take aim not at the political insiders (ho-hum) but at the press. If today’s globe is any indication for one day at least it worked. But continuing to build a grassroots organization, and using a reasonably funded media campaign in responding to Reilly’s already apparent strategy of going negative, is expensive. People aften make the mistake of believing building feild is cheap it’s not.
<
p>
So each candidate has challenges but I think Patrick has a clearer idea of what his are and an organization better focused on adressing them than Reilly, while Gabrielly will tell us if a mediocre candidate can win with cash.
I spoke with a lot, and I mean a lot, of Reilly delegates who openly stated that they were voting for Reilly at the convention because they felt he was owed a place on the ballot for all his years of service. They are neither wedded to or inspired by his candidacy. Many of these folks stayed around to watch Deval Patrick give his “acceptance” speech at the end because they really are Patrick supporters who haven’t yet emerged from the closet. The same, I believe, holds true for many Gabrieli supporters.
<
p>
Look, anyone at the convention who claims to see little potential or charisma in Patrick is simply failing to read the writing on the wall. Something else is going on there, if that’s the case.
I wondered if you’d notice and click. đŸ˜‰
Go teachers!
We also spoke with some Reilly folks who had been on board both at the caucus and through the convention. I’m not sure if Saturday was the first time they’d heard Deval in person, but they were quite impressed — even making the comment that they were envious of not being able to openly join in the cheering and sign-waving.
<
p>
However, now that their “obligations” have been cleared, they may well join the Deval team. As one of them said to me, “I have just seen the future of the Democratic Party.”
<
p>
As an avid Deval supporter, I wholeheartedly welcome everyone who wants to team up with us.
Anyone notice during Deval’s speech just how quiet the hall was at times? Notice how everyone in the hall was paying attention? When was the last time anyone can remember such a thing at a Massachusetts State Convention? At one point in Deval’s speech I looked around, and you could see the yellow and orange-shirted Reilly supporters and the baseball shirted-Gabrieli supporters, many of them standing, just transfixed by Deval’s speech. Very impressive performance, in my humble opinion.
You have to wonder what was going through the heads of all those extremely faithful people who have worked so hard for the party over the years and have unfailingly supported the candidates they were “supposed” to support. They must have felt a little left out, a little envious, and a little disappointed that they couldn’t really share and participate in what was truly an exhilarating moment.
They can make up for that now because they are welcome to join in whenever they decide to. That’s the whole point of Patrick’s campaign, isn’t it?
I made that same point in several earlier posts today.
Sorry, Iris, but this extremely faithful person who has worked so hard for the party over the years and has unfailingly supported the candidate I was “supposed” to support, was completely ecstatic and feeling completely left in, and not at all envious or disappointed – because Deval Patrick is my candidate. I think some of my fellow Patrick supporters have to get over their conspiracy-theory mindsets and recognize that lots of Party stalwarts are behind Patrick. I think that people like John Walsh, Nancy Stolberg, Mardee Xifaris, and others Party stalwarts should be recognized for the contributions that they are making to this campaign. This is a team effort, with a diversified constituency, and we all need each other to make this work. Let’s not let our rhetoric turn away other potential supporters.
One of the biggest shockers for me was when Rep. Tom Stanely walked up to our delegation with a Deval button on. I was not the only one visibly surprise. I think most of us assumed he was going to go with Reilly or at least Gabrielli. When I mentioned I was pleasantly surprised he was supporting Deval he replied, “Why? He is the best candidate,” and smiled. Likewise Rep Cory Atkins was our Deval Whip. Deval does have support from within the party, and not just from the folks you would expect.
I got used to it a long time ago. Before Deval Patrick had announced, declared, or given any actual campaign speeches, Martina Jackson organized an event for him in Newton (where he gave a campaign speech, though it wasn’t billed as such, but was what most of the audience wanted). That she would support Deval was a surprise, but after that, nobody else I’ve learned supports Deval has been a surprise at all đŸ™‚
but I know of many in the 1WO where that is not the case. Your tone seems to suggest that I’m not one of the party “faithful,” that perhaps I’m a “newbie” or someone inspired to recently participate by Patrick’s candidacy. If so, that is certainly not the case, and I stand by my comments based on the conversations I had with other party faithful who feel as I described.
People who are part of a political machine stay bought. To expect mass defections is wishful thinking. While moved by the euphoria of the moment they will express their enthusiasm for Deval, this morning they are recognizing that there is little or no advantage for them to step away from them that brought ’em. If defections like Senator Walsh continue then for those kind of activists movement becomes safer. I grew up with that kind of politics, and I can assure you that there is as much dismissing of the conventions message as there is re-evaluation of the candidates. The question that is relevant is how the message is heard outside of that room. In that regard I think Devals pointed challenge of the media has reaped dividends, particularly by tieing Reilly and Gabrielly to back room dealing.
<
p>
I worked my ass off for Deval (our Town was 100%) but I know the folks around here who are not going to suddenly move from Reilly to Deval. They certainly weren’t interested in the convention. If he wins they’ll be there – ask Mike Dukakis – but until then the best that we can hope for is that they are keeping their powder dry.
Except there’s already substantial support for Patrick in the party apparatchiks…they will be more convincing to their peers, I suspect, then anything Patrick can do in a speech.
This book provides useful reading on this subject: Plunkitt of Tammany Hall
I was the DLP senate whip yesterday in District 39 (Worcester and Middlesex) where Reilly has loads of support and more than a couple of Reilly supporters told me that they were knocked out by Deval’s speech and the enthusiasm of his supporters. Two union-looking fellows told me with a smile that if there was a second vote, they were voting for Deval. They probably knew there wasn’t going to be a second ballot, but it was still nice to hear.
This year’s candidates are different from 2002’s candidates, so the voting blocks won’t match up directly, but here’s where I think the parallels lie:
<
p>
1. Deval Patrick’s support = Reichies + black voters + nonvoting cynics who want to be inspired back to politics. That last group won’t play a big role in the Democratic primary, but they will in the general if Patrick gets the nomination. So for the primary, I think Patrick’s “base” is Reichies + black voters.
<
p>
2. Tom Reilly is the “default candidate”, the one whose turn it is to get the nomination, so on the surface, it seems like Shannon O’Brien’s voters are his. But there are some key differences: First, O’Brien had a taint of insider corruption that Reilly doesn’t have. Pretty much everyone agrees he’s an earnestly honest man. Secondly, black voters are usually part of that block that votes for the consensus Democrat (for example, they backed Kerry more than any other group in 2004 – in the primaries). Patrick’s appeal to them weakens a key part of Reilly’s base.
<
p>
I haven’t quite figured out who Gabrieli’s base is, yet. He seems to attract the few progressives not taken with Patrick, plus a lot of party insiders. His TV ads have given him broad name recognition among those voters who aren’t paying any attention to the race otherwise so far, so he gets good poll numbers but it tells us nothing about who will actually support him in the primary.
<
p>
If you look at the 2002 primary results, outside of the Camberville cluster, O’Brien won all the major cities in MA, while Reich came in 3rd or worse in all of them. Despite this, Reich was able to come in a respectable second. Those cities – Worcester, New Bedford, Fall River, Lawrence, Springfield, etc. – all have sizeable minority populations. Especially Boston. If Patrick really gets the coalition of Reichies+minorities that I think he can get, he’s in a very strong position.
What exactly do you mean by your comment that “O’Brien had a taint of insider corruption that Reilly doesn’t have?” What was corrupt about Shannon O’Brien’s political career? She cleaned up the Treasury after Joe Malone’s hacks had stolen millions of dollars, she blew the whistle on the Big Dig cost overruns, and she stood up for consumers time after time – from gift cards to bank mergers. I think you owe Shannon an apology.
I don’t think anything of it myself. I just remember that was part of the dynamic of the campaign. She was viewed as someone who played ball with inside deals and was part of the Finneran-linked Democratic state party insiders network and many people, including reporters and voters, were suspicious of it. That’s just how it was in 200 – I had nothing to do with it.
<
p>
Reilly doesn’t have that problem.