That’s not my title, it is Brett Arends’ in today’s Boston Herald. I happen to agree with this position, but rather than pontificate further, I figured that I would simply paste Mr. Arends’ piece and invite commentary.
Gabrieli only Dem built for long run: His rivals lack crossover appeal
By Brett Arends
Boston Herald Business Columnist
Thursday, September 7, 2006 – Updated: 07:15 AM EST
There will be two elephants in the room when the Democratic candidates for governor face off in tonights TV showdown.
Though maybe its a stretch to describe the pencil-thin Kerry Healey and the compact Christy Mihos as elephants.
Officially, the Healey campaign says it doesnt really care who wins the primary. The campaign would be equally happy running against Attorney General Tom Reilly, former Clinton administration official Deval Patrick or venture capitalist Chris Gabrieli.
Unofficially? As a senior Republican strategist put it, Wed be happiest with Reilly or Patrick.
And no wonder. Recent polls show Gabrieli doing by far the best against Healey in the November election.
The Republicans believe Reilly is a poor campaigner, while Patrick is too liberal and would be vulnerable on the issue of taxes.
They also wonder if either could unite his party by Nov. 7. Patrick Democrats, in particular, are almost by definition anti-Reilly Democrats. Its why they first rallied to the rebel standard.
The under-appreciated variable in all this: Convenience store magnate and independent candidate Christy Mihos.
How big a factor is he going to be?
This week he is writing another $1 million check to his own campaign, taking the total to $2.5 million so far.
He is getting ready to film his first TV commercials, which will begin airing after the Democratic primary.
And he has hired a serious player to produce them. Bill Hillsman, of Minneapolis-based North Woods Advertising, has built a national reputation on insurgent campaigns. Last month he helped Ned Lamont beat Joe Lieberman in Connecticuts Democratic Senate primary.
Mihos says he is committed to spending between $5 million and $10 million on the race. That alone will make him impossible to ignore.
He is, of course, watching the Democrats battle with interest.
Just being out there all the time, and talking to people, I think its going to be Reilly or Patrick, he says of the nomination.
And that suits him just fine. His preference would probably be for Reilly. A November race that pits the attorney general against the lieutenant governor would look so much like politics as usual that he would have an easy opening, he believes.
Mihos thinks he can pick up disaffected Patrick Democrats in those circumstances. Yes, hes a libertarian rather than a liberal. But both men, independently, have called themselves outsiders running an insurgent campaign.
Deval and I get on extremely well, Mihos says. I like him.
On the other hand, if Patrick is the nominee, then the anti-tax Mihos, a former Republican, may appeal to a lot of blue-collar, conservative Democrats.
Reilly or Patrick gives (me) a good opening, Mihos says.
Like the Republicans, the one he doesnt want to face is Gabrieli.
It isnt just because the venture capitalist may be even richer than he is.
The bigger problem? Their pitches are too similar.
Chris Gabrieli and I say a lot of the same things, Mihos admits.
Both are successful businessmen who are offering to get under the hood of the state government and fix it.
None of this may be a final argument for picking a nominee. But it would be foolish if the Democrats dont consider it. The race doesnt end Sept. 19. Thats when it starts in earnest.
that Chris has huge crossover appeal and that they are lacking in “crossover appeal.” I think that the question that Democrats have to ask themselves is do we want to win? If we do, Chris Gabrieli among many other reasons is the best guy. If Gabrieli is elected as the democratic nominee, he will beat Healy and Mihos. Even Healy and Mihos admit that Gabrieli would be their toughest opponent. This race is similar to the choice national democrats had to make when Bill Clinton ran for president in 1992. Clinton was no darling of the liberals but liberals decided to back him because he could win. National dems were on a 12 year losing streak back in 1992. Now Mass Dems are on a 16 year losing streak. Electing Deval Patrick, in my opinion, would lead to another defeat. Not because Deval is too liberal for me but because he is too liberal for most of the Massachusetts electorate.
A lot of conservatives ive talked to, my former history teacher a self described “Joe Lieberman” Democrat is favoring Patrick, my brother an evangelical Christian and social conservative (but an ardent environmentalist and social programs fan) is favoring Patrick and he also knew Reilly pretty well personally which is even more surprising, both of my parents are former Gabrielli and Reilly supporters in other races (Lg, Congress, DA, and AG) and are proudly supporting Deval. And no I dont believe for a second that I have a magnetic ability to convince people Im right (just ask anyone whos critizied me on these boards) its Deval whos done the job with these people I know.
<
p>
I think people in Massachusetts are tired of politics as usual, Reilly represents what O’Brien and Birmingham previously represented, old school pols wanting to step up a position. Gabrielli seems not to have learned, usually if you lose a public office you run the next time for the same or a smaller office, you dont take defeat as a reason to keep running for higher office. But Gabrielli has, well I cant win district wide, cant win statewide, but maybe I can try winning statewide again without a top ticket nominee to weigh me down. But I think most people are turned off by a man with an ego that big, and a pocket book that big, that they dont trust him to be Governor. Also he and Patrick have nearly indentical positions so he is not the most moderate in the race by any stretch of the imagination.
<
p>
“I’m not a real moderate, I just play moderate on TV.”
Jconway, Deval is great on the stump – there’s no denying that – and I think you likely underrate your effect on the people you know, so please take a well-deserved bow, but I respectfully beg to differ on a number of points. Where to begin?
<
p>
1) Gabrieli won the 2002 democratic primary for lieutenant governor and received the most votes of any democrat on the ballot in that primary – including O’Brien and Galvin. That the general election ticket of O’Brien and Gabrieli lost to Romney/Healey is not on Gabrieli. Most people vote the top of most tickets. If voters could have voted separately for the top and bottom of the ticket, Gabrieli would have beaten Healey hands down four years ago.
<
p>
I mentioned this in a post last month and I think it bears repeating: Losing an election or two does not disqualify you from being very successful in future elections. Two of the best/most polished/skillful politicians of the last 40 years if not all time – Clinton and Reagan – lost elections, no?
<
p>
2) “I think most people are turned off by a man with an ego that big, and a pocket book that big, that they don’t trust him to be Governor.”
<
p>
I know Chris Gabrieli. He does not have a big ego, I can assure you of that. He is modest, down-to-earth, sincere, trustworthy, intelligent, and thorough.
<
p>
Money is politics is nothing new. Your guy is a millionaire too. I don’t disqualify or qualify any candidate based upon the size of their checkbook. Gabrieli – followed by Patrick – has the best favorable/unfavorable ratio in most polls that I have examined. This would not be the case if what you said about people not trusting him was a widespread belief.
<
p>
3) “Also he and Patrick have nearly identical positions so he is not the most moderate in the race by any stretch of the imagination.”
<
p>
Not true. In the interest of time and space I’ll give you one example – immigration. While Patrick has come out in support of licenses for illegal immigrants, he has also supported the idea of placing illegals on public housing waiting lists along with (ahead of?) legal US citizens. That’s not moderate by any stretch. Gabrieli – the product of parents who legally immigrated to the states – on the other hand thinks that we need to clearly distinguish between legal and illegal behavior while also proposing/studying solutions (in conjunction with the federal government) that address security concerns and provide a working blueprint to deal with the problem. That’s much more moderate.
<
p>
Also, all recent polls that provide the horserace between a democratic nominee, Healey, Mihos, and Ross show Gabrieli with the largest lead. That underscores his strength and broad appeal across the political spectrum.
I seem to remember a recent election where a certain candidate came from behind to win the primaries, despite strong support among Democrats for one of his opponents, because voters were concerned about electability in the general election. Refresh my memory — how did that work out again?
<
p>
Look, having the ability to win is important, but talking points nonwithstanding, I don’t think anyone seriously believes that any of the three Democratic candidates lack the ability to win this election. They are all credible and qualified, and have large bases of support that will become even larger once the primary is over. Most every general election poll shows any of the three Democrats winning, and my principles are worth more than the margin of error in a poll.
<
p>
It’s time to stop making the mistake of believing we can win elections by trying to be all things to all people. Voters respect (and even vote for) candidates who are clear and honest about their beliefs, even when they don’t agree all the time — just ask George W. Bush. My support for Deval Patrick is not, as another post claims, based on his being the “anti-Reilly;” it’s based on his understanding that knowing WHY we should win this election is at least as important as knowing HOW we win. If your views most closely align with Gabrieli, that’s fine, but mine are reflected in Patrick’s platform, and I’m not going to abandon him because of some poll-based speculation about who might do slightly better in the general election.
This argument sounds familiar.
<
p>
We can REALLY get some crossover appeal by nominating Kerry Healey.
“Your guy is a millionaire too.”
<
p>
Yes but he is NOT using his millions to fund his campaign and that is the big difference, he believes in public financing and the grassroots donor affect on campaigns (aka he’d rather get 1000 $20 bills than 10 $2000 cheques). Also he puts his money where his mouth is, so he has not donated any money to himself during this campaign. So it is a big difference.
<
p>
Also each candidate will cream Kerry Healy, yes I will concede in the polls that Gabrielli currently has the biggest lead over her but each candidate has a pretty big lead, add in Mihos and I think its incredibly unlikely Healy will win. Charlie cook is currently rating this a SAFE DEMOCRAT regardless of the nominee and hes the most neutral pollster out there. So the electability argument is moot for two reasons
<
p>
1)Vote your conscience its the American and the democratic thing to do, never vote for the candidate that can win because thats the candidate most willing to sell out their principles
<
p>
2)ALL of the Democrats are electable versus Kerry Healy, once Mihos starts spending his millions on ads it will take votes away from Healy
<
p>
So if you like Gabs then by all means vote for him, if you really like Deval but if your getting that feeling that he’s been the frontrunner too long and its a Dean de ju vu again and your supporting someone you think is a winner I strongly urge you to reconsider for both of those reasons.