Larson, who three years ago was number one on Boston Magazine’s list of the 100 most powerful women in the city, said in an interview that she believed that Patrick had far more private and public-sector experience than Healey.
“Deval Patrick wants to reach out and will build an administration that’s inclusive of Democrats, Republicans, and independents representing the best and the brightest,” Larson said. Among Republicans joining her in backing Patrick is Francis W. Hatch Jr., the former GOP House minority leader and the party’s 1978 nominee for governor.
Democrats hope Larson’s decision to join the Patrick campaign will insulate him against Healey’s strategy to paint him as a left-leaning liberal who espouses anti-business policies…
The entire story is linked here.
What does this mean? If Republicans for Patrick is (are?) successful, in combination with the field organization, good debate performance and positioning on issues, this could set the stage for the largest landside in Massachusetts politics in some time.
Usually it is the Republicans, making headlines with “Democrats for Whoever(R)for Governor”. Gloria Larson now gives cover for other high stature Republicans, tired of the Mitt Romney/ Kerry Healey administraion abuses and incompetence to come over to the otherside.
Nice work! Good signs of a coalition that finally envisions real “smart government” instead of winning a position to be used just a stepping stone. And it also looks like once and for all we’ll do away with the last 16 years of practice in coercing higher level newly hired State Government managers to change their party registration to (R) in order to boost party enrollment.
Too bad some enterprising reporter doesn’t take the time to look at the “coincidence” of changing party affiliation in conjunction with getting hired/promoted in state government over the last 16 years. Or maybe they could find first party confirmation from current or former employees about this outrageous practice. Strange ideas about “party building” in my book. Abuse of power? Maybe. Outrageous? Definately.
I think that the MOST interesting thing in that article is that she gave money to Reilly! Did she give money to Deval in the primary, does anyone know? That indicates (to me, at least, and I don’t know any of the people involved so I’m just making stuff up) that her disatisfaction with the Republican party in MA doesn’t seem to be just because she’s a fan of Deval personally.
<
p>
To me, this means that some very influential Republicans really dislike Kerry Healy. I would think that if she were merely ambivalent, she’d just stay out of it. Actively changing parties so that she can support a democrat, and then continuing to support the Democratic nominee even if he IS NOT the person you originally supported, seems to be a whole other ball game. It shows something much deeper than “oh, I like the person the other party is running.” It shows something of a “I really dislike the person my party is running, and I’d really like someone from the other party to win.”
<
p>
That’s just my two cents.
that I knew Republicans who really liked Deval? I was attacked by a few posters (you know who you are). Well, I wasn’t kidding.
Her husband, Allen Larson, recently wrote a guest editorial for the Cape Cod Times supporting Chris Gabrieli! HE was the Bush Ranger I spotted in the audience during the debate.
Hey, I’d be more than happy to have Mr. Larson on board, but I wonder if anyone (i.e., Mr. Rove) questioned the wisdom of using the term “Bush Ranger”:
<
p>
<
p>
Thanks, of course, to Wikipedia.
It does seem somewhat appropriate….
My Republican friends are just as sick of the politics of destruction as we are. The politics of hope is about change not ideology. Hopefully the left will raise the level of debate and sit down at the table and have that discussion that Deval so eloquently asked for in his Victory speech.
Unlike Democrats who vote generally the way theyre told to vote (the Unions, The Boston Globe, all the people standing outside the polling stations with signs, etc.) I dont think Republicans care much about Gloria Lawson (ask any Republican who she is and Im sure youll get a blank stare) or whom she supports.
And Massachusetts Republican politics an even smaller world. Believe me, anyone who is anyone in Massachusetts Republican Politics, knows who AND how powerful Gloria Larson is.
<
p>
I’m sure shock waves are still reverberating…
I think the Republicans are the ones who vote the way they’re told to. All those mega-churches telling their congregants to vote Republican or go to hell (literaly)? I think that lack of unity in uniting behind a common candidate for petty reasons has traditionally been the Democrat’s tragic flaw.
<
p>
You’re also missing quite a few of the larger points. The point is not that she’s going to tell the greater republican masses who to vote for and they’ll magically decide to listen. By attaching her name to the campaign, she’s drawn the attention of her friends and collegues to the fact that Patrick’s campaign is a viable option for disatisfied Republicans (and I think we all know that there are plenty of those right now), she’s made it harder for the entrenched Republican machine to call Patrick fringe, she’s brought her considerable fundraising clout, she’s brought connections from across the political spectrum. And did I mention the fundraising clout?
<
p>
No, Joe Republican on the street might not have heard of her, just like Jane Democrat has never heard of some of the most influential and connected Democrats in Boston. But that’s hardly the point.
that the average taxpaying voter doesnt care much about whom anyone endorses. The average voter goes to work or takes care of the family and only gets involved in politics on Election Day. And on election day they will see an overwhelming majority of Democrats holding signs versus Republicans holdings signs. The average voter will also be approached numerous times by someone from the MASSPIRG asking you to join the party. Or read what is supposed to be an unbiased newspaper only to find an endorsement for the Democratic Party. So perhaps youre right that Republicans are being bombarded by all these forces but Ive never seen it.
As I said in my above message, it’s not about mere endorsement. It’s about money, it’s about cache, and it’s about making it much easier to deflect blows that D.P. is some sort of fringe liberal.
What would the Republicans have against Kerry Healey?
<
p>
Was there bad blood created when Romney picked her?
<
p>
Or (what I’d like to believe) are the sane republicans of the state rebelling against the insane Bush followers in an attempt to get their party to moderate?
<
p>
Mark