Seriously — Patrick’s campaign put out two ads (including the education ad, one of the worst in this campaign in my opinion) before some staffer-with-a-future said “hey, let’s put the candidate in front of a camera, and a crowd! He’s a great speaker!” They had great stuff of Patrick knocking home runs in the can, and they put him in a second grade classroom, circa 1985.
Then we have Reilly, who puts out a series of ads comparing himself to the Republicans. I still give him points for starting off with going up against the Republicans first and foremost. But in his first ad, we don’t even hear his voice. He’s a bloody lawyer making the case of his life, and some other guy is doin’ the talking. Finally, somebody got a film crew to Watertown, and got a great ad out of the deal. (They’re not stupid either…they’ve already got a second Watertown ad up). *
(I’m giving Gabrieli a pass. He embraced the wonk thing early, even appearing in an with his kids that has him posed in front of a pie chart. I’ll admit it, when I think Gabrieli, I think pie chart).
I mention this mainly for the following reason: We all know what’s awaiting the winner. Healey will immediately assail her tax-and-spend opponent, whether he is a tax-and-spender or not. From what we’ve seen thus far, I worry that the Democratic candidate will not be operating a particularly agile campaign. Hopefully the good folks at Victory 06 have something ready, to combat the attacks. Because if they don’t, the candidate won’t get to a reply until mid-December.
* I love that second ad even more than the first. Reilly again goes straight after Romney/Healey, gets in the public schools angle. I’d love to see Patrick or Gabrieli start talking about Healey in their ads.
Especially if Reilly or Patrick is the nominee, the party needs to be ready to be on the air the day after the primary. And not with a lot of soft crap about our commitment to jobs and education.
<
p>
Kerry Healey is still not that well known or understood by the voters of Massachusetts. It’s up to her opponents to help introduce her to the state on our terms. These include:
<
p>
Mitt’s untested, backstage understudy
<
p>
Supporter of the Bush Administration
<
p>
Complicit in cuts to cities and towns
<
p>
Nowhere on the Big Dig collapse
<
p>
etc., etc., etc.
<
p>
If Healey succeeds in defining herself as a Massachusetts version of Christine Todd Whitman (pro-choice, fiscal conservative, pro-environment, classy-Talbot’s-wearing- moderate suburbanite), we’ve got a fight on our hands.
<
p>
I sure hope the party is ready to go well before Tom, Chris, or Deval is giving his victory speech on September 19th. If it isn’t, it may be the only victory speech they give.
As well as Deval and Reilly’s positions on taxes and the rollback. Deval says he opposes the rollback because it will increase local property taxes, yet he neglects to mention how he’ll fund the new programs he’s mentioned on the trail. Reilly says he’ll cut it immediately to 5 percent by mainly using surplus which should go to the rainy day fund, while neglecting to mention how he’ll get that through a Legislature which has opposed going back to 5 percent all at once. Healey’s been vague on what spending she’d cut to get to 5%, and how she’d get that through the Legislature also. However, she’ll still paint the Dem as a tax-and-spender or fiscally irresponsible, which will be easier to paint on Deval or Reilly than on Gabrieli.
<
p>
The other big issue the GOP will whack over the head of the Dem will be illegal immigration. Again, Deval and Reilly are more vulnerable to that attack than Gabrieli, since the former two support in-state tuition for illegals and have been largely silent on prosecuting employers who hire illegals. Reilly may be worse off since he hasn’t done much as AG to do so.