In our endorsement of Deval Patrick, we made a provocative assertion that perhaps deserved more discussion than we gave it: That Patrick is the most likely of the Democratic candidates to beat Kerry Healey. Predictably, folks supporting the other campaigns have questioned that.
This evening I channeled my inner Dick Morris and came up with this snappy, late-night-TV-style litany of the prerequisites of a winning campaign: Charisma, Campaign, and Cash. (I’m going to take a shower as soon as I’m done writing this.)
- Charisma: Patrick is magnetic. Wiseguys typically dismiss the loyalty and enthusiasm of Deval supporters as the wackiness of a few “moonbats”; ignoring the alternative thesis that maybe there is actually something to be enthusiastic about. Patrick comes across quite well in debates, extremely well in ads, and creates euphoria at rallies. As Adam Reilly notes, “Theres a pro-Patrick blog called The Deval Patrick Experience [sic]. Theres no Chris Gabrieli Experience.” The Tom Reilly Experience is probably something like getting frisked at the airport.
Kerry Healey, on the other hand, is going to need a whole team of media coaches to approach the raw political sexiness of, say, Mike Capuano. The “Kerry Healey Experience” is apparently to drop five c-notes for the privilege of watching a criminologist munch hot dogs in your yard. Healey’s said to be an improved public presence, but not that improved.
- Campaign: The Patrick campaign has hit every single target so far. They showed up in numbers and volume at the Lowell convention last year. They crushed the opposition at the caucuses in February. They stumbled with two so-so ads, then got smart and got out of the way with a terrific ad consisting of … Deval Patrick talking. (Who knew?) Bottom line: These folks know how to execute — and somehow that goes for his grassroots operation as well, so patronized and infantilized by its skeptics. Compare this to the continuing disaster of the Reilly campaign, sluggish, entitled, and tone-deaf; or Gabrieli, who stumbled into the race late, and has spent immense amounts of money on merely OK media. And that brings us to …
- Cash. You don’t need to have the most, but you need to have enough to get your message out. And with MassVictory ’06, Patrick would have a promised $1 million to immediately drop onto the airwaves. If he wins the nomination, the spigot turns on. Clinton shows up. Obama shows up — again. Most folks from out of state won’t know anything except there’s a black guy running for governor in MA, but that alone will get national attention. Patrick will indeed get outspent by Healey, but not by enough.
In short, Patrick the man and Patrick the campaign have proven they can swim with the sharks. It will indeed be a different game come October/November, but I trust this campaign’s instincts and execution more than the others. And that’s why I feel quite comfortable with the endorsement on the grounds of electability.
In general elections, an overwhelming percentage of voters vote by emotion, identity, tribe, or gut feeling, rather than by ideology or issues. An inspiring speaker with a clear message and positive presence wins people over, and a straightforward candidate who seems honest and direct and to understand the issues wins people over. Patrick is all of those.
<
p>
When I was first considering Patrick at the beginning of 2005, I had a very strong feeling that this is someone who could win the general election more easily than any other Democrat likely to run… but the primary was going to be the bigger challenge.
<
p>
That’s the same feeling I had about Howard Dean in early 2002 when I heard he was running: If he’s nominated, there’s almost no way he can lose, but getting that nomination is a long shot. And it’s how I feel about Russ Feingold for 2008 – getting the Democratic nomination will be extremely difficult, but if he gets it, he’s our next president.
<
p>
People like to judge electability by how “liberal” or “centrist” a candidate is, by early name recognition, how rich they are, or how much institutional support they have, or by their controversial issues positions. These things play a big role in primaries, but once someone gets the nomination, they’re overwhelmed by the two things I listed in the first paragraph:
<
p>
* Inspiring speaker with a clear message and good presence
<
p>
* Straightforward, honest, direct, and projects the s/he understands
Uh…anyone think to check OCPF. The Mass dems have less than $200,000 on hand as of right now. Healy has so much money she can afford to attack a phantom primary opponent … Chris Gabrieli.
Have you donated yet?
There are three groups that all believe deep down that their candidate has the best policy, is the most electable and in perhaps a new twist, is the beneficiary of Healey attack ads.
<
p>
Whos right? Who knows, but it has been a fun ride.
I agree with you that Patrick is by far the most electable candidate, but I do so for drastically different reasons. In analyzing why Republicans win and why Democrats lose, be it from watching what the candidates do or reading incredibly poignant essays and books like “Crashing the Gate,” I’ve come with this conclusion:
<
p>
Republicans win by a) creating a distinction from their opponents, b) defining their opponents, putting them on their defensive (which even some of the best candidates can’t win) and c) using the noise machine to their advantage.
<
p>
Democrats who a) create clear distinctions from their opponents (i.e. NOT Gabrieli’s tax plan), b) clearly define opponents and put them on their defensive – have a very good shot of winning. The media will likely pay attention, even if we don’t have a hold of it like the right wing does.
<
p>
Furthermore, Democrats need to use the right rhetoric. We can’t keep putting down fellow democrats and the democratic party – it creates a distrust and turns our party into a bad name. We need to be proud democrats and embrace the name. Candidates need to be who they are and lay out a case for why they’re right – people respect that and will vote for that, even if they don’t agree 100% of the time. Just look at John Bonifaz – I’m supporting him despite the fact that I don’t agree with several of his positions.
<
p>
We need real leaders who will stand up. Deval Patrick has shown he’s that guy. He’s shown he will not only create clear distinctions from Kerry Healey, but put her on the defensive. He’ll always be sharp, use great language and won’t be afraid to be a proud democrat. He has so many of the qualities that makes a tough opponent that the other candidates lack – if anything, that’s why he’s still in the race. If he didn’t have those qualities, Deval never would have had a chance to win the primary. He’s only here now because he’s that much – infinately – better than the competition.
Good analysis Charley. The one thing I would point out is that with the money from the Victory ’06 you have to remember that that spending cannot, at least as far as I know, be coordinated with the Patrick campaign and that could be dangerous. Plus, I am not quite sure where the $1m figure comes from, I thought Johnston has only said it was like $250k. My only concern is that the Dem Party creates a bunch of bone head ads that don’t help Patrick at all. However, I completely agreed that Patrick should easily be able to tap into a huge national fundraising network that can pump his coffers full pretty fast.
Am I nuts?
<
p>
Ah, here it is:
<
p>
<
p>
Now, an earlier commenter brings up the important question of whether the party has actually done that. Don’t know.
<
p>
Can you characterize the ballpark how much DP general election $ you think would be a success?
<
p>
2. Ryan said:
<
p>
<
p>
Like Lamont? Didn’t he put him on the defensive by clearly defining that Lieberman supported the invasion of Iraq?
<
p>
3. Speaking of which, Morris got it wrong: he predicted that if Lieberman stayed in the Dem primary, he couldn’t win the general.
<
p>
Maybe Morris needs to channel his inner-Charley!
Dan Payne was spot on in his column the other day, when he said Patrick’s supporters were “liberals, gays, black voters, Latino voters, environmentalists, atheists, healthcare reformers, professors, peaceniks, pro-choice marchers, antigun protesters, health store shoppers, progressive unions, teachers, social workers, and those who hear justice in his voice. In short, anybody who can’t stand President Bush.”
<
p>
Anybody who can’t stand Bush? That’s a HUGE constituency in Massachusetts right now. And I think Patrick is best positioned to tap into centrist anger about the direction of Bush Republicans.
<
p>
It gets back to what I said in an earlier post, about the zeitgeist of this election, what the New York Times called “irate moderates.” That’s me. Folks, people have been voting for candidates with positions to the right of their own for years now. Why is that? Because of what’s been said above about why Republicans have been effective vs. the Democratic tendency to push issues instead of intangibles.
<
p>
THERE’S NO REASON WHY VOTERS WON’T VOTE FOR CANDIDATES A LITTLE TO THEIR LEFT ANYMORE THAN THEY VOTE FOR CANDIDATES WAY TO THEIR RIGHT!
<
p>
Please note that Deval Patrick isn’t “out of the mainstream” and he’s not a “wild-eyed liberal.” That’s crap. But he is a bit to the left of me on a few issues, while we agree on many other issues. But here’s the thing.
<
p>
HE CAN PERSUADE. PEOPLE LIKE ME ARE PERSUADABLE. I BELIEVE PATRICK WILL BE THE BEST AT ACTUALLY LEADING — WHICH MEANS GETTING PEOPLE BEHIND HIM, PERSUADING PEOPLE TO ACCEPT HIS VISION FOR MASSACHUSETTS.
<
p>
I’m not as “progressive” on the laundry list of issues as many of Patrick’s supporters. I’m undecided on Cape Wind. I’m leaning against in-state tuition for children of illegal immigrants. He may be for tougher affirmative action than I am. (Although I admit do agree with him strongly on the income tax issue.) Yet I not only will vote for him, but I’ve donated to his campaign and am volunteering.
<
p>
Besides cracking jokes about the Patrick fans, people should be asking themselves why this phenomenon is occuring, and what it means.
<
p>
The Republicans think they might be able to attract voters like me with a Healey candidacy. Democrats worry that Healey could peal off voters like me if Patrick’s the nominee. They can’t. Not because of a checklist of Patrick’s positions but because of who he is and the emotional attachment he can create with voters. NO other candidate in the race can touch him on that. It would be CRAZY to give that up.
<
p>
Phenomena? If Deval wins the primary it will be with 40% +- in a low turnout year. That means a majority of the democrats didn’t vote for him and he has a way to go to get to the majority of the general election voters.
<
p>
A different kind of leader? Let’s see…
<
p>
Housing plan without addressing Chapter 40B…same as other two
<
p>
Defends United Airlines saying big companies shouldn’t have to deal with differing employment laws on wages and benefits in different locations…good bye livable wage laws…worse than other two
<
p>
Education Plan that supports MCAS (and raising the requirement), Charter Schools, Merit Pay…same as other two
<
p>
On Health Care defends the pitiful $295 assessment for large firms not providing health care
<
p>
Can anyone tell me of one position that Deval Patrick has taken in this campaign that shows a desire to fight for working people against the interests of large corporations?
<
p>
At best, he is the same as the rest. If you think you can win statewide in Mass (or any place else) by taking progressive positions on social issues and the same positions as Republicans on economics, good luck. You can fill a library with all the work done by folks in recent years to rebut that one.
I find little in Deval Patrick that motivates me. I think that his candidacy is just another in a long line of Democratic failed efforts to regain the corner office. To the common men and women of the commonwealth he is on the wrong side of too many issues. The common person doesn’t understand that Deval knows what is best for him or her.
<
p>
He may be right about the tax rollback but “shell game” argument is completely devoid of any connection to reality. His shell game argument is essentially a shell game and will hurt him.
<
p>
He is on the wrong side of state tuition and room and board subsidies for illegal immigrants.
<
p>
He is probably right that illegals should be given Massachusetts Drivers Licenses but this position will hurt him in November.
<
p>
He properly recognizes deficiencies in the current CORI law but this position is way outside of the mainstream and, in my opinion, will be devastating to his candidacy.
<
p>
His rabid followers are so outside the mainstream that they will hurt his candidacy. Their shrill zealotry is really off-putting. Elitism is the disease that his candidacy suffers from but the visitors to this blog have been so blinded by their idolatry of Patrick that they are oblivious of its corrupting influence. DP clearly is the weakest candidate in November due to his affinity for the left and his aversion to the center. Unfortunately, BMG just doesn’t get it. The Devalistas are essentially paving the way for four more years of Republican control of the governor’s office. Four more years? Oh no, not that.
Your old signature line kind of says it all. You are a former Dem who’s not gonna vote for any of these Dem candidates — correct? You dislike “illegals”. You dislike “liberals”. You’re voting Healey (although why is beyond me).
<
p>
I’m very happy to hear that you find Deval to be the weakest candidate. It means that he’s not a Republican or Republican lite. Good. We agree totally. He’s the Dem you most want to attack because he stands for something you don’t. Isn’t Gabbers you’re new favorite Dem? Hmmmm.
I consider myself to be a moderate. I am an un-enrolled voter. I do not like Kerry Healey and do not anticipate voting for her. I did not vote for Romney, Cellucci or Weld. I did not vote for Bush, Bush or Reagan. I love “liberals” and have been married to one for 24 years.
<
p>
Regarding illegals; I am for granting them licenses. I cannot understand why they are denied licenses and I feel that they are being set up by the current system. They are routinely charged with Operating a Motor Vehicle without being Licensed and similar offenses. They need to drive in order to feed their families. I am against giving them subsidized in-state tuition, unless they can demonstrate that their parents are filing state tax returns.
<
p>
My grandparents were poor immigrants and my parents, my family and I now enjoy the American Dream. I want that Dream to be available to the illegal aliens about whom I wrote. John Q Public doesn’t share my (or Deval’s) views.
<
p>
I am against the tax rollback because I feel that it will not benefit the individuals as much as it will hurt the Commonwealth’s bottom.
<
p>
My post points out that Deval is not on the common man’s wavelength nor are his followers. I agree with much DP has to say and I have not yet decided for whom to vote. It is either Gabs or Deval.
<
p>
Enough with the labels lolorb, I am just a voter trying to figure out who for whom I should vote. I am an innocent, much like the child who pointed out that the emperor had no clothes. I am routinely pilloried on these pages for my views due to my criticism of the zealotry and inflexibility of the Deval Patrick supporters. My ratings hover near zero. I do not consider the DP people to be for inclusion, they clearly are not trying to woo me. To me they seem to be elitist. This will hurt DP in the general election.
<
p>
BTW, I never had a signature line. You must be confusing me with someone else.
Deval Patrick’s people are the furthest I’ve ever encountered from elitism. I can say that with conviction because I volunteered to get involved from the very beginning. The people who were brought into the campaign were the ones who didn’t do it for money, recognition or to gain anything but a decent governor. Most were people who desperately wanted to see a change in the status quo and many had never been invovled before. I know a majority of the people who have worked tirelessly to bring Deval from zero to sixty in the last year and a half. Most have devoted countless hours to doing the real work of talking to people in their communities. That’s how Deval got 56% of the vote at the convention — from people talking to other people in their local communities. You don’t get those types of results by being elitist. I think community activism is what the democratic process is all about. It’s not about millions for airwave blitzes or some consultant figuring out the best meme to appeal to whomever. It’s about getting people involved and offering them the opportunity to really participate in the process. Deval has done that from the inception of his campaign. You’re welcome to your opinion. I cannot agree with it because I know it’s inaccurate.
I just get the feeling that DP followers are very much like the followers of George W Bush.
<
p>
Here is a guy who has run up massive deficits, squandering Clinton’s surplus. 9/11 happened on his watch and he responds by chipping away at the Bill of Rights. We are involved in a civil war in a country far from home and we know that as soon as we withdraw the deluge will come. Profits are up and wages aren’t keeping up. Go and criticize Bush about any of this and you will be beset by people who protect the man and their distorted view of him much like a lioness would protect her young.
<
p>
I sense the same thing with DP followers; if you dare criticize him you are either chastised or shunned. There seems to be an intolerance here that inhibits the free exchange of ideas. I am sure that most followers want to change the world and truly believe in DP. He clearly is a charismatic man with an impressive biography and resume. I think that the faith you have in DP and your strong admiration of him colors your perception. You need not protect him as vociferously as the Bush followers do. Bush truly is incapable of protecting himself, Deval has no such limitation.
I would guess that most people would feel the same way I do if their candidate were mercilessly lambasted with innuendo or even lies, which is what is happening now. Or, at the beginning, labeled “unelectable”. Come to think of it, the unelectable part is still begin used. My strong admiration of Deval does color my perception. My strong admiration for those people who’ve become active in politics again colors my perception. Should I not state truth to the lies? That’s what the Kerry campaign failed to do with Bush. Been there, watched that. This is not just Deval’s campaign, it’s a team campaign. Maybe that’s what you see as zealotry. It is different. But, it’s different in a very good way.
“Deval Patrick’s people are the furthest I’ve ever encountered from elitism.”
<
p>
You mean the only people arrogant enough to call the people that disagree with them campaign stooges?
<
p>
You’re making my head spoon.
Spin.
I once had a secretary who liked to read. She recommended a book once to me. She said “you should really read this book, ‘Breed on the Water.'” I looked at the book and said “it says ‘Bread on the Water.'” She replied, “breed, bread, what’s the difference.”
are going to vote based on a laundry list of positions. That said, though, I’m very much in favor of an independent investigation into the Big Dig. If there was one, I think it would come down hard on the big corporations that worked on the project. So that’s one place where I think Patrick is favoring citizens over corporate money, and that one is important to me, I’m incensed over what’s gone on with that.
<
p>
But to me, “leadership” is more than positions on issues. I think Patrick would be best at building public consensus and support for things that matter to me. I think he’d be good at getting people to pressure their representatives on issues that are important to me.
<
p>
Sure, I want someone I agree with generally, but to me, there’s a LOT more to “a different kind of leadership.” I work in the private sector. I’ve worked under a LOT of different CEOs, and I can tell you without hesitation that philosophy of management, style of leadership, how well you are able to communicate your vision, how you work with others … all of that stuff MATTERS. It’s not just window-dressing. That’s what’s resonating with me, and I’m not alone.
<
p>
We have two big indicators: polls that consistently show Gabrieli to beat Healey by the biggest margin, and the fact that Gabrieli is the only candidate to be attacked by Healey. These are worth more than a belief, among passionate Deval supporters, that Deval’s charisma will captivate the majority of voters.
Sure, that’s decent data, as far as it goes. But polls change — as I’m sure you’re hoping will be the case between now and Tuesday.
<
p>
And as I say, I’m not really interested in what Healey’s campaign is afraid of. As I say, they don’t know any better than we do. And that they pre-emptively attacked Gabrieli only shows how 1. rich, and 2. desperate they are.
Especially in a primary- where it’s all about turnout.