Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Is the Mass GOP dead?

By

Today’s Beagle carries an analysis by reporter Jack Dew on the state of the Republican Party in Berkshire County.

It’s a good article, and not just because I was quoted:

Michael Wilcox, a leading member of the Berkshires for Progressive Change {MFW: a chapter of PDM}, agreed, adding that Downing is more in tune with Berkshire voters, particularly his support of a single-payer health care system and of keeping the income tax at its current 5.3 percent.

Meanwhile, Wilcox said the state Republicans were hurt by the national party’s malaise. The state party will suffer, he said, as long as the national party lingers in the doldrums.

“It is going to take a shift in the national scene,” he said. “If that happens, the right Republican candidate could win (Berkshire County). I don’t think the local Republican Party is necessarily dead, but I think it definitely needs an overhaul.”

I’ve seen recent posts on our grassroots Yahoo group about how hard it’s been for our organizers to make headway in some of the more GOP-friendly areas, such as the Blackstone Valley and the Merrimac Valley. I wonder what others think about the state of the GOP statewide, and what it would take to resuscitate the Party here in Massachusetts.

Maybe, as a Democrat, I should just say RIP, but I don’t think that would be helpful for the kind of civic dialog we need to challenge us to articulate and work for our values and our beliefs.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

    • …hey, just kidding!.  I may be a Mass. Democrat, but it’s just not healthy democracy to have so many unopposed races, whether it’s a U.S. house seat or a State House seat.  And it’s not just Democrats running unopposed; I voted for my Republican state rep (if I’m struck by lightning, you’ll know why) because she ran unopposed, too.

      <

      p>
      But it’s not up to incumbents to go out and recruit their opponents.  If the GOP is to become a relevant force, they might just have to run candidates in every race and lose a few times to get some name recognition — like Joe Malone, before he finally won as Treasurer — but they have to have the stomach for it, as well as enough warm bodies.

      <

      p>
      After Mitt tried recruiting in 2002 and they ended up with a net loss, I think anyone would wonder what to do.  Any ideas, P.P.?

      • A healthy Republican party in MA is good for democracy in our Commonwealth. Even Teddy agreed with that and mentioned it when thanking Ken Chase for entering the race for Senate. I would love to see Republican primaries for more offices. I think doing so would both help the party and develop a better dialogue in the state, but how can we as members of the other party help this come to fruition? Any help we offer will either jeopardize our positions with in our own party and/or be met with suspicion from the Republicans.

          • say state wide, but feel there should be primaries on all levels so removed it. Out of ~150 races for state and national level races 3 is a pretty poor percentage. Furthermore look at your party’s track record over the past several election cycles here in MA. Not so good. I am not saying the dems are great by any means, but at least there is some internal completion.

        • The Greens had as many statewide candidates as the GOP — maybe they should be considered the opposition.  At least until the WFP takes over the role.

          <

          p>  – Dan

  2. I’m surprised the article didn’t mention that Patrick campaigned in western MA — that surely contributed to the margin.  I hope the Dems will continue to employ a 351-city strategy.  I suspect it will be a while before the GOP builds up enough resources to compete on that level.

    <

    p>  – Dan

  3. I think the Republican Party in Massachusetts has come to rely on a few strong personalities, but the party structure itself is in shambles, even in places like the Blackstone and Merrimac Valleys.

    <

    p>
    Here in North Reading (one of the red blips in a sea of blue) we have an interesting dynamic going.  Democrats actually outnumber Republicans 3:2, but the town always seems to go Republican in the big elections.  Ideologically, it is a fairly conservative town, but the Republican Party structure itself is virtually nonexistent. 

    <

    p>
    Instead, what we have is the organization of Representative Brad Jones, the House Minority leader.  At civic events where we have our DTC booth, there is never any Republican equivalent, but there is always a Jones booth.  Curiously, the Jones booth never has any literature or handouts other than his own stuff: No Healey, no Bush, no elephants of any sort. 

    <

    p>
    At the polls on Tuesday, the Jones folks were out in force, holding Jones signs all day, even though he himself was unopposed.  The Healey signs didn’t show up until lunchtime and, even then, they weren’t at all three polling places.  Healey still won the town by 7%.

    <

    p>
    I would be curious to hear if this dynamic is similar in other Republican “strongholds.”

  4. Why isn’t the problem that Republicans are a terrible fit for Massachusetts’ values?  That’s why Gov. Weld couldn’t get his diplomatic nomination past a Republican Senate.  Even our successful Republicans aren’t real Republicans.

    <

    p>
    It seems to me that Mass. Republicans might consider folding up and flocking to the Libertarian standard.  There may be enough folks who are socially liberal but fiscally conservative to consistitute an actual opposition.  It’s hard for Massachusetts non-Democrats to vote for a party that wants you to believe that radical Shiites and Arab Nationalists are aligned with Al Qaeda — or that Intelligent Design deserves to be taught in anything other than a course on political science — or that it’s just peachy to have lobbyists write legislation.  Such people might be very content voting Libertarian though.

    <

    p>
    On the other side, many of us are represented by conservative Democrats when we’d really prefer more progressive representation.  Perhaps a local Massachusetts-only party of progressive Democrats or Greens?

  6. Aside to PP: I’ve really appreciated your upbeat and friendly comments on this site. I have a diverse set of friends, and I even count some Republicans among them. Some of my best learning comes from my discussions with them, when they challenge me to defend my positions or beliefs. I wish we had more such.

    <

    p>

    <

    p>
    I believe that perhaps the key thing that Deval Patrick offered was a vision of government; of how to govern. A list of programs is not a vision. A list of complaints is not a vision.

    <

    p>
    Here in the Berkshires, I listened as our Democratic State Senate candidate talked about his passion for job creation, for quality education for all, for a single-payer health system, all under the rubric of advocating for a government that cares for the needs of ordinary people. What I heard from his Republican opponent was a list of negatives: cut taxes [taxes are bad]; unemployment insurance is too costly [cut unemployment benefits]; auto insurance rates are too high [not really explaining why more companies don’t want to do business here…]. And negatives on the so-called social issues: deny same-sex couples equal treatment under the law; take away the right of privacy for women in making medical decisions; and so on.

    <

    p>
    In the end, I think voters responded to the positive messages. We went 75% for Patrick, 71% for Downing. The GOP was not talking to most of the people around here, obviously.

    <

    p>
    Comments I heard from the business community suggest to me that the local GOP is too concentrated on the mantras passed down from the national scene, and not attuned to local needs.

    <

    p>
    The nice thing about a vision is that it can be molded to local circumstances. A list of pabulums cannot be.

    <

    p>
    I would welcome a more substantive engagement by the opposition. Failing that, we will do our best to govern as we see best.

Archives