The Globe is reporting that Patrick will come out and endorse Obama for president, and that the two talked on the phone today.
This is surprising to me, and at the same time, not at all. Although, I was expecting Patrick to come out in support of Clinton, having had been in the Clinton administration and all.
Thoughts?
Please share widely!
so in that sense it’s not surprising to me. also, why should Patrick endorse Hillary simply because he worked in Bill’s administration?
I think Hillary has best answered his call to give voters something to vote for, rather than just something to vote against. It’s his choice and ofcorse they both have the same people, but I’m very disappointed.
if Obama loses the nomination, Patrick can then shift his support to Hillary or whoever wins. It’s a win for Obama with a future win potential for Hillary. But I can see how it is a big loss for Hillary right now. A major Black supporter is coveted by most politicians with a brain.
Incredibly, the NH primaries is literally weeks away…so the pressure to endorse at this time is surely intense from Obama since his NH campaign has been stalled out for months…But, I am disappointed that Deval chose to get involved now… considering the fact that there is so much to do (and redo) right here on Beacon Hill that needs his undivided attention…(we’re talking Dukakis I, not Dukakis II, here)…I understand that he owes Barack Obama and no one is surprised by the endorsement but the timing is terrible.
<
p>
Coincidentally, I received a very high dollar fundraiser invite from the Deval committee today that offered me the chance to join “Women in Action” to hear Deval and Diane Patrick discuss what his administration is doing for women. I have no doubt that they will have some solid accomplishments to report (and for that I am grateful) but I guess it is safe to assume that the real woman in action, Hillary Clinton, will not be on the list of women they are helping.
Obama stumped pretty heavily for Patrick last year, so… that’s politics.
….really surprise me. The campaign that Obama is running is very similar to the one that Patrick ran. There is much in common between the “Audacity of Hope” and “Yes, We Can…” so there is a synergy there to be sure. Unfortunately, despite all hope to the contrary, Gov. Patrick has heretofore not been doing a splendid job so the endorsement will likely draw the expected comparisons and leave people wondering if Obama’s call for a new way will fail to take off post election the way that Patrick’s sadly has.
the two campaigns shared the same braintrust, David Axelrod, who hails from Chicago. He was the inspiration for both campaigns’ message(s) of hope. This wouldn’t necessarily explain the endorsement, though.
was a dry run for Obama’s.
Actually the David Axelrod playbook did not start with Deval…the campaign strategy and themes we saw with Deval were a repeat of what he had used for Obama in the Illinois Senate race…then used for Deval in MA…now refits for Obama in NH…that’s why the messages are so familiar.
(the Globe did when Deval ran)alot of it comes out of Bill Clinton’s Hope campaign circa 1992. But, that’s politics.
You’re absolutely right. The only surprise is that he did endorse, many sitting Governors are not so as not to interfere with their in-state political dynamics. I thought perhaps Patrick would hold off not to heighten tensions on Beacon Hill.
…far better than his Republican predecessors. Massachusetts is back in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. Marriage rights were protected. There are meaningful proposals on the table to help cities and towns – the lege has adopted some and at least we are having a real conversation about the others, not stuck in fantasyland talking about reducing the income tax rate. We’ve reopened the door to stem cell research and the economic and medical benefits it may bring us. We have an engaged leader who is actively selling the state to businesses. I could go on. No politician’s perfect, and no governor is going to be successful with 100% of his initiatives. But DP is the most inspiring and hardworking politician I’ve seen in my lifetime. He’ll get a lot of good things done for this state in his term. Your potshots are no more sensible than if someone were complaining about how the Patriots are playing this year. What can one say to such a person, beyond telling him that he’s completely out of touch? This is as good as it gets. Appreciate it.
<
p>
…considered adding a disclaimer but wanted to see how long it would take people to read criticism of Patrick in what I wrote. You will note that I did not say he was doing a bad job, just that he has not lived up to the momentum of his capmaign and that people may try to use that fact to draw comparisons to try and criticize Obama. I personally think that Patrick did an amazing job on the gay marriage issue and has been competent in most other regards. But, the first months of his administration were a PR nightmare and otherwise nothing else of note has been fully accomplished. I understand that it is only the first year of the administration and that substantive change and improvement is not a practical reality in that time frame but that matters not on the stump. I stand by my actual point and reject the challenge to debate the accomplishments of the Patrick administration. The Patrick endorsement of Obama will likely give rise to negative inferences. That doesn’t mean I agree, but I’m not going to pretend Patrick is bullet proof.
Just reacting to what you did in fact write:
I just don’t share at all your sentiment that he has not been doing a good job. I’m pleased with the steps he has taken. Anyone remember the last Governor? The guy who pandered to national Republican party bigotry? The guy who pulled the state out of the RGGI? The guy who sat on his hands while the state lost thousands of jobs? The guy who tried to balance the budget by cutting funds for services for vulnerable populations like the mentally ill and the developmentally disabled?
<
p>
I’m delighted to have a guy in the corner office who shows some vision and some values. Sure, he made a couple of early PR stumbles. So what? I’m not a right-wing radio talk show host, poised to pounce on anything less than perfection. The Gov righted the ship pretty quickly, and he moved on to the issues that he promised to make his focus.
<
p>
We could be watching a Republican governor try to score political points off the lege by calling for an income tax cut, while the state infrastructure crumbles and jobs flee. Instead we’re having a series of meaningful conversations about how we pay for the services we want and need as a community. This is big progress, and we owe it to the Gov’s political courage in taking on and moving beyond the stale political conversation we had in this state under Cellucci, Swift and Romney.
<
p>
We’re lucky we got this guy to run our state – we could have done, and have done, so much worse.
…you are not reading into what I am saying yet you quote “not doing a SPLENDID job” and interpret me as saying he is not doing a good job. They are different words with different meanings and one was specifically chosen over the other. You are ABSOLUTELY reading into what I wrote things that I neither intended or facially conveyed. I never said that Patrick was doing a poor job or that our previous Governors were preferable.
<
p>
It is, however, undeniable that there was a very short honeymoon for Patrick after the campaign ended and his term began. He has been lambasted by the Press for PR gaffs and there has been a lot of documented contention with the legislature. None of that means he is doing a bad job, but it is the kind of thing that people can pick up on to criticize Obama’s potential since he is running a similar campaign. In fact the kind of stuff that has already been picked apart on this thread (below) and on other blogs.
<
p>
That is what I said, that is what I meant. STOP reading things into what other people write that just aren’t there. You are wasting my time and yours.
<
p>
that I think are unfounded, about a Governor I’m pleased with and would like to see succeed.
<
p>
As for how you want to spend your time, you’re on your own. I can’t waste any of your time. You’re the only one who can do that.
….you really must learn to read and comprehend
He delivered a well thought out, balanced budget. The Leg ignored it.
<
p>
He created reasonable, positive ways to increase revenue (loophole cuts & local meals/hotel options). The Leg ignored it.
<
p>
He then went even further, creating anything to meet the demands – supporting casinos even though I and many others think it’s a bad idea. I hope that fails, too, but heaven knows at least he’s trying. That’s a whole lot more than Sal DiMasi can say.
<
p>
Add to that the fact that Deval played a huge role in the SSM victory and is still just getting his feet warm and I don’t see at all where he’s doing so poorly. I don’t think it’s a matter of me drinking the koolaid, either, because as I’ve said… he’s coming up with creative solutions, the Leg keeps ignoring them.
and has been inspirational in the same way Patrick was. Since so many local pols have endorsed Hillary I expected Patrick to deline to endorse or to endorse Hillary. Hillary wrapped up Menino’s endorsement months ago. good for Patrick.
And that rally sounds like a great double bill. They were great together at the Hynes last year.
but could Patrick’s decision to endorse Obama have been influenced by Patrick’s own White House ambitions (assuming he has them, at least in latent form)? Think about it: Patrick could surmise that Hillary has the nomination all-but-cinched, so endorsing someone else wouldn’t dim her chances. Moreover, endorsing Hillary would have been kind of a throw-away anyway, while an Obama endorsement would be more valuable. Just a thought.
He’s got his hands full here in Massachusetts, and I don’t read him as a quitter. I think DP supports Obama because 1) Obama campaigned for him 2) they share a worldview and a sense of politics as public service
Gives DP’s reasoning as follows…
Here’s the link.
Lol… I wouldn’t expect him to announce his run in 2016 ten minutes later, doncha think?
If he was looking to curry favor with the future president in support of future ambitions, he’d hedge his bets and not endorse, or bet on the frontrunner.
assuming that future president is Hillary. It’s that he would calculate that Obama – in whatever capacity – could offer him more in the future than Hillary, due to the differences between their styles, messages, ideologies, base of support, etc. He recognizes that endorsing Obama doesn’t really hurt Hillary, and the payoff is worth the risk of alienating Hillary and her supporters because right now an Obama endorsement is really valuable to Obama, and Obama’s got a bright future. Once Hillary is in office, she will have reached her peak. Think about it – if Patrick is content where he is and has no higher ambitions (whether reelection, Senate, WH), why take a risk and endorse the underdog, much less anyone? Like you said – he’s got enough on his plate. There’s gotta be something in it for him – and that something is a political chip to cash.
when every single decision an officeholder makes is assumed to be a self-serving calculation.
An economist would tell you that’s simply people being rational. I’m not saying this is the only consideration that Patrick would make (under this hypothetical situation, of course). Naturally, there are close ties between Patrick and Obama and their similar campaigns. But, as a politician, Patrick naturally would calculate the costs and benefits to endorsing anyone, and then deciding to endorse Obama. You may bristle at this notion, and he may indeed authentic – but the pressures (and downsides) of the job produce such political calculations.
Is probably the only non-politically-calculated decision of the day for most politicians, in MHO.
for a federal-level pol anyway. milk v. sugar
…I’d like to believe DP endorsed BO (ooh…not good initials!) because he’s the best (electable) choice for president?!? I know many might consider HC “inevitable”, but she personally doesn’t appeal to me. She is the same person that, given the opportunity to make a statement about the disgusting farm subsidies and their millionaire lobbyist beneficiaries, said “they are real people too”. Yes, they are real people who are taking real money from Massachusetts taxpayers to line their wallets while continuing to turn “America’s heartland” into a chemically-fed mono-culture desert. I understand why politicians don’t want to trifle with the Iowa full-employment subsidy while trying to win the Iowa caucus, but I personally believe that BO is much more principled the HC. I think BO has distinguished himself among the frontrunners by at least not blatantly pandering to that “constituency” while HC has not. That and her refusal to acknowledge her mistake in voting for the Iraq war (and that’s exactly what she did – no matter how she spins it!) makes me extremely reluctant to support her campaign!
is that HC has simply been around longer than BO, in and around federal office longer, so she has had more time to, shall we say, develop any pander instincts she may have. will BO be pure 15 years hence? AFAIK, he’s already good at pandering to coal and christians. they all pander.
I take your point, but I am holding out for a campaign like the one Niki Tsongas’ late husband ran 15 years ago!
You don’t get to the White House by buying a ticket on the Titanic’s second cruise just as the iceberg is creaking into the hull during the first one…
Obama’s a big disappointment. I figured Deval Patrick would support Obama – and thought it would happen sooner – but I wish Obama was a better campaigner. Sadly, I just don’t think he’s ready for prime time. He’s yet to win a really big race and it shows. (His Senate victory was a joke – Alan Keyes?!)
<
p>
Still, though, Deval’s endorsement could really matter – especially if he can get some troops moving to NH to help out. Obama needs to be competitive there if he’s going to have any shot in defeating Hillary.
He’s excellent on the stump.
I’ve been thinking that if Hillary won, at least Deval would be gone. I figure he is in a no win situation here, since the budget is a bigger problem than he thought, his rookie mistakes during the early months and all the other problems that the Commonwealth has and that if (unfortunately I think this should read “when”) Hillary won Deval would leave to be her attorney general.
<
p>
Now I don’t even have that silver lining.
even though I don’t support Obama. I doubt this was a political move. I would guess it’s an assist from a friend who understands how difficult it is to deal with making change happen. Deval could have played it safe. There’s a great article in the last New York magazine detailing the backgrounds of Hillary and Barack (Yale vs. Harvard). Worth a read. They are very much from two different generations and as such, have different ideologies to offer in their campaigns. Obama is much more like Deval than Hillary. It all makes sense to me.
Especially when you know that the Clintons are nothing if not vindictive.
<
p>
I remember him being asked about this 6 months +/- ago, and he said that while he was close to Obama, he had worked with Clinton and people whouldn’t assume he’d endorse anyone.
<
p>
It was the perfect answer – explaining bona fide ties to BOTH sides and a desire to sit it out like a gentleman, and work for the winner.
<
p>
but, Nooooohhhhh…..
<
p>
Deval has to endorse once it’s futile, and the Wrath of Khan will be upon him. Just the latest in his string of misadventures. I freely admit – I never foresaw how Deval would go downhill so fast. Just the right note to demonstrate for anyone unsure about the chances of Obama’s presidency….
<
p>
Oh, but please – all you BMG’ers go to NH and work hard for him – that’s what the endorsement is all about, after all.
As pointed out upthread, the Deval campaign was essentially a warming over of Obama’s Senate campaign. Plus Obama came by a couple times, endorsing before the convention, and lent Deval half a campaign theme. Bottom line: Deval owes Obama a lot.
<
p>
And it’s not as if Obama’s getting a whole lot in return. There’s little recent polling, but Deval’s ineffectiveness on crime and stumbling vagaries on casinos don’t make him look visionary. (And I’m sorry, Ryan, but delivering a dead budget isn’t an achievement. It’s a failure.) As for getting “troops” up to New Hampshire, that’s facile. Anyone so out of it that they’ll support a candidate on Deval’s say-so already loves Obama because he says the same things.
<
p>
Hey, it’s better than losing that endorsement, but Deval’s thumbs-up seems predictable and ho-hum to me.
If they could sink Kerry for a single comment imagine where this could go if it is not immedietly debunked …
<
p>
http://www.youtube.c…