This is cross-posted at Marry in Massachusetts, with cutesy art.
As much as I join in the easy ridicule of the local GOP party-ette, this is a grand chance to put it out there for party and principle…if only she had either. Healey, you might notice, is a woman as well as nominal Republican. She was not the first of her gender to be looey here, following the bumbling and equally arrogant Jane Swift in the office. However, she was elected, not appointed, although her only real experience was as head of the state GOP and that for only a short time.
Pretending that the Dems here are all progressives and lefties, our Republicans often hide in the other party. That is practical for election purposes of hypocritical and cowardly pols. I question the strategy, which seem based on individual offices. If those pols who really believe in the national and state GOP platforms shed their donkey skins, wouldn't they give the less-left-leaning voters a real choice, rather than making them decode when it comes time to vote? Wouldn't that provide a real two-party (with lots of fractional minors) instead of Dems and DINOs?
So, Healey has her chance to lead her party's battle here. Even if it meant defeat on January 19th for the special election, it would have been for the good of the commonwealth as well as her nominal party.
Instead, we have lesser known possibles with less money and fewer connections to fight. They may have more guts and party loyalty, but they have weaker chances. In fact, DINO U.S. Rep. Stephen Lynch (who wears the badge of conservative Dem) will likely run and stands more of a chance of winning and representing the GOP views than any of them.
Healey has never been a leader or heroine and is not about to start. She is a wealthy woman married to a wealthy man. She seems to have more emotionally pulling if more trivial things to do. Her privileged status may be the stuff of GOP ideal, all except for the courage of convictions and advancing the party.