Email (no link):
Today, Diane Patrick, the Commonwealth’s First Lady, announced that she will endorse Mike Capuano for U.S. Senate.
Mrs. Patrick will formally endorse Congressman Capuano tomorrow at his 50th “Open Mike” conversation with voters at the Dedham Community Theater, 580 High Street, at 10:30am.… A partner at the law firm of Ropes and Gray, Mrs. Patrick first met Mike on her husband’s successful campaign for Governor. Congressman Capuano was one of Governor Patrick’s earliest endorsers.
“Mike and Barbara offered us tremendous support and friendship throughout the course of Deval’s campaign. I am very pleased to have the opportunity to reciprocate with my own endorsement now,” said Mrs. Patrick. “Mike has proven leadership on issues important to me such as improving education and fighting to protect our cherished civil liberties. Mike’s experience in the House coupled with his passion to fight for what is best for Massachusetts makes him the very best candidate to send to the U.S. Senate. I am proud to endorse Mike today”
Interesting. I confess I’m surprised to see Mrs. Patrick putting herself out in the political arena like this, but more power to her.
NO BODY
It sort of begs the question of what Deval will do, especially given her rationale.
Gov. Patrick has stated that he’s not going to officially endorse anybody. Nevertheless, I think it’s fair to say that this qualifies as a “quasi-endorsement”, for what it’s worth (probably not much).
…Marty Meehan’s wife signing on as chair of Niki Tsongas’ campaign while he officially didn’t endorse.
Diane Patrick has been fairly visible since Deval came on the scene. I had never heard of Marty Meehan’s wife (I don’t live in his district) until she decided to endorse. So that felt more like a signal than this does, at least to me.
<
p>In other words, I can imagine the governor splitting with Diane on the endorsement. But I don’t know, and I could be all wet on this.
You state
<
p>
<
p>Really? In what way? Because the press dogged her and her family? I think she’s been remarkably in the background, given her own very impressive credentials.
<
p>I know she’s been the keynote speaker at several high-profile fundraisers for charitable causes, but I can’t recall any other political statement she’s made, before this one.
<
p>I know the Governor has been extremely emphatic about staying out of all political races (other than his own!), and I think that’s proper (as much as I regret the absence of his endorsement in races where he has an obvious ally).
<
p>Yet, just as people tried to make a big deal out of Doug Rubin working for Steve P., and trying to attribute the Governor’s “implicit” support to other actions his political friends have taken, I remain convinced that Deval is truly neutral on all of these races.
<
p>My own family is divided between Capuano and Khazei, yet I didn’t detect any gloating by my partner over this endorsement. “Diane is her own person and is free to make up her own mind,” was the comment I heard.
Not sure how I missed that.
<embed pluginspage="http://www.adobe.com/go/getflashplayer" src="http://www.necn.com/avp32.swf?
or9mv1)csQ,N$I,QN T~[UdHNAnDzR<m4bE&!<0h?B8 6AtvQpN>R(o{I0R=kdDUUazJ|6;i&Zbq,Go},Hx9wnTcuQ]_nt7mv2yf,SZ@OX’OB4j!YrFH;FJ?Zi.-z$eZX}Kj,ZDUlt;Wz(Bq0Fd7LL{5u,h-C7<U/lk.@T9#(WZl^=b)7g:97~*H4zUVg#I5;&/pRu.aPVOR7uQp:aQguYFP>ysiEB|uNMYNs&]pqE~k9cm5>MTnjhKi_Km<O}gbkc’)qGdi,c<!v]Bd$s!K@wh?NbY7<:y@-Lo@e,A” type=”application/x-shockwave-flash” allowfullscreen=”true” wmode=”transparent” allowscriptaccess=”always” width=”320″ height=”240″><
p>I always love the “I’m staying out of this race, but I’ll endorse through my spouse” type of endorsement.
<
p>So, for me, the real surprise is not that Mrs. Patrick is putting herself out there, but rather (some) surprise that, though this endorsement, Deval is implicitly announcing that he is supporting Capuano. I’m mainly surprised because, let’s face it, Coakley will win the primary and trounce Brown in the general. So why (quasi-)endorse the very likely loser at this point in the campaign?
Not addressing the issue of “quasi-endorsement” but, there are those of us who endorse the person who we think is best for the position. We may endorse, even if there is the possibility that the person might lose.
I’m so dissapointed in the ‘endorse the frontrunner’ attitude. The point of a primary, especially a primary in such a staunchly democratic state, is to ensure we pick the very best, most capable candidate to go into a general election they’re likely to dominate. In Massachusetts, this is where we find the real competition. We’re lucky enough to live in a state where instead of having to fight tooth and nail to elect a democrat, we have the luxury to focus on chosing the democrat of the highest possible caliber. If Diane or Deval think Capuano would make a better Senator, I certainly hope they wouldn’t let Coakley’s polling numbers dictate their endorsement.
<
p>Let’s be honest, whoever makes it through the primary is likely to smoke the competition in the general. Our votes and endorsements shouldn’t be about who’s ahead in the polls. They should be about who we think can best represent progressive interests.
<
p>So yeah, I get the political benefits of endorsing the frontrunner. But I wish we saw independence and courage taking precedence over stategy a little more often.
Though I’m raising the question from the perspective of the Governor, where the question of who to endorse necessarily goes beyond the idealistic question of “who is best for the position.” There must be political reasons for this “quasi” endorsement, and I’m interested in what they may be, that’s all.
It is unfortunate that some people will assume that Mrs. Patrick’s endorsement is somehow an “implicit” endorsement by the Governor. The Governor issued a statement today saying that he will remain neutral in this race.
<
p>I am working with Steve Pagliuca, but I respect Mrs. Patrick’s decision to endorse Congressman Capuano and also respect the fact that she made the decision for her own personal reasons.
I do not believe that you believe your own comment.
No one with an ounce of political sense could believe that Diane Patrick would do anything political without weighing in with her husband first, given that it will affect his standing as Governor. It would be totally out of character.
<
p>AND No one would have any doubt that people would indeed assume her endorsement reflected his approval….after all it will have consequences to his own upcoming race to hold onto his job.
<
p>Doug, you are being paid to support and advise Steve Pagliuca and the Governor…it is understandable that you would publicly stick up for the Patrick’s decision to inject themselves in the Senate race…but it is truly hard for me to believe that it was a decision you advised them to take. Patrick supporters across the state are worried about the statewide election ahead and wish he (and his wife) would not take unnecessary actions that diminish his already weakened chances.
one way or the other but the more you say how truly cataclysmic Diane’s endorsement of Mike Capuano is for Deval Patrick, the more I think Diane’s endorsement of Mike Capuano helps Mika Capuano regardless of whether Diane is a cutout for Deval.
<
p>And let’s face it, stating Diane is a cutout for Deval is not a particularly savory presumption for progressives who, at least traditionally, view a woman every bit as equal to her husband, capable of having her own well-reasoned point of view, and in some cases, twice as good as their male counterpart.
n/t
I absolutely stand by my comment.
<
p>I believe the statements by Diane Patrick and Governor Patrick are sincere and reflect their individual decisions.
<
p>And yes, it is true that I am paid to work with the Governor and Steve Pagliuca. But I also believe in them. I also strongly support Diane Patrick and her right to make this endorsement.
<
p>Given the fact that Mrs. Patrick has kept out of the political limelight for the most part, it’s a little strange that she would even bother to publicly endorse, no?
<
p>And the notion that she did so “for her own personal reasons”, with no input from the Governor, is pretty unlikely indeed. Politician spouses (both men and women…this has nothing to do with gender) understand the political ramifications of their actions, and do not simply emerge from relative obscurity to do something like this without the full consent, and probably encouragement, from the Governor and his political team.
<
p>That all said, how much does this endorsement matter? Not much at all.
no political wife would ever endorse a candidate her husband opposed.
There are just a couple teeny-tiny differences, such as the fact that Maria Shriver is far more high-profile politically than Mrs. Patrick (particularly as a member of the Kennedy family), and not to mention of a different political party from her husband.
<
p>But other than that it’s exactly the same situation.
Not strange. She is a partner at the biggest law firm in Boston. Law firms have an interest in supporting candidates, even to have one partner support one candidate and another partner to support a different one. Relationships make the world go round.
Lots of folks owe Mikey- He will still be a Congressman capable of favors.
You heard her say that Caps was one of the first to support her husband- that’s the way it works here- People have long, long memories. You either owe or are owed. That’s the reality.
politicians endorse their opponents. I know it sounds crazy but that the way it works there. And everybody has long memories.
See Mike in Dedham or throughout the state this weekend.
<
p>Diane Patrick will be the special guest at the Dedham “Open Mike.”
Link to full text of the endorsement here.
Seriously. Folks are suggesting/claiming that Mrs. Patrick is doing Mr. Patrick’s bidding… instead of simply thinking for herself.
<
p>Maybe they’re right.
<
p>Or, maybe little Mrs. Patrick put her big girl panties on this morning and made up her cute little mind for herself before baking snacks for all the boys before their poker game.
I think it’s reasonable to wonder if one spouse is speaking for both regardless of which spouse actually holds the office.
…the “big girl panties” reference is the most sexist thing about this exchange. You could have at least said shoes or something. I’m not sure why a basic observation about how things tend to work, especially since I was careful to say this could go either way gender-wise, got downrated above.
the most sexist part was suggesting that her mind was “cute” and “little” and that she’d be “baking snacks for the boys”.
<
p>But come on. The entire one sentence paragraph was satirical. That was the point. Twelve of the 15 raters saw that and gave the comment a 6.
You have to expect that any discussion of a Democratic primary is going to be accompanied by lots of downratings. That’s just the nature of such discussions, I’m afraid.
<
p>During the last Senatorial primary, threads degenerated into battles about downratings or, still worse, downratings wars.
My suggestion that Mrs. Patrick’s endorsement has a political angle is not exactly a stretch. Seriously.
<
p>Your comment recalls the paraphrase of Capt. Renault in Casablanca — “I’m shocked — shocked! — to find that politics is going on here.”
The governor is at about 35% in the polls. Hardly a position of strength. Why would he want to deliberately tick off the supporters of Coakley, Khazei and Pagliuca to endorse Capuano who currently can’t break 16% himself in any poll? Deval had better continue to pray that Cahill hangs on to at least 20% in the Gov. race or Charlie Baker will be the beneficiary of yet another faux pas by the governor.
that politicians should endorse the race leader out self-interest? Clearly not everyone thinks that way. But maybe that’s why Deval didn’t endorse and his wife did: So they could choose who they favor and not the race leader, rather the person they think is the best candidate.
That at times I feel like it is not a “party” at all in the classic sense.
<
p>That is partly because the Republicans in this state have dwindled to such a small group that would-be candidates who, in another state, might be Republicans claim to be Democrats here.
<
p>”Big tent” is one thing – but one size fits all quickly diminishes meaning.
<
p>That is part of why I was so under impressed with this year’s platform; in aiming to offend no one, it failed to either inspire, or delineate what is expected/inherent in “being a Democrat”.
<
p>Too often politics in our state feels like Incumbents v. Newcomers more than party politics.
In November. Oops, everything is wonderful in blue land. No problem.
the best move for Deval is to stay out of endorsing anyone and let the Democratic Primary voters decide for themselves. Diane Patrick is not going to make such a blatant political move without the okay from her husband…it would be totally out of character…if she were truly political, she would have advised her husband to stay neutral and be helpful to the party nominee after Dec. 8th.
Deval will need all of the Dem. Senate contenders pulling damn hard for him to survive next year. Ticking off 75% of them hardly seems wise.
That’s exactly what he did. He stayed out of endorsing anyone.
He may as well have had the guts to do it himself. No one…no one… will believe she would do anything to compromise her husband’ chances for re-election with an independent endorsement move such as this…if she took the step, it was with his knowledge and approval. The good news for Martha Coakley is that Hillary Clinton won the Democratic Primary here without support from the Patrick or Dukakis or Capuano families…and Martha Coakley will, too.
<
p>Asserting that Deval endorsed Capuano is a nuanced and couterfactual argument that contradicts direct statements by Diane and Deval. Regardless – whether he did or did not endorse Capuano – how is his “endorsement” in any way obstructive of how Democratic Party voters decide for themselves?
speaks in favor of one candidate or another, the rest of us simply reach behind the left ear, flip the lock on the cranial vault, open that sucker up, and remove our brains.
I still haven’t read one argument that compells me to believe this endorsement is anything more than an endorsement …one of many by many endorsers endorsing many different candidates, all individually without much consequence, taken together amassing some force of persuasion.
<
p>If HLPeary is pissing on this endorsement because s/he favors a candidate other than Capuano, the controversy and debate being stirred on BMG is clearly drawing more attention to the endorsement than it would garner on its own.
is the notion that, once again, a prominent Democratic female has decided to favor someone other than Coakley. We’ve seen over-the-top stuff suggesting that anyone’s endorsement of Capuano is an endorsement of the status quo (whatever that is) and a vote in favor of some sort of good ol’ boys club, but gawd forbid a woman should stake ground in that camp. For example, look at the reaction by some of the Coakley supporters around here to Nancy Pelosi’s endorsement of Capuano. Seems to me that if there’s ever a clubby sort of element here it’s the one that presumes there’s some sort of community of Democratic women who are expected to support a strong female candidate simply because she’s female. Failure to do so calls into question one’s commitment to gender equality, feminist concerns, the status of women, and the role of women in American political leadership. At its extreme, this sort of thinking reduces those who support candidates other than Coakley to self-loathing women and sexist men. Meh.
criticism of Coakley unreasonably leads to calling “ into question one’s commitment to gender equality, feminist concerns, the status of women, and the role of women in American political leadership” limited mostly to forums like WomenforCoakley and BMG as far as I can tell.
<
p>In addition (and I find this phenomenon equally disturbing) is the untoward criticism of women in politics who endorse candidates other than Coakley, such as Nancy Pelosi, Diane Patrick and State Sen. Marion Walsh as if they must be ostracized from the club for their “egregious offense.”
<
p>Do you think Coakley’s service in the Senate would be equally driven by this gender justice, us and them, worldview if she were to win in January?
Certainly her comments regarding how she would have voted had she been Capuano are real cause for concern. Whether or not she can remain so rigidly ideological under the pressures of the seat will remain to be seen. I do think, however, that unless she strays beyond the pale, her supporters will remain aggressively protective (how ironic) and that is a problem for another day. The tent will have gotten a lot smaller, I fear.
<
p>On matters of gender politics, she’s committed and what we’ve seen in consistent with her sense of integrity.
<
p>What you see is what you get …unless it’s about her having some exposure and then she’s ready to assign blame (as all good attorneys do effortlessly) even if she’s responsible.
Because you wrote most of my comment for me.
FWIW, I respect you tremendously, so your respect for me means something. Thanks.
As I talk with people, there are those who find it annoying that people assume that a prominent or active woman Democrat will be a Coakley supporter. Have many had that experience?
they don’t know what you mean.
I’m sure it’s being said elsewhere (there are very few things you can think of that aren’t being said somewhere), but you seem to go on at length about comments no one here has made.
My comment is in the context of dialogue that has occurred here for three months, not this one post. Unless you’ve been paying close attention to this site since Martha Coakley’s announcement, you may not have any real sense of what I’m talking about. If, however, you have been paying close attention to the comments on this site and don’t know what I’m “going on at length” (?) about, then I don’t know what to say. I’m a pit puzzled how one paragraph and three comments on this post constitute “at length,” but whatever. I’ve intentionally kept my distance since the initial dust-up over Fells Acre in September. A few comments about the treatment of Nancy Pelosi post endorsement and that’s about it.
are you saying that the Governor should endorse Martha Coakley — the candidate who wasn’t with him in the Governor’s race, endorsed the opposing candidate in the presidential race, and was rumored to be looking at running against him in 2010?
<
p>Maybe loyalty still means something to the Governor. Capuano endorsed him in the primary, worked hard to get him elected, was with the same presidential candidate (the winner), and was actually helpful in acting as a go-between the Governor and DiMasi during the casino debate.
<
p>He’s far more likely to get my vote for Governor if he DOES endorse Capuano, because loyalty means something to me too.
He will needlessly lose votes of many Coakley, Pagliucca and Khazei supporters. Neutrality was his best political move for the primary and all out support for the Democratic nominee in the final. The Governor has a tough fight ahead…he cannot afford to fritter away votes.
That is stupid.
<
p>Deval is not going to lose any votes by anything that happens in this race.
that led to Deval Patrick’s political Armageddon. God save the Commonwealth.
Maybe Diane Patrick thinks that Capuano is the best candidate. Maybe I think that the Governor should show some political courage and stand with someone who stood with him. I don’t know when loyalty became such a bad word around here.
<
p>If the Coakley, Pagliuca and Khazei supporters don’t vote for Patrick based on this, then that’s pretty pathetic. Are they going to go with Cahill or Baker? Cause I don’t think either one of them has the same values as any of the candidates in this race.
the pro-choice, anti-death penalty, very pro-local aid, pro-tax cut Republican? The Governor’s race hasn’t even begun yet. Don’t lose sight of history…Bill Weld could not win with just GOP votes, he won with the votes of Independent AND Democratic women in a political climate in which the public was angry at the state government and its leaders. Sound at all familiar?
<
p>Don’t take a Democratic victory for granted…we have a tough fight ahead next year!
This is not to say Baker could not win, but I think he has a lot of political baggage to overcome. Christy Mihos might even have a better chance in the republican primary than Baker–and that would be a disaster. But I just want to remind you that the real reason Bill Weld won was because he was running against John Silber–who was detested by a lot of democrats, including me. That election was the first time I voted for a republican since the 1960’s, when I voted for John Lindsay as mayor of New York.
Silber’s flipping out during an interview with Natalie Jacobson?
<
p>Silber later blamed Natalie for his loss:
<
p>
<
p>The question: “What are your strengths and weakness?”
<
p>The whole thing is in the first link, but it’s to a Google book.
taking a Democratic victory for granted? And how is being anti-tax one of the values that we share?
Maybe not the primary, but in the general she used HER ad buys to promote his candidacy since her opponent was an asterisk. I’m not sure I’ve ever seen that before.
the primary. Capuano was with Patrick from the beginning. Sure, Coakley was with him after he was the nominee, but so was pretty much every other Democratic officeholder in the state.
Cahill was doing better in the polls than Baker. Frankly, and perhaps this is off topic, but I wonder why people aren’t wondering if Charlie Baker can hang on to that 16% he’s barely cracking. And, quite frankly, I wonder if he’s even going to get past the primary (at this point, I have my sincerest doubts).
it’s called having it both ways…and every time the Governor has tried to do that, he has come out on the short end of the public opinion stick.
It strikes me as pretty dishonest to have waited to do this until right after the Women for Deval event in the middle of the week. Many of the big fund-raisers for that event are Coakley supporters and I know that at least some (if not all) of them would not have come out for and raised money for the Deval event if they’d known about this.
<
p>Frankly, as a very early (pre-announcement) and strong supporter of Deval the first time around I have been so disappointed by his actions at governor–starting with his call to Citibank on behalf of a predatory mortgage lender. I had hoped that things would get better but they have not–it seems that he is tone deaf. I had decided before this that I was going to sit out this election–not work for him or give him any money but still vote for him, unless someone better came along. I still feel that way, now more strongly than ever.
If its true that the timing was arranged and is more than coincidence – delay Diane’s endorsement so as to reap a maximum benefit in the fundraiser – its seems to me that its just smart politics and not nefarious or unethical. At the same time, I’m sure you have other substantive reasons for being dissapointed by Deval.
It just seems dishonest, if not unethical.
It’s probably not the greatest idea to think that one is doing Deval a personal favor by working for him. Whatever one’s disappointments with the Patrick Administration, one shudders to think of how a Republican Administration might have dealt with the recession. A more than good enough reason not to stay at home is to prevent a Romney Restoration.
I hate to have to agree with elliebear on this one. In the presidential primary, the Patricks waited until after their own Women for Deval event (fundraiser) to announce that they were not with Hillary Clinton (as if that were ever going to be in doubt)…and now the timing of yet another Women for Deval event (fundraiser) conveniently takes place before announcing that they will not support the first women US Senator in Massachusetts history. Maybe coincidence but I do not believe in coincidence.
<
p>That nitpicking aside, I was more struck by Ms. Patrick’s reasoning that she had to endorse Mike because he had been a strong supporter of her husband’s campaign…that is laudable I guess, if Coakley had been unsupportive…but, if you will roll back the tape, you might remember the one moment when Kerry Healy seemed to be gaining traction on the crime issue with attacks against Deval…someone who was also running for statewide office stepped up and was the person in the pro-Deval commercial that stopped Healy in her tracks…seems others have conveniently forgotten that…Coakley was there for Deval. (How many pols do you know who would do that when their own name was on the same ballot?…any Congressmen step up then?)
<
p>Ms.Patrick also said she felt Mike had more experience…when experience was never an issue for her in the Governor’s race. I just found her reasoning very confusing.