His problem, though, is the relatively low metabolism of too much of his governorship. He floundered through a freshman year of controversy over office decorations and cars and an ill-advised call on behalf of a mortgage giant.
Ah, yes! We’re back to the drapes! That was about #2,785 on the list of important things facing the Commonwealth when it happened, and that was nearly four years ago. Yet McGrory starts off with that as a key “problem” with Patrick here in 2010.
Meanwhile, McGrory claims that “Baker is bold. Baker is decisive. Baker is an innovator…” while providing no evidence whatsoever. Maybe he’s referring to Baker’s decisively disastrous Big Dig financing plan or his innovative plan to raise health insurance premiums on working families 150% while his own salary tripled. I don’t know if this is what McGrory means, since he doesn’t say. What he DOES say of Patrick is:
In the last 18 months or so, he’s achieved an impressive roster of reforms – of state ethics, pensions, transportation agencies, and especially education. At the same time, he has surgically cut the state budget with an eye toward preserving services for the people who most need them.
Huh. Sounds a little more substantive than empty talk about “boldness” and “decisiveness.”
Look, let’s face it — this campaign hasn’t gone the way Charlie Baker planned. He thought he’d be able to waltz into the State House because of the tough economy, making the race into a referendum on Patrick while hoping voters looked away from his own record. The only problem is that there’s a long list of positives here in the Commonwealth under Governor Patrick’s tenure — consistent job growth, an excellent business climate, fiscal responsibility, top-notch education — none of which happened by accident.
The facts speak for themselves. Because Baker, his allies, and occasionally wishy-washy journalists can no longer run on the facts to criticize Gov. Patrick, they instead run on the stale fumes of “drapes!” and empty, false rhetoric about things “not going well” under Patrick. In these last couple weeks before Nov. 2nd, we’ll be hearing a lot more of the same. In the meantime, consider heading over to devalpatrick.com or heading over to BMG’s ActBlue page to help ensure that the governor’s office actual produces actual leadership and action rather than empty and frivolous talk.
Your candidate hasn’t exactly knocked himself out campaigning this season – we barely see him, unless there’s a debate or a big event with Obama.
<
p>And many of his comments at debates on issues like taxes, benefits for illegals and the Ground Zero mosque, have gotten boo’ed – he seems tone deaf.
<
p>He must know that he’s incredibly unpopular – and he’s holding on by a thread here. But he isn’t even trying to win!
Where is any kind of substantive proposal on what he plans to do in his second term? Silence is the strategy for re-election? That’s pretty lame, guys.
<
p>Don’t you think you should expect MORE from the candidate to whom YOU’RE constantly asked to give your time, energy and money?
<
p>Maybe this is why we always see such a poor showing at pre-debate standouts from your camp, and why when I do phonebanking and ask people who they’re voting for, the FEW who support him won’t even utter his name; instead, I get: “Unfortunately, the guy that’s in there now.”
<
p>Why don’t you ask the guy that’s in there now where the heck he’s been and what he plans to do?
<
p>”We”? Who is “we”? If you looked at Deval’s campaign schedule, you would see that he is pounding the pavement practically every day. He’s met with thousands of voters in person, and he’ll meet with thousands more by the time this is done. Unlike Charlie, who actually told his donors in a fundraising solicitation that this race will be “won or lost on the airwaves,” Deval is going back to what worked last time: real grassroots campaigning. You haven’t seen him because you haven’t looked.
<
p>
<
p>I guess “tone deaf” is in the ear of the beholder. If by “benefits for illegals” you mean in-state tuition for the children of illegal immigrants, well, he’s right about that, because a just society doesn’t punish children for the sins of their parents. Or maybe you didn’t get that memo. Anyway, he’s right about the “Ground Zero mosque” that isn’t at Ground Zero too. Sometimes you stand up for what’s right, even if some people don’t agree with it – see Details, Police. Pass that along to your candidate – he might learn something.
<
p>
<
p>I mean, that’s just silly. I refer you to my first comment. I also refer you to the fact that for the last few months Deval has substantially outraised Charlie, and I’m guessing he will continue to do so. If by “trying to win,” you mean pandering to the teabaggers, well, touché. Otherwise, you’re ignoring reality.
<
p>As for the rest of your comment, well, I’m going to keep doing what I can to put Deval back into the corner office for another term. That is probably not going to include going to a “pre-debate standout,” which you seem to think is the be-all and end-all of “trying to win.”
Even the Globe reports–
<
p>
<
p>And I comletely agree with someone’s assessment in the same article (which I didn’t even read until after my last comment)–
<
p>
<
p>http://www.boston.com/news/loc…
<
p>So he failed on two counts– energizing and engaging his base, and learning the ropes–
<
p>
<
p>And in addition to lackluster campaigning, nothing I’ve seen indicates that he ever really did figure out how to govern– look at the fact that we’re facing a $2.5 billion budget gap and he relies on stimulus money and tax hikes (eight of them, so far) every single year. I don’t know that we can honestly say he has figured out how to do the job. Look at the way he bungled the casino bill this summer – it’s reflective of his inability to get out in front on the issues, and he ends up looking inflexible and inept.
…you’re in bad shape.
for proving my original point in my post — Baker and his allies are running on little other than fumes at this point.
<
p>Specifically, you’re reduced to keep bringing up the first year of the Patrick term — which, I’d agree, was rocky. But “even the Globe” points out that Patrick stumbled “before finding his stride.”
<
p>That stride includes several accomplishments, including first-in-the-nation job growth, excellent education, managing the budget well in the worst recession since the Great Depression, and several other accomplishments.
<
p>Face it — Baker’s team wasn’t banking on the economy improving here in the Commonwealth, and now that leadership from the Governor’s office has gotten us there, Baker’s got little left to run on.
You really didn’t read that article very carefully, did you?
<
p>
<
p>Uh, that “someone” was me. đŸ˜€
<
p>As for the rest of your comment, again, not worthy of response. Silly Republican talking points. Though I will point out that, far from “bungling” the casino bill, he did the right thing. If you think “inflexible” is the same as “standing on principle,” well, we have different philosophies.
The right thing on the casino bill is what Charlie Baker is proposing – one so we don’t keep losing revenue to CT, but not THREE which would be overkill.