State of the Day - Massachusetts

Formed in a moment of religious reform and fundamentalism, Massachusetts's role in manufacturing and overseas trade made it the early economic powerhouse of the United States. The state has a rich intellectual tradition, spread by Yankee settlers whose influence can still be seen across the country, especially in the Upper Midwest. After mass Irish immigration began in the mid-19th century, Massachusetts politics was a battle between Yankee Protestant Republicans and Irish Catholic Democrats for the better part of a century. Back then, it was the Republican Party that carried the torch of Massachusetts' liberal progressive tradition. Irish Catholics grew in number and by the mid-20th century had turned Massachusetts into one of the most Democratic states. The Kennedy dynasty helped influence Protestants to vote Democratic as well. Massachusetts was the only state to vote for George McGovern, the state has has generally pursued liberal policies (remember Willie Horton and weekend furloughs?), and the most notable politicians here have all been confirmed liberals: Michael Dukakis, Edward Kennedy, John Kerry. However, the economy collapsed in the late 1980's and the state elected fiscally conservative Republican William Weld as Governor. Over the next sixteen years under four Republican Governors, the economy improved but the state continued to be quite liberal, even passing a preview of ObamaCare on the state level in 2006. The economy has slowed down again over the last ten years and Massachusetts will probably lose another seat in the 2010 Census. There is a consensus here on cultural liberalism and the state was the first to approve gay marriage. While this was controversial at first, the policy has generally been confirmed by subsequent elections. Massachusetts is now almost a unanimously Democratic state, with the notable exception of Republican Senator Scott Brown's victory in the January 2010 special election to replace Edward Kennedy.

In 2010, Democratic Governor Deval Patrick finds himself in a three way dogfight to hold onto his job despite low job approval ratings. While he seems certain to get less than 50% of the vote, the fragmented opposition may deliver him a second term anyway. Republicans have also mounted serious challenges in four of the state’s ten House seats, but only one has a decent chance of succeeding.

President – 12 Electoral Votes

Barack Obama did a tad worse here than you might have expected in 2008, which I ascribe to the state’s disgust with the very similar Deval Patrick. Even so, Obama won 62% and I cannot imagine that Massachusetts will be competitive in 2012. The primary here will be on March 6, barring a change in the law, which will probably prove too late to matter. If it does, one presumes the state will favor Mitt Romney, though his 51-41 win here over John McCain in 2008 was hardly impressive. Still, Massachusetts is not likely to vote for an identifiable social conservative, so it's hard to see someone like Sarah Palin beating Romney. LIKELY DEMOCRAT.

Governor – Deval Patrick (D)

Patrick broke the sixteen year Republican hold on the Governor’s office in 2006 with a very similar approach and rhetoric that Barack Obama used two years later to win the White House. Perhaps the foreshadowing did not stop there. Patrick’s tenure started with controversy over lavish inaugural expenses and has not really improved. He has suffered from very low job approval ratings. Based on this alone, Patrick should be toast. He has indeed generally topped out in the high 30’s in polling. Here is a sampling of typical Patrick problems. Two nominees withdrew from consideration, one because it turned out he was not a Massachusetts resident. He came under fire for energy rate hikes, doubly so because the companies involved were major contributors. He has taken heat for being too close to unions, pursuing overly aggressive regulatory policies, inappropriate influence peddling, and even the closure of a local dog track. He has also recently come under fire from accepting money from slot machine interests.

Republicans nominated former Harvard Pilgrim CEO Charlie Baker, who has managed to trounce the Governor in fundraising. Baker looks good on paper but never seemed to catch on with the public. He has been trying to hit Patrick hard over the state's bleak job and fiscal picture. His biggest problem is the independent candidacy of State Treasurer and Receiver-General Tim Cahill, a Democrat. Cahill has been just as aggressive in attacking Patrick. He had been polling 20% in the polls, but has dropped as the campaign has played out. His running mate recently dropped out and encouraged Cahill to do the same. Rumors are also swirling that Cahill's candidacy was orchestrated and backed by Patrick.

For most of this cycle, Patrick was stuck in the low 40's in polls. Thus, it seemed that if Baker could keep Cahill under 10% he would win. However, Patrick has somehow managed to boost his own standing and is now polling around 47-48. Thus, he has maintained a lead even as Cahill has sagged to around 8%. I could be wrong, but I think Patrick will probably stall in the high 40's. The question then is whether Cahill will fall under 5% and whether Baker will take any more of Cahill's support. It seems Baker's only chance is to win a squeaker by something like 48-47-4. Since Patrick has thus far won a decent amount of the support that Cahill originally had, I don't like Baker's chances. LEAN DEMOCRAT.

Prediction: Gov. Patrick (D) 49%, Baker (R) 43%, Cahill (I) 7%

Senior Senator – John Kerry (D)

Kerry’s longtime colleague, Edward Kennedy, spent the first eighteen years of his career as something of a dilettante in the Senate. Only after finally losing his ambitions for the White House did Kennedy dedicate himself to the Senate and become a legend in that body. Kerry was not a particularly accomplished Senator for four terms, angling first for the White House and then Secretary of State. Still finding himself in the Senate, he seems newly determined to become a major player and active legislator in the Senate, much like Kennedy. He’s certainly safe in Massachusetts in 2014. SAFE DEMOCRAT.

Junior Senator – Scott Brown (R)

Brown’s January victory to replace the late Edward Kennedy was a true "Bloomberg" (a perfect political storm allowing a candidate to win who otherwise would have no chance). First, the election would not have even occurred had Massachusetts Democrats not messed with the law in 2004 to prevent Mitt Romney from appointing a successor to John Kerry. As it happened, the election took place at a low point for the Democratic Party. It also coincided with the culmination of the debate on the health care bill, which was unpopular even in Massachusetts. Coincidentally, Brown could maximize that issue since he would be the 41st, filibuster holding, vote against the bill in the Senate. Brown also came up against a woefully horrible performance by Democrat Martha Coakley, who memorably thought Red Sox hero Curt Schilling was a Yankee. To top it off, Brown was a good candidate himself. Brown will still be a good candidate in 2012, but the rest of the perfect storm should have dissipated. Brown has done everything right and has given himself a chance. Realistically though, he faces long odds to win in 2012. LEAN DEMOCRAT.

House 1 – John Olver (D)

This is a safe Democratic seat, and Republican nominee Bill Gunn doesn't have any bullets left. SAFE DEMOCRAT.

House 2 – Richard Neal (D)

This is not a totally safe Democratic seat, but Republican Tom Wesley poses no threat to Neal even in a year like this one. SAFE DEMOCRAT.

House 3 – Jim McGovern (D)

See the previous entry, but substitute Marty Lamb for Wesley. SAFE DEMOCRAT.

House 4 – Barney Frank (D)

Frank shockingly has a race in this overwhelmingly New Bedford/Fall River/Suburban Boston seat. Republican Sean Bielat has raised over a million dollars and attacked Frank relentlessly for infamously saying that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were in fine shape shortly before their collapse contributed to the fiancial sector collapse. Frank apparently saw something he didn't like since he called Bill Clinton in to campaign for him. National Republicans would love to knock off Frank.

Frank will win by a reduced margin, but he's not going to lose this seat. Though Scott Brown narrowly carried this seat, it is otherwise highly Democratic. Bielat is tailoring his message to this district, but I don't think it will matter. Though two public polls (Boston Globe/UNH and WPRI/Fleming) have Frank under 50% they also show him with huge leads over Bielat. I can see Frank checking in with less than 55%, but Bielat is an extreme long shot to actually win. LIKELY DEMOCRAT.

House 5 – Niki Tsongas (D)

This Lowell based seat is not hopeless for Republicans and Tsongas was not impressive in winning it in a 2007 special election. She has a serious challenge from Jon Golnik. The Republican is trying to channel his inner Scott Brown (who won this district) by wearing work boots and appearing blue collar. However, substantively he is well to the right of Brown and recently stumbled when asked if there was any issue on which he disagreed with John Boehner.

Golnik has not proven a great fundraiser and is actively seeking even more NRCC help than he already has. Although not a cinch, I think Tsongas is a heavy favorite. LIKELY DEMOCRAT.

House 6 – John Tierney (D)

Some national Republicans are talking up attorney Bill Hudak in this Northeast Massachusetts seat. He has essentially matched Tierney's fundraising. The incumbent had a huge head start, however, and has more than $1 million cash on hand compared to less than $100,000 for Hudak. Even though the district is mostly Democratic, Tierney is a water carrier for the national Democratic agenda, which may make him vulnerable. His other problem is his wife, who recently pleaded guilty to tax fraud. Although Tierney was not accused of wrongdoing, this does not help.

However, Hudak has his own problems. Namely, he once compared Barack Obama to Osama bin Laden and told a reporter he had evidence that Obama was born in Kenya. He has since denied that he is a “birther”, but this is not the sort of issue that can do anything but hurt him. He has sued Tierney over the incumbent's campaign ads. This sort of tactic pretty much always backfires. While Scott Brown (who won easily here) is campaigning for Hudak, I just don’t see someone like Hudak winning here. LIKELY DEMOCRAT.

House 7 – Edward Markey (D)

Markey faces no threat from Republican Gerry Dembrowski, leaving him free to spend too much time on your television screens this fall. SAFE DEMOCRAT.

House 8 – Michael Capuano (D)

I think JD’s brother is the only Republican in this district, and he declined to run. SAFE DEMOCRAT.

House 9 – Stephen Lynch (D)

Yawn right past Republican Vernon Harrison. SAFE DEMOCRAT.

House 10 – Bill Delahunt (D)

Delahunt decided to hang ‘em up, leaving the most Republican district in Massachusetts open. The Suburban Boston/Cape Cod seat still leans Democratic, though Scott Brown won this district in a landslide. Democrats nominated Norfolk County District Attorney Bill Keating. He seems to be running as a pretty generic Democrat in a year where that might not be the best idea. He has also had questions about his residency, although those seems to have faded.

Republican Jeff Perry has nearly matched Keating in fundraising. Unfortunately for Perry, he has several problems. His biggest problem is an accusation that as a police officer, Perry stood aside and allowed illegal strip searches to take place. He also had obtained a college degree from a diploma mill. The local party seems to be split on his candidacy, and his primary opponent has pointedly refused to endorse him.

The race has turned personal, and Perry seems to be getting the shorted end of that stick. This is a winnable district for Republicans, and they may still win it if the wave is big enough, but Perry has struggled enough I have to give the edge to Keating. LEAN DEMOCRAT.

House Predictions: 10 Democrats…NO CHANGE