MA GOP throwing in the towel on Kerry seat?

posted at 5:01 pm on February 10, 2013 by Jazz Shaw

Is Massachusetts still in play for elections on the state-wide level? If you asked anyone in the heady days of the 2010 cycle after Scott Brown shocked the nation, you’d probably get a lot answers in the positive. (Or at least a strong maybe.) But plenty of water has passed under the bridge since then, along with an election which certainly didn’t provide Northeastern Republicans with much reason for confidence. That general air of pessimism seems to have taken over the GOP in the Bay State as they prepare for a special election to fill John Kerry’s seat in the upper chamber, since it’s hard to find anyone of any standing who is interested in the job.

Decisions by Brown and numerous other top-tier Republicans to bow out of contention for a special US Senate election were made for individual reasons but reflect ­Republicans’ new reality, much like their pre-2010 reality: No one ­expects one of them to win.

“Of course, it’s a rare opportunity, and Brown showed in 2010 that it’s possible,” said GOP political consultant Jason Kauppi. “This special election, though, comes right after an enormous national election in which, at least in the Northeast, ­Republicans fared very badly.”

The Massachusetts GOP is trying to put the best face on the lesser-known Republican contenders who are stepping up, including state Representative Daniel B. Winslow, who announced his candidacy Thursday, and Cohasset private ­equity investor Gabriel E. Gomez, who is expected to become a candidate soon.

This isn’t taking anything away from the earnest desire to serve on the part of players like Winslow and Gomez, but for a Senate race you generally hope to enlist an A team player with a lot of positive name recognition going in and the ability to attract a lot of high dollar donors. Apparently, William Weld, Richard Tisei and Charles Baker – top tier candidates to be sure – were all approached and declined. One strategist seems to sum up the general mood among them pretty well.

“You’re looking at your chances of winning,” said Kauppi, who contrasted their odds with Brown’s ­upset in 2010. “He caught lightning in a bottle. Can you catch lightning in a bottle again? I just think the ­national atmospherics are not forecast to go Republicans’ way, let alone in Massachusetts.”

I can sympathize with the Republicans in MA. We’ve had similar issues in New York, as I’m sure others around the Northeast have. When we had our own opening after Hillary left, there was a lot of energy among Republicans for taking a serious run at Kirsten Gillibrand. Entering her first real election at that level, she had very little name recognition by comparison and no real accomplishments. People were hoping that George Pataki or one of the other senior party members would throw their hat into the ring, but there was just no appetite for it. We’ve not put up a serious candidate for Senate in some time, much to the dismay of locals, so I suppose I can understand where the MA first bench is coming from. Kind of a pity, really.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Well, this is after all the state that elected the first woman of native color to the senate so what chance does an old white guy have?

Kissmygrits on February 10, 2013 at 5:04 PM

We’ve not put up a serious candidate for Senate in some time, much to the dismay of locals, so I suppose I can understand where the MA first bench is coming from. Kind of a pity, really.

Not really. Not when the definition of a “serious candidate” is a Colin Powell Republican at best.

Bill Weld was a flake as governor. Tisei has been beating the pro-gay marriage drum, and Charlie Baker (also beating the gay marriage drum) thought that the only reason anyone could ever possibly oppose illegal immigration was because of welfare benefits, completely ignoring lost jobs, lower wages, and oh yes, the act of trespassing.

The sad thing is the establishment believes that you can’t possibly get a Republican elected there who actually resembles anything close to a Republican. The two best GOPers from that region of the country right now are Governor Paul LePage of Maine and Senator Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire. (Major hidden secret for establishment types who say we need to run a squish: both are pro-life and oppose gay marriage).

Stoic Patriot on February 10, 2013 at 5:09 PM

Who was the fellow who challenged Barney Frank for his seat (so to speak)? Couldn’t he be tempted to run?

onlineanalyst on February 10, 2013 at 5:12 PM

If they can get me residency, hell, I’ll run.

(I was in Boston a few years ago, so maybe they could say I never really left Mass., but just had to move away for business reasons, quasi-temporarily.)

profitsbeard on February 10, 2013 at 5:23 PM

The RINO Republicans(that’s all they’ve got in MA)are still in shell shock that they lost the election to Obama. Looks like the RINOS are in descending. There must be one Conservative in MA somewhere. Well, maybe not. They are buried under snow today so they probably aren’t paying attention.

BetseyRoss on February 10, 2013 at 5:31 PM

Good deal. So its settled. You Establishment R’s have this one covered. No need for Tea Party support. Good strategy. HT GOPe.

Bmore on February 10, 2013 at 5:31 PM

The N.E. of this great country really has it together don’t they? All figured out well in advance. No wonder we are winning so big./

Bmore on February 10, 2013 at 5:33 PM

Republicans win in places like Massachusetts or New York when:

1.) Things are a total clusterfark;
2.) There is some major ideological issue in the news that people are angry about;
3.) There are no Republicans in office at the state or national level for Democrats to blame the clusterfark on.

That was the case in 2010 — the Democrats controlled ever federal office in Massachusetts, controlled the White House and controlled both the House and Senate in Washington, while people’s anger was growing over the way ObamaCare® was forced down their throats and the fact the economy wasn’t improving. There was no Republican with any power within 500 miles for the Democrats to blame things on (Bush being 1,500 miles away in Texas), and so Scott Brown won.

He lost in 2012 in part because the GOP controlled the House — it may be only one half of one third of the federal branches of government, but that’s all it took for ‘soft’ Democrats in Massachusetts to decide in their minds that John Boehner and the Republicans were now the ones to blame for everything, so they needed to vote for Fauxahontas. And since the GOP still has control of the House and, at this moment, the shirt hasn’t hit the fan over the Democrats’ overspending and failures to come up with a budget, let alone budget cuts, the conditions are poor to get a Republican elected, only to have to run again in 2014 (which could be marginally better for a GOP candidate in Massachusetts — the Dems can still blame John Boehner, the Tea Party, Fox News and talk radio as the root of all the nation’s woes, but if the economy is totally tanking, there may be an anti-incumbent sentiment that could help a GOP Senate candidate.

jon1979 on February 10, 2013 at 5:39 PM

There are a few states that are absolutely hopeless for the Republicans to get power in, Massachusetts, New York, Illinois, and California, there are other states that have a lot more common sense and will eventually change. Massachusetts is hoping that Obamacare kicks in before their healthcare system collapses, Illinois is starting to crack under the weight of pensions, New York is in the same boat and then there’s California. Everyone of these Democrat bastions is on the verge of serious financial disasters and what happens when they finally kick in God only knows. ONe thing we do know, they won’t be able to blame Republicans.

bflat879 on February 10, 2013 at 5:42 PM

GOP throwing in the towel

That would have been an equally apropos headline.

The party of cave is giving the impression that it wouldn’t know how to win if spotted 20 points and failure of the opposing team to show up. Heck, Boehner couldn’t pull a win out of a forfeit.

Anybody in MA think about maybe running a real conservative? You know, maybe give the people in the state a real choice? Nah, that would be too radical and everyone knows conservatives can’t win.

Of course one does have to take into account that MA is more than 60% stupid, so that will work to the democrats favor.

AZfederalist on February 10, 2013 at 5:48 PM

ONe thing we do know, they won’t be able to blame Republicans.

bflat879 on February 10, 2013 at 5:42 PM

If only!

OldEnglish on February 10, 2013 at 5:51 PM

Hard to present a viable conservative candidate, when the Massholes show every inclination to vote for a fake.

Just like they did for president.

GarandFan on February 10, 2013 at 5:55 PM

Dan Winslow is pretty much in the same position as Scott Brown was a few years. A relative unknown, looking to make a name for himself in the shell of what’s left of the GOP in Mass. However, he is a solid conservative with a great background and credentials. He is a longshot for sure, but he will be fiery in the debates, but he’ll at least make it interesting and entertaining. Here is a great write-up on him if you have the time:

http://www.masslive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/02/republican_state_rep_dan_winsl_1.html

cdog0613 on February 10, 2013 at 6:04 PM

Good to see the establishment’s got a handle on things.

topdawg on February 10, 2013 at 6:05 PM

Anybody in MA think about maybe running a real conservative? You know, maybe give the people in the state a real choice? Nah, that would be too radical and everyone knows conservatives can’t win.

Of course one does have to take into account that MA is more than 60% stupid, so that will work to the democrats favor.

AZfederalist on February 10, 2013 at 5:48 PM

Sure would like fat boy Rove’s take on this. A staunch conservative might or might not win. How about at least giving conservative ideas a chance to be explained and debated.

I am starting to think there are no real conservatives with any power, name recognition in that area of the country as well as California.

Call me naive but if Whitman and Fiorina would have put up more of a fight they might have won. C’mon, Barbara Boxer? We’ll never know because they were both lukewarm, chickenshits. eg–Both were unable to explain why outsourcing has taken place and why CA is in such desperate straits.

arnold ziffel on February 10, 2013 at 6:07 PM

Dan Winslow … is a solid conservative with a great background and credentials.

cdog0613 on February 10, 2013 at 6:04 PM

From your article:

Winslow said his campaign will be focused on the economy and jobs and fixing the federal deficit. Winslow stressed the importance of “economic sustainability” and “climate sustainability” to protect America’s future.

Winslow is socially moderate and supports abortion rights and gay marriage. He was the only Republican in the Statehouse to vote in favor of a bill protecting transgendered rights in housing.

I’d say that your own article disproves your own claim.

Stoic Patriot on February 10, 2013 at 6:11 PM

Maybe we can get one of my chins to run.
Massholes apparently like long chins.
Just make sure you wipe them first.

RovesChins on February 10, 2013 at 6:14 PM

bflat879 on February 10, 2013 at 5:42 PM

In the states that you cite, there seems to be a commonality of emasculation of its citizens. The “chickification” of their electorate has destroyed them.

onlineanalyst on February 10, 2013 at 6:18 PM

I just think the ­national atmospherics are not forecast to go Republicans’ way, let alone in Massachusetts

.”

Horse-puckey. Scott Brown’s campaign helped create the atmospherics necessary in 2010. You’re letting us down.

Jeff Weimer on February 10, 2013 at 6:24 PM

One of the problems in the northeast is that liberalism is so endemic to both parties, that it becomes more about the personality contests in the Democrat primary. The general election is a formality.

Republican leaders like Rudy, Christy, and Pataki did nothing to build the party beneath them, to build a bench and prepare successors. Thus, once they’re gone, the libs can swoop back in. It also doesn’t help that the media is a lib monopoly up here.

Republicans, and more importantly conservatives need to start doing the hard work of building the benches in these places. The libs are beatable, you just need just a little more than token opposition.

Iblis on February 10, 2013 at 6:31 PM

GOP throwing in the towel

…that’s one area…they lead the country in!

KOOLAID2 on February 10, 2013 at 6:31 PM

Time to get a big ole stinkin federal bailout of these “culturally enlightened states” such as MA, NY, IL and CA.

The peasants that toil the fields enjoy giving their treasure to the ruling elite of these paragons of perfection.

acyl72 on February 10, 2013 at 6:34 PM

One less GOP establishment seat!

Means fewer places for GOP Ayatollahs to sit within this party.

Hell yeah – I’ll take Dimmocritic fake indians in those seats any day – anything … AND I DO MEAN ANYTHING that will deprive the GOP Ayatollahs of real estate to gorge themselves on.

HondaV65 on February 10, 2013 at 6:44 PM

One of the problems in the northeast is that liberalism is so endemic to both parties, that it becomes more about the personality contests in the Democrat primary. The general election is a formality.

Republican leaders like Rudy, Christy, and Pataki did nothing to build the party beneath them, to build a bench and prepare successors. Thus, once they’re gone, the libs can swoop back in. It also doesn’t help that the media is a lib monopoly up here.

Republicans, and more importantly conservatives need to start doing the hard work of building the benches in these places. The libs are beatable, you just need just a little more than token opposition.

Iblis on February 10, 2013 at 6:31 PM

Incredibly well-said. I’d also add that the GOP is way, way past the point where competing in all 50 states is a luxury. A 50-state strategy is now mandatory.

Building the party requires, as a first step, recruiting good candidates who can articulate the party’s principles well and providing them solid financial and organizational backing.

The Northeastern state GOPs have got to stop laying down. For example, the GOP could be competitive in New York state, IF, it stopped laying down in election after election.

More importantly, the RNC has got to get off its butt and start investing in the Northeastern state GOPs. It’s not enough to show up for the big ticket races. They’ve got to be dedicated to winning seats at the local and state legislative level as well. That’s where political farm teams & benches are built.

Robert_Paulson on February 10, 2013 at 6:51 PM

If you go in as a Massachusetts republican you will be called a RINO and get zero help from the outside but just might win. You still be called a RINO the whole term. But if you go in as a Tea Party Republican you still will be called RINO because you will not be pure enough and then get no support as you can’t win being crazy right, then lose big.

tjexcite on February 10, 2013 at 6:57 PM

I trust this won’t come as a shock to too many people, but the potential Republican vote here in Massachusetts is fiscally conservative, small-government, and leans socially libertarian.

We don’t want big government taxing, spending and regulating us to death and we don’t want the nanny state telling us what we can do with our lives. As a result, the vast majority of GOP candidates here are pro-choice and OK with gay marriage and decriminalizing pot.

We don’t want a SoCon candidate to run here, and if one did, they would lose in a landslide.

cool breeze on February 10, 2013 at 7:02 PM

In NY when Gillibrand ran for her own term she was very vulnerable. People implored Peter King to make the run but he was fearful of losing his position in the House. In the NorthEast the GOP elected reps are so totally involved with maintaining their positions that no one reaches for the next ring. Instead you get businessmen, county party leaders, or no names. Unfortunately it’s not about ideology even though most people here believe that. it’s about keeping their ricebowl. They’ve been allowed to keep a spot at the table and have zero incentive to take a chance and give it up. Even Giuliani who had nothing to lose against Hillary in 2000 punked out because a loss would diminish his business prospects that he had in hand

xkaydet65 on February 10, 2013 at 7:23 PM

I would like to thank all the wonderful folks at Hotair for calling my Senator Snotti and calling the citizens of the state Massholes.

If you had a brain bigger than a bee you’d have figured out the state is 50%+ registered independents with only 10% Republicans- at the most. Against all odds we elected a hard working senator who sat on the Republican side of the aisle.
Lord knows it would behoove the current Republican party to welcome any independents voters and help us attract some of those votes here in the state to get another Senator who would sit on the Republican side of the aisle.

For some reason, you seem to think shitting on independents is a party favor. Grow up. That shrinking tent cost you an election and a Court.

c.j.ammenheuser on February 10, 2013 at 7:39 PM

We don’t want a SoCon candidate to run here, and if one did, they would lose in a landslide.

cool breeze on February 10, 2013 at 7:02 PM

Forgive me if I have a problem believing that Mass GOP’ers are fiscally conservative with a “libertarian” mindset.

Pray tell – what in the hell was “libertarian” about Willard? Forget that … what was “fiscally conservative” about him? I submit that Willard was a socialist – just based on WillardCare.

Which doesn’t say much for the “libertarian” mindset of Mass GOP’ers.

HondaV65 on February 10, 2013 at 7:40 PM

The sad thing is the establishment believes that you can’t possibly get a Republican elected there who actually resembles anything close to a Republican. The two best GOPers from that region of the country right now are Governor Paul LePage of Maine and Senator Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire. (Major hidden secret for establishment types who say we need to run a squish: both are pro-life and oppose gay marriage).

Stoic Patriot on February 10, 2013 at 5:09 PM

Umm, LePage and Ayotte are “establishment” types, even though I hate the word.

It was the fringe Tea Partiers that tried to tear dwon Ayotte, a great assett in a state that Obama wone twice. The “real” conservative lined up behind two time loser Ovide Lamontagne, who already had lost a House racew and a Governor’s race by double digits, but that’s who Erick Erickson, Laura Ingraham and the “real” conservatives backed.

swamp_yankee on February 10, 2013 at 7:45 PM

By the way-
it’s NOT Kerry’s Seat.

It’s the peoples seat

c.j.ammenheuser on February 10, 2013 at 7:47 PM

By the way-
it’s NOT Kerry’s Seat.

It’s the peoples seat

c.j.ammenheuser on February 10, 2013 at 7:47 PM

Maybe one of the people could run then?

Bmore on February 10, 2013 at 7:51 PM

Richard Tisei- Sponsor of a Unisex Bathroom bill, Homosexual/TransGender Poster Boy;

Dan Winslow, another Willard clone, also favored by the Homosexual Lobby, nothing conservative about him, except he’d like to fool conservatives;

Charlie Baker, yet another Willard clone, his first announcement when running for Governor against Deval Patrick: “my brother is gay”.

Losers all.

You now have the measure of the MA GOP.

wraithby on February 10, 2013 at 8:05 PM

By the way-
it’s NOT Kerry’s Seat.
It’s the peoples seat
c.j.ammenheuser on February 10, 2013 at 7:47 PM

Solution: you run. Till then, shut up.

nobar on February 10, 2013 at 8:06 PM

and leans socially libertarian.

We don’t want big government taxing, spending and regulating us to death and we don’t want the nanny state telling us what we can do with our lives. As a result, the vast majority of GOP candidates here are pro-choice and OK with gay marriage and decriminalizing pot.

If you are “okay” with gay marriage you are not, I repeat, not socially libertarian. You are a liberal or a closet democrat. A libertarian does not want a government who needs to sanction a sexual relationship especially for no practical purpose like an emotion. Marriage gets the state more involved in people’s personal lives and bedrooms.

melle1228 on February 10, 2013 at 8:08 PM

We don’t want a SoCon candidate to run here, and if one did, they would lose in a landslide.

cool breeze on February 10, 2013 at 7:02 PM

Good, I won’t send one up, but what I find HILARIOUS is that it is people like you who try to shove candidates like Scott Brown and Mittens down our throat and YOUR STATES NEVER VOTE RED.. You keep taking for granted those loyal voters in that do vote for socons..

melle1228 on February 10, 2013 at 8:13 PM

For some reason, you seem to think shitting on independents is a party favor. Grow up. That shrinking tent cost you an election and a Court.

c.j.ammenheuser on February 10, 2013 at 7:39 PM

Clean up on aisle 20 someone is crying buckets again. STFU mmkay. The last two elections we have ran candidates that have been close to indpendents and yet “independents” have decided not to go with the fake liberals but the real ones. God you people pi$$ me off. Had we run Pat Buchanan or David Duke I could understand this hysteria, but we ran frickin McCain and Mitt Romney for God’s sake.

melle1228 on February 10, 2013 at 8:16 PM

For all those dumping on So-cons, the libertarians are the ones who didn’t show up last election, not the so-cons. Wimpy Willard got a MAJORITY of Catholics for crying out loud!

Also, this is a smaller issue, but voter fraud is endemic in the Northeast, especially in NY. Its one of those unspoken truths that compound the already difficult circumstances we have to run in.

Iblis on February 10, 2013 at 8:36 PM

Naw, just leave the Mass. electorate to their own devices. Sorry repubs in mass but for the rest of those liberals there. You own it now donks.

jake49 on February 10, 2013 at 8:39 PM

The Brown election was an anomaly. Taxachusetts got over that and replaced him with a good old fashioned socialist. Why in the world would anyone with an R after their name waste their time and effort trying to get elected there? And even if someone did, who the hell would waste their money financing the campaign?

farsighted on February 10, 2013 at 9:36 PM

For some reason, you seem to think shitting on independents is a party favor. Grow up. That shrinking tent cost you an election and a Court.

c.j.ammenheuser on February 10, 2013 at 7:39 PM

The Republicans nominated the great moderate that was supposed to appeal to independents. He lost the election. Buy a clue.

topdawg on February 10, 2013 at 10:31 PM

I would like to thank all the wonderful folks at Hotair for calling my Senator Snotti and calling the citizens of the state Massholes.

But they are Massholes. Sorry to put a bug up your butt.

For some reason, you seem to think shitting on independents is a party favor. Grow up. That shrinking tent cost you an election and a Court.

c.j.ammenheuser on February 10, 2013 at 7:39 PM

How was that inauguration for Mitt last month? Oh wait.

Many of us carried the water supporting Mitt (Honda excluded) and yet you still expect us to take physical beatings from you because he was your preferred candidate. And guess what? He lost horribly. Because he refused to run as a conservative and felt embarrassed by it. He and his campaign staff ran like they had no interest in winning, and thus exhibited an utter lack of discipline (the “47%” speech – regardless of how accurate it might have been; “the Etch-A-Sketch candidate”, etc.).

HELLO??? HELLO??? ANYBODY HOME??? THINK McFLY, THINK!!!

Myron Falwell on February 10, 2013 at 10:45 PM

I think it’s more about this being a 1-and-half year position (Kerry was elected in 2008). Having to campaign now and then again in a year, in commie-blue Massachusetts.

2014 could be a tide, either anti-Democrat or anti-incumbent, or worse anti-Republican. It’s a midterm without the ‘honest’ activists pushing the black-prez. Will also be nice to see “the establishment” sit this round out and let the cream float. Wouldn’t we all like to see more non-oligarchs get a shot? Practice run is nice; a good reference would be Linda McMahon-CT (2010/2012).

John Kettlewell on February 10, 2013 at 10:55 PM

And the Democrats have put up serious candidates? You mention Killibrand. Serious?

unclesmrgol on February 11, 2013 at 12:34 AM

melle1228 on February 10, 2013 at 8:16 PM

And the paulbots rioted and stayed home.

Mitt lost by (51-47.3)/2 == 1.9%. Had just 2% of the voters voted differently, Mitt would be President today.

Think about it. We were that close.

unclesmrgol on February 11, 2013 at 12:39 AM

Yet another sign that the party is in a state of collapse and can’t be bothered to try very hard to win elections anymore.

Doomberg on February 11, 2013 at 12:49 AM

Pataki’s an interesting example.

In 2010 and 2012, Republicans wanted him to run against Gilibrand because he was a former three-term Governor.

But in 1994, he was elected Governor, after two years in the State Senate. Before that, he has spent eight years in the state assembly and four years as mayor of Peekskill, NY (population 22,500.) I’m sure Republicans were hoping for someone more prestigious when this guy claimed that he could win against Cuomo.

Mister Mets on February 11, 2013 at 1:41 AM

One gets the feeling that America is the new Titanic, passengers filled with the bubbly stuff and certain of no danger, as it rushes rapidly in the night toward a known danger–a giant field of Godless, socialist icebergs.

Having Kerry on as one more inept officer, matters not in the least.

Don L on February 11, 2013 at 6:24 AM

We don’t want a SoCon candidate to run here, and if one did, they would lose in a landslide.

cool breeze on February 10, 2013 at 7:02 PM

If you had a brain bigger than a bee you’d have figured out the state is 50%+ registered independents with only 10% Republicans- at the most.

c.j.ammenheuser on February 10, 2013 at 7:39 PM

If Mass is as libertarian as you two say, then why isn’t it a two party state with Democrats and Libertarians? Methinks that 50% registered independent stat is due to some other issue than actually being independent.

Odysseus on February 11, 2013 at 6:30 AM

Keep in mind that Scott Brown was a nobody until he ran for Senate. I’m hoping that one of the Republican members of the Governor’s Council will run. :)

Also, here in Massachusetts, if one is registered to a party one he can only vote in that party’s primary, but someone who is unenrolled can vote in either one…

oddball on February 11, 2013 at 7:27 AM

Please Please don’t use a Boston Globe (boston.com) as a source of information here.

There are some candidates considering a run. There are no republican Congressmen serving our state, who would have the experience that would logically lead to throwing their hat in the ring. There are only two dozen republicans on Beacon Hill in the legislature. There is only about 13% republican party registration in MA. About one third of the voters, vote more conservatively, with us, and two thirds vote with the liberals. A lot of out of state students participate, and that is hard on us also.

Do not presume that in MA winning just requires “acting conservative enough” it requires good sense, fiscal conservatism, and an appeal to populist democracy. Also, Scott Brown was an identity vote with male Veterans, and began with an edge in that category of voters. But there are probably more government workers in MA and union workers to act “as a machine” on election day, than there are veterans, and some of those work in local governments.

Right now, the same people in MA have worked on campaigns non stop since December of 2009. First we had Brown, then a governor’s race, and then Brown again, and Romney was out of Boston too.

Brown has run two times in three years, and he was here helping for the gubernatorial race. This position is not for six years, and would require Brown to spend on it what it costs for a six year term.

In MA, we are hoping that Scott will run for Governor. It is desperately needed right now, Patrick is starting to propose loony tax increases, and the state government is reeking with corruption and favoritism again. Duval enjoyed Romney’s reforms just long enough for to keep the state going so he could make it to his next election. But now, he is looking for tax increases and spending; and witness the Do Nothing regulator who let American’s become ill by not inspecting the lab where contaminated cortisone was made. The democrats here use government jobs as welfare, and patronage payoffs, and they rarely can do the jobs they are paid for, it’s not actually about “doing” the jobs, just handing them out, and voting correctly to keep your job.

This run, for republicans, is an opportunity, for us to practice campaigning and give a few of our candidates wide exposure. Winslow is a great candidate for MA, for higher office here, or for Senate/Congress. We will hope for a win by stealth.

Fleuries on February 11, 2013 at 9:18 AM

Oddball, says Brown was Nobody.

I beg to differ, he was important on Beacon Hill, and beat every opponent the democrats threw at him. He was also well known state wide with veteran’s groups.

I think Oddball is a strange moniker for a political website, this comment smacks of some personal resentment or agenda, don’t you think?

Fleuries on February 11, 2013 at 9:22 AM