Posted on 08/29/2014 7:53:52 AM PDT by sunmars
After this week’s dreary news out of Kansas, we owe Hot Air readers a pleasant surprise, and this may be it. Martha Coakley, who lost a special election to fill the Senate seat vacated by the death of Ted Kennedy four years ago despite the near-total grip Democrats have on Massachusetts, may be in the process of losing another election. Republican gubernatorial nominee Charlie Baker took his first lead in the Boston Globe poll series, edging Coakley barely, while neither candidate looks to be catching fire:
Republican Charlie Baker has edged ahead of Democrat Martha Coakley in the race for governor, taking the lead by the slimmest of margins for the first time in the Globe’s weekly poll.
The survey found the hypothetical general election race in a statistical dead heat, with 38 percent of respondents saying they would support Baker for governor, a slight edge over the 37 percent who said they favor Coakley. Though Baker’s lead remains well within the margin of error, it shows movement in a race between the two likeliest candidates for the November election.
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
Martha Coakley - the gift that keeps on giving!
First time I’ve ever seen a State-ie smile.
Most polls show her ahead, this was the first I saw that gave the lead to Chazz Baker.
I’m surprised she’s expected to win the rat primary so easily.
I’d be interested to see if the GOP can be competitive in the open races for AG and Treasurer.
1966 was the last time the GOP won the Attorney General’s office in MA, with Elliot Richardson. Curiously, despite the high-profile nature of the office, it has been generally a political dead-end for its holders. Excluding Richardson, who received federal appointments, the last time anyone went higher in office was his predecessor Ed Brooke (who went straight to the Senate). Richardson failed to get the 1984 nomination for Senator.
Before Brooke, no Attorney General since Democrat Paul Dever (1935-41) went to the Governorship. Dever didn’t do that directly, either. When he ran in 1940, he was defeated by Brooke’s Senate predecessor, Leverett Saltonstall. Not until 1948 did he upset left-wing RINO Governor Robert Bradford.
Before Dever, you’d have to go back to the 1850s (!) Whig John H. Clifford went to the Governorship for a single-year term after 4 years as AG. After his term ended (he didn’t run for another term), the incoming Governor re-appointed him back as AG.
As for the Treasurer’s office, the GOP did hold that throughout the ‘90s with Joe Malone (who then ran against Cellucci in the ‘98 primary for Governor and lost). Before that, not since Conservative Laurence Curtis won in the 1946 GOP landslide (for a 2-year term) did the GOP last win it.
Just as an odd note, excluding Curtis’s 2-year term, from 1931-1952, 4 men all named Hurley occupied Treasury. Charles, Francis & John were Democrats, William a Republican. Charles succeeded Curley (Curley to Hurley) as Governor for a single term from 1937-39 (then losing to Saltonstall). Democrat John F. Kennedy (Francis, not Fitzgerald) held the office from 1955-61, losing the nomination for Governor in 1960. Two John Kennedys ran to succeed John Francis for Treasurer, but both lost the primary. And you thought the Alaska Sullivans were confusing...
I know it’s Mass but I would cackle hard if she managed to lose again.......
That’s why if I was a MA Dem, I’d be reluctant to nominate her.
While a Republican governor of MA has very little power so long as Democrats have supermajorities in both houses, I would posit that Deval Patrick appointed ultraliberal Mo Cowan to the Senate when Kerry resigned, and he served for 5 and 1/2 months, where he voted 100% liberal, while a Scott Brown type appointed by a Republican would have voted 70% conservative. And Baker’s Supreme Court nominees wouldn’t be as bad as Coakley’s. Plus, the MA governor still has some power, like the time that Romney blocked the performance of same-sex “marriages” for non-residents (there was a 19th century law limiting marriage to residents, but a Democrat governor would have ignored the law or “interpreted” it differently. While I wouldn’t give a red cent to a RINO such as Baker for the governorship, I would prefer him in office to Coakley, and thus would vote for him instead of nominating a nobody with no chance of winning the general or voting for an independent with no chance of winning.
Not going to argue with anything you say. Except the state trooper uniform. It’s been the same dress uniform for almost 50 years. It’s no more or less silly looking than any other State Trooper or Highway a Patrol uniform. Look to Rhode Island or New Jersey to see clown suits.
True-—but the commandant uniform takes on a whole new meaning in the current political climate
I predicted months ago that Chazz B. would win. I hesitate to even call him a RINO, but, everyone can see the emperor has no clothes. In this case, the emperor being the RATS.
AuH2O makes some very valid points - something is better than nothing.
Things are so out of whack that a candidate that I agree with ~25% of the time starts to look like Ronald Reagan compared to what had to be endured.
Yeah, but it is simply because she looks so bad in it. There ARE tailors and seamstresses in Boston. She needs to find one.
Nice touch, that whistle on her tit.
Whatever, instead of a simple clown, they look like rodeo clowns.
I think all cop uniforms look stupid.
As long as the Massachusetts GOP is leftist, then many Massachusetts voters WILL BE more friendly towards them, even if they continue to vote for the Democrats, only. Here’s the funny thing about this years Massachusetts GOP race for governor: There’s an actual conservative running, this time, in Mark Fisher, but Mark is, only, getting about 11% of the total, popular vote! The other GOP candidate, Charlie Baker, is a leftist! So, if Charlie Baker does win the GOP primary, which he should be able to do with ease, then the left wins, while Independent candidates for governor end up splitting all of the non-leftist votes! Isn’t that a knee slapper? BTW, during the entire duration that there was a GOP Massachusetts Governor, they were all leftist Republicans!
The legislature wouldn’t hesitate to remove a GOP Governor’s ability to make Senate appointments, so there goes one. As for whom a RINO would appoint to the bench, we’ve already seen they’re as bad if not worse than Democrats (look at the Supreme Judicial Court or Willard’s appointments, the loony-toons bitch who released the murderer who butchered the Maucks). There goes that. And the blockage of gay marriages, since none of these guys are on God’s side when it comes to the social order of man, that too is worthless.
I’m in the same boat here in IL, the GOP nominee is a rich RINO a-hole but whatryougonnado, Pat Quinn is a live birth abortion of a Governor. He’s making that clown Blago and the last R Governor, RINO scumbag George Ryan, look good. And RINO’s Jim Edgar and Jim Thompson look like friggin gold right now.
As for MA, I sure as hell ain’t gonna hope Croakly wins, at least it would embarrass the rats if she lost.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
