U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Massachusetts
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-06-2018, 08:02 AM
 
15,935 posts, read 11,752,416 times
Reputation: 8324

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by lrfox View Post
It did?
I heard quite a bit about Zakim especially in the last few weeks in a similar context to Pressley, basically 2 "outsiders" hoping to pull off upsets against 2 popular incumbents for no real reason other than "it's time for new blood".

Quote:
Originally Posted by lrfox View Post
What prevented him from fundraising more than $11k? I see small town politicians and local reps with more of a budget than that.
Asking the wrong person here. Like you said, lack of name recognition?


Quote:
Originally Posted by lrfox View Post
I don't think he would have done much better with the same budget. Frankly, I think he's the type of guy that the deeper you dig, the more he turns people off. He benefited from being a relative unknown in this race. He also benefited from being the "outsider" vs. the mainstream candidate which is a pretty common trend nowadays. People who are motivated and inspired turn out in force to vote for change and it still wasn't close. The guy is an extremely moderate Republican and he still got about 2/3 of the republican vote. You could have put a literal elephant on the ballot and it would have done similarly as well as Lively did.
Hence my Western Mass. point. Where he is likely much better known (grew up in Shelburne Falls, now lives in Springfield) and more able to connect with the voters, he performed much better and won many of those towns out there. Your argument fails in this instance.






Quote:
Originally Posted by lrfox View Post
Baker had this race locked up from start to finish. Nobody ever felt there was a threat. A lot of his supporters stayed home on Tuesday. That 36% of the vote amounts to some 98,000 votes in a state with nearly 7 million people. Bob Massie, who got even less coverage than Lively (by a good margin), took home a similar share of the vote (35%) and from more than double the voters (191,000). Baker's a moderate Republican who many Republicans feel is almost a Dem and he still got nearly 2/3 of the vote in the Republican primary. What makes you think that Lively would fare any better in the general election in Massachusetts? He was blown out of the water in the primary, and he would be blown out of the water even further in the general election.

First of all Baker is not even a moderate, Romney was a moderate. Baker is an all out liberal. Many Democrats lean right of him on most issues.


Second, Independents vote in the Primary as well. Independents are the majority of Massachusetts voters, it's not exclusively Republicans. As an "Unenrolled" myself, I would rarely miss a Primary in Mass.. Now that I am in Maine where we have the party caucuses, that is no longer an option unfortunately.


And also, Democrats in the state outnumber Republicans 3 to 1. Their numbers will be higher in just about any Primary. Just compare it to the 2014 numbers.


Republican primary results[SIZE=2][70][/SIZE] Party Candidate Votes % Republican Charlie Baker 116,004 74.1 Republican Mark Fisher 40,240 25.7 Republican All Others 336 0.2 Republican Blank Votes 30,327 Total votes 159,936 100

Last edited by massnative71; 09-06-2018 at 08:27 AM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-06-2018, 08:07 AM
 
15,935 posts, read 11,752,416 times
Reputation: 8324
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaseyB View Post
A normal candidate might have beaten Baker.
Not so sure about that. I think Baker and the GOP would have sabotaged any opponent's chances (main point of this thread). They did it to Lively this time and they did it to Fisher in 2014.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-06-2018, 08:41 AM
 
3,781 posts, read 2,328,564 times
Reputation: 3297
Quote:
Originally Posted by massnative71 View Post
Not so sure about that. I think Baker and the GOP would have sabotaged any opponent's chances (main point of this thread). They did it to Lively this time and they did it to Fisher in 2014.
Baker sabotaged Lively? Please, the man sabotaged himself by being a total loon. He only garnered a notable percentage of support due to those right-of-center submitting a protest vote against Baker.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-06-2018, 08:42 AM
 
Location: East Boston, MA
10,250 posts, read 18,364,493 times
Reputation: 11951
Quote:
Originally Posted by massnative71 View Post
I heard quite a bit about Zakim especially in the last few weeks in a similar context to Pressley, basically 2 "outsiders" hoping to pull off upsets against 2 popular incumbents for no real reason other than "it's time for new blood".
I haven't heard much about Zakim. Certainly not more than Lively. But I have heard a lot about Pressley - she even got the Globe endorsement. Again though, I've heard a LOT more about Lively than I have about Massie who received more than twice as many votes as Lively and received a similar share of the vote in his respective primary.

Quote:
Asking the wrong person here. Like you said, lack of name recognition?
There's no reason he can't do more than $11k in a gubernatorial election. Especially if there's as much animosity toward Baker as your'e implying. He's been in the state and local press plenty, and he's even been mentioned in national late night TV (Colbert). People knew about him. My neighbor raised $25k in a few months of campaigning for Freetown Selectman back in the early 2000s. There's no way Lively couldn't have raised a lot more.

Quote:
Hence my Western Mass. point. Where he is likely much better known (grew up in Shelburne Falls, now lives in Springfield) and more able to connect with the voters, he performed much better and won many of those towns out there. Your argument fails in this instance.
How so? Regardless of budget, most candidates do better in their home regions than they do elsewhere. Hometown success is an outlier, rather than an indicator of what could be with X amount of dollars. If he raised more money, sure, he could have campaigned harder in other areas of the state, but he'd never be able to establish statewide roots of support like what he has near his hometown in a year or so of campaigning. The improvement would have been negligible. And given his coverage in the press (which, again, was much more than the Dem runner up), you can't argue that the press tried to bury his name. Blame the candidate for bad fundraising and a message that falls flat among voters rather than the press.

Quote:
First of all Baker is not even a moderate, Romney was a moderate. Baker is an all out liberal. Many Democrats lean right of him on most issues.

Second, Independents vote in the Primary as well. Independents are the majority of Massachusetts voters, it's not exclusively Republicans. As an "Unenrolled" myself, I would rarely miss a Primary in Mass.. Now that I am in Maine where we have the party caucuses, that is no longer an option unfortunately.
I don't even care to argue the specifics of that that. My point was that he's a centrist candidate (which side of the middle he falls on is irrelevant to the point) and that it's not at all a shock that a little more than 1/3 of Republican and Independent voters who voted in the primary voted for the guy who is much further to the right. It's MA, but there are still a decent amount of conservatives here. Frankly, it's embarrassing that Lively couldn't manage to muster more than 98k voters all things considered.

I know you have a personal bias against Baker and I don't disagree that the more conservative voters out there find him to be a disappointment. However, I think claiming any sort of moral victory for Lively while simultaneously blaming the press for not giving him the attention he deserves is missing the point. Lively's message didn't resonate with nearly enough people. Whether you like Baker or not, Lively was a crappy candidate on almost every level and it's no shock that he got blown out of the water - even considering the things that should have worked in his favor (conservative message, wave of "unknown" candidates beating incumbents, etc.). A better candidate could have beaten Baker in the Republican primary. I don't think it'll be as easy in the general election (though the margin will be closer simply due to the number of Dems vs. Republicans).
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-06-2018, 09:10 AM
 
15,935 posts, read 11,752,416 times
Reputation: 8324
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shrewsburried View Post
Baker sabotaged Lively? Please, the man sabotaged himself by being a total loon. He only garnered a notable percentage of support due to those right-of-center submitting a protest vote against Baker.
https://www.scribd.com/document/3809...aker-Complaint


In 2014, Fisher sued in a similar matter and won.


https://www.necn.com/news/politics/M...291748141.html
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-06-2018, 09:16 AM
 
11,565 posts, read 11,662,814 times
Reputation: 7939
Quote:
Originally Posted by massnative71 View Post
Of course it wasn't a "narrow victory" or anything, just putting it in perspective with all the circumstances I pointed out.
More media coverage would have hurt Lively people were voting against baking without knowing who his opponent was knowing Baker would win. If they knew who he was a I would bet that share goes down.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-06-2018, 09:30 AM
 
15,935 posts, read 11,752,416 times
Reputation: 8324
Quote:
Originally Posted by lrfox View Post


How so? Regardless of budget, most candidates do better in their home regions than they do elsewhere. Hometown success is an outlier, rather than an indicator of what could be with X amount of dollars. If he raised more money, sure, he could have campaigned harder in other areas of the state, but he'd never be able to establish statewide roots of support like what he has near his hometown in a year or so of campaigning. The improvement would have been negligible. And given his coverage in the press (which, again, was much more than the Dem runner up), you can't argue that the press tried to bury his name. Blame the candidate for bad fundraising and a message that falls flat among voters rather than the press.











I don't even care to argue the specifics of that that. My point was that he's a centrist candidate (which side of the middle he falls on is irrelevant to the point) and that it's not at all a shock that a little more than 1/3 of Republican and Independent voters who voted in the primary voted for the guy who is much further to the right. It's MA, but there are still a decent amount of conservatives here. Frankly, it's embarrassing that Lively couldn't manage to muster more than 98k voters all things considered.

I know you have a personal bias against Baker and I don't disagree that the more conservative voters out there find him to be a disappointment. However, I think claiming any sort of moral victory for Lively while simultaneously blaming the press for not giving him the attention he deserves is missing the point. Lively's message didn't resonate with nearly enough people. Whether you like Baker or not, Lively was a crappy candidate on almost every level and it's no shock that he got blown out of the water - even considering the things that should have worked in his favor (conservative message, wave of "unknown" candidates beating incumbents, etc.). A better candidate could have beaten Baker in the Republican primary. I don't think it'll be as easy in the general election (though the margin will be closer simply due to the number of Dems vs. Republicans).


A lot of contradictions in here. Going with the theory that lack of name recognition allowed him such a showing (despite having such a failed message), wouldn't that give him the advantage in the eastern part of the state away from his home base (because back in familiar territory they MUST know what a "deplorable" individual he is and how extreme his views are, etc.)? In Greater Boston, he would simply be a protest vote or dismissed due to what the Globe says about him being "extreme" and anti-gay and whatnot. And if his message truly was such a failure, then wouldn't those closest and most familiar with him be the first to see that?


To say that Lively's performance was "embarrassing" is a little far fetched, considering no other Primary incumbent challenger has come that close since Ed King in 1978. Any incumbent should have a Primary race locked up, and historically has even if that incumbent doesn't exactly pander to his/her base ie. Bill Weld. That such a "poor candidate" like Lively can make that much of a dent, shows vulnerability. And yes, this thread is really more about Baker than it is about Lively. They still call him the most "popular governor in America".
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-06-2018, 09:32 AM
 
15,935 posts, read 11,752,416 times
Reputation: 8324
Quote:
Originally Posted by btownboss4 View Post
More media coverage would have hurt Lively people were voting against baking without knowing who his opponent was knowing Baker would win. If they knew who he was a I would bet that share goes down.
His strong showing in many small Western Mass. towns suggests otherwise. They would certainly know Lively better Chesterfield than someone in Brookline would.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-06-2018, 10:18 AM
 
3,781 posts, read 2,328,564 times
Reputation: 3297
Quote:
Originally Posted by massnative71 View Post
A lot of contradictions in here. Going with the theory that lack of name recognition allowed him such a showing (despite having such a failed message), wouldn't that give him the advantage in the eastern part of the state away from his home base (because back in familiar territory they MUST know what a "deplorable" individual he is and how extreme his views are, etc.)? In Greater Boston, he would simply be a protest vote or dismissed due to what the Globe says about him being "extreme" and anti-gay and whatnot. And if his message truly was such a failure, then wouldn't those closest and most familiar with him be the first to see that?
The turnout numbers are so low in western MA, it's hard to draw much of a conclusion. Generally speaking, the R primary voters skew older, more religious, and more conservative ... which favors Lively.

If you look at denser voting blocks, like Springfield or Worcester, it's pretty clear that Lively's message fell flat.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-06-2018, 10:40 AM
 
15,935 posts, read 11,752,416 times
Reputation: 8324
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shrewsburried View Post
The turnout numbers are so low in western MA, it's hard to draw much of a conclusion.

And so is the population, of course the numbers look low. Maybe the voter turnout was lower there as a percentage, I'm not sure. My guess is that Lively saw the smaller towns as being easier to conquer with his limited campaign resources and decided to keep his focus there.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Shrewsburried View Post
Generally speaking, the R primary voters skew older, more religious, and more conservative ... which favors Lively.
In relation to what, the general election? Not sure the point here? I'm also not sure of the average age of the typical Lively vs. typical Baker voter. As for conservative and religious, yes there I would bet Lively's voters to trend more in that direction.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Shrewsburried View Post
If you look at denser voting blocks, like Springfield or Worcester, it's pretty clear that Lively's message fell flat.

No I wouldn't expect Lively or any conservative to do well there, that is a given in any election.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:




Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Massachusetts

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top