Election Poll - Governor of Massachusetts

[ron_newman]

In the tradition of pre-election polls here on davis_square, here's one for the Governor's race.

[Poll #1630254]

Comments

[chaiya.livejournal.com]

Hey, Ron, any chance of reposting the poll with more privacy? I'm not up for telling everyone on the internet how I intend to vote, and I suspect I'm not the only one.

[ron_newman]

We've generally posted these in the past with 'Viewable to All" selected.

Unfortunately LJ doesn't offer 'None' as a choice for who can see the individual votes. The most restrictive setting is 'Just Me' which means I'd be able to see them but nobody else could. That's not really ideal.

[clevernonsense.livejournal.com]

i would prefer to see view all results as this is a fairly open and friendly community

[sparkgrrl658.livejournal.com]

...then don't?

there's no reason you can't still comment with thoughts on the candidates and/or participate in discussion without announcing your final decision.

[clevernonsense.livejournal.com]

I've been a big fan of Charlie Baker (though I am a lifelong liberal) but two things are making me consider voting for Deval: I've come to find Brown offensive and when he endorsed Baker that sullied my opinion of him, and all the knee-jerk hate filled commentary that is getting thrown around lately.

Honestly, the 3 leaders in this race are all so similar that I really don't think it matters much, especially with how our state government works.

[tom-champion.livejournal.com]

There are HUGE differences between Patrick and Baker. Perhaps the most fundamental is on fiscal policy. Baker has made specific proposals to make significant cuts in corporate, sales and income tax rates because in his view -- and that of most Gopers -- both tax and regulatory relief are needed to "get our economy moving again."
(http://massachusetts-election-2010.com/1990/charlie-baker-unveils-massachusetts-tax-cut-plan/)
This view ignores the fact that Massachusetts is not a particularly high-tax state, and that the recession here has already been shallower, and the still-excruciatingly slow recovery has been somewhat faster, than the average for the nation as a whole. Even the reflexively anti-tax Tax Foundation makes the following observation on their website "Estimated at 9.5% of income, Massachusetts' state/local tax burden percentage ranks 23rd nationally, just below the national average of 9.7%. Massachusetts taxpayers pay $5,377 per capita in state and local taxes. Massachusetts has dropped 17 places in the rankings since 1977 by imposing a property tax limitation and keeping a lid on its personal income tax rate, living down its 'Taxachusetts' nickname." That doesn't sound like a job-killing tax burden to me.
Baker's proposals also fail to address the age-old problem that cutting taxes is easier than cutting spending. Even if you assume that Baker's proposed spending cuts would bring the budget into balance, it's unlikely he could get all or even most of them through the Legislature. In the end, the likely outcome would be that cuts in the current tax rates would push state government to continue the historic trend of neglecting long-term infrastructural and educational investment while making further cuts in aid to cities and towns. (And cuts in services at the municipal level are the ones that have the most direct impact on our daily lives.)
Like all Gopers, Baker embraces the rhetoric (in the words of his own campaign) that "Massachusetts’ tax policies [must be made] competitive with other states so that jobs are created here." Baker doesn't refer us to any states where veanishing tax rates have created an economic paradise, but that race-to-the-bottom talk disturbs me. I'm GLAD I don't live in Mississippi -- or even Texas. And if Baker thinks New Hampshire has all the answers, then he should run for governor there.
Baker is about as "different" or "thoughtful" as Mitt Romney. Whenever one of these guys runs for office, the first things out of their mouths are calls to restore the death penalty and cut taxes.
Like most Mass residents, I'd love to see more structural reform in state spending, and I'm sad that Governor Patrick's efforts in that regard have so often been watered down or stymied by the Legislature. But the reason we need to cut waste is to fuel a major reinvestment in our common wealth -- infrastructure, education, economic development and the environment -- not so that we can cut taxes yet again.

[clevernonsense.livejournal.com]

The main difference in fiscal policy between Baker and Patrick is Baker seems to actually know what he's talking about. While I voted for Patrick and I don't think his term has been a complete failure, I can't help but think of him as basically a puppet that has given away too many strings.

[m00n.livejournal.com]

A puppet for whom, exactly? Baker has, as Tom Champion points out, only proposed more tax cuts as a way to fix our systemic problems. Patrick, by contrast, has overseen one of the largest restructurings of the transportation department that we've ever had, and mainly in the interest of improving its financial footing.

Also, Patrick was willing to make the very unpopular proposal of raising the gas tax to pay for our transportation problems. The gas tax has been at a fixed rate (not adjusted for inflation) for several decades even as our per-driver transportation costs have increased, so it definitely plays a big part in why we have so much transit debt.

Baker says he believes that if we continue to cut our taxes, it will attract so much new business to the state that it will more than cancel out the reduced tax rate. Considering our tax rates are already competitive with more than half the states in the country, it's hard to see how this could have such a dramatic effect on commerce.

If you still believe the main problem in Massachusetts is high taxes, then probably you should vote for Baker. If you believe it lies anywhere else, then you should vote for Patrick. I'm not sure how you came to your conclusion that they are "all so similar." Their approaches to governing really couldn't be much more different.

Anyone have a decent compare/contrast on major issues?

[secretlyironic.livejournal.com]

The Votesmart.org profiles are pretty basic, although they do link to the campaign websites; my impression is that Cahill and Baker both want to cut spending, especially on education and infrastructure. So.... given that education and infrastructure are things I think are worth having, Patrick it is.

Re: Anyone have a decent compare/contrast on major issues?

[m00n.livejournal.com]

As someone who rides the T almost every day, I'm having a pretty hard time figuring out what else they think they could cut...

[plumtreeblossom.livejournal.com]

Ron, would it be appropriate for me to post a discussion thread about Question 3 on the ballot? I am undecided on how I'll vote on this question and I'd like to see perspectives from my neighbors in Davis and how they plan to vote. However, the topic is admittedly not Davis-specific. Let me know if I can.

[prunesnprisms.livejournal.com]

It'd be alright by me.

[ron_newman]

Yes, please do! Last time we had a state election, someone made a series of separate posts explaining each ballot question, and then we had a poll for all of them.

My own opinion is that cutting the sales tax in half would be disastrous for both the state and localities such as Somerville that receive state aid.

Edit: some discussion of Question 3 is in this post and its comments.

[ron_newman]

If you use public transportation, I strongly recommend a vote against Question 3. Here's why.

[thespian.livejournal.com]

Other: I am Canadian and while I live in Davis, I am not allowed to vote here.

That said, in the past, I have supported people who were running (yard signs, campaign work, small enough donations that are legal for resident aliens to do). And I cannot actually get myself to give a damn about which if them wins. I'm rarely this indifferent to elections.

[hissilliness.livejournal.com]

I had had a vaguely good impression of Stein, but the recent Globe profile did a very effective job of making her sound a an uninformed kook.

[cos]

I like Jill Stein but not nearly enough people support her to give her even the slightest chance of winning, and an election isn't an opinion poll, it's a process for electing who will actually govern. Since we don't have instant runoff, I feel that voting for someone who you *know* not enough people support, and will not become Governor, is like not bothering to vote, or like treating the whole thing as a joke, or at best, a something to do when you think it makes absolutely no difference whatsoever which of the candidates who might become governor, does. Given that huge differences between Patrick and Baker (and Cahill, who maybe has a ghost of a chance), that last option makes no sense in this case. So, I like Jill Stein, but I don't think anyone should vote for her.

(I actually think Patrick is the better candidate anyway, but all of what I say above, I would say even if I thought Jill Stein were the better candidate)

[gruene.livejournal.com]

I would love to see a poll on the Secretary of the Commonwealth race. I'm quite impressed with Jim Henderson and he is my preferred candidate, but I think Galvin has been doing a decent job and Campbell would be a total disaster, so I wouldn't want to "waste" my vote on Henderson if he's polling badly and Campbell has a chance of winning.

Ironically, one of the reforms that Henderson favors is instant runoff voting...

[cos]

I think Galvin's been doing a bad job, and he has a pattern of always refusing to participate in debates or candidate forums with any of his opponents, election after election. He's primarily responsible for stopping the legislature's moves to pass election day registration, and has prevented it from happening for about six years now, while occasionally saying in public that he supports it. He's slimy and dishonest. The pace of making information available to the public online about elections is shameful. Election results are posted as PDFs in a different format each year, with no coherent way of finding them on the web site, and that's only for the past few elections. Older ones are still on paper only, and if you want things like per-town or precinct numbers, you pretty much have to have them read the numbers to you over the phone from a book.

Unfortunately, I think Galvin will coast to victory. His strategy of avoiding campaigning and avoiding his opponents pays off once again: Not enough people pay attention to the Secretary race because there are other more exciting races to follow, with more information available.

I agree that Henderson is the best candidate. And that instant runoff would be a great reform (which we will *never* get as long as Galvin is in office, because he hates all sensible voting reforms).

[gruene.livejournal.com]

I don't disagree with anything you said, Cos. I think Galvin is doing a decent job because elections in Massachusetts are well run. (I'm an election clerk for the City of Somerville, so I do have some basis for saying so.) Ultimately it's the job of the legislature, not the SoC, to reform the election laws and having a competent executive is worthwhile.
Henderson would certainly improve the transparency issues you mention and provide stronger leadership in pushing reforms through the legislature. Campbell would focus on erecting barriers that would make voting more difficult. In short, Henderson > Galvin > Campbell. I'll probably vote Henderson unless there's evidence that I need to vote for Galvin for strategic reasons.

[cos]

> and provide stronger leadership in pushing reforms through the legislature.

While that'd be nice, I think we actually have some leadership in the legislature itself for pushing reforms. It may be that we don't need strong leadership from the Secretary's office, we just need an end to strong backroom *opposition* and obstruction from the Secretary's office.

[turil.livejournal.com]

Which is the Globe's job. To marginalize anyone who challenges business as usual in a seriously meaningful way. The globe is essentially a centrist-conservative paper when it comes to corporate profits, as their number one priority is to sell advertising.

[obie119.livejournal.com]

Please remember - if you support Gov Patrick (or simply UNsupport Baker or Cahill), the most important thing you can do is to VOTE and get your friends and family to VOTE. It's not about changing the mind of someone voting differently than you - it's about fighting people's indifference regarding this election.

There's a lot of people out there saying "they're all the same" and - as Tom Champion has expressed much better than I would - that's simply not true.

Wednesday is the final day for voter registration in MA for this election! Please register if you haven't already!

[cos]

I changed my vote to "Other" because I'm still not eligible to vote, but I have been volunteering for Patrick via Cambridge-Somerville for Change. Also for "no on all three".

[ron_newman]

Why are you not eligible to vote? Even if you moved recently you should be able to vote at your old precinct (or re-register by this Wednesday evening)

[cos]

I know the voter registration rules so well, I've occasionally caused elections department people at Cambridge city hall to learn new things because of the questions I asked :) But I'm not a US citizen.

[cos]

Yes.

[anomie666.livejournal.com]

What is my fellow DS LJ'ers take on whether Deval will get re-elected? Its pretty clear most of you would like that to happen. Do you feel confident about that?

[doxasticpirate.livejournal.com]

No public polling has Baker ahead, and most have him back five points or more. That doesn't mean that Patrick will win for sure, obvs, but I'd say 70-30 Patrick wins.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/15/10-ma-gov-ge-bvpvc_n_728439.html

(I know that linking to HuffPo may seem a bit biased, but that's a link for a list of available polling for the race. It's kinda too bad that a clearly partisan group took over pollster.com.)


I am much more worried about the sales tax ballot question.

[thetathx1138.livejournal.com]

Yeah, actually. And to be honest, it's baffling.

I like Patrick. Well, kinda. I don't think about him much. I think he's stepped up recently and actually made an impression, but he got elected when I moved here, and I didn't think about him much until recently. He’s capable, but invisible except for when he screws up. He only got the job because everybody hated Mitt Romney so much the Democrats could have run Zardoz and won.

And, he polls terribly. People find him ineffectual, or just don't like the job he's doing. By all accounts, he should be on the way out.

I think he’s going to get reelected not out of any great love, but because of Charlie Baker. You know me, I’d never vote for Baker, but on paper he’s a competitive candidate: he’s middle-of-the-road, he’s experienced, he’s got a ton of money. But he’s just managed to screw up, every step of the way. I think he made the Martha Coakley mistake: he took the election for granted and assumed everybody would love him because they hate Deval…and despite all those polls, he still seems to believe it.