Earlier this year, conservatives were glum about the governor’s race in Massachusetts. The Republican candidate, businessman Charlie Baker, was socially liberal; his running mate, state senate minority leader Richard Tisei, was ideologically suspect; and the Democratic incumbent, Deval Patrick, was well ahead. State treasurer Tim Cahill, a Democrat-turned-independent, was splitting the opposition votes with Baker, ensuring victory for the widely unpopular Patrick.
Or so the dirge sounded. In Rasmussen Reports’ latest poll, Patrick now leads Baker by only five points, 47 to 42 percent. Cahill, meanwhile, trails both of them badly, at 6 percent. As the election approaches, Baker is gaining strength — and giving conservatives cause to cheer.
True, Baker is no Ronald Reagan. In June, the Boston Globe reminded readers that Baker, as secretary of finance in Gov. Bill Weld’s administration, oversaw funding for the Big Dig, which ran billions of dollars over budget. Compared to Patrick, however, Baker is Barry Goldwater. His platform calls for capping state pensions at $90,000 per year, raising public employees’ retirement age from 55 to 60, and lowering both the sales tax and the income tax to 5 percent.
If conservatives wish that Baker were less in the moderate camp, they can at least take comfort from his electoral prospects. “Baker has been steadily improving because he’s been increasing his name recognition, which was horrible,” David Paleologos, director of the Suffolk University Political Research Center, tells National Review Online. Cahill, it appears, performed well earlier in the race mostly because more people knew who he was.
Recently, however, Cahill’s stock has plummeted. Last Friday, his running mate, Paul Loscocco, dropped out of the race and endorsed Baker at the Republican’s headquarters in Boston. Calling the initial part of the campaign a “primary of sorts . . . in the hearts and minds of voters,” Loscocco declared that metaphorical primary “over” and said electing Baker was the “best chance at defeating Governor Patrick.” Voters seem to be making a similar calculus.
Still, pundits say Baker faces another challenge: likeability. Although most voters disapprove of Patrick’s performance, they would be happy to grab an appletini with him. According to a poll for the Boston Globe, just 44 percent of Baker’s supporters “identified him as the most likeable candidate,” whereas 71 percent of Patrick’s supporters identified the governor as the most likeable.
Baker’s weakness in this regard is particularly acute among women, a key voting group. “Baker trails among women by 12 percent,” says Paleologos. “If you look at older women, over 65 years of age, Baker trails Patrick by 19 percent. . . . Normally there has been a gender gap with Republican candidates, where they carry men by a fairly wide margin and then they basically break even with women. You need to win men by more than you lose women.”
The problem, observers say, is Baker’s angry tone. At a recent rally in his hometown of Needham, Baker showed that he does angry well. “Over the course of the last few years, I grew increasingly dismayed, disappointed, and, yeah, a little angry,” he said, thrusting his head forward for emphasis, “about what I saw going on at Beacon Hill.” Decrying eight tax increases, $3 billion in new spending, and 300,000 people out of work, the candidate chopped the air with his hands as he griped that “month after month after month it became clearer and clearer to me the governor, the treasurer, the rest of the folks up there — they did not know how to solve the state’s fiscal problems.” Pointing to a sign emblazoned with his slogan, Baker concluded his fiery peroration: “And you know what? I finally said, ‘I’ve had enough!’”
Baker also showed that he can’t do sweet — at least not easily. He mentioned a story in the Globe that said the staff at Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, of which he was CEO, would lie across Route 128 for their old boss if he asked them to. In an attempt at empathy, Baker enunciated, just a little too deliberately: “Well, you know something? I would lie across Route 128 for them if they asked me to.”
Aware of this deficiency, Baker’s campaign has been showcasing the candidate’s softer side. At a recent event, Baker spoke to a mostly female crowd about his love of mac-and-cheese, the bracelets he wears in honor of his children, and his propensity to cry when he hears his daughter sing. Unsurprisingly, the media mocked Baker’s faux femininity.
Nevertheless, Baker can win if he focuses on long-term strategy rather than short-term tactics. He already has the winning message. “The choice is pretty clear,” Sen. Scott Brown tells NRO. “If you want continued deficit spending and out-of-touch government, go for Deval. If you want someone with business sense who will bring fiscal sanity back to Beacon Hill, go for Charlie.”
The message seems to be resonating even if the gimmicks are not. In fact, at this point in the campaign Baker is closer to Patrick than Mitt Romney was to Democratic candidate Shannon O’Brien eight years ago. In early October 2002, O’Brien led Romney by twelve points, but the Republican triumphed on Election Day. Baker is ahead of the game.
He seems to admire Brown’s example. “He took [his] race seriously,” Baker tells National Review Online. “And he took the people of Massachusetts seriously. And he reflected the frustration and the anger the people have about the overspending and the tax increases and the lack of fiscal discipline that they see on Beacon Hill and Capitol Hill.”
If Baker follows Brown’s example, particularly the seriousness part, he may end up the second Republican in a row elected statewide in Massachusetts.
— Brian Bolduc is a William F. Buckley Jr. Fellow at the National Review Institute.