Thursday, March 02, 2006
Uh-oh!
A week after the disappointing news that Peter Blute will not challenge Fat Boy for his United States Senate seat, all but ensuring that The Swimmer will run unopposed (or virtually so) for this first time in his 43-year career this year, comes the news that millionaire Christy Mihos will today announce that he will run for governor as an independent.
And with that, virtually any hope the GOP had in keeping the corner office of this very blue state colored (at least nominally) red are essentially kaput.
But for the moment, let's parse this seemingly innocent statement by Mihos' campaign manager. "Economically conservative and socially liberal" eh? Super - well so is the lieutenant governor and now de-facto republican nominee for the corner office, Kerry Murphy Healey. In a state where (if the legislature would ever let it come to a vote) homosexual marriage would be de-certified, likely by a wide margin, just what we need is a choice between three socially liberal candidates for governor (either of the two candidates running on the democrat side are demonstrably to the left of both Healey and Mihos on every single issue - and social issues are no exception). Just. Super.
Well, we all know the last thing the Globe wants is a "staid" race - so I'm sure we'll be hearing them call for independent challenges from the left with equal vigor, right? Oh, I forgot. This is the Globe - Pravda on the Bay - we're talking about here.
Of course, many on the left already have the long knives out for Mihos - who does have a tendency to at times engage his mouth long before his brain is working at capacity. But let's face it, this is a gift to the Democrat Party of Massachusetts - a party that has salivated over the possibility at getting the Beacon Hill corner office back since at least 1998 (they had no chance in 1994 and they knew it), and thereby ushering back the Massachusetts Miracle brought to us by none other than The Duke.
And while his web site doesn't appear to be fully operational yet, and therefore it's a little difficult to determine precisely what Mr. Mihos' platform will be, I can expand a little on one idea he floated during an interview this morning on the WRKO "Boston this Morning" show. "Proposition One" as Mihos calls it, would allow for the re-assessment of a piece of residential property only after it has been sold - meaning that towns could not go-back every 3-4 years (as is common practice in the commonwealth today) and re-assess property, in many cases (mine being no exception) resulting in large tax increases. In other words, Mihos' proposal is an idea to close a loophole cities and towns have been using to get around Proposition 2 1/2 - the Massachusetts Tax Limitation law.
A nice idea to be sure, Christy. But here's the problem: such a proposal would immediately draw the ire of, among others, the Massachusetts Teachers Association, Massachusetts Municipal Association, not to mention the poorly-named Massachusetts Taxpayers Association, and is therefore dead-on-arrival unless the Governor - that would be, in theory, you - had some sort of base of support in the Legislature from which to build a coalition for passage. And in case you've not been paying attention Mr. Mihos, Democrats (and liberals ones at that) control 7-of-8 seats in the legislature and, as a long-time republican choosing to run as an independent, you can probably count on precisely none of the remaining republicans in the legislature for support. Therefore, unless you can bring large numbers of supporters into the Massachusetts General Court, your proposals are likely to go precisely nowhere.
So Mr. Mihos, what are your plans for moving the legislature more to your favor?
< crickets chirp >
< /crickets chirp >
There are two other facets of this race I want to touch upon before signing-off for the day. First, while this is indeed a silver-platter type gift to the Democrats this development will, if anything, likely make the coming primary battle between Reilly (the worst Attorney General in the Nation) and Patrick (a far-far-left Clinton rump-swabber) even more vicious - which is of course a delicious prospect for those of us on the other side of the battle. Time will tell.
Finally however, something has to be said about Mitt Romney - the man no one wants to talk about in this state anymore. While Mr. Romney has been jetting about the country, introducing the President at the most recent GOP Governors' Association fundraiser and appearing with Chris on FNS, what little remaining of the Massachusetts Republican Party is slowly disintegrating - and that cannot be a good place from which to launch a Presidential bid.
Covered also at Hub Politics and cross-posted at RedState.
"Christy is economically conservative and socially liberal. He is a true independent," said Peter Pendergast, the Mihos campaign manager.
And with that, virtually any hope the GOP had in keeping the corner office of this very blue state colored (at least nominally) red are essentially kaput.
But for the moment, let's parse this seemingly innocent statement by Mihos' campaign manager. "Economically conservative and socially liberal" eh? Super - well so is the lieutenant governor and now de-facto republican nominee for the corner office, Kerry Murphy Healey. In a state where (if the legislature would ever let it come to a vote) homosexual marriage would be de-certified, likely by a wide margin, just what we need is a choice between three socially liberal candidates for governor (either of the two candidates running on the democrat side are demonstrably to the left of both Healey and Mihos on every single issue - and social issues are no exception). Just. Super.
Running as an independent, which could draw votes from Lt. Gov. Kerry Healey, a Republican who essentially controls the state GOP apparatus, won't be the only way Mihos shakes up an otherwise staid race.
Well, we all know the last thing the Globe wants is a "staid" race - so I'm sure we'll be hearing them call for independent challenges from the left with equal vigor, right? Oh, I forgot. This is the Globe - Pravda on the Bay - we're talking about here.
Of course, many on the left already have the long knives out for Mihos - who does have a tendency to at times engage his mouth long before his brain is working at capacity. But let's face it, this is a gift to the Democrat Party of Massachusetts - a party that has salivated over the possibility at getting the Beacon Hill corner office back since at least 1998 (they had no chance in 1994 and they knew it), and thereby ushering back the Massachusetts Miracle brought to us by none other than The Duke.
And while his web site doesn't appear to be fully operational yet, and therefore it's a little difficult to determine precisely what Mr. Mihos' platform will be, I can expand a little on one idea he floated during an interview this morning on the WRKO "Boston this Morning" show. "Proposition One" as Mihos calls it, would allow for the re-assessment of a piece of residential property only after it has been sold - meaning that towns could not go-back every 3-4 years (as is common practice in the commonwealth today) and re-assess property, in many cases (mine being no exception) resulting in large tax increases. In other words, Mihos' proposal is an idea to close a loophole cities and towns have been using to get around Proposition 2 1/2 - the Massachusetts Tax Limitation law.
A nice idea to be sure, Christy. But here's the problem: such a proposal would immediately draw the ire of, among others, the Massachusetts Teachers Association, Massachusetts Municipal Association, not to mention the poorly-named Massachusetts Taxpayers Association, and is therefore dead-on-arrival unless the Governor - that would be, in theory, you - had some sort of base of support in the Legislature from which to build a coalition for passage. And in case you've not been paying attention Mr. Mihos, Democrats (and liberals ones at that) control 7-of-8 seats in the legislature and, as a long-time republican choosing to run as an independent, you can probably count on precisely none of the remaining republicans in the legislature for support. Therefore, unless you can bring large numbers of supporters into the Massachusetts General Court, your proposals are likely to go precisely nowhere.
So Mr. Mihos, what are your plans for moving the legislature more to your favor?
< crickets chirp >
< /crickets chirp >
There are two other facets of this race I want to touch upon before signing-off for the day. First, while this is indeed a silver-platter type gift to the Democrats this development will, if anything, likely make the coming primary battle between Reilly (the worst Attorney General in the Nation) and Patrick (a far-far-left Clinton rump-swabber) even more vicious - which is of course a delicious prospect for those of us on the other side of the battle. Time will tell.
Finally however, something has to be said about Mitt Romney - the man no one wants to talk about in this state anymore. While Mr. Romney has been jetting about the country, introducing the President at the most recent GOP Governors' Association fundraiser and appearing with Chris on FNS, what little remaining of the Massachusetts Republican Party is slowly disintegrating - and that cannot be a good place from which to launch a Presidential bid.
Covered also at Hub Politics and cross-posted at RedState.
# posted by Doc J @ 8:48 AM 
Comments:
<< Home
Hi there -- interesting thoughts, although obviously I come at it from a different perspective.
But I have to ask, how do you justify this: "homosexual marriage would be de-certified, likely by a wide margin". Can you show a recent poll that indicates this? The ones I've seen have indicated that a plurality support keeping the current status quo.
But I have to ask, how do you justify this: "homosexual marriage would be de-certified, likely by a wide margin". Can you show a recent poll that indicates this? The ones I've seen have indicated that a plurality support keeping the current status quo.
# posted by 
: 4:48 PM
: 4:48 PM
Hey Charley,
Thanks for asking. My principal logic is that if it were going to fail the legislature would be quick to put it out there for a vote and the pro-homosexual marriage folks wouldn't be going through the hystrionics of "outing" the people who signed the petitions.
Finally - and here's where you and I may differ more than a little - I just don't put a whole lot of stock in polls done by the Boston Globe, particularly on issues like this. Also, nearly every "poll" done ahead of a referendum on the subject shows a pro-homosexual-marriage bias (in that, where polls show it close, marriage protection laws pass overwhelmingly and where polls show it losing, it passes with double-digit margins). I see no reason to believe Massachusetts is any different.
No recent polling one way or the other, though - and May 2005 is forever-ago in politics.
Cheers.
Thanks for asking. My principal logic is that if it were going to fail the legislature would be quick to put it out there for a vote and the pro-homosexual marriage folks wouldn't be going through the hystrionics of "outing" the people who signed the petitions.
Finally - and here's where you and I may differ more than a little - I just don't put a whole lot of stock in polls done by the Boston Globe, particularly on issues like this. Also, nearly every "poll" done ahead of a referendum on the subject shows a pro-homosexual-marriage bias (in that, where polls show it close, marriage protection laws pass overwhelmingly and where polls show it losing, it passes with double-digit margins). I see no reason to believe Massachusetts is any different.
No recent polling one way or the other, though - and May 2005 is forever-ago in politics.
Cheers.
I think this proposition 1 idea is stupid, frankly. It creates tremendous inequity between homeowners based upon an arbitrary event, makes home ownership more difficult for first-time buyers, and makes it impossible for municipalities to predict what their tax revenue will be.
Post a Comment
<< Home
