Focus On...MASSACHUSETTS!!!

This is number six in a planned series of 50 entries between now and November, looking at each of the 50 states in terms of every race on that state's ticket--Presidential, Gubernatorial, Senate, House, State legislatures--the whole can o’ beans. Special attention paid to identifying and promoting the most important contests per state.

This time, we look at Massachusetts, the bluest state of them all.

Previous diaries in this series:

Delaware: http://www.dailykos.com/...

Arkansas: http://www.dailykos.com/...

Illinois: http://www.dailykos.com/...

Texas, Part One:  http://www.dailykos.com/...

Texas, Part Two: http://www.dailykos.com/...

Utah: http://www.dailykos.com/...

If Utah is the 50th state in the 50-state, 435-district strategy, then Massachusetts is the first. It has achieved the level of Democratic dominance where it can afford to send the troops out to work on solidifying other states without fear of losses at home.

No other state has both a 100% Democratic Congressional delegation and the trifecta of a completely Democratic state government. Not only is Massachusetts solid blue from the blue Berkshires to the blue city of Beantown to the bright blue tip of Cape Cod, but even every congressional district that surrounds Massachusetts is represented by a Democrat.

http://www.nationalatlas.com/...

So, while the Utah entry was something of a dirge and call for urgent care, today’s entry is little more than a celebration of one safe blue Democrat after another. Let’s count our blessings:

First of all, the 50-state blog project’s Massachusetts representative is Blue Mass Group. Well done, BMG!

http://www.bluemassgroup.com/

PRESIDENT: Safe Obama. The safest 12 Electoral votes you’ll ever find for Democrats.

SENATE: Safe for incumbent John Kerry.
http://www.johnkerry.com/

GOVERNOR and OTHER STATEWIDE: The Governor is Democrat Deval Patrick, and all other statewide offices are held by Democrats. None of them are up for re-election this year.

STATE LEGISLATURE: The State Senate has THIRTY FIVE Democrats in a body of 40 legislators, and the House has ONE HUNDRED FORTY ONE Democrats out of 160. That’s five and nineteen Republicans, respectively, an even bigger disparity than the reverse numbers in the Utah legislature.  That’s more than a supermajority. That’s complete one-party government!

Congressional Districts

District 1—John Olver –Unopposed Democrat

District 2—Richard Neal—Unopposed Democrat

District 3—Jim McGovern—Unopposed Democrat

District 4—Barney Frank—Safe Democrat

District 5—Nikki Tsongas, the junior member of the delegation, having won a special election in 2007.  If I had to pick a race that needed attention in Massachusetts, it would be this one, but really, she’s not on the top 100 list of endangered Democratic-held seats either. The potential opponents are bottom tier contenders.

District 6—John Tierney—Safe Democrat

District 7—Ed Markey—Unopposed Democrat

District 8—Mike Capuano—Unopposed Democrat

District 9—Stephen Lynch—Unopposed Democrat

District 10—Bill Delahunt—Unopposed Democrat.

All ten Democrats in the House are incumbents.

REDISTRICTING MASSACHUSETTS:  It's worth a mention, since we’ll probably lose a seat next time around, and will run the table on how it is to be done.  I expect the lost seat will be the 5th district, which is as close as MA gets to a "conservative" district, which is contiguous to four other districts, and which is held by the most junior member of the delegation to boot.

Move the 2d west into the 1st, and the 1st east to the 5th; move the 4th west into the 3rd and the 3rd north into the 5th; move the 6th southwest into the 5th; move the 10th, 9th and 8th north into the 7th, and the rest of the 7th takes up what is left of the 5th.

So there you have it. Seven out of ten incumbents getting absolute freebies in November, and the other three facing sacrificial lambs. A safe Senate race and 12 safe EVs for President. A state legislature with the biggest supermajority cushion in the nation, and a Democratic Governor not even facing the voters.  Massachusetts has won everything already, and the other 49 states are green with envy.

So what is the role of the bluest state of the union in a 50-state strategy (OK, commonwealth, you’re a commonwealth. Shut up)? Well, there are two things.

First and most immediate is helping out to make more states as blue as Massachusetts.  New England has two top tier Senate races (Allen in Maine and shaheen in New Hampshire) that could use some help. Vermont has a Governor’s race, Connecticut has the only GOP-held district still in New England, and New York has several top tier House races and the contest for the makeup of the State Senate. Rhode Island has...er, well, their chance to tie for "bluest state in the union" will have to wait till 2010, when the GOP Governor is up again.  Additionally, there are some incumbent first term Democrats, like Carol Shea-Porter in NH, who might need some defensive help, and New Hampshire is the only Northeastern State (other than West Virginia, depending on whether you count it as "northeastern") in which Obama is not yet assured of easy success in the general election.  And for those who like to travel, you can tell from the other entries in this series that there are tons of hot contests where you can make a difference.

The other area of need is simply the responsibility, when in power, to govern well. Democrats have the entire government of Massachusetts: now, use it to be a beacon of light and a shining example to the rest of America that, yes, when liberal Democrats have the chance to rule, good things happen. Let the blue state of Massachusetts have the most effective government, best education, the best economy, the best benefits, the best roads, housing, civil rights protection, and the happiest, most productive, most well-fed citizenry in the nation. When those of us without the perfect blue government are out there trying to persuade people to vote for Democrats, let us be able to point to Massachusetts and say proudly, "Look what they’re doing over there with a solid Democratic government. WE CAN DO THAT, TOO"—and let your example be something that overwhelming majorities of voters, all over the country, will want, too.

In "Red" areas of the country, Republicans like to pretend Massachusetts is some kind of hideous bogeyman, a spectre of what might happen to the heartland if ThoseDamnLiberals get into office.  Massachusetts’s job, as the state with perfect Democratic-controlled government, is to be the place others want to be part of.

God Bless You, Massachusetts. You are the aspiration to us all.  

•  Tips, Recs & chowder

  I wish all 50 entries could be this positive.

  Wanna see your home state diaried? Let's talk...

  by AdmiralNaismith on Thu May 08, 2008 at 07:41:09 AM PDT

  •  That should be chowda

    by atlliberal on Thu May 08, 2008 at 07:56:36 AM PDT

•  Blue

  I love the color blue.  When you live in Massachusetts, it's sometimes hard to understand what the rest of the country has to contend with..

  by maddercow on Thu May 08, 2008 at 07:43:40 AM PDT

  •  Exactly. Matter of fact, most of "New England"

    has practically no GOP left.

    It would be better to say that the traditional puritan republicans do not belong in the new "southern strategy" GOP.

    The GOP left new england a while ago.

    In terms of political comfort for progressives, it is a great area.

    by MAORCA on Thu May 08, 2008 at 07:49:20 AM PDT

    •  Finneran called himself a Democrat

      There's plenty of work to do meking our state legislature more progressive. Sometimes it means replacing the right winf of the party and sometimes it means finding strong candidates to run against weak Republicans. Sara Orozco is running for the State Senate against an incumbent in Needham. She is just one of many local candidates worth volunteering for. Anyone looking for ways to help the legislature achieve more progressive goals should check out Mass Alliance.

      by wmdrpa on Thu May 08, 2008 at 08:40:07 AM PDT

      •  My blud is type O

        Sorry for the spelling train wreck above.

        by wmdrpa on Thu May 08, 2008 at 08:57:43 AM PDT

  •  I grew up in Mass

    Now I live in RED GA, in one of the reddest districts in the state. Talk about a culture shock.
    I'd go back if I thought I could deal with the winters again. (I can't)

    by atlliberal on Thu May 08, 2008 at 07:58:46 AM PDT

    •  It's OK. They need you where you are.

      Lemme guess. Northwest Georgia? Or maybe Zell Miller territory to the Northeast?

      Georgia used to be the best of the Southern states. With the help of transplanted residents like you, maybe it will be blue again. Take courage, and let us know what we can do to help.

      by AdmiralNaismith on Thu May 08, 2008 at 08:40:47 AM PDT

      •  Marietta, right outside Atlanta

        I'm encouraged at a couple of our senate candidates this year. It would be wonderful if we could beat Saxby Chambliss. Also I live in the 6th district, formerly Newt's district. It's a tough one but at least we have a candidate again this year. For many years the congressional seat went unchallenged.

        by atlliberal on Thu May 08, 2008 at 01:00:03 PM PDT

•  The 5th ain't goin' no place

  The last time someone got it into his head to eliminate the Fifth during redistricting, he ended up being driven out of politics, and getting a felony conviction - and it was the Speaker of the Massachusetts House!

  More likely, they're going to smoosh together Neal and Olver's district out west, which is good.  There should be a district that consists of Springfield, its surrounding cities, and the rest of western Mass.  It never made any sense for Pittsfield and Fitchburg to be in the same district, and Representative Olver is about ready for a well-deserved retirement anyway.

  Wait a second, did I say Representative Olver?  I meant Appellate Judge Olver.

  by joe from Lowell on Thu May 08, 2008 at 07:46:19 AM PDT

  •  The First does make sense

    If you don't want a fairly solidly Republican district carved out of the eastern part of the first, the northern part of the third, and the western part of the fifth.

    by ActivistGuy on Thu May 08, 2008 at 07:49:26 AM PDT

•  Massachusetts

  Lean Obama, not safe Obama.  I would bet that McCain breaks 45% in MA.  

  Deval Patrick has W like approval ratings and will really hurt Obama in Massachusetts.

  by IhateBush on Thu May 08, 2008 at 07:54:25 AM PDT

  •  Why is that?

    Deval Patrick seems to have gotten off to a rocky start. My son lived there when  he got elected and can't stand him, but i'm not sure why.  

    I still have a hard time believing Obama will not win Mass, once Hillary's supporters have a chance to heal. The numbers right now are skewed.

    by atlliberal on Thu May 08, 2008 at 08:06:47 AM PDT

    •  He'll probably win it

      but not by much.  I wouldn't be surprised that Obama does better in Oregon or Washington, Minnesota, Wisconsin, or Iowa in November than he does in Massachusetts.

      He had Ted Kennedy's and John Kerry's endorsement, Massachusetts is a state that has often went with outsider candidates in the past (Hart, Tsongas), was the only state to vote for McGovern, and is not really racist (elected Patrick by 20+ margin).  Yet Obama got just 41% there.  

      by IhateBush on Thu May 08, 2008 at 08:18:52 AM PDT

      •  Patrick needs to make new headlines

        The old ones give the impression that he is mostly concerned with opening up casinos. As a disappointed supporter I'm optimistic but cautious about his ability to change the media narrative by addressing more serious issues.

        by wmdrpa on Thu May 08, 2008 at 08:44:44 AM PDT

  •  Lanie Davis been sounding that racist dog whistle

    I heard Lanie Davis on CNN try to start an alarm bell that Obama could lose the bluest state of all, Mass, and I heard the dog whistle loud and clear.

    Patrick is black and with his popularity way down, in Clinton-speak that translates to Obama struggling in Mass.

    BS!

    Lived all my life around Boston and yeah, sure there's still alot of racism here. BUT translating a governorship popularity to presidential politics in MASS is HUGE mistake.

    We had a popular REPUBLICAN governor in William Weld and guess what the state did NOT go Republican.

    Mass voters WILL NOT vote for a PRO-LIFER, CONSERVATIVE judges McCain. They may LIKE him, but when it comes down to it, they are going Democratic.

    There's as much chance of Mass going Republican this fall as NEW YORK and CALIFORNIA. No bloody way as the war here is HUGELY unpopular.

    by scamperdo on Thu May 08, 2008 at 08:17:06 AM PDT

    •  Racism isn't the whole reason

      Patrick won by more than 20% in 2006.  His popularity is about where W is right now.  He will hurt Obama in Massachusetts.

      by IhateBush on Thu May 08, 2008 at 08:20:24 AM PDT

      •  If he won by 20% in 2006...

        ...then what's changed since then?  It's not as though Massachusetts hates liberals.

        by AdmiralNaismith on Thu May 08, 2008 at 08:45:29 AM PDT

        •  What changed was that ...

          he not only didn't live up to the hype but took actions that were a complete surprise to those who voted for him. If he had said during the primary campaign that he was going to solve the state's financial problems through casino gambling, he wouldn't have been nominated.

          One can't blame Patrick's problems on racism. Sure, there are racists here, but when Kerry Healey tried to run an old-style Southern race baiting campaign against Patrick, she got clobbered. Saying that people are upset with Patrick only because he's black is just going to cause further anger.

          by raboof on Thu May 08, 2008 at 08:51:44 AM PDT

  •  Massachusetts is not "safe".

    Patrick is unpopular here, and in particular with the activists that used to be his base. He is perceived as ineffective, arrogant, and unresponsive. His casino gambling initiative surprised those who voted for him, who didn't even imagine that he would use that of all things to solve Massachusetts' problems. He was unable to fight the entrenched machine of the state's political boss, Speaker DiMasi, and instead of supporting his troops in the doomed casino vote went off to New York City to arrange a book deal.

    If Obama uses a "yes we can" campaign in this state, people already annoyed with Patrick are going to remember his "together we can" campaign - which turned out to be, for Patrick, "this 'together' talk doesn't include me". That's going to hurt Obama badly.

    by raboof on Thu May 08, 2008 at 08:35:00 AM PDT

    •  "Hurt Obama Badly"

      ...means he gets 62% of the vote instead of 70%.

      by joe from Lowell on Thu May 08, 2008 at 09:34:21 AM PDT

  •  Oh, far out.

    I guess you're worried about New York and California going red, too.  OMG, WHAT IF MCCAIN CARRIES ALL 50 STATES!!?!!

    If you think Patrick is unpopular, look at Blagovich in Illinois. He'll never win a second term, and will probably cause Oberweis to win the special election in Hastur's district, by a landslide. Oh, right.

    by AdmiralNaismith on Thu May 08, 2008 at 08:44:33 AM PDT

  •  Not so fast

    McCain has a chance here in Massachusetts, if we take it for granted.

    I hate to generalize, but Deval Patrick won the race for governor as a youthful black man with an inspiring message of hope and change.

    Deval Patrick's administration has accomplished next to nothing, and his approval ratings are in the toilet.Much of the lack of progress is due to a powerful and inflexible leadership in the state Congress, most notably Sal DiMasi, but that's another story for another day.

    So here comes Obama, another youthful black man with an inspiring message of hope and change.

    Some here in the Bay State are more than a little concerned.  Are we going to make the same mistake again?  

    As W once said, "Fool me once..shame on, shame on you -- fool me --- you can't get fooled again."

    I think Mass will stay blue of course, but it's not the slam dunk that it has been historically.

    by bigmikek7 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 08:50:11 AM PDT

•  Massachusetts is a warning about one-party govt.

  Massachusetts is suffering from a two-fold problem. First, more and more people are moving out of the state. Second, more and more businesses are moving out of state. This is resulting in a decline in tax revenues (as MA has a 5% Sales tax and a 5% (and change) income tax), and diminished power on the national level.

  It is also a warning on the blindness of the Republican party. For a couple decades the state legislature was balanced by Republican (and I use that term loosely as in most other states those faux Repubs would be moderate Democrats, if not liberal) Governors. They consistently lost more and more House and Senate seats until finally there was no longer a base to build on.

  The Republicans relied on a Top-Down system of power. It failed. Obama has shown the power of the grassroots, and if the Republicans had any brains they'd start on a grassroots level, working to increase the number of Republicans on the town government level... and then start increasing the number of Representatives and Senators, bit by bit. Once a firm foundation is built, then they would be able to reclaim the Governorship.

  Instead, those Republicans who could and who didn't feel tied down to their homes sold them and moved out of state. They moved to New Hampshire and Florida. And they took businesses with them, which has depressed the potential revenue of the state.

  The Democratic party of MA are in a position to ensure the Republicans never return, but they have to maintain fiscal responsibility and shift to a more conservative system of taxation and government spending. Whether they can manage this or succumb to the temptation of running rampant with their power remains to be seen.

  by Tangent101 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 07:59:05 AM PDT

  •  More transparency needed

    The power of the leaders in the House and Senate is too much.  There are too many backroom deals controlled by DiMasi, especially.  There is little accountability now.

    by bigforkgirl on Thu May 08, 2008 at 08:04:57 AM PDT

  •  This is covered in the book

    "The Bluest State" by Jon Keller - as in the post-Reconstruction South, one dominant party means in reality a duopoly of factions. MA has such a high post-high school education level that the demographic fault line is glaring.
    Both Romney and Patrick more-or-less "lucked into" into the governorship, being in the right place at the right time, than for having pro-candidate momentum as a significant factor.

    by newdem1960 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 08:39:26 AM PDT

    •  Patrick Made His Own Luck

      Patrick ran a great campaign.  He got down in the weeds and went door to door for years and also cultivated the netroots like nobody's business.  He didn't luck into his election.  He worked hard and smart for it.

      Unfortunately, he hasn't been able to govern with that same industry and ability.  Unless he does something to turn around the trend of his administration, he will be a failed governor, even if he can win a second term.

      This is common knowledge in the Commonwealth (God preserve her) and a worry that extends to Obama too as he seems to be a politician in the same mold as Patrick.

      by gmoke on Thu May 08, 2008 at 08:58:28 AM PDT

  •  Could be time for an alternative left party in MA

    Given that the Dems have successfully arrived at the point in this state where Republicans are just not an option (I mean, 19 house seats out of 160?), it may be that a Green or Progressive presence could be appropriate to establish as the second political party in MA, and keep the worst of the Democrats from being complacent.

    by AdmiralNaismith on Thu May 08, 2008 at 08:48:00 AM PDT

•  ... nine(9) .... is my vote ... n/t

  by ArthurPoet on Thu May 08, 2008 at 08:02:51 AM PDT

•  I'm a staunch Democrat

  but I'm a progressive first, and frankly, the situation in Massachusetts would be helped, not hurt, if the Democratic Party would split in half and half became the Progressive Party, like they have up in Vermont.

  I know people in other states with strong Republican parties often fantasize about having a supermajority, but ours is ineffectual and runs Beacon Hill more like a boys club or a patronage machine than a responsible government.  Exhibit A is this sham "universal" health care they pushed through without debate - it's really just a massive giveaway to the insurance companies.

  Massachusetts Democrats are in what would seem to be the enviable position of having absolute power and never, ever seeing a resurgence of the Republicans, because the Republicans are dead as a doornail here.  But there effectively already are two parties, with the goal-oriented progressive Democrats on one side vs. the clubbish conservative Democrats who, from what I can see, seek only to hold onto their power (I bet you can guess which side I favor).

  The split's already there, so I say make it formal.  If nothing else that would reenergize things and strike a blow for cleaner government.

  by movie buff on Thu May 08, 2008 at 08:11:10 AM PDT

  •  Progressive Democrats work harder

    We've actually made serious progress since giving Finneran the boot but there's plenty of work to do, especially outside Cambridge, Brookline, JP, the Valley and the Islands. We also have to watch that today's progressives don't become tomorrows machine politicians.

    by wmdrpa on Thu May 08, 2008 at 08:49:04 AM PDT

  •  Cape Wind, Anyone?

    We could have a Progressive Democratic Party, and instead of a donkey, our symbol could be a wind turbine.

    by joe from Lowell on Thu May 08, 2008 at 09:35:50 AM PDT

    •  Heh

      I'm not sure if a windmill is the best symbol for a political party, but I like where you're going with this...

      by movie buff on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:11:55 AM PDT

      •  The answer, my friend...

        Oh, come on, you didn't actually click down here did you?

        ;-)

        by joe from Lowell on Thu May 08, 2008 at 03:58:17 PM PDT

•  I agree

  Massachusetts is so blue!! Interesting fact: the Vineyard went heavily for Obama, though the rest of the state voted Hillary.  Interesting, as we islanders got a close up look at the Clintons all those summers...
   You're doing great work!  We all are benefiting from the detailed information.  Thank you.
     

  by MVgirl on Thu May 08, 2008 at 08:30:16 AM PDT

  •  So did Nantucket and much of Cape Cod!

    Has to do with the fact that voters in that part of the state are majority Obama-demographics.

    by newdem1960 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 08:33:42 AM PDT

•  I know you're right

  but, we did dread their visits.

  by MVgirl on Thu May 08, 2008 at 08:47:24 AM PDT

•  On Redistricting

  First and foremost, Massachusetts congressional redistricting is about protecting incumbents. So Niki Tsongas will be safe.

  The redistricting election in 2012 will be when Ted Kennedy's Senate seat is up. It's hard to imagine Ted not retiring at that point, with one or more of the current Congressmen running to replace him.

  Whatever seat is vacated will be eliminated and the others will be adjusted accordingly.

  by aard on Thu May 08, 2008 at 06:49:03 PM PDT