Campaign roundup: Baker supporter explains why Baker is doomed

By adamg on Fri, 10/15/2010 - 6:29am

Sam Obar is not happy with his man's camapaign:

We are now less than three weeks away, and I know for a fact many people, including many I have spoken to, still have no idea who Baker is. He has not gotten his message out to voters, he has not highlighted his record at Harvard Pilgrim, and he has not promptly and properly responded to accusations against him about his work on the Big Dig. He has also done a shoddy job indeed of utilizing the media to reach out to voters.

Tom Reilly knows how to hold a grudge.

Oh, noes, how will Massachusetts residents learn we have the best lottery in the country?

I'm a liar? You're a liar! Brad Marston wonders how the head of the Back Bay Association can call him a liar when she gave as much as she could to incumbent Marty Walz two years ago.

Bielat wants Frank to release an ethics report on his trip to the Virgin Islands.

Scott Brown likes all the Republicans running for Congress, even un-birther Hudak.

Topics:

Free tagging:

Ad:

Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

Umm.. you're really reaching

By Anon MyGoodman on Fri, 10/15/2010 - 8:55am.

Obar looks to be 12. Why are you focusing on him?

He wrote something that seemed interesting so I linked to it. I put it at the top of the post because it was the one thing that was "new" (I'm guessing that most of the people who frequent UHub already knew about Tom Reilly).

Obar-arama

By John-W on Fri, 10/15/2010 - 10:25am.

Hey, he's not 12...he's 16. Hadn't heard of him until now, but it looks like the kid is doing a pretty good job. Reading his article about Baker I thought it was as well written as (actually better than) most of the junior high note passing crap the Globe puts out there as "keen political insight."

And I have to agree with him, that Charlie Baker tv ad blows monkeys. I had sort of assumed that Baker had a better chance of winning than Patrick, especially after the Brown-Coakley mess. I am now dumb-founded that he seems to be blowing this (God knows it's not Patrick's strong showing that's winning over the masses). There's still three weeks to go, but right now it looks like the attitude is go with the Deval that you know than the Devil that you don't.

One more time

By Stevil on Fri, 10/15/2010 - 1:58pm.

Two party government - still far from perfect - but if the last ten years taught us nothing it's the disaster that is one party government.

Gotta love Reilly's timing -

By Cynic on Fri, 10/15/2010 - 9:19am.

Gotta love Reilly's timing - endorsing Baker just as it's becoming clear that he hasn't done quite enough to overcome Patrick, and as L'Affaire Cahill sucks up the media coverage that he would need to close the gap.

Of course, that's probably not Reilly's fault. Endorsements like these are often extended in private earlier in the campaign, and held in the wings for a propitious moment. That the Baker campaign chose yesterday to release it is a sign of just how frustrated they have become over the past week with their inability to advance their preferred narrative in the media. They may have destroyed Cahill (or, more accurately, revealed that he had destroyed his own campaign) but that's not the same as raising their own profile or positives. And after Loscocco, even Reilly's endorsement looks kinda creepy - as if Baker is in the habit of suborning betrayal and backstabbing.

It's hackery like this that kept Reilly from winning four years ago. And by publicly welcoming the support of Loscocco and Reilly, Baker has undermined his own message of change. He looks every bit as much the cynical insider, jockeying for advantage, as Patrick now.