Mass. Senate Debate – John Kerry Plugs his Challenger Jeff Beatty – "We Need Change in Washington!"

NECN hosted the only televised debate between John Kerry (D-MA) and challenger Jeff Beatty (R), last night. During the hour-long debate, Kerry continued to campaign for Barak Obama rather than debate the issues with his opponent. Beatty reminded Kerry several times that the focus of the debate was the Massachusetts Senate, while Kerry continued to bring each and every point back to the Obama campaign. Kerry, who won all three of the presidential debates in 2004, (according to major U.S. media outlets), went on to lose the presidential bid to incumbent George W. Bush. Once again, the Boston Globe, who endorsed Kerry, gave Beatty a shalaqueing in their subsequent article, pointing to Kerry’s poll numbers in the state, as the incumbants only asset.

What the article failed to mention was that Kerry made several misstatements during the debate. From Fannie Mae and the Bail-out to his closing statements, watching Kerry was a real treat. Kerry, using tired party rhetoric continued to draw a comparison between McCain and Bush and then called Beatty’s campaing tactics “Rovian”. Beatty is a moderate conservative, which was glaringly apparent in last nights debate, far from partisan, he praised Ted Kennedy, while pointing out Kerry’s generally lack of connect to the State he alledgely represents. Kerry then went on the stump for Barack Obama.

There were several highlights during the debate, and one in particular regarded the loss of population in the state. The debate moderator pointed out that Massachusetts was the only state in the Union to have lost population and Kerry wondered if there were several more. The fact of the matter is that Massachusetts has lost population to the extent that Congressional states will be lost. Massachusetts has been consistentaly losing population over the decades due to high taxes and loss of manufacturing jobs and immigration to other states .(Incidentially, since Kerry's been in the Senate.) This segment of the debate was focused on Question 1 on the Massachusetts ballot that would repeal the state income tax. Beatty supports repeal of the state income tax, while Kerry does not. In his argument for repeal, Beatty underscored the need to bring more businesses and population to the state by eliminating the state tax. Due to high taxes and fees, businesses are heading over the border to Rhode Island and other more states whose environment is less taxing. Kerry also used the scare tactic of “higher real estate taxes” should the income tax be repealed. Apparently, Kerry is not aware that Massachusetts has a cap on real estate taxes through a provision passed in 1980 - Proposition 2-1/2. Although there are override provisiions in that bill; for example when housing prices rose, some municipalities were allowed to re-asses home values, thereby increasing the tax. When Proposition 2-1/2 was on the ballot, dire predictions of job losses and school closings were bandied about, yet none of this happened, the state lived within its means, at times, under the tenure of fiscally conservative Governors. Now that Massachusetts, with all taxes in place, is looking at 12.6 billion dollars in budget cuts due to a runway Democrat controlled State Government - Kerry argues that the repeal of the income tax would be devastating. He has got to be kidding.

When asked about the states high tax rate, Kerry opined that Massachusetts was no longer Taxachusetts, but that the state was “somewhere in the middle”. Massachuetts is not the higest, true, but the 6th highest in the nation; while neighboring Rhode Island ranks 13th and New Hampshire ranks 35th. New Hampshire is in the Middle.

Kerry continued to questions Beatty’s ability to “get the facts” straight; however, in light of the Junior Senators lack of knowledge regarding his home state, that plea appears a bit ironic.

The Debate, available in video segment below or at New England Cable News Website is entertaining to say the least.

The closing statements were telling, Beatty thanked everyone for attending, and asked Bay Staters watching to visit his website and vote for him on November 4th – adding, God Bless the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and God Bless the United States of America. Kerry’s closing included an unusual plug for his opposition: “We need change in Washington” and ended with “God Bless us all”. Perhaps Kerry might have stopped stumping for Obama long enough to give a closing statement that reflected a Senatorial Debate.

Jeff Beatty.com
Kerry Vision . net










Closing statements

Predicting the Election Outcome - Consider Massachusetts, Methods of Polling and Other Factors

Massachusetts, long touted as the “Bluest State”, should accurately be described as the “Independent State”. The fact that there is a Democrat governor and legislature is misleading – for the most part, Massachusetts elects Republican candidates when they either appeal to the “middle ground” or if the incumbent Democrat has done such a poor job that it is inconceivable that they be re-elected. Consider this interview with Dukakis, former Governor of Massachusetts and presidential candidate done in 2006. In the interview Dukakis explains that the Bay state had Republican governors for 16 years, and notes: “So, don’t make the mistake of assuming that Massachusetts is totally in the Democratic column. Massachusets is a very independent state. The Bay State voted for Ronald Reagan not once, but twice, in the 80s. On the other hand, I wouldn’t spend two seconds looking at these polls and these poll numbers. I mean, at this stage of the game, this is nothing but recognition — these are nothing but recognition numbers “

I’m not certain what Dukakis means by recognition numbers, as I am no mathematician, however, that said, anyone with an ounce of sense understands that if one samples one thousand individuals, 60% democrats, 20% republicans and 20% independents, they cannot accurately reflect the entire electorate – in other words, it is pretty much misleading – why – Dukakis understands from a personal perspective as he led George H. Bush in the polls weeks before the election. (The NY Times even noted that many “Regan Backers Shift Sides” – Sound familiar?)
Let’s talk about “the October Surprise” and “Swift boating”. How much does a negative change anyone’s minds? John Kerry famously blames, of all people, Osama Bin Laden, for his loss in 2004. What was in that tape that pushed American’s to vote for Bush and not Kerry? Nothing: the tape from Bin Laden, and all the political commercials in the world, including Swift Boat ads and the infamous “Willie Horton ads against Dukakis are nothing more than political name calling – and I would hazard to bet that most individuals watch these commercials with a pre-conceived partisanship, which can be applied to the Independent voter. Independent voters lean either Republican or Democrat, occasionally changing positions, but for the most part, staying with one particular party - sometimes exclusively.
Election losses have been credited to the weather and the turn-out – what one does not consider is that the basic conservative v s. liberal mindset has not changed in this nation in the past 12 plus years. More about polling: Terrance Battleground Research this year: 62% of those surveyed consider themselves conservative or leaning conservative - this particular article describes how there are conflicts within the polls itself, as it predicts either a Democrat or Republican win. Go figure. The fact of the matter is there has not been a landslide since Ronald Regan hit the political scene. He followed a dismal Jimmy Carter, and George Bush, although “approval ratings” are low, could not possibly be compared to Jimmy Carter under any circumstance – Carter is extreme left, and, as any conservative knows, Bush will certainly side with the Democrats on a variety of issues, ranging from the Border to the Bailout.

Other factors to consider: What about baggage? That’s the key, the amount of baggage that a candidate drags with them into an election will tell the tale, regardless of the amount of cash on hand. How well is the candidate “known”, regardless of personality? The middle ground: is that candidate a moderate? Bill Clinton was a moderate, who appealed to the essential middle, to the common ground, yet both races were close, not landslides. Additionally, there are those who are still looking for someone with the ability to lead the nation in a time of terror/war. When one looks at all the variables, unless a poll accurately reflects the electorate (without leading questions), they are pointedly useless.
Recall the 2004 exit polls that had the nation convinced John Kerry would be the next president? Therefore, anyone who wants to know who the next president will be has to wait until November 5th, (or perhaps a month or two hence) – there is simply no way to predict - should one be inclined; there is a 50/50 chance they will be correct. However, if one uses the Battlegrounds conservative vs. liberal statistics, considers the historical inaccuracy of the polls, debate winners and newspaper endorsements, adds baggage, and includes those who are looking for a commander in chief that has some military background, then one can confidently choose the McCain/Palin ticket.

Sarah Palin Rocks SNL – The Irony - Palin pushes rankings highest since 2002

Sarah Palin has given a big boost to NBC’s Saturday Night Live, which has enjoyed consistently high rankings since Tina Fey found she resembled her enough to parody the Governor in a series of skits beginning with the season opener. The episode last night, where Palin appeared on SNL (videos below), was billed as a must watch, and the Neilson rankings are sure to come up with some startling numbers. Watching NBC local news prior to the 11:30 PM start, three male reporters (news, weather, sports), were plugging the Governor’s appearance urging their viewers to be sure to watch. It was, in a word, hysterical – both the pre-show plugs and the performance by Palin. NBC must now consider the consequences of enjoying an audience that makes up the entire country, rather than continuing to pursue a bias that insures they will garner at least a part of the 30% of the country which considers itself liberal. As an independent leaning conservative watching the program last evening, the majority of the skits were boring, and boorish – from the MacGruber stunts to the ridiculously dull “Engagement Surprise” skit, the only highlights were the Palin stunts, as well as a the appearance of Walhberg, although a bit slow - definitely not up to the heyday SNL performances of the the 1970’s or the 1980’s. It is not that the humor hinges on stupid, or slapstick or schlock, as that type of humor finds appeal across a broad range of demographics – it is that most of the skits are humorless and painful to watch. Perhaps one has to be a bit less critical, however, put the political humor aside, and the balance of the skits are lacking. It is more entertaining to watch MSNBC, and that is telling. Surely, as GM stocks tank, perhaps the board should consider a new direction for their news and information outlets – taking a clue from SNL – it’s good to have an audience, a big audience.