Purple Massachusetts? Not so Fast
Albert Lew, CC BY 3.0
Massachusetts is an odd state.
It is a state, or commonwealth I should say, that prioritizes the divide between insiders vs outsiders rather than partisanship.
It is a place where Democrats have had long control over the legislative branch but has had a consistent history of electing moderate Republican governors.
It is where politicians say is the home of progressive ideas and policy accepted by all when it is really a hub for liberal ideas that tend to clash with local municipalities.
Massachusetts is a lot of things — — but a purple state is not one of them. The term “purple state” is used as a moniker for a state that is likely to flip from Democrat to Republican control during elections. Most political analysts tend to use the term: battleground state when referring to such places.
In his article for Boston Magazine titled, The Purpling of Massachusetts, political analyst Jon Keller argues there is a “flashing neon warning sign” for Massachusetts Democrats that the state could fall into Republican control.
Keller cites anecdotal stories from residents of Somerville, a city in Massachusetts, who expressed their anger and displeasure at Mayor Joe Curatone for keeping schools closed in 2020 and 2021 as a measure to stop the spread of COVID-19.
He also puts a spotlight on how schools are handling different topics of education, namely sexual education, and how some parents are dissatisfied with the subject being introduced into public schools.
While I respect Mr. Keller and have been inspired by him and his work on Television to become a reporter, I am dismayed by the rather unfinished analysis his article presents.
The article takes a very black-and-white approach to how Democrats are viewed in Massachusetts. While Keller argues that some voters might not like how Democrat leaders are conducting policy, it does not appear to be the biggest factor for why they vote Democrat.
The main base of Democrat support in Massachusetts is white voters with a college degree. These are voters found in areas such as Needham, Wellesley, Jamacia Plain, Lexington, and Dover — the latter being a long-time bastion for Republicans.
These are the voters that Democrats nationwide are doing well with.
In fact, according to Lakshya Jain, an elections analyst of the website Split Ticket, Massachusetts’s Democratic lean to the rest of the nation began to skyrocket in the mid-2010s.
Really? https://t.co/T49zbjOnT8 pic.twitter.com/OVQSAQW5kP
— Lakshya Jain (@lxeagle17) July 27, 2022
In 2016, many towns that voted Republican in the past began to vote Democrat. This was the year Dover flipped.
The Massachusetts Democratic Party’s tent of voters is continuing to grow, as what used to be a reliable voting coalition for Republicans has moved towards Democrats.
What about the old base? The one comprised of working-class immigrants from Ireland and Italy that helped pave the way for leaders such as John McCormack or John F Kennedy?
Who says they left?
Yes, the main type of voters that would be the shining example of what makes a Massachusetts Democrat of the early 20th century are not the dominant force of the party when it comes to reporting — but they still make a decent part of the coalition.
Many Massachusetts Democrat voters are not the ultra-left anecdotal examples that Keller describes in his article. Many of them are just average people who identify with many basic principles of the Democratic Party.
Unions, the need for a good education at an affordable price, and supporting the immigrant, all of these ties the voters together.
While they may not agree on everything, the majority of Massachusetts voters — Democrat, Independent, and sometimes Republican — are quite liberal compared to the rest of the nation.
Speaking of the Republican Party, its not in a good place right now.
The party has discarded the formula for electing candidates such as Charlie Baker, who ran as the “independent manager who can fix the issues we have been having” template and instead have opted for a more nationalized approach to appeal to hyper conservative voters — -something Massachusetts does not have in abundance.
In fact, Jim Lyons, the MassGOP chair has declared war on Governor Baker and Lt. Governor Polito, saying they do not represent the party. Steve Koczela of the polling group MassINC. calls this a “lifeboat shoot out.”
It should be noted that Keller does make these points in his article, but the argument presented is not “Massachusetts Democrats are not ultra-left as you may think,” it’s “The Purpling of Massachusetts.”
Due to high educational polarization, a lackluster Republican party, and a coalition of voters that will still vote Democrat despite ideological differences amongst each other, it is unlikely that Massachusetts will turn into a battleground state — even if voters may have individual concerns with party leaders.
Do not fret however, for you can still see purpling in this commonwealth. Just ask a Red Sox fan about the latest game and they will scream and shout with rage until their face goes purple.
This piece originally appeared on the author’s medium page which you can find here
MA has always had a weird political tinge. It’s the home of Kennedy, the birthplace of the Revolution, and as such the residents often really proudly identify with a liberal, Democratic lineage.
And yet… there is some pretty strong social conservatism, or at least was. You had Irish and Italian immigrants and their offspring, bringing pretty conservative Catholic ideas, a somewhat insular immigrant experience, and some strong blue collar values. There are the (literal) Puritanical roots of the area, that you saw vestiges of in things like the outlawing of tattoo parlors until 2001 and the prohibition on Sunday alcohol sales until (I think?) 2003 or so.
I think this is changing as we hit the 3rd or 4th or 5th generation of those original immigrant families and as Boston and some of its suburbs have gentrified.
And then, of course, there is Western MA which is just WTF.Report
There are certain evergreen political stories that seem to crop up every two to four years and political reporters can never seem to resist them despite always being untrue and always assuming a lot of facts not in evidence:
1. “Will be this the year Jews break for Republicans?” has occurred in speculation in nearly every single Presidential election of my life. 2020 might be the only exception. It never happens. With the exception of 1920 and 1980 (when Debs received 38 percent of the Jewish vote), the Democratic candidate has always received over 50 percent of the Jewish vote.
For the most part, the Jewish vote has gone Democratic by over 70 percent since 1928. The three exceptions being Carter in 1980 (45 percent to Reagans 39 percent with Anderson receiving 15 percent), 1988 (64 percent for Dukakis), and 2012 (69 percent for Obama). Yet the media always wonders if this will be the year Jews break for the GOP and it never happens.
This happened the most in the Bush II years when Gore received 79 percent of the Jewish vote and Kerry received 76 percent of the Jewish vote.
2. Will this solidly blue state turn purple/red? It is never the other way around. You never see the media warning Georgia Republicans about needing to moderate despite the clear victories of Warnock and Ossoff and the fact that Warnock is proving to be formidable on the campaign trail in 2024. The same with Texas where Abbot is still likely to win reelection but Beto is performing well above average for a Democrat in a state-wide election in Texas. The media was all a flutter that Gavin Newsom might get recalled and he crushed his opposition. The School Board and DA recalls are supposed to be warning signs for the left in San Francisco. The mayoral race in LA the same even though Karen Bass was the top vote receiver after the mail in ballots were fully counted.
Massachusetts has a small history of electing Republican governors but the current Republican governor is more popular with Democrats than his fellow party members and the MA Republicans decided to nominate a candidate who is full MAGAtReport
The thing that I see as the early indicator is not the whole red/blue thing but the thing where the guy who has been County Dogcatcher for 18 years suddenly finds himself with a challenger at the primary who starts asking questions about whether our Dogcatchers should better reflect the county’s values.
And, like, get a good solid Democrat in there who is more to the left of the old (probably racist) Dogcatcher or a good solid Democrat in there who knows better than to tweet about the importance of defunding the police when we’re in a place where we need to *FUND* the police.
And we’ll get a new, solidly blue, Dogcatcher to replace the old one.
No purple needed.Report