Just when a person thought things could not improve for the Republican Party – reeling as it was from the philandering of Senator Ensign and Governor Sanford, as well as the bizarre behavior of Governor Palin (if you want to read a semi-illiterate missive from the Alaskan governor, click here ) – two old-fashioned Yankee Republicans in New England stepped forward to begin reclaiming their party.
Yesterday, it was New Hampshire Attorney General Kelly Ayotte, who announced her resignation later this month to explore a run for the New Hampshire Senate seat in 2010 (Republican Judd Gregg currently holds the seat and has announced he won’t run again).
Today it was Charlie Baker, the Massachusetts wunderkid who served in two of the biggest jobs in the Bay State -- Secretary of Health and Human Services and later as Secretary of Finance and Administration – and who announced he was going to run for Governor of the Commonwealth in 2010.
Just like that, the species of Yankee Republican – thought to be dead, done, and gone – has returned like a phoenix.
Here’s what we know both of them share.
- Managerial competence
Baker has far more stripes on his uniform, both in government and in business (where he served as CEO for two large, very complex organizations, Harvard Vanguard and Harvard Pilgrim), but both Ayotte and Baker have solid reputations as straight-shooters who consider facts first, and then think about ideology.
- Fiscal conservatism
We don’t know as much about Ayotte in this regard, but Baker’s record is clear on this issue and my suspicion is that Ayotte will be very similarly tight-fisted. Both candidates are banking on spending and stewardship of tax dollars to be the number one issue for voters in 2010. They will argue that Lynch, Patrick, and Obama have been spending tax dollars recklessly and inefficiently.
- Refusal to embrace conservative social issues
Other than endorsing a strong law-and-order perspective, I don’t expect either Ayotte or Baker to bear-hug conservative social issues significantly. While we will see what each candidate says and does on the campaign trail (see below), and while I expect each candidate will mouth support for conservative positions like so-called traditional marriage, immigration, and abortion, I also expect neither candidate will adopt a call to overturn existing laws or judicial rulings in their respective states. I think it’s reasonable to expect them to endorse charter schools, but look for a libertarian-to-moderate social conservatism from both candidates. And expect both to be pro-environment.
- Likeability
It’s hard to deny that both candidates offer a lot to like – they’re smart, earnest, hard-working, pleasant on the eyes, and not ideologically paralyzed. We will learn a lot more about them on the campaign trail, but on paper and in person (so far), both Baker and Ayotte have a lot going for them.
- Inexperience
Neither Baker nor Ayotte has run for statewide office before. We have no idea how well they will do, either in terms of connecting with a huge swath of voters or in terms of managing a campaign enterprise.
One of Obama’s secret assets during the 2008 campaign was how well he managed his own team – it showed he had the managerial chops to run the federal government. The nod here has to go to Baker in terms of delivering the goods, if only because he has far more work experience than Ayotte. On the other hand, running a statewide campaign in New Hampshire is far easier than in Massachusetts.
Aside from the managerial demands, I think the great unknown is how they each do in front of crowds, big and small. In this YouTube age, when every comment can and will be recorded, it’s not at all clear that they will be as good in the public square as they are in the governmental office. It’s true that Deval Patrick had none of this experience when he ran, and it’s probably true, too, that John Lynch won three gubernatorial elections without mastering the art of a public presentation, but Ayotte and Baker must still present (day after day) in forums other than their own choosing for months and months if they are to be successful in November 2010.
So, who will fare best some 15 months from now, Ayotte or Baker? I’d have to give the nod to Baker. He’s got more government experience, a deeper rolodex for fundraising, proven managerial skills, and an electorate happy to elect Republican Governors to counter the strangle-hold that the corrupt Massachusetts Democratic Party has over statehouse politics. Ayotte faces a real uphill battle, despite polling numbers that whisper otherwise like a siren. Though a solid public servant, she will struggle from a variety of issues (no support from John Lynch, a modest rolodex, and no experience in retail politics), but none will be so damning as her swim against the demographic stream in the Granite State. As Andy Smith of UNH and others have demonstrated, the New Hampshire electorate has swung Democratic. They outnumber Republicans in terms of voter registration, and if you add independent voters to the mix, the advantage clearly belongs to the Dems. I predict that Hodes will beat Ayotte so long as Obama’s popularity remains above 55% in New Hampshire in November 2010 (which would be about ten points below where the President polls today), and he makes no major mistakes on the campaign trail.
Regardless of who wins in November 2010, the events of the past two days signal an important moment for the Republican Party nationally, one which Democrats ought to notice. First, the Obama cool – in managing, consideration of world events, and style – can be co-opted by the other party. Democrats also ought to notice that spending (and its twin, the deficit) will be the policy issues upon which Republicans run in 2010. Democrats will not only have to defend their choices, but hope that the economy shows sustainable signs of recovery by the next mid-term election if they are to retain their advantage in Congress and among governorships.
Comments