If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
But voting for anyone other than Baker, or not voting, REWARDS Gonzales.Charlie is a D, give him another 4 years and it will be an F.
DO NOT REWARD BAD ACTORS -
It's such a complicated issue. Do you believe in the lesser of two evils? I do, so I will go ahead and play the stupid game of politics because I value many different issues. I do my best to avoid weighing one too heavily over another. I totally understand why people don't want to vote for Baker when in this sort of situation. He's clearly liberal, but he is also clearly a liberal republican. He's not a moonbat that will side with BLM and their identity politics like a democrat would. He's not trying to raise our taxes despite governing a state full of people who always seem eager to vote away other people's money (whether they know it or not). Look at the MBTA issues. Loony democrats like Mahty Walsh and the Boston city councillors are demanding we pour more cash into a broken organization. Baker opposed that and instead opted to put focus on repairing the organization with a people and process first approach. He fought to keep leverage against the unions in the MBTA revamp. That's how you fix a broken organization and it's certainly not what any actual democrat would ever do. There are some positive things about Baker as a republican, but none of them are attractive and they don't draw the same attention as other decisions.
It sucks that we are forced to make those decisions in this state. It's a fact though, that actual democrats are more of a risk to your values overall than a liberal democrat. As a conservative, or even a libertarian, actual democrats these days line up way too often on the wrong side of too many important issues. I know he's bad on many things and those are things I will never let him off the hook for. I firmly believe that this Massachusetts has potential to field even better Republican (libertarian/conservative/right) governors in the future. I don't even think it would be limited to governors. The way to win this game is to build on the successes of these candidates and slowly build more conservative ideas and policies on platforms that have been proven to work.
Mass will never have a Greg Anbott for governor. If all we do is tear away at the wins we do get, we will never change anything.
If you write in Scott Lively, Springfield, MA, how would that affect FUTURE potential republican runners?
I'm voting Scott lively, dont trust the liberal Baker anymore, and really dont care to support rinos.No, he isn’t a liberal. Conservatives need to recognize that there are people in the middle and Baker is one of them (as am I).
MA voters won’t “learn” to be conservative from after a liberal governor. Did MA turn conservative after Dukakis or Patrick? No.
MA is a liberal state and will remain so. Any idea that it turn conservative is simply fantasy.
The best we can hope for out of a governor is a moderate. Our only alternative will be a liberal.
I'm voting Scott lively, dont trust the liberal Baker anymore, and really dont care to support rinos.
I'm planning on a write-in for Tom Bevacqua, Central/Western Masschusetts meteorologist.
I already have his campaign slogan:
"Tommy B, because he knows which way the winds are blowing."
Baker not sure he will vote for Geoff Diehl
Gov. Baker not sure he’ll vote for GOP candidate he endorsed
I just saw a campaign ad for Baker on TV, they show a few nitwits saying stuff like:
"I'm a democrat, but I'm voting for Baker".
His slogan should be: "Democrats For Baker, He's One Of Us"
Vote for whoever you want. But don’t kid yourself that you would be achieving something to bring about a conservative revolution in MA.
The best possible outcome is that Baker wins by the narrowest of margins and this shocks him (and the MA Republican party) into realizing that a lt of us really want a REPUBLICAN in office.
The thing is, most people in MA are liberal. There are more registered Democrats in MA than Republicans. And most of the unenrolled lean Democrat. Most people in MA don’t want what people on NES would call “a real Republican”.
So our choice for governor will range from a moderate to a liberal — a conservative has no chance in MA.
I had no intention of voting for Baker but this would certainly seal the deal for anyone on the fence:
Gun safety group endorses Charlie Baker - The Boston Globe
Our "Republican" governor received an endorsement from Everytown, even over his Democrat rival
He didn't get the EveryClown endorsement. Faker DID!Baker is a faker for sure. But Gonazalez is FAR LEFT LOONY LIBERAL. He talks about more gun control in his commercials. You guys want to hand the election to him?
...and returning the favor.I can't hold my nose and vote for the Faker again. Count my blank as a protest.
Are there any libertarians or independents on the MA ballot for Governor? I REFUSE to support Faker Baker!
CharLIE has already signed a tax increase and it takes effect in 2019 IIRC. It's called the family leave act. Those of us who work need to pay some more for those that don't or want more time off for bullshit reasons.
CharLIE has done nothing for the children (I have none) under the states watch.
CharLIE has stood more times against us than with us on many issues.
CharLIE has swept how many items under the rug?
CharLIE doesn't even have the balls to support Geoff Diehl in the Senate race. He stuttered on the answer (showed his true colors) then after the debate he spit out a little vomit. How f***ing sad it that?
CharLIE does not deserve my vote. I did that the first time around. Screw me once. Shame on you. Screw me twice. Shame on me.
if you vote for faker you are voting dem.If you vote for a DEM it will be worse than BAKER. Don't fool yourself into thinking otherwise.
He may not be great. But there is NOT a better candidate that can win.
In almost every election the better thing to do is vote for the lesser of the two evils.
It's not often in Massachusetts that we have a great candidate, that actually has a shot of winning!
Remember it is "Massachusetts" The liberal cancer has spread through most of the state!
Overall you're not wrong. However I think you may be mistaken about FMLA (Family and Medical Leave Act). The costs associated with FMLA hits businesses. If you own a business it could be seen as a tax, but otherwise there should be no direct cost to taxpayers. We currently use the Federal FMLA rules at my place of employment, and it's a giant pain in the ass. It's relatively easy to abuse, but it doesn't offer paid time off. I believe MA FMLA is funded by a payroll tax. I wouldn't be surprised if the taxpayer would be left footing the bill if the payroll tax cannot cover the cost.