Conference turris::womannotes-v2

 Seriously? I doubt it.

 The Doctah

    Who is Ev Murphy, and in what state is she running for Governor?
    
    -- Mike

    Sorry, Mike....she's the only woman candidate for Governor of
    Massachusetts, where she is currently Lt. Governor.  She is opposed for
    the Democratic nomination by Francis X. Bellotti, ex-Atty. General, who
    is trying to escape a rather right-wing political history and claim
    conversion to a pro-choice and perhaps pro-other-lefty-causes stance.
    
    						=maggie

    Thanks, Herb and Maggie, for the explanation.
    
    -- Mike

    My impression of Bellotti is that he's been an "old-time-liberal"
    also.  Maggie, in what way is he "right-wing"?  (so I won't vote
    for him!)  It also seems to me that he's been running for governor
    of Mass. for at least half my life-time!
    
    I admit I've never paid much attention to Evelyn Murphy, other than
    to know she exists.  I don't know anything about her except she's
    a woman, and lt. gov.  
    
    I doubt a woman could get elected governor of Mass. at this point
    in time.
    
    Lorna
    

    
    
    I think that Evelyn has an excellent chance of winning.  I believe that
    most people consider this a 2-person race between Belotti and Murphy
    for the Democratic nomination.  Belotti was part of the Dem. machine for
    years, and in all the years that he was Atty. General, he wouldn't
    state his view on abortion.  Political analysts felt that that
    was because Mass. has generally been pro-choice, and he's not.  In
    the current race (as in most of the other governor's races) Abortion
    is one of the most important (if not _the_) issues.  And it is at
    this time that Belotti has come out as pro-choice, but I believe he
    was rather wishy-washy about it.  
    
    Evelyn  Murphy has a lot of support in this state, and not just from
    women.  Men and women, young and old, and a lot of the mainsteam party
    types support her candidacy.  She got more delegates than Belotti in
    the Caucuses, but there are still a lot of uncommitted delegates, so
    the convention is by no means "sewn up."  I think she's getting a lot
    of heat because of her association with Dukakis, and of course, there
    are those who would never vote for a woman.  I'm working for her
    campaign -- I signed up as a volunteer the day after the Webster
    Decision was announced.  The other morning when I heard that Ann
    Richards had won in the run off in Texas, one of my first thoughts was
    that this would help Ev.  I'm also a delegate to the convention in
    June, so I'll be happy to come back and give a full report.  
    
    Justine
    
    ps  if anyone is interested in getting involved with or hearing more
        about her campaign, please send me mail.

    I don't really know where I get the idea of Bellotti being a
    right-winger.  Maybe it's just by contrast, or maybe I've been looking
    at just a few issues.  Or maybe I'm confusing him with someone else. 
    In any event, if he actually has a liberal history then I cheerfully
    admit that I don't know what I'm talking about! :-)
    
    						=maggie

    Evelyn is going to be painted with the Dukakis-inability-to-
    manage-finances brush.  This could be her death-knell, given the
    current hysteria over problems with the state's finances.  She seems
    to be counting on the abortion issue to separate her from the other
    candidates, and give her a win.
    
    Belotti has perhaps the most tepid 'pro-choice' position I've ever
    heard.  My conclusion is that he'd really prefer to come down pro-life,
    but is convinced that the Republicans have that position 'sewn up'
    and a Democrat can't win that way.
    
    I have an uneasy, and unhappy, feeling that the entire campaign
    is going to be a vicious, negative affair, rather than a constructive
    attempt to thrash out solutions to the very real problems that we
    face.  As usual, I'm not thrilled with the prospects of what *any*
    of my choices are likely to be by November.
    
    Sigh.
    
    Alison

    I'm wondering if some of the people here supporting Evelyn are
    doing so only because she's a woman?
    
    I really don't think she has many redeeming qualities to many voters
    here in Mass, other than she's more Pro-choice than any other
    candidate.
    
    And female.
    
    I've often wondered (maybe this should be in its own basenote): Would
    women vote for *any* female candidate for, say, President - regardless
    of the candidate's views on anything - soley on the basis of gender?
    
      Alan

    I am so angry at the Beacon Hill (Executive AND Legislative branches)
    inability to cut spending *creativly* and increase revenues *creativly*
    that I can't see straight! The emphasis shound be on the former, too!
    
    Right now they are talking about bonds - - "Let's borrow the money!"
    
    Duke got us into this mess and both Evelyn and the Lagislature just
    watched it happen. 
    
    True, she wrote a memo. 
    
    That, along with $.50 will get you a cup of coffee!
    
    We need STRONG leadership in Boston now.
    
    She will, most likely, say it was not her fault. I don't believe
    she can convince the electorate that it wasn't 'On her watch'!
    
    Bottom line: We need someone stronger.
    
    					Charlie.
    
    P. S. I am at the point now where I am ready to volunteer to help in
          the campaign for *anyone* who has sound ideas on how to get our
          house back in order!
    
    Sorry, this subject just hit my hot buttons!

    I'm not at all in touch with the "general populace", but I don't think
    Murphy being a woman will make one iota of difference in the campaign.
    The fact that she is Lt.Gov. under Dukakis will be much, much more
    influential.
    
    My personal feelings towards Murphy are extremely ambivalent.  I'd love
    to get excited about her, but everything I've seen to date doesn't
    suggest a very good leader.  At the very least, Belotti is much more
    effective at campaigning and getting his name known.  You'd never even
    know she's a candidate -- in the debate last week sponsored by the
    Boston Herald she didn't participate.
    
    On the plus side, though, I have some fairly negative opinions of all
    the other major candidates, so ambivalent is a step up.

    Well, maggie, I think Belotti is real pleased to have some confusion,
    and is at least as cheerful about it as you.  Actually left/right is
    probably arguing the wrong dimension.  He is a looonnnggg time political
    insider (MORE than half, Lorna, you're not THAT ancient yet %->) trying
    to position himself as an outsider.
    
    And I wouldn't write off Ev.  Her standing is well down at this point,
    and her campaign lately has been fairly inept, but she has a hard core
    of strong supporters, and has been very effective at times in the past. 
    She is also having an understandably awkward time decoupling herself
    from Dukakis.  But the whole scene is so volitile that everything could
    easily be inverted by summer.  And I don't at all agree that her gender
    is a major barrier.  It might even turn into an asset if people stay
    fed up and angry at the status quo maintained by male political
    leaders.
    
    			- Bruce

RE .13
>>  Would
    women vote for *any* female candidate for, say, President - regardless
    of the candidate's views on anything - soley on the basis of gender? 


one woman's voice:
I would very much like to see a female governor, but female-ness is just one
issue and I have never been a one-issue voter.  




      >>    And I wouldn't write off Ev.

   OK.  So I wasn't paying strict attention, but this one sentence drove my 
blood pressure up at least 10 points -- good thing the next word was HER so I
could re-focus.

    If anyone else here is a survivor of the Ev Mecham reign in Arizona,
they will understand   :-)

    Evelyn is a much prettier name and certainly a more qualified candidate.

re: 1091.13

>    I'm wondering if some of the people here supporting Evelyn are
>   doing so only because she's a woman?
    
Ah yes. And I wonder how many people *won't* support her only because
she's a woman.

Kathy (who has yet to make up her mind what any of the candidates offer)

    
    
    I am certainly excited that a woman whose politics and ideas I support
    is running for governor.  Someone a few notes back mentioned that it
    seemed that the choice issue was the only thing that really
    differentiates Evelyn from the rest of the pack.  Well,  I don't
    think that's true.  I think her experience and record on the
    environment set her apart from the other candidates, and there are
    probably other areas, too.  But more importantly to me, I think the
    Webster decision means that abortion becomes _the_ issue.  Now that
    the states have become empowered to deal with the abortion issue
    at the state level, who the governor is really matters.  And to me,
    if women don't have the right to choose, everything else is at risk.
    So... for the first time in my political life, there is one issue that
    takes precedence over everything else.  That is to say that, when I
    consider a candidate, I first look at their stand on the choice issue.
    Then of those that are pro-choice, I look at other issues.
    
    Another thing that really captures me about Evelyn is her stated desire
    to be inclusive.  In speeches of hers that I've heard, she has made
    reference to people of color and people of different lifestyles.
    That makes me feel like my voice will be heard.  She has also spoken
    out on the issue of violence against women, with specific references to
    the Stuart case.  I haven't heard any other candidates talking about
    those issues.
    
    As for the financial state of the state, I think we're in trouble now
    because of Prop. 2 and 1/2 and because of Reagan-era cutbacks in state
    aid.  It was just a matter of time before the prosperity of this
    region would level off, and because Mass prosperity has been so closely
    tied to growth in the high-tech industry, the levelling off/losses
    there have taken their toll on this state.  It's fine to blame Dukakis,
    but I think we'd be in this situation no matter who the governor is.
    And no matter who the next governor is, we Mass residents and
    businesses are going to have to pay more taxes.  (IMO)
    
    About the any-woman will get a feminist's vote issue.. back when Barney
    Frank ran against Margaret Heckler (a conservative who later went on to
    become a Reagan appointee), I supported Frank (as did NOW), because
    his record on issues important to me was stronger, and if I lived in 
    England, I sure wouldn't support Maggie Thatcher...
    
    Justine

    RE: .13
    
    I wouldn't vote for Evelyn Murphy just because she's a woman anymore
    than I would have voted for Dan Quayle, "just because he's a pretty
    face" and we all know how women like Robert Redford-types. I personally
    prefer to at least get beyond the pretty cover and see if there
    is anything interesting inside the book before I cast my vote for
    anyone or anything.
    
    BUT, if there were two candidates that supported my issues equally
    and one was male and one was female, YES I WOULD VOTE FOR THE 
    WOMAN.  I feel strongly that until women are equally represented
    in the government, their issues will never be equally treated.
    
    Nancy

    Ev also has a strong environmental background and has been heavily
    supported by environmental groups throughout her career. 
    
    
      Nina

    Well, I wish Weld had a chance on the Republican side!  He's
    pro-choice, liberal in at least many issues, etc.  He'd be an
    attractive, interesting alternative.  
    
    I find Evelyn Murphy boring.  Guess I'll wait a bit longer to decide.
    
    Nancy

 I believe that Evelyn will have a tough time getting past Belotti. Of course,
if she were to do so, she probably would have cleared the highest hurdle.

 She is pro-choice, and that is a popular position, especially since a
significant percentage of voters will vote on a single issue of that importance.
She has a good record with the environment; that's good too.

 The crucial tests will be whether she will be able to deal with the legislature
from a position of power and whether she is able to run the executive branch
especially in dealing with the deficit. I am worried that the legislature will
view her as someone to control, rather than someone to be controlled by due to
the predominance of men therein. The majority of the people in power are old
time politicians; they are extremely powerful and can make things impossibly
difficult for the governor if they so choose. I am somewhat assured that
she understands the financial situation of the commonwealth, otherwise she
wouldn't have written the memos- a definite plus in my book.

 I have heard the criticism that the state ran into this financial problem
"during her watch" and I just don't buy it. She did what she could; she wrote
memos which were disregarded by a man who sold out his state while pursuing
his lifelong ambition. Had she called public attention to the problem as some
would suggest, it would have been political suicide. Undoubtedly she was told
in no uncertain terms that she would not be making those memos public during
such a crucial time for her party. I can't blame her one bit for what happened;
I believe I would have done the same thing. The pressure within both the
Massachusetts democratic party and the national democratic party to be true
to the party, especially in an election situation, is immense. Had she done
any more than she did, she would have never been backed by the democrats again.

 I think Justine has a good point about Evelyn being attuned to people with
differences. In order to best govern all of the people, you must listen to
all of the people. That Evelyn is willing to do this is a good quality.

 I disagree with Justine's view that the current fiscal situation was 
unavoidable and the fault of the Reagan administration. The current situation
occurred because spending was not matched to reasonable revenue expectations,
and because the legislature can find no fat to cut in a $12 billion dollar
budget. I chuckled when I saw the headline in the Globe today "Keverian says
a tax increase would pass if Dukakis resigned." I think politics ought to
be spelled with four letters sometimes.

 While my initial reaction to Evelyn running was "she'll get plenty of votes
from women just because she is a woman," further reflection reminded me that
she'll be denied plenty of votes for the very same reason. Both are equally
sad, and probably end up in a wash votewise.

 I find her to be more liberal than I like, so that would make me likely to
vote against her, but as far as liberals go, she looks like a decent enough
candidate. I really do think she has to go beyond the abortion issue, though.
Except for her pro-choice position, most voters have no idea of who she is
and what she stands for. If she expects to win, she'll have to change that.

 I think Justine is providing a shining example of working within the system
for change, and I think she deserves to be applauded for her efforts. To make
our system work, we must have people like Justine that are willing to expend
energy to work for a better government and a better life for all of us. I may
not agree with Justine's politics, but I believe that she is motivated 
honorable intentions. Surely something good will come of it.

 the Doctah

    What I find fascinating is that the Boston chapter of NOW hasn't
    "endorsed" Murphy yet (this might have changed, my information is a
    little bit dated).  The state chapter of NOW, on the other hand,
    "endorsed" her a long time ago.  NOW can't officially endorse political
    candidates because of their tax-exempt status but there's something
    they can do to make their sentiments known.
    
    Boston NOW doesn't like Murphy because she isn't pro-labor enough and
    is, in their opinion, too pro-management.

    Right, Mark, it's all the fault of Duke the evil national candidate.  He
    was *so* irresponsible that the problem is even contagious, and is
    happening in almost exactly the same way in Connecticut, New York,
    Vermont, New Hampshire --- New Hampshire??? Who was just Governer up
    there???
    
    The Reagan era was responsible in one quite indirect sense.  Revenue
    sharing and federal support for medicaid, housing, job training, and the
    like, were steadily cut back during the 1980s.  Thanks to the booming
    Mass. economy, the state was able to make up for these cuts AND
    drastically increase local aid, while also cutting the tax rate.  We
    got spoiled.  While people scoffed intellectually at the supply-side
    mythology (Bush's Voodoo Economics, don't forget!), many came to
    believe it semi-consciously.  We were getting both a free lunch and
    half price beer.  When the economy flattened and the "free money"
    stopped flowing in, people were outraged at the return of the menu's
    normal prices.  No governess nor governor could have gotten the
    legislature to act this winter.  The script was settled months ago. 
    There will be a tax package in early May, just after the filing
    deadline for new legislative candidates.  Suddenly all the reps
    without opposition will emerge from their closets and vote for it.
    Credit is deserved by the voters who re-elect these people without
    fail, regardless of the responsibility of what they do on Beacon Hill.
    
    Cutting taxes! scoff the cynics.  Well, yes.  In 1977, the total burden
    of state and local taxes and fees in Massachusetts was nearly 18% of
    personal income; by 1987 (latest available figures) they had fallen to
    15% of personal income.  As some wags would hasten to point out, that's
    not a 3% decrease, but an 18% decrease.  During the same period, the
    state and local tax burden in the rest of the country went up.
    
    Yep.  It's all the fault of the Duke and his liberal Democrat cronies. 
    Goodness knows no good Republicans would ever let us live beyond our
    means, and run up astronomical deficits.  And Goodness is never wrong,
    right?
    
    			- Bruce

    I just deleted my response to the 'It isn't his (Duke's) fault' note
    after spending 15 minutes writing it.
    
    This one is "Can Evelyn Win?"
    
    --------------------
    
    I have cooled off a 'tad (obviously).
    
    My vote is not for Evelyn. She is not forcefull enough.
    
    Don't know who I will vote for though.
    
    				Charlie.

    
    Sure she can win, if she comes out with specific proposals
    to deal with the problems facing MA. And I think that she should
    pay heed to the general feeling of the people. If the state
    is rampant with anti-tax sentiment, she should listen and act
    accordingly. 
    
    The people here aren't stupid. They're just waiting for someone
    to acknowledge that their complaints are valid. They'd like
    to be heard, and then represented.
    
    But then, when one considers how little it takes to erode
    the viability of a candidate (Switzler, Hyatt, etc) her recent
    flap surrounding her resume may have already damaged her 
    candidacy. These are strange times in politics.
    
    							Hank

>>    not a 3% decrease, but an 18% decrease.  During the same period, the
>>    state and local tax burden in the rest of the country went up.
  
Oh really?  Some states, but not the rest of the country (Pennsylvania comes
to mind).  

Can she win? Yes. Will she win? Maybe. Probably. She's the semi-incumbant,
so that's a plus, and she's the only candidate running on the Democrat's
slate whose name I can remember without prompting (local politics are not
particularly interesting to me). If others' memories are as poor as mine,
name recognition will get her a long way.

If abortion weren't an issue, I'd probably vote for Weld, but given the
Republicans' stated stance on it (I don't particularly care what the local
Republican party says, in part because I don't really believe them or any
other politician - actions speak louder than words) I really don't know who
I'd vote for, and probably won't until I pull the lever.

    .28 > Some states, but not the rest of the country (Pennsylvania comes
    .28 >to mind).  
    
    Yes, the rest of the country.  That doesn't also mean each other
    individual state.  I don't have data on the other 49 individual states
    going back that far, so I'm not sure how many bucked the trend.
    
    			- Bruce

Re: .19

>>>I first look at their stand on the choice issue.
>>>Then of those that are pro-choice, I look at other issues.

If many people are like you, then this has become _the_ issue.
I think many people *are* like you in that one issue overrides
others.  In this case it will be Pro-Choice or Fiscal responsibility.

I'm a watcher from over the border in NH (the *other* camp).

I see (paranoically) the liberals invading NH territory (thinking of
a 3 1/2% income tax!  Live free or die!).  My only solace is seeing
the Republicans in MA having their best shot ever over the fiscal
disaster in MA.  I doubt that they'll accomplish their goals, though.

In Massachusetts, those who are successful in making the pro-choice
issue _the_ issue will see another Democrat (and the old guard IMO)
in the fall.  If the money in Massachusetts can be _the_ issue, then
the Reps have a 60-40 chance of winning.

I'm not a *flaming* conservative, but I am right of center.  The closer I
get to balance, the better I feel.

RE: Subject matter (Can Evelyn Murphy Win?)

   - She can.  She has the cards against her (I think).
     You Ev supporters can help her win by making Pro-choice _the_ issue
     with your friends as well as with yourselves.  The trick is to
     make it an issue in your favor.

  I think Judd Gregg (Gov. of NH) said something interesting:
  "The Abortion issue is an issue, not since the Abolition movement,
   that has no middle ground."  (paraphrased)

  Since he vetoed an abortion rights bill, he has gotten calls of "'sexist,'
  'callous', and 'ignorant' while anit-abortion activists showered him 
  with roses and praise."


What this means to me is that if any campaign is a *ONE* issue campaign,
you'd better be sure that your side has 51% on your side.  In MA I think
there's more than 51% pro-choicers.  Can you swing them into the *one*
issue election?  (that's your task).

As for NH, I guess I'll have to start weeding out these liberals from politics
in my area.   ;-)   

Mark

Sure it does.  

To sum:
Evelyn can win (IMO) only if it becomes a ONE issue campaign.

Perhaps my verbosity threw you off?

Mark

Why thank you, Herb.  I'd rather leave my copious opinion where it is.
However, the moderators have my permission to delete this rathole note
to get back onto the topic.  (.35?)

I thought I was only commenting on Evelyn's chances, and *WHAT* I thought
her chances were *based on* in my opinion.  I also thought it was specific
to the topic ("Can Ev Win?").

[Polite Smiles from me to you]

Mark

    I don't think she can win. She has a strong negative rating in the
    polls. Why, because she is closely aligned (or misaligned) with Mike
    Dukakis.
    
    I am a tried and true Democrat and proud of it. I would vote for
    Ms.Murphy in a heartbeat over either republican. 
    I have seen the standard of living decrease over this republican reign
    for the first time in this nation's history. 
    I have seen foreign investment paying our debt. I have seen the world's 
    biggest lender nation transform itself into the world's biggest debtor 
    nation. After 9 years of republican dogma, the impact finally hits our 
    pocketbooks. Whoever gets elected will be the state scapegoat for a
    couple of years. Why would anyone want a governors job in the northeast
    in 1990? A touch of masochism? Maybe.
    
    
    With Political Cynicism,
    
    Kate  (no smiley)
                     

    re.-1
    
    Herb. I would have thought so too but from what I've read it isn't the 
    case. The standard of living in this country had never declined in the
    US until 1984. This is per my college Macro Economics professor , Old
    What's-His-Name. My favorite prof, I should remember his name. The 
    graveyard shift turns my mind to silly putty.
    
    Another point I wanted to make is that women and feminists would not
    vote for a woman simply because of her gender. Many of us have a vested
    interest in seeing that the school systems survive. Many of us would
    like to see affordable health care for all. What I'm trying to say is
    that myopia is not a problem in all women.
    
    Kate

    
    re .36
    
    How does one try and true a Democrat?