Yesterday, I participated in the Massachusetts Republican State Convention as a delegate from my town. The only contested state race was for Governor (although there will be a primary for U.S. Senate); I cast my ballot for Charlie Baker.
In the past, I’ve described my political stance as “a bit to the right of Antonin Scalia.” Nevertheless, I voted for Charlie Baker and not Mark Fisher for several reasons. The first of those is that I asked myself:
Is this candidate ready and capable of being the CEO of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts?
The “CEO” question is an inherently conservative one, a query that focuses on the role and duties of an office, not on pretty slogans (e.g. “Hope and Change”), identity politics, feelings, or grandstanding.
Charlie Baker is ready and capable of handling that job. Mark Fisher, by all accounts, is not – and even his campaign speech yesterday hinted at that. (Fisher’s entire discussion was about the election, not about what happens starting on 05 November 2014.) Baker’s speech was about budgets, education, roads, children in the custody of DCF, etc. – an inherently conservative vision of the role of governor. Fisher promoted his conservative leanings, but had no coherent vision of what a governor ought to do (or what he would do as governor), only to be. It was a bit like listening to the conservative version of Barack Obama: “Elect me because I am.”
Sorry, Mark Fisher, but if I wanted to elect a guy whose sole goal is getting himself elected, I would be a Democrat.