We were just talking about this at the Boston gathering on Saturday. And, lo and behold, the globe puts an article out!
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2003/11/02/why_cant_the_bay_state_elect_a_democratic_governor/"IT'S MASSACHUSETTS'S LONGEST-running mystery. The Democratic Party dominates all levels of state politics -- from state representative to US senator -- but cannot capture the State House corner office. A year after losing their fourth consecutive gubernatorial election, Democrats are still asking themselves: Why?
Elaine Kamarck, a lecturer at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government and a former domestic policy adviser to Al Gore, seeks to answer the question in an article published in the summer 2003 issue of CommonWealth magazine. Examining Election Day exit polls from the last 12 years, she found that independents were most likely to split their tickets when voting for governor and president.
But the bigger news was the impact of the state's changing demographic makeup. Kamarck found that Democratic candidates, both state and national, fare best at the lower end of the income distribution (with voters from households earning less than $75,000 annually) and at the top of the educational spectrum (voters with masters' degrees and doctorates).
That's a problem for Democrats. People with advanced degrees may constitute the fastest-growing portion of the state's population, but it is still the smallest portion. And on the income side, the news for Democrats is even worse: The under-$50,000 bracket, where Democrats do best, shrank from 64 percent of the electorate in 1992 to 37 percent in 2000." <snip>
It just doesn't really make any sense- supposedly one of the most liberal states in the nation and we can't even get the top state official from our party! Since I just moved here I'm not completely hip to local politics, did we run a bunch of losers against the repugs here?