Dukakis underperformance or overperformance in Massachusetts in 1988?

[hopper]

 I know the Republicans still had a following in the Northeast but Dukakis was Governor of the state still even though it was his 2nd stint(non-consecutive terms) as Governor. So the question is did Dukakis underperform or over perform in carrying his home state by an 8 point margin? 53-45%.

[Vega]

Hmm... my gut tells me under-preform (it was his home state); but I will say over-preform (given the election climate).

[buritobr]

Bush was born in Massachusetts and moved to Texas only when he was already an adult. Did his origin have some influence?

[Vega]

Bush was born in Massachusetts and moved to Texas only when he was already an adult. Did his origin have some influence?

I doubt it.

[Liberalrocks]

I will say underperform. It was his home state despite the national tide.

Also keep in mind that Massachusetts was the closest state that Reagan won in 1984, Mondale came close to winning it at 48.5%. Thus one would expect larger movement in the democratic direction in 1988. Dukakis outperformed in Iowa (farm crisis) but not his home state.

[buritobr]

From 1960 to 1972, Massachussetts was much more Democratic than the whole USA.

From 1976 to 1992, Massachussetts was more Democratic than the whole USA, but not very much.

From 1996 to the present, Massachussetts was much more Democratic again.

[TDAS04]

Definite underperformance.  Massachusetts was the only state where Dukakis was outperformed by McGovern, ironically.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Wasn't the "Massachusetts Miracle" already starting to end by 1988?

[Bandit3 the Worker]

Wasn't the "Massachusetts Miracle" already starting to end by 1988?

To hear the right-wing media tell it, one would have thought it never started.

[Bandit3 the Worker]

Also, Dukakis might have been hurt a little when the Boston Herald put out its "WHAT A MESS!" headline. Nice in-kind contribution to Bush you got goin' there, Rupert.

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

He may have been hurt by the Boston Harbor issue.

[Bandit3 the Worker]

Wow, everything in the world that ever went wrong was Dukakis's fault, I guess.

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

I hope you weren't responding to me, because that's in no way a coherent response to my post. I didn't blame Dukakis for anything, Boston Harbor was a major issue for the Republicans in 1988, they ran ads on it and did blame Dukakis. I'm just saying that the national attention it received may have resulted in a backlash in MA.

[Bandit3 the Worker]

I hope you weren't responding to me, because that's in no way a coherent response to my post. I didn't blame Dukakis for anything, Boston Harbor was a major issue for the Republicans in 1988, they ran ads on it and did blame Dukakis. I'm just saying that the national attention it received may have resulted in a backlash in MA.

That's what I meant. Anytime something even remotely connected to Massachusetts went wrong in that era, somehow it resulted in a media talking point against Dukakis.

[SingingAnalyst]

It was a wash, or perhaps Dukakis slightly underperformed in MA, perhaps because younger MA voters have a libertarian streak (Ron Paul received 0.9% in MA, twice his national share of the vote). The Boston talk show media (which I listed to daily in the van to the physics lab I worked at in the summer of '86) was highly critical of Dukakis' waffling about whether he was running for President. Also in 1986, voters repealed 46.5-53.5% a seat belt ordinance supported by Dukakis; all the counties near Boston supproted repeal, while outstate counties (particularly Hampshire) supported keeping the law. It may have been the last time a state seat belt ordinance was repealed by voters in the US. And as a footnote, neighboring NH was Dukakis' 2nd worst state, the only time that has happened to a Dem to my knowledge; the fact that Dukakis balked at participation in an evacuation plan for Seabrook nuclear power plant probably didn't help him in NH.

[SingingAnalyst]

Dukakis did worse than Carter in '76, who severely underperformed in MA for a variety of reasons.

[buritobr]

Bush was born in Massachusetts and moved to Texas only when he was already an adult. Did his origin have some influence?

I doubt it.

I don't know. But in 1980, 1984, 1988 and 1992, when George Bush (the old one) was in the ticket, Massachussetts was closer to the national average than it was before and after.

[TheElectoralBoobyPrize]

I doubt Bush being born there was a factor. Birth state really doesn't mean anything in elections if the candidate had his political career elsewhere. Also, it's not like Dukakis' ties to the state were in question (he was both born there and had been elected to office there).

[SingingAnalyst]

I doubt Bush being born there was a factor. Birth state really doesn't mean anything in elections if the candidate had his political career elsewhere. Also, it's not like Dukakis' ties to the state were in question (he was both born there and had been elected to office there).

It may have been a factor in Milton, GHWB's birthplace, where Bush held 36% in '92. But proably nowhere else.

[Mechaman]

Egh, I think that Bush being born in Massachusetts was about as effective as Reagan being Irish.  In other words, it might have had some effect but wasn't as near as effective as the GOP positioning themselves as the Party of the New Middle Class, man.  Something they have really bombed at since Clinton, for obvious reasons.