.

GOP gubernatorial Mike Minogue is trying to keep his chin up as polls show him losing big next week to Maura Healey, as MassLive reports (“Republican Minogue confident heading into home stretch: ‘Lies, damn lies and polling’”) and as the Globe’s Adrian Walker and the Herald’s Joe Battenfeld perform early political autopsies on his campaign. But am I the only one who thinks Minogue has performed just well enough (at least for a political rookie) to establish himself as a potential contender for elected office down the road? That he might do better a second time around, sort of like former Republican Govs. Mitt Romney and Charlie Baker, both of whom lost before they won? … Two obstacles to Minogue  prevailing in the future: his pro-life stand on abortion (Mitt deftly flip-flopped on the issue while Baker was pro-choice) and Question 3 if it passes (no more GOP primary coronations). … Above, C-Span video of the Romney-Kennedy U.S. Senate debate in ’94, during Mitt’s first go at statewide office.

Update – 10.26.26 – Jon Keller has an excellent piece at MassterList on how moderate Independents aren’t thrilled with either Healey or Minogue. … The more I think of it, the more Minogue reminds me of Charlier Baker 2010, who ran against incumbent Deval Patrick as a hyper-critical Republican. He alienated Independents in the process — and didn’t win. A chastened Charlier Baker 2014 was less robotic and more moderate — and won.

 

Following up on Friday’s post on political extremism (“A very tardy and timely movie recommendation: ‘The Baader Meinhof Complex’”), here’s French philosopher Bernard-Henri Lévy on the ongoing violence in France, via the WSJ:

(With) his country teetering on a cliff, Mr. Lévy’s attention is elsewhere. “You can sense that we are on the brink of civil war,” Mr. Lévy says. “The worst part is that the country’s two main political forces now have an interest in the riots—Le Pen because she would take power, Mélenchon because he would take control of the streets. This domestic Yalta is the nightmare of all moderates, whether conservative or liberal.” …

Mr. Lévy regards Ms. Le Pen and Mr. Mélenchon with equal distaste.“They are a right-wing and a left-wing version of the same populism—a right-wing Trumpism, if you like, and a kind of left-wing Trumpism, both sharing the same fundamental tendencies.” … It is a death match, he says, over “which of them will have the dreadful privilege of ruining this country.”

As they say, read the whole thing.

OK, so this is a quick recommendation of an 18-year-old movie that I stumbled upon the other night on Prime. But it’s a recommendation of a still topical movie during these polarized political times, both in the U.S. and Europe: ‘The Baader Meinhof Complex,’ a German film about the infamous Red Army Faction, better known as the Baader Meinhof Gang, which terrorized West Germany for decades, starting in the late 1960s. Watching the film, it’s hard not to think of how the movie’s plot progression – which basically tracks left-wing ideologues’ transformation from ‘60s armchair radicals to cold-blooded terrorists – applies to today’s politics. Specifically, how it applies to the current rise of extremism across the political spectrum. Today, I happen to believe the most extremist threat to our democracy comes from the storm-the-Capitol right. But it’s also disturbing to see an increasing number of people on the left embracing a party that’s partly, if not largely, dominated by outright Marxists. Ultimately, one of the movie’s main messages, as I saw it, was how easily radical political movements can drift from passionate rhetoric to murderous action during times of turmoil. It’s happened before — and it can happen again. … I definitely recommend ‘Baader Meinhof Complex,’ especially to fellow history buffs and political junkies. ….

Btw: The Wikipedia entry on ‘The Baader Meinhof Complex’ extensively quotes from the late Christopher Hitchens’s original high praise of the film in Vanity Fair. Roger Ebert admired the movie, but identified some of its faults. And here’s the NYT’s Fred Kaplan on the film.

Some slightly off-the-beaten-path stories you may have missed over the past week:

— They can’t possibly be as good as Nicky D’s old-fashioned morning delights: “Blackbird Doughnuts eyes national expansion; founder sells South End restaurant” (BBJ)

— Very encouraging: “Springfield Rail Hub gets $130M as West-East Rail Advances” (B&T)

— A simple case of morons thinking everyone else is morons? “Republican PAC seems to think you’re a moron” (Universal Hub)

— Strange times. This normally happens during recessions, not before recessions: “Colleges and hospitals drive construction activity while developers wait out high rates” (BBJ)

— It merely obscures the ominous demographic trends facing higher-ed: “Free community college helping to shore up state university enrollment” (WBUR)

— Our state and governor don’t rank very high: “Which states are the most free? A new report scores all 50” (Washington Post)

— He thinks there must be more to MBAs than graduates choosing between jobs at McKinsey and Goldman Sachs: “I Teach at a Business School. It’s Time to Shut Them Down” (NYT)

— It wasn’t supposed to be this kind of ‘assistance’: “High pay, low results: Nearly 600 DTA staff on six-figure salaries as fraud runs rampant” (Herald)

— Protests are a little too much, but it is one of the worst ad campaigns ever: “People have a lot of feelings about ‘Liberty Biberty.’ Now there’s a Boston protest planned over the mascot.” (Boston Globe)

— A fascinating look at the country’s changing demographics: “Israel’s New Center of Gravity” (WSJ)

 

Sound the trumpets! Another failed Republican candidate has entered the Pantheon of Bottom of the Barrel Massachusetts Republican Candidates. Shawn “Vomit Comet” Oliver, step forward. You have truly earned this moment in Massachusetts political history, joining a long list of scandal-plagued minor-league Republican pols who just weren’t ready for the big leagues, such as, most recently, Anne Martin, Michael Walsh, Dean Tran and Nick Cocchi. … Of course, going back a few decades or more, there’s John Lakian, Greg ‘Naked Truth’ Hyatt, and Royall ‘Special Forces’ Switzler. One could argue that Peter ‘Booze Cruise’ Blute should have a spot in our august political pantheon. But he succeeded before he failed. Jim Lyons is another close-but-no-cigar non-pantheon member. … And think of the timing of Shawn’s entry into this prestigious club. Backers of Question 3 salute you, Shawn.

Update — A reader chips in: “Hah! Quite a list. Needs more Jack E. Robinson, though!”

WBZ-Channel 4’s Jon Keller hosted a debate over the weekend between Andrew Mikula, a backer of Question 7,  and Adam Chapdelaine, head of the Mass. Municipal Association and an opponent of the referendum question that would allow single-family homes to be built on smaller lots in Massachusetts. It was an interesting debate. Definitely check it out. As for myself, I support the measure. As intended, it will likely lead to the building of slightly less expensive homes, largely by cutting down on land costs. Good riddance to any and all snob-zoning land requirements that drive up housing costs. But I don’t believe, as its supporters claim, that it will necessarily lead to a flood of new “starter homes” in Massachusetts. The photo above of recently built houses in Hudson, my hometown, show what will probably happen if the ballot question passes: large homes, small lots. The photo below is from the same new subdivision. Once again: large homes, small lots.* …

One day, Question 7, if it gets the nod as polls suggest, will probably produce true starter homes of the Cape and Ranch varieties. But right now the market is still calling for McMansion-like homes. OK, maybe something slightly short of McMansions. But definitely not starter homes, as you can see above and below.

*Update — I checked out the top right house in the photo above. Unless the definition of starter homes has changed to include 4-bedroom, 5 bathroom, 4,300-square-foot abodes priced at $1.47 million, I think it’s fair to call it a non-starter home.

I’m not going to get too upset about Maura Healey’s indifferent “things happen” response to the alleged rape in the State Police barracks on Martha’s Vineyard. It was wrong. It was borderline callous. Still, I think it’s safe to say that she regrets the remark and isn’t the type to dismiss rape as a trivial “thing.” But what makes “things happen” ultimately bad for her was how eager she was to rhetorically move from the latest scandal involving the State Police to declaring she’s “proud to have the support of local and state law enforcement in this race. And that’s because they know I have their back.” … From the topic of rape to vote grubbing. Now that’s callous. … The Globe and the Herald’s Joe Battenfeld have more on ‘things happen’. … And, yes, Joe’s right: she’s still going to win reelection, perhaps minus a few ‘things happen’ votes.

Here’s a pleasant surprise: The Globe has endorsed Question 3, the referendum question that would replace the state’s current party primary elections with “all-party” primary elections. I’ve harped on this subject before, here and here. But the Globe editorial really nails why Question 3, as imperfect as it may be, is needed to promote genuine political competition in Massachusetts. I particularly liked these lines:

The biggest reason for the lack of competition (today) is because the Republican Party has slid into irrelevance in much of the state, and does not bother to field candidates. The biggest reason to vote for Question 3 is because having a healthy democracy with competitive races shouldn’t depend on the Massachusetts GOP someday getting its act together.

Toward the end, the Globe unfortunately gives a sop to progressives by saying that all-party primaries could one day co-exist with ranked-choice voting. But ranked-choice voting would actually negate the benefits of all-party primaries, giving the majority (i.e. Dems) extra shots at controlling who advances to general elections. Ranked-choice voting is a bad idea. But that’s a debate for a different day.

Update — 10.18.26 – More from your favorite inept party, via the Globe: “Shawn Oliver, GOP nominee for lieutenant governor, suspends campaign after OUI charge”

Some slightly off-the-beaten-path stories you may have missed over the past week:

— Very interesting. Loans tied to future rents, not to a builder’s income: “A New Type of Mortgage Is Reviving Long Abandoned Neighborhoods.” (WSJ)

— A really good pros-and-cons explainer piece from Scott Kirsner: “Mass. could get the nation’s toughest law to stave off AI catastrophes.” (MassLive)

— Whoa. That’s a lot of housing: “Downtown Brockton Proposal Includes 1K Housing Units” (B&T)

— Live by the trend, die by the trend: “Pickleball franchisor with Mass. locations files for bankruptcy” (BBJ)

— Actually, his biggest challenge is getting people to pay attention to the race: “John Deaton’s biggest challenge isn’t Ed Markey. It’s President Trump” (WBUR)

— He seems to impress both moderates and progressives: “The Jon Ossoff guide to being a Democrat” (The Economist)

— So pathetic: “Hunt on for couple who stole tips from a Jamaica Plain take-out place” (Universal Hub)

— A Massachusetts history buff helps solve a mystery dating back to the War of 1812: “His Unmarked Grave Lay Forgotten for 200 Years. They Had to Fix That.” (NYT)

— If only he would take a different view towards his obsession with 3-pointers: “Joe Mazzulla already seeing dividends from taking a different view this Celtics preseason” (Globe)

— Make sure you have MediVac insurance before eating: “This underrated Mass. burger joint has an insane quadruple cheeseburger (Video)” (MassLive)

— Think project cost-overruns are bad in Massachusetts? Check out this UK fiasco: “A ‘Ludicrously Ugly’ Bridge Is Exhibit A That Britain Has Lost Its Mojo” (WSJ) 

At the Atlantic, Pulitzer Prize-winning historian Anne Applebaum lets the president have it for cutting a pre-election diesel fuel deal with Putin:

In the past 72 hours, Donald Trump has dropped all pretense, torched a couple decades of American policy, and undermined 18 months of his own diplomacy. He lifted sanctions on the import of Russian diesel fuel, in violation of the letter and spirit of laws that he himself signed. He has threatened to stop sharing intelligence with Ukraine, unless Ukraine agrees not to target Russian refineries, thus demanding that Kyiv give up its most effective weapon while asking nothing from Russia in exchange. He has not criticized Russian attacks on Ukrainian power plants or factories, even those owned by American companies. He has offered no condolences for the recent deaths of Ukrainian children in Russian bombing raids. 

He has lied repeatedly.

If you haven’t already, check out some of her books, especially Gulag: A History (2004 Pulitzer Prize winner) and Red Famine: Stalin’s War on Ukraine.  She definitely knows her Russian and Ukrainian histories.

Update — From the NYT: “Trump Hands Victories to Putin, Who Offers More War in Return.”

Update II –– 10.15.26 – From the Economist: “Hardly his finest hour.” And the subhead: “Donald Trump’s scheme to secure Russian diesel is scandalous.”

Update III — From Tom Friedman: “Trump’s Democracy-for-Diesel Deal Shames Us All.”