Is Gov. Patrick Next?

The sound of dominoes falling…

The crushing momentum of state Sen. Scott Brown’s popular U.S. Senate campaign should be a wake-up call for Gov. Deval Patrick’s already shaky hold on the Corner Office , as Patrick’s three formidable challengers seek to cash in on a surge of voter discontent, said Beacon Hill observers.

“There’s no question that the Senate race significantly heightens the prospects of Deval Patrick’s challengers and it certainly only adds more to the worries that have already existed among Deval Patrick supporters,” said Paul Watanabe, political professor for the University of Massachusetts at Boston.

The gubernatorial race is expected to skyrocket into statewide prominence as voters energized by Brown’s come-from-behind race look for the next big candidate, said Democratic strategist Michael Shea.

“I think it’s a wake-up call to the governor and every Democrat in Massachusetts that there are lots of angry, frightened people out there, and they are striking out,” Shea said.

But state Democratic Party chairman John Walsh said the race also works in Patrick’s favor, because his Democratic base is now energized and unlikely to take any vote for granted.

“For Deval Patrick and Tim Murray, the implications are they need to talk to people on the ground and engage with them. Clearly that’s something they’ve been doing since they got there,” Walsh said.

State Treasurer Timothy Cahill, who is challenging Patrick as an independent candidate, said Brown’s unlikely bid has boosted his own chances.

“If anyone tells me over the next six months that I can’t win, I’ll look at them and say, ‘Did you say that about Scott Brown?’ ” Cahill said.

UPDATE: Please be sure to join us Wednesday night on The Notes on Blog Talk Radio! Our guest will be attorney and author Harvey Silverglate, the author of Three Felonies A Day: How the Feds Target the Innocent. Plus, more from Howie Carr and Michael Graham.

SECOND UPDATE: More from the Globe and AP.

THIRD UPDATE: More from the Globe, Herald and WBZ.

Think About It

A brilliant column by Kevin Cullen of the Boston Globe, in anticipation of today’s US Senate race.

Blue Hill Avenue runs like a vein through the city.

It stretches for 4 miles, from River Street in Mattapan to Dudley Street in Roxbury, and a little more than a year ago there was an Obama sign on every block. There were Obama signs in Mattapan barber shops, in the windows of the apartment buildings opposite Franklin Field and Franklin Park, in the restaurants of Grove Hall, in the bodegas near Jermaine Goffigan Park.

Fourteen months ago, there was a buzz on Blue Hill Ave. and the streets that run off it like caterpillar legs. This is the heart of the biggest minority community in the state, and the energy generated by the prospect of Barack Obama becoming president was palpable.

Yesterday, I drove the length of Blue Hill Ave. and counted exactly two Martha Coakley signs. One of them was on a fence next to the Roxbury Energy Gas station, on the corner of Moreland Street. The sign wasn’t properly fastened. It flapped in the wind, revealing a “Mike Flaherty for Mayor’’ sign underneath.

If Martha Coakley loses today, it won’t be because she didn’t put up enough signs on Blue Hill Ave. It’ll be because she failed to convince enough of the people who put up the Obama signs on Blue Hill Ave. and a lot of other avenues across Massachusetts that Obama’s ability to get anything done depends on her winning the election.

Blue Hill Avenue voted for Barack Obama in 2008. Blue Hill Avenue voted for Deval Patrick in 2006–”Together We Can” and “No Ordinary Leader” signs were in virtually every storefront in late-October and early-November of that year.

Think about that as you go into the voting booth today.

UPDATE: Please be sure to join us Tuesday for a special Election Night edition of The Notes on Blog Talk Radio beginning at 8:00pm EST. We will be joined by Stephanie Davis of RFC Radio and Paul Couturier of Blog Talk Radio. Plus, more from WBUR, the Globe and Herald.

Massachusetts Law: Kirk Can’t Vote After Tuesday

The Weekly Standard’s Fred Barnes explains:

Appointed Senator Paul Kirk will lose his vote in the Senate after Tuesday’s election in Massachusetts of a new senator and cannot be the 60th vote for Democratic health care legislation, according to Republican attorneys.

Kirk has vowed to vote for the Democratic bill even if Republican Scott Brown is elected but not yet certified by state officials and officially seated in the Senate. Kirk’s vote is crucial because without the 60 votes necessary to stop a Republican filibuster, the bill will be defeated.

This would be a devastating loss for President Obama and congressional Democrats. The bill, dubbed ObamaCare, is the centerpiece of the president’s agenda. Brown has campaigned on becoming the 41st vote against ObamaCare.

But in the days after the election, it is Kirk’s status that matters, not Brown’s. Massachusetts law says that an appointed senator remains in office “until election and qualification of the person duly elected to fill the vacancy.” The vacancy occurred when Senator Edward Kennedy died in August. Kirk was picked as interim senator by Governor Deval Patrick.

Democrats in Massachusetts have talked about delaying Brown’s “certification,” should he defeat Democrat Martha Coakley on Tuesday. Their aim would be to allow Kirk to remain in the Senate and vote the health care bill.

But based on Massachusetts law, Senate precedent, and the U.S. Constitution, Republican attorneys said Kirk will no longer be a senator after election day, period. Brown meets the age, citizenship, and residency requirements in the Constitution to qualify for the Senate. “Qualification” does not require state “certification,” the lawyers said.

An appointed senator’s right to vote is not dependent on whether his successor has been certified, the lawyers said. In Massachusetts, the election of a senator must be certified by the governor, the governor’s council, and the secretary of state – all of them Democrats.

So, all the delays being floated by Democrats are irrelevant. But then again, Massachusetts Democrats have a long record of considering Massachusetts law irrelevant. The way they’ve schemed to keep Brown out of the Senate shows not only contempt for the law and our representative democracy, but for the people who who are governed by those very laws.

Oh, Just Shut Up

Gov. Patrick sticks his beak into the US Senate race.

Rudy Giuliani and Scott Brown arrived in the North End, and the crowd parted.

“Go, Scott, go!’’ they shouted. “Rudy! Rudy!’’

This pair of Republican stars – Giuliani, the former mayor of New York, and Brown, the suddenly ascendant GOP Senate hopeful – soaked up every last bit of the adulation.

“I’m used to being here with winning candidates,’’ Giuliani said, citing his visits to Boston for Republican governors such as Mitt Romney and William Weld. “I like campaigning here because, frankly, they feed me.’’

Giuliani is hoping to christen another victor this time, his presence yesterday underscoring the sudden national interest in Tuesday’s special US Senate election between Brown and Democrat Martha Coakley, the state’s attor ney general.

Several hours later, Coakley was surrounded by heavyweights from her party, with state and national Democrats seeking to rouse voters with red-meat attack lines portraying Brown as out of touch with Massachusetts and the future.

“You just have to decide whether you want us to be a tomorrow country or a yesterday country,’’ former president Bill Clinton told a packed banquet hall at the Fairmont Copley in downtown Boston, an event Coakley aides said drew 1,500 people. “You just have to decide if you want to pick the person who gets to shut America down.’’

Clinton, who is helping lead American relief efforts for Haiti, which has been ravaged by an earthquake, cast his dueling responsibilities yesterday as “two sides of the same coin’’ because they both illustrate the need for good governance.

Coakley, referencing a Brown TV ad showing him campaigning around the state in his GMC truck, drew a roar when she said, “Just because you’re driving around in a truck doesn’t mean you’re going in the right direction.’’

Coakley’s campaign rally, coming as polls indicate a tight race, drew an assortment of Democratic operatives, elected officials, and fans of the former president. The free event was held in the glitzy Grand Ballroom.

Senator John F. Kerry launched into an impassioned attack on Brown, calling him “silent Scott’’ for not raising his voice during President Bush’s administration, describing the 30-year National Guard member as “AWOL’’ when Bush proposed privatizing Social Security.

“For eight years, he was George Bush’s yes man, and now he wants to go to Washington and become [Senate Republican leader] Mitch McConnell’s no man,’’ Kerry said. “We’re not going to let it happen.’’

Democrats spoke in dire terms about the prospect of losing a Senate seat to a Massachusetts Republican for the first time since 1972, in a bid to galvanize the state’s Democratic Party establishment ahead of Tuesday’s vote.

“The voting here is going to determine the balance of power in America,’’ Kerry said

“We have a fight on our hands,’’ said Governor Deval Patrick. “We’re fighting . . . the same folks who made the mess we’re in.’’

Wrong, Governor. Scott Brown is fighting the folks who made the mess we’re in. And by God, he’s gonna win that fight this Tuesday.

UPDATE: More from the Boston Herald and Globe.

SECOND UPDATE: More from Politico.com, the Globe and the Herald.

Oh Well…

This would have been a good fight…

Secretary of State William Galvin on Tuesday ruled out a primary challenge to Gov. Deval Patrick, quelling buzz among Beacon Hill Democrats that he would look to capitalize on the governor’s low poll ratings and his own statewide standing to shake up the gubernatorial campaign.

“I’m not running against Deval Patrick,” Galvin told the News Service late Tuesday. “No way against the governor.”

Galvin said he was interested in running for attorney general if Martha Coakley wins next week’s U.S. Senate election over Republican candidate Scott Brown and Libertarian underdog Joseph L. Kennedy, who is no relation to the late senator.

Reflecting on surging Democratic concern that Coakley could lose, Galvin said, “Everything I can see suggests she’s in a fight.”

If Coakley wins, Galvin said, “Obviously, the Legislature’s going to appoint somebody. If they appoint somebody who’s going to run, I’d just assume be that person, but I don’t think that’s likely. I think it’s pretty likely I’m not going to be appointed.”

“I’m interested,” he said. “I’m looking at it. I continue to do that, and I’m evaluating it, and we’ll see what happens. It depends what the Legislature does. If they appoint somebody very qualified, I’d have to think about that, too.”

Galvin reported “very high” returns from absentee voters in the Senate election. Alarmed by polls showing Brown rapidly closing what had once been a safe Coakley advantage in the polls, national and local Democrats have flown into high gear within the past week, attacking Brown and rallying to Coakley’s side.

“I won’t be surprised if it’s 10 [percent] or less,” he said, referring to Coakley’s margin of victory.

UPDATE: Please be sure to join us Wednesday night on The Notes on Blog Talk Radio. Our guest will be Wall Street Journal drama critic Terry Teachout, the author of Pops: A Life of Louis Armstrong. Plus, more from MIT Tech.

SECOND UPDATE: More from the New York Times and Boston Phoenix.