Local pundits see some cracks in Deval’s armor

Dan Devine

While pundits have christened Deval Patrick the big winner of Monday night’s opening gubernatorial debate, some have suggested he owes his victory more to his opponents’ attacks on Lt. Gov. Kerry Healey than to his own performance.

During NECN’s post-debate coverage, John Gonzalez of Boston Magazine called the debate a “victory by default for Patrick,” noting that Patrick “just sat there and … let Grace Ross and Christy Mihos attack Kerry Healey, so [Patrick] wins by just being relatively silent.”

Adam Reilly of the Boston Phoenix concurred, calling Mihos “a big boon for the Patrick campaign,” particularly in his emphasis of the Romney/Healey administration’s responsibility for the Big Dig tunnel collapse in July.

“[Mihos] is going to hammer away at Healey all election,” Reilly said. “He basically said [to Healey], ‘You and Mitt Romney are responsible for Milena Del Valle’s death, in so many words.”

And “so many words” might be Patrick’s biggest problem.

Some analysts believe Patrick needs to take more clear, concise stands. Democratic strategist and former John Kerry debate coach Michael Shea told the Boston Globe that Patrick needed to answer as strongly and succinctly, then “pivot out of there” without becoming bogged down in ambiguous phrasing.

Patrick accomplished that in defining his support for granting driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants as a security issue. He missed, however, by reiterating his reasonable, but somewhat muddled — and therefore vulnerable — stance on the proposed rollback of the state’s income tax to 5 percent from 5.3 percent.

“I think it’s a mistake to roll the income tax back to 5 percent right now. I think we can do it, but we have to grow the economy so that we can afford to do it,” said Patrick.

He failed again on the question of providing in-state tuition rates to Massachusetts colleges for the children of illegal immigrants, saying that “the folks on the other side of the question” from him are right to say that “we should only reward people who play by the rules,” and that immigration is a “serious problem” requiring a “serious response.” Patrick then said immigrants come here for jobs, not tuition breaks, and promised to come down hard on employers who hire illegal aliens, a response that businessman and former state treasurer Joe Malone categorized as “ducking that [issue] very nicely.”

The lack of clarity certainly hasn’t derailed Patrick’s momentum. Polls conducted prior to the debate by CBS4/Survey USA and Merrimack College both showed Patrick holding leads of over 30 points against chief opponent Healey. Polls on

Boston.com and FOX25’s website named Patrick the debate’s decisive winner by similarly large margins.

He mostly stayed above the fray Monday night, ably deflecting attacks when targeted and landing his own shots against Healey on the Big Dig. Patrick responded to the charge that he is “soft on crime” by asserting his practical experience as a prosecutor over her theoretical training as a criminologist and emphasizing what he called her administration’s “fiscal shell game.”

But eventually, Patrick will likely be forced to answer a criticism crystallized in a recent piece by Globe columnist Joan Vennochi.

“Indeed, when Healey takes her shots, what’s Patrick’s response going to be — ‘Together we can,’ the inspirational but vague theme of his primary campaign? Voters are going to want specifics, as in together we can do exactly what?” she wrote.

Until Patrick begins being clearer, CBS4 political analyst Jon Keller warned before the debate, the presumptive favorite still has a long way to go.

“The Patrick campaign will have to guard against complacency and gear up for a barrage of hard questions about exactly how this frontrunner would govern,” Keller said.