SNAP POLL: Massachusetts Republicans Say Ryan Will Energize Campaign

Patch asked their political influencers state-wide to react to the news Paul Ryan will be Mitt Romney's running mate.

An overwhelming majority of influential Republicans from Massachusetts say Mitt Romney's choice of running mate, Paul Ryan, will galvanize the state GOP.

That’s the finding of a Red Commonwealth Snap Poll survey of influential conservatives sent out after Saturday morning's announcement.

When Patch asked Massachusetts Republicans if Paul Ryan as vice president would help undecided Massachusetts voters, the answers were split down the middle with half saying they strongly agree and the other half saying they strongly disagree.

"He is incredibly smart and can convey concepts in easy-to-understand language," one respondent said was an advantage to having Ryan on the Romney ticket.

Others noted Ryan's youth, ability to articulate himself and perception of being a family man as reasons for him being a good choice.

"He's an articulate yet forceful proponent of the necessity to dramatically change America's cultural/economic/political paradigm in order to avoid the malaise produced by said paradigm that is slowly destroying Europe," one person answered.

Massachusetts political influencers surveyed said they disagree that Democrats will be able to win against Romney and Ryan by running against Ryan's budget plans and proposal for Medicare.

Those surveyed did agree that the choice would also galvanize Democrats in the state and nation-wide.

Those surveyed also noted Ryan will be able to inject new energy into the campaign.

"Paul Ryan will appeal to many more voters in MA than people think. He's smart, relatable and isn't afraid to call out the current administration," one respondent said.

Another person answered: "Ryan's appointment signals that Romney intends to make the 2012 election a referendum on the direction of the country. Either voters choose another four years of European-styled socialism by voting for Obama or they choose to reverse course and double down on American exceptionalism by voting for Romney. Ryan will force the public itself to debate on which way America will go."

Red Commonwealth Survey

Our surveys are not a scientific, random sample of any larger population, but rather an effort to listen to a group of influential local Republican activists, party leaders, candidates and elected officials in Massachusetts. All of these individuals have agreed to participate in Massachusetts’s Patch’s surveys, although not all responded to this story’s questions.

Patch will be conducting Red Commonwealth and Blue Commonwealth surveys throughout the 2012 election season in hopes of determining the true sentiment of conservatives and progressives on the ground in Massachusetts. If you are an activist, party leader or elected official and would like to take part in periodic surveys that last just a few minutes, please contact Associate Regional Editor Katie Curley-Katzman at Katherine@patch.com.

Red Commonwealth Survey Roster: Patrick Rahilly (North Andover lawyer), Chris Barrett (former Romney staffer, Lynnfield), Tom Terranova (Lynnfield CPA), Jack Buba (Marblehead Republican Committee), Amy Carnevale (Chair of Marblehead Republican Committee), Sharon Randall (Marblehead Republican Committee), Rosemary Smedile (North Andover Republican), Bernie Green (Medford Republican Committee), Mark Crowley (Medford Republican Committee), David Carnevale (former state senate candidate from Medford), John Dorr (small business owner from Medford), Jim Morse (retired firefighter, Medford), Don Ordway (Tewksbury GOP committee), Doug Sears (Tewksbury Republican), Jeff Stinson (Hamilton selectman, political director for Richard Tisei), Brad Hill (State Representative), Elaine Appel (Hamilton Republican Committee), Harriet Davis (former selectman from Wenham), Randy Hunt (State Representative), Bill Doherty (County Commissioner, Cape Cod), John McCarthy (Peabody Republican), Jarrod Hochman (Peabody Republican), Chuck Holden (Peabody Republican), Scott Frasca (Peabody Republican), Evan Kenney (Republican Caucus alternate, Wakefield), Joseph O'Keefe (Salem city councilor), Tracy Lawrence (Salem Republican), Sean O'Brien (Salem Republican Committee), Todd Siegel (Salem city councilor), George Gerogountzos (candidate for state representative, Stoneham), Monica Medeiros (Melrose Republican Committee), Ted Cinella (Melrose Republican Committee), Andrew Applegate (Suffolk University), Chad Heipler (infrastructure manager), Meg Rowan (Republican), Teresa Perrier (Republican), Katelyn Regan (West Roxbury Republican), Brad Williams (GOP chair), John Golnik (Westford U.S. House of Representatives candidate), Tim Regan (Charlestown Republican), Lisa J. Murray (DMD), Lindsay DiNatale (Charlestown Republican), Ted Owens (Needham Republican), Alan Reiss (Wayland Republican), John Toto (Wayland Republican), Sue Pope (Wayland Republican), Kent George (Wayland Republican), John DiMascio (Watertown Republican), James Ridge (Watertown Republican), Steve Aylward (state committee), Laurie McManus (Watertown Republican committee), Francis Stanton (candidate for state rep.), Gerry Dembrowski (Woburn candidate), Evan Rice (Republican committee member), Dean Carvaretta (Acton candidate for state rep.), Jesse Segovia (Acton Republican), Michael Prisco (North Reading selectman), Bob Mauceri (selectman), Ben Tafoya (selectman), Jim Hatherly (town committee), Nancy Quimby (town committee), Brian McCarty (Sommerville town committee), Peter Nicolas (Marblehead Town Committee), Brad Marston (Beacon Hill Republican), Joe Selvaggi (Beacon Hill Republican), Steven Jeffries (Beacon Hill Republican), Allan Zenowitz (state committee), Vonnie Boyle (state committee), Joseph Zarrella (Braintree, State House intern), Jim Powell (Martha's Vineyard Republican), Krista Lynch (North Andover Republican), Wayne Comeau (Danvers Town Committee), Dan Bennett (Danvers selectman), Val Wormell (Westford selectman), Angel Connell (Westford Republican), McKenzie-Hebert (Shrewsbury Republican), Ken Weisman (Hopkinton Republican), Brian Major (Andover Republican), James Lyons (state rep.), Alex Vispoli (Andover selectman), Paul Adams (candidate for state rep.), Marty Scafidi (Peabody Republican), Dick Gilmore (Danvers lawyer), Tom Weaver (candidate for Congress), Dylan Hayre (Westford Republican), Mario Marchese (Wilmington Town Committee), Dean Cavaretta (state sen. candidate), Philip Mitza (Sommerville activist), Thomas Vasconcelos (state rep. candidate), Richard Wise, (Salem Republican Committee), Michael Morales (Medford committee member), Mary Connaughton (Framingham Republican), Ed McGrath (state committee), James Bonazoli (Reading Selectman), Doug Obey (Westwood Town Committee), Ed Niell (Westwood Town Committee), Frank Herschede (Danvers Republican), Eleanor Hersey (Framingham Republican), Janet Leombruno (Framingham Republican)

Postman August 13, 2012 at 03:37 PM
Even better said Ray. It's like it midnight and pitch black out, yet the Obama supporters say it's daytime and there's no convincing them of otherwise. I really don't understand it. How can people be so blind?
Ed Bertorelli August 13, 2012 at 04:08 PM
question for Jim Rizoli- who was your candidate for President or Vice President ? and for viewers a ' Rino' = ' Republican in name only '- a frequent critical comment made about a lot of bay state Republicans by Conservatives
Deborah Strafuss August 13, 2012 at 04:15 PM
Actually, unemployment is down, the economy is improving despite European monetary scares, and the total mess left by the last republican leadership - it's huge price tag to the American public - is still being paid. Despite that, more people have health care and jobs as we mark a slow recovery. Applying a quick fix to a deep wound does not allow it time to heal. 4 year directional changes have a huge potential to do more harm than good. I have no assurance the Romney Plan - which was no plan until he got Ryan's voice - is a proven model that effects economic recovery on all levels - remember the float everyone's boat analogy - we have a class war going on here - one side seems to think that if you lighten up the burdens of the very rich enough they will stimulate the economy. This has not proved true in real life. Lightening up the tax burdens on the very rich allows them to go through depressions less affected than the middle class. The rich certainly did not stimulate enough business and economy when their burden was lighter - they stuffed their coffers with insurance against the expected blowout caused by their extravagances, and they have survived well. The very wealthy have not cut down on meat and vacations. On the other hand, if we stay on the same course, the rich will yelp, but will we continue to make a reasonable recovery goal in the next 4 years? Following the current trajectory, there is some hope of digging out of the debt left by earlier administrations.
Iron Mike August 13, 2012 at 04:37 PM
>> if we stay on the same course, Deborah, WHERE do you get your NEWS, - NPR and the Daily Show? Watching Letterman? Unemployment is UP! UNDER-employment is WAY UP! Obama's DeptLabor has fudged the REAL numbers by ignoring all those who quit working and went on disability. We have 1 in 5 Americans in POVERTY since Obama's election crushed the life out of our economy. In years to come he'll be known as 'The Welfare President'. The constant MYTH put out by Obama and others is about taxing the rich. Even if we STRIPPED the rich - took their last dimes, - it would only run the country for a few weeks. Despite all your jealousy - there really AREN'T enough rich out there to pay for lazy Americans [and illegals] to just stay home watching Oprah. The left - i.e. the Democrats / Progressives / Socialists - have been slowly destroying the American WORK ETHIC for decades. It's called the Democratic Voter Plantation System; - we call it modern-day slavery. It's wrong, but Obama and his cartel are pushing it for all they're worth. ENOUGH! Vote them OUT!
Postman August 13, 2012 at 04:44 PM
Thanks Mike for helping pry Deborah's head out of the sand, you beat me to it.
Mary MacDonald (Editor) August 13, 2012 at 04:52 PM
Please keep the comments civil and treat other posters with respect. Thanks!
FindBalance August 13, 2012 at 05:36 PM
I’m sorry, but I couldn’t disagree with you more, Debra. Unemployment may look to be down, but there are too many questions about how they came up with such a low number, plus as Mike pointed out, the number of under-employed (working in jobs below their qualifications, and for much less money) is substantial. Even if you believe the unemployment rate is 8.3%, there has been more than enough time for it to improve more than it has (contrary to your assertion). Instead, Pres Obama’s solution is to spend tax dollars to grow the economy – among other negatives, that does not lead to long term prosperity – an $800B stimulus did not even get us to below 8% unemployment (which, btw, is what was promised). He has also stymied growth in the private sector, by creating a climate of uncertainty – will there be more tax on business, on top of what is coming with Obamacare? What additional regulations might be imposed that will hamstring business? Business is not creating jobs because they are not willing to take risk in this climate. You imply that European monetary scares have had an impact on our economy – these monetary scares are caused by countries like Greece, Spain, and Portugal at the end of the very direction in which Pres Obama wants to continue to take the US! (continued...)
FindBalance August 13, 2012 at 05:38 PM
(cont...) You say, essentially, that not taxing the rich even more has not proven to create jobs in real life. To the contrary, it has worked every time. Not only did it work for Pres Reagan, it worked for GW Bush in the early 2000’s, with his tax cuts. Yes, at the time of the tax cuts, we were in a bit of an economic malaise due to the Tech Bubble Burst and 9/11, and the tax cuts took an unemployment rate that was heading toward 6%, and redirected it downward toward 5%. And you lay blame for this vague “mess” squarely at the feet of the last Republican leadership. I am not clear on what all mess to which you are referring… but if you are talking about the bad economy, that was caused by the credit crunch in 2008 that was caused by Barney Frank forcing banks to give loans to people who could not pay them back, then backing the bad loans with Fannie/Freddie; and yes, Wall Street had their role in it, too, but who monitors the Wall Street? The House Finance Committee does, and Barney Frank was the Chair for the 4 years leading up to the 2008 credit crunch! I see no culpability on the part of the Republican leadership in that mess, except that when Republicans in 2003 were concerned that mortgage lending requirements were too loose, they believed the Dems – lead by Barney Frank and Chris Dodd – that tightening loan requirements would have a negative effect on the economy. It turned out that there was an even worse effect on the economy, only a short time later.
Pete August 13, 2012 at 06:54 PM
"ANYbody still thinking of voting for Obama again is either a committed Socialist – or just plain hates our country – like he does." Name calling, meanspirited comment. I'm voting for Obama and I'm not a socialist and to say I hate my country is incredibly vicious. To say you're a Republican detracts from the Republican party.
Iron Mike August 13, 2012 at 09:19 PM
There's a distinct difference between 'name calling' Pete, and applying the correct label to a specimen. When the label fits it's usually obvious to all. I've been watching politics since the early 50s, I think I'm qualified to recognize and label socialist specimens when I encounter them, and America-haters too. You ~ could ~ have remained silent. That you felt moved to pipe up is truly instructive. There's nothing 'meanspirited' about my observation. What IS meanspirited is what Obama is doing to our Republic. Please explain exactly what he's done to make your life – and your children's lives – better?
Jim Rizoli August 13, 2012 at 09:34 PM
Well if it's any consolation to you...WE can shut the Govt. down send everybody home and we would still be in debt. http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/EW5IdwltaAc?rel=0 Nice! Jim@ccfiile.com
Ralph August 13, 2012 at 10:27 PM
@Deborah Strafuss "Actually, unemployment is down". Deborah, I don't know what statistics you are looking at, but the U.S. Department of Labor says otherwise. In Feb 2009 the unemployment rate was 8.2% -rose to over 9.6% in 2010 and has now settled back to it's present level of 8.3%- one tick higher than when the President was sworn in. You also stated "but will we continue to make a reasonable recovery goal in the next 4 years? Following the current trajectory, there is some hope of digging out of the debt left by earlier administrations." What is considered reasonable? The President himself said if the economy doesn't turn around in his first 4 years, he is a one term President. That economic recovery is slugging along at a snails pace even with a Democratic majority in the House AND Senate for his first 2 years in office, backing all his agenda. Sorry I don't share your enthusiasm for the direction of our economy right now. This, from the U.S. Dept. of Labor as of August 3, 2012 "Both the number of unemployed persons (12.8 million) and the unemployment rate (8.3 percent) were essentially unchanged in July. Both measures have shown little movement thus far in 2012
David Nolta August 13, 2012 at 11:02 PM
Yeah, Postman, don't be such a jerk!
David Nolta August 13, 2012 at 11:05 PM
Well, Clinton GREW the economy by spending on infrastructure, taxing people more fairly, supporting education and jobs programs, etc. What is Romney's record as an employer?.... Hmmm. And when DO you believe the economic figures, FindBalance? When they support your pre-conceptions?
David Nolta August 13, 2012 at 11:08 PM
Oh God, a throwback to the McCarthy days. Yes, Iron Mike, we trust you, because you survived the '50's, to 1) know what socialism means and 2) recognize America-haters when you see them. Rusty....
Joe Rizoli August 13, 2012 at 11:46 PM
I always try to see what "Numbers USA" has to say about our Politicians Immigration stance: https://www.numbersusa.com/content/nusablog/beckr/august-11-2012/paul-ryan-immigration-record-disappointing-he-doesnt-seem-likely-make- >>The good news about Mitt Romney's pick to be his vice presidential running mate is that Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) doesn't seem to have put a lot of thought into immigration policy and doesn't seem to have deep ideological reasons for his poor immigration record during his 14 years in Congress. << He gets a "C" rating from Numbers USA. Joe Rizoli
Ed Bertorelli August 14, 2012 at 02:25 AM
I guess that -for once- Jim Rizoli didn't respond to a post- who was your candidate for President or Vice President ??
Postman August 14, 2012 at 12:34 PM
Clinton didn't do anything until the Newt and republican congress forced his hand. Obama has completely gone against Clinton's welfare program. If you're a Clinton man, then you're more of a Romney guy then Obama. Say "hi" to Debrorah in the sand David!
FindBalance August 14, 2012 at 01:46 PM
That's bologna, David - the driver of the economic growth during the Clinton years was the Internet phenominon (which Clinton had nothing to do with creating - that was Al Gore :-) - but it could be argued he brought to an abrupt halt by suing Microsoft), and a Republican sweep in Congress at the end of Clinton's first 2 years, which forced him to reign in spending (for which I give him credit). Besides, I've never heard your about assertions of Clinton being big on infratructure spending, education, jobs programs (do you mean govt jobs programs?! They would only serve to contribute the cumulative problem of bigger and bigger govt over time) as a means to grow the economy. Let me ask you one of your favorite questions - what are your resources for Clinton getting credit for all these (govt sponsored) things he did as the plan to (successfully) grow the economy? Romney's record as an employer - through investing, let's ask the people at Staples Corp Headquarters how many jobs he's helped create... RE believing govt-produced figures - I take all with a grain of salt. But this administration and this President take fudging figures to another level. A disciple of Saul Alinsky, he (and remember Ram Emmanuel?) will do anything and say anything to achieve his agenda. Plus, these unemployment #'s have been broken down and analyzed to show that in an apples-to-apples comparison with the beginning of his term, the unemployment rate would be double-digits.
Jim Rizoli August 14, 2012 at 02:19 PM
Ed....To be honest I most likely will pass voting this time. Congress runs the country they are controlled by a small group of special interest AIPAC, and the rest is history. The only way people are going to get this country back is on their local levels. Framingham sad to say is lost as the same group AIPAC runs this town too. Not many towns are run by the majority of reasonable people. So I have to sit back and watch it all come tumbling down. Jim@ccfiile.com
Ed Bertorelli August 14, 2012 at 03:03 PM
I think you are correct on Congress running the show but their gridlock shows the power of competing lobbying groups. Then when the Federal Government officials and administration members retire -they go to work for foreign interests like China, Saudi Arabia -too many to mention. I remember the days Jim when Framingham was a vibrant town,,a shopping hub and medical hub-we all came over to Framingham on a regular basis- I believe that a lot has to do with the SMOC takeover of so much of the downtown area.The real hidden power is Mass are all these 03 state accounts that amount to billions of dollars in the pockets of state 'vendors'.
Pete August 14, 2012 at 03:15 PM
In 2008 69 Million "specimens" voted for Obama. So by your account we have 69 million people who hate the U.S. and are Socialists. In 2012, I expect that number will be less, but Obama will win, despite the hate filled labels. In 2008, my 401K plan had been stagnant for the 8 years since Bush took office. In 2012, the market had risen over 30% and my 401K is healthy again. In 2008 Bin Laden was on the loose for over 7 years. In about 2 years he was dead. In 2008, if you had no health insurance, everyone else paid for the cost of your health care. Beginning in 2013, you need to pay for your own insurance. I have not paid one dime more in taxes since Obama took office, nor have you. In 2008, the economy nearly collapsed. Today, banks are back to normal and GM is back in business. In 2008, and in prior years the debt ceiling was raised 172 times. Bush himself increased the debt ceiling one year over 15%. Suddenly, in 2012, Republicans pretend that raising the debt ceiling is a "crisis." So my life is better, my children's life will be better, and I don't really believe you, or any Republican "must hate America" just because you disagree with me. 69 million VOTERS were not wrong.
David Nolta August 14, 2012 at 04:19 PM
Well, FindBalance, I see you are still looking. Here is a nice summary of Bill Clinton's affect on jobs in general, and his interest (thwarted and non-thwarted) in jobs programs: http://www.ontheissues.org/celeb/Bill_Clinton_Jobs.htm There is also a link there to some of his Infrastructure spending (and this includes as well information on his "school-to-work" program, which falls into more than one category). By "jobs programs" I did in fact mean Clinton's oversight of the nation's employment in general; 6 million jobs created in his first two years--you say that's all the internet, and yet, you also say that the Republican "sweep into power" in 1994 was responsible--which makes absolutely no sense. Also before that "sweep," in "1994, the economy had the lowest combination of unemployment and inflation in 25 years." (http://clinton1.nara.gov/White_House/Accomplishments/html/accomp-plain.htm) Not reigned in yet... A little credit where credit is due. Now we could maybe turn our discussion to Clinton's more recent work. Did you see his interview with Jon Stewart a few months back? He talks about jobs programs and the future of the American economy and his book, "Back to Work". Why not have a look? http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-september-16-2010/exclusive---bill-clinton-extended-interview-pt--1 As for Mitt's job-making myth, you have Staples, but I have this: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/23/bain-capital-layoffs-dade-behring_n_1695960.html
FindBalance August 14, 2012 at 06:42 PM
Wow David – I am impressed at how quickly you have all this info at your fingertips; how do you do that? I’ll have to take this piece-meal… First, it was primarily the Internet boom that drove economic growth; I then meant to say only that the R Congress in 1994 reigned in Clinton’s spending, not that it also drove economic growth; my apologies for making the point poorly. My real point there is that if the R Congress kept govt spending in check, how could there have been enough govt spending to do all the things you assert Clinton did to grow the economy? As for the rest of that paragraph - By "jobs programs" I did in fact mean Clinton's oversight of the nation's employment in general… By your logic, 6 years of Clinton’s oversight of the nation’s general employment coincided with an R Congress that shared in that oversight of the economy. I give Clinton credit for not opposing a more business-friendly environment, but I still don’t see that there was a “more govt” approach even allowed during his presidency, let alone one that lead to economic growth. (cont...)
FindBalance August 14, 2012 at 06:42 PM
(...cont) Also, 7 years of his Presidency (1994 to 2000) coincided with the Internet boom. I saw nowhere in your links that 6M jobs were created in his first 2 years. Actually,the link in this paragraph lead to the following message: “Sorry, URL Not Found. The link you just selected ( http://www.whitehouse.gov/White_House/Accomplishments/html/accomp-plain.htm ) could once have been available from the White House Web Site during the Presidency of William Jefferson Clinton.” If that is the case, I’m sure the stats there wouldn’t have had any bias toward Clinton’s presidency. Even if it is accurate that 6M jobs were created in Clinton’s 1st 2 years, 1 of those years was the beginning of the Internet boom. I still don’t see any evidence that backs your initial assertion that “Clinton grew the economy BY SPENDING ON INFRASCTRUCTURE, TAXING PEOPLE MORE FAIRLY, …AND JOBS PROGRAMS [to which jobs programs are you referring?!], etc. [in other words, govt programs]”. I do agree that some of the adult education programs helped train a workforce that could perform the jobs being created in the 1990’s. So please, give evidence that backs your assertion.
FindBalance August 14, 2012 at 07:03 PM
Next – the Huffington Post, a bastion of neutrality. I’d like to hear the other side of the story. Ever been at a company that is having layoffs? I have, and not on the job-keeping side - of course there were morale issues. Not knowing where your next job will be, not having the same routine, not seeing people you may have worked with for many years. But there are no guarantees in life, no one is owed a job. Whose responsibility is it to be of value to an organization (current or future), anyway – the organization, or the individual? If there is potential value to the organization, then the organization will help, but the ultimate responsibility lies with the individual.
Ralph August 14, 2012 at 09:43 PM
Obama is no Clinton... Clinton took the hint when the mid term elections went against him and his party- made the adjustments and things turned around (aka the 'comeback kid'). Mr. Obama had a majority in the House and Senate his first 2 years, with little result. When the electorate voiced displeasure in the most recent mid term election, which lost the dems a majority in the House and a few seats in the Senate, Obama didn't take the hint. Unlike Clinton -he's still playing the blame game. Obama made no adjustments in his policies/agenda to reflect what the people tried to tell him. So, again, I say Obama is no Clinton.
TaterSalad August 27, 2012 at 07:35 PM
Elizabeth "Chief Full-of-Bull-Warren's campaign advisers assault a T.V. cameraman while she hides in a vehicle and never even apologizes for the attack. http://weaselzippers.us/2012/08/27/elizabeth-warren-staffer-assaults-cameraman/
Jim Rizoli August 27, 2012 at 08:31 PM
WOW! That''s great! I've had the same thing happen to me while covering stories. Camera man should get him for an assault. Jim@ccfiile.com
Iron Mike August 27, 2012 at 08:34 PM
Before posting the video to my blog - I called MV Taxi <508 693-8660> ans spone to a man [wouldn't give me his name] who claims HE is the guy in the video - and that HE was assaulted. He seemed pretty edgy and hostile. As a candidate for the US Senate - Warren SHOULD have stepped out and apologized. She didn't. Another revealing day for the voters of the Commonwealth!


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something