I find anyone who spends large amounts of their personal wealth on campaigns is generally looked down upon. Anyone crazy enough to spend that kind of money to win a governor's job might just be committed enough to do a good job. (I think I'd be sitting on a beach somewhere with a rum based tropical drink and my millions). Clearly they know how to make money and they you would think they can't be bought easily. I don't like the idea of buying an election either, but people still have to go vote for you (twice in the democratic candidates case) and it takes some convincing to pull it off. I'm always disappointed by low voter turnout and I don't see any of these candidates turning them out in big numbers.

I still don't know enough about either Gabrieli or Patrick to have an educated opinion just yet. If Patrick keeps hanging in with a solid liberal base and without the ads, you have to figure he is odds on to win the primary (barring a major gaffe).

You know what you get with Riley. Out of the gate I though he would be a decent candidate. But he has made some bad decisions and can't outrun the reputation of being a career politician against two guys with outsider approaches and a republican who can hammer him on his democratic record. In a state that has gone republican in the executive office for a while now, having a democratic track record makes for easy targeting. If he wins the primary, it also may hurt Patrick in the general election if he only holds on to his core liberals

I'm surprised there hasn't been more commentary on this thread. But I'll say one thing, I'm registered unenrolled so my opinion means squat. I won't be voting in the democratic primary unless spurred on by something major in the next month.

The "Killer Coke" campaign makes for some fun, but its really nothing real.. and is just making Tom Reilly look bad again.

Patrick seems to be stalled with just his left-wing liberal base. I've personally never seen him or heard his views (most of what I read just seems like typical democratic platform stuff).

Gabrielli has a lot of local political support. I do like someone who has worked in the real world.. ie had to make a payroll, pay taxes, etc.

Normally that would push me towards Mihos, but I think he's just a lost cause, and a vote there would be wasted.

We also need to keep an eye on Lt Gov Healy (she did well at that breakfast in Lowell a few months ago). She needs to become part of the Big Dig solution and make a name for herself. I liked her pension reform stuff.. but we all know that they will be as big a battle as the big dig was.

Shawn, it's interesting how in this day and age of new media, the ads define a candidate and not what they are saying. Gabrieli has gotten a boost from his TV ad campaign, and Reilly has not. Patrick now gets his chance with the debut of his ads while Healey is also stepping into the airwave wars. I am looking forward to the televised debates from now until the primary. These usually bring out the best and worst about the candidates or at least it shows how they will work under pressure. Right now, I see very little spark in the Reilly camp although insiders tell me that the AG is ready to do something big. I find that hard to believe. Patrick's got charisma and Gabrieli has cash. Who wins? Cash is hard to beat in this game, but what do I know?

Gabrielli surge is obviously tied to TV ads. Patrick needs to add to his base, which he can if he can get his ideas out effectively. So far these two have been able to campaign without any negatives. Reilly, on the other hand, has just about blown any chance he had, starting with the Lt Gov selection fiasco, some questionable claims on the Big Dig, strict opposition to Cape Wind, and now involvement in Killer Coke group.

I first heard Patrick interviewed on NPR well before he announced his bid for governor. He came across very much as a moderate. Since then, he has sought and won the support of teacher unions. Since then, his education platform has morphed into the union platform: removing MCAS as a graduation requirement, reducing class size, universal preschool,... all things that benefit the practioners, but not the students.

The unions subsidize his campaign, and I'm sure that makes up for some of his shortfall in spending when compared to Gabrielli. At least Gabrielli is spending his own money. Public school teachers must pay an agency fee to the union. That money is not supposed to be used for political purposes -- but when is the last time the unions were audited to ensure that isn't happening. Can it even be detected or is the line so blurred that it no longer matters?

As for me, I'm unenrolled and voting for Kerry Healey. She's the only candidate who recognizes the need for pension reform, who has not been bought by the unions, and who can counter-balance our out-of-touch/out-of-control legislature.