Politics

Where Massachusetts wants to take its Scottish love affair next

Published

4 months ago

June 19, 2026

FOXBOROUGH, Massachusetts — Boston is bouncing and the Massachusetts governor wants to thank thousands of kilted Scottish soccer fans who have taken over the city between Scotland’s first match against Haiti last weekend and its second, against Morocco, today.

The tournament’s shock love affair is sparking delight in Gov. Maura Healey’s office as the supporters plow cash into the local economy, star in feel-good viral videos and drink copious quantities of Sam Adams Boston Lager.

Earlier this week, the governor — who’s seeking what stands to be an easy reelection this year — spoke with Blue Light News about which of Massachusetts’ World Cup wins can be made permanent, including extended hours for bars and service along mass-transit networks.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

Were you expecting this?

Oh, yeah, what do they say? No Scotland, no party? [Author’s note: This is, indeed, what they say.] I would say the Tartan Army’s reputation precedes them in the best of ways. So we knew that they would bring a ton of energy and joy and the noise. The bagpipes, the partying in our restaurants and bars, it’s just been great, and to think — it’s very warm here, of course — half of them are doing it in kilts. It’s really amazing to see.

What has stood out to you?

In just a matter of days, the Tartan Army has become part of the Massachusetts family. We have seen them become regulars at our local restaurants and our pubs. We’ve seen them take over Fenway Park. 5,000 fans marching with bagpipes into the games. We loved the viral videos of them trying hot dogs […] inside Fenway. The videos of them taking over the cruise ships in Boston Harbor. We even had a Boston police officer kicking a soccer ball with them at the fanfest. So it’s just been really wonderful for us in Massachusetts, and we’re thrilled to have them here.

Do you have plans to capitalize on this beyond the World Cup?

Given that Scotland-Haiti was our first match, we were really thrilled. Massachusetts has a huge Haitian population. And then, of course, a lot of people in Massachusetts have ties with Scotland because many, many families here have ancestors who came from Scotland. And I have to say, I think Scotland just set the tone from the day the fans got into town. There was concern leading up to the World Cup, you know, how’s this all gonna work? And the media was covering a lot about security and transportation, and all these things about what could go wrong. And as soon as the Scottish fans arrived, they just laid the whole vibe for the World Cup. It’s gonna be about joy, energy, fun and bringing people together from all around the world. And I really credit them with establishing the vibe for our World Cup experience right at the outset.

Have the ticket prices charged by FIFA had an impact on that?

Well, one thing that I was really determined to do was to make sure that we were able to secure tickets for young people here in Massachusetts, which we did. 1,100 tickets that we distributed through Boys and Girls Clubs, so the kids who otherwise wouldn’t have a chance to see the game, were able to see the game — and for free. We’ve tried as a state to help out where we can, making $10 million available to communities around Massachusetts to host watch parties, because we know not everybody can afford to go to the game.

And as the governor of a blue state, how were your interactions with the Trump administration on planning for the tournament?

Well, when it comes to public safety that is something that it’s so imperative that local, state and federal authorities work together on. We did around transportation funding, security funding, that’s the way it should be. There should be that kind of work and coordination.

At the local level, would you support either a pilot program or a permanent extension of later last call and public drinking districts after the end of July? And would you encourage the legislature to start working on a bill about this?

We wanted to do that to create a welcoming environment, and I know that extension is helping our restaurants and bars and helping local businesses, and helping fans enjoy this experience. I’m certainly open to making some things more permanent, and I think this gives us a great opportunity to pilot it right now and see how it goes.

Do you see it as a runway for allowing happy-hour discounts, which have been banned in Massachusetts for decades, to become legal again? Because you’ve previously expressed problems with the concept.

I expressed support for happy hour the other day. We’ll see, we’ll have more conversations with the legislature.

And in terms of the transport would you consider keeping extended service hours on the MBTA?

I’ve always been for extended service hours. For us, it’s just a matter of budgeting and the labor costs associated with that. Also, you need a little bit of downtime so that trains can get repaired and maintained. We extended hours well before the World Cup on weekends, and it’s certainly something that I’d like to see us do across the system. But again, it’s just a matter of what we can do in terms of budget. But so far, transportation has been working really well. Trains have been made available, and selling out, and people have really enjoyed that experience; it’s been super easy, you know, getting to and from the match.

I think some Scotland fans would maybe dispute that it was easy getting back from the [Haiti] match, but I guess it’s all relative when the stadium is far away from the city.

I know. You can only run so many trains at once. But, hey, they won, so …

I understand it’s a challenge to keep young people in state. Are these measures you approved for a summer of intense tourism part of a longer-term solution?

I think that they’re really important to making sure that people know that we’ve got a great culture here and a great vibe for young people. That’s why I’m building homes […] so we can look at housing costs. Massachusetts is a place where people come to study from all around the world, and it’s a place that’s filled with young people, filled with opportunity. We’ve got an innovative economy, and doing so much in life sciences and robotics and AI, and cutting-edge industries. And it’s a very safe state and safe city. We’ve got the best schools in the country, best health care in the country. We got a lot going for us. And we’ve got great sports teams, too. So it’s a great vibe for young people, and we’re working always to try to make sure the message is out there around the globe. This is a great place to come and study, and start a business or raise a family.

Lisa Kashinsky contributed to this report.

Politics

‘A warning sign for polling’: Why one GOP pollster thinks a blue wave may fall short

Published

17 hours ago

October 19, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Democrats are salivating over, and Republicans are bracing for, a potentially massive blue wave. One GOP pollster is urging everyone to calm down.

Patrick Ruffini, a founding partner at Echelon Insights, has been loudly throwing cold water on Democrats’ hopes of sweeping the red state Senate seats that have become battlegrounds in a worsening national environment for Republicans.

“The polls are, I think, intentionally inflating the size of the battleground,” Ruffini told Blue Light News.

Democrats are pushing to flip Senate seats in Iowa, Texas, Ohio and Alaska — all states that President Donald Trump won by at least 11 points in 2024 — with dreams of going even deeper into the map Kansas, South Carolina and even Mississippi. Sensing a potential disaster, Republicans have significantly curtailed their investments in North Carolina and Georgia to direct resources elsewhere.

Ruffini, who isn’t polling for candidates or party committees in any federal races, said he’s skeptical of Democrats flipping some of those seats, particularly in the Midwest, and gives the GOP a coin flip’s chance at keeping control of the Senate.

If a blue wave were to come, he said it would defy the ingrained partisanship in deep-red states that has mirrored growing political polarization around the country.

“I think it would be somewhat of a historic shift if that were to happen,” he said.

Here’s more from Blue Light News’s chat with Ruffini, edited for length and clarity. A more condensed version of this interview ran in Blue Light News’s Morning Score campaign newsletter.

You’ve been pretty publicly skeptical of polling that indicates a big tsunami for Democrats in November. Why is that?

I think we can read the environment right, but the map wrong.

The pretty large shift towards Democrats that we’re seeing on the generic ballot and in a lot of individual races, I’m not saying that’s not going to materialize. What I am more skeptical of is… the ability of any major party in this polarized era that we’re in to rack up significant gains in states that went double digits for the other side.

I’m not ruling out — I think there will be some [examples]. I think Alaska is one where it’s both an idiosyncratic state, and [Democratic nominee Mary] Peltola has shown some specific candidate-centered strength. Nor would it shock me if [Democrat] James Talarico wins, despite the history in Texas. That would not surprise me, just given the candidate quality disparity, particularly on the Ken Paxton side.

Where I get more skeptical is when you move into the Midwest, where there has historically been pretty large polling errors [overstating Democrats’ chances] in states like Iowa, Ohio. And I think you can extend that to the Democratic enthusiasm around Kansas.

Is your skepticism coming more from the quality of the individual polls that you’re seeing that are showing massive Democratic surges in the Midwest, or is it the history of these states that you’re betting will ultimately win out?

I think fundamentals are going to play an important role, particularly in states where there was a solid Trump advantage. We’re not talking about a state like North Carolina or Georgia that’s only for Trump narrowly, where Democrats, at least in the Senate races, are clearly favored.

Historically the presumption is that states tend to converge on their base partisanship in the closing days of an election, but especially that’s been the pattern in the Midwest.

Specifically as it relates to the polls this year, I think any pollster you would talk to, including myself, is experiencing significant non-response bias favoring Democrats.

When you’re seeing high-propensity Democrats [responding to polls] at twice the rate of high-propensity Republicans, when we know that the turnout on both sides would be roughly evenly paired, that’s a warning sign for polling in this cycle.

It seems like there’s some GOP internal polling saying that Republicans are worried about these states, because they are moving money around to triage certain races. I’m curious if you feel like they’re wrong to be making those decisions?

Absolutely not. They’re not wrong. You do have to take the polls somewhat seriously in the sense of, if you do get a poll that’s within the margin of error, I think you’re duty-bound to spend money in those places and not to ignore what could be a potential signal.

I think that control of the Senate comes down to Texas, so they’re right to be spending money there. If you just look at the amount of money being spent in Texas versus Kansas, obviously it’s a much, much bigger state, and you need to spend much more money.

But it’s not something along the lines of ‘the battleground has shifted. It’s a foregone conclusion. Democrats are going to win the Senate,’ and then the battleground entirely shifts to a state like Kansas or to Iowa, right? I don’t think we’re seeing that.

It sounds like the issue you have is how the broader public is interpreting these polls rather than the polls themselves?

The polls are, I think, intentionally inflating the size of the battleground. And to some extent it’s happening both ways. The polls showing a margin-of- error race in Minnesota is possible, right? I’m not as concerned about a polling error in Minnesota as I am in Kansas.

But because of the number of Democratic internals and because of the incentive of Democratic internals to show close races across the battleground, what you generally tend to see is more of an inflated sense of how big the battleground actually is. A lot of these races just break a certain way.

We’ve reported that Republicans are privately conceding that the House is lost. Is that your reading of the data too?

That’s the best reading of the data. That said, if there’s a three-point polling error or something, then I think it gets very, very tight and anything can happen. But I think that’s the most likely outcome.

What is your prediction for the number of Senate seats Republicans will have?

My prediction for both the probability and the seat count is 50-50. There’s a 50-50 chance Republicans hold the Senate. I think if they do, it’s with 50 seats, probably. But obviously, that can tilt very easily.

Which of these states do you think are going to flip for Democrats?

Alaska is clearly favored. I mean, I don’t know if it’s clearly favored, but I think it’s at least still Democrat. I think Texas is going to be very, very close. I just think the partisanship of the state is — people forget it’s a little bit more Republican than it was back in 2018. I think Republicans are probably being underestimated in Ohio because of the past Midwestern polling error.

At the same time, I would say it’s still uphill in Maine and Michigan to some degree. I think Susan Collins has really been the lone bright spot, at least in terms of the conventional wisdom, the narrative in the Senate for Republicans. I think she has a fighting chance, but I think Republicans are still probably under a 50% chance in both Michigan and Maine, just due to the nature of their partisan lean.

If at the end of all of this it is a real blue wave in the Senate, what will have happened to have made you wrong?

If that happens, we will have seen a level of depolarization in the electorate that we haven’t seen since around 2012. You really have to go back in history for a state like Kansas to flip.That would be pretty unique historically, where it’s a flip where you have an incumbent losing.

That’s the kind of thing that used to happen in Senate races a lot, and then things, starting with Trump, got a lot more polarized. So what that would mean is, maybe this is the start of a new political era. But I think it would be somewhat of a historic shift if that were to happen.

Politics

Ohio returns as a bellwether

Published

19 hours ago

October 19, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Ohio returns as a bellwether

lead image

Politics

Inside the quiet money pullback — for both parties — in Georgia’s Senate race

Published

21 hours ago

October 19, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

The money spigot is sputtering in Georgia’s Senate race amid growing expectations that Democratic Sen. Jon Ossoff will win reelection.

The Senate Leadership Fund, Republicans’ top Senate super PAC, did not spend on broadcast television in the state last week — the first week they were off air in the race, according to tracking firm AdImpact. Neither did Democrats’ Senate Majority PAC.

Senate Majority PAC will also be dark again this week, the Chuck Schumer-aligned group shared first with Blue Light News. It was not immediately clear whether SLF would follow suit. The group declined to comment on their future spending plans in the state.

The spending slowdown underscores how dramatically Georgia’s place on the Senate map has shifted, as Ossoff maintains wide margins over Republican Rep. Mike Collins in public polling and fundraising. Georgia was expected to be one of the cycle’s most expensive and preeminent battlegrounds — now some of the biggest outside spenders are pulling back and turning their attention to more competitive races in redder territory.

The two major Senate super PACs have closely mirrored each other’s spending decisions in recent weeks, with neither fully retreating from the state. They still both technically have future ad reservations booked past this week, but those are not binding, leaving both sides with the flexibility to redirect money as they assess the Senate map. And with two weeks until Election Day and early voting already underway in Georgia, it’s unclear whether either will spend any more in the state.

“National Republicans are abandoning Mike Collins as he continues to show Georgians why he’s unelectable and unfit for office. We are committed to seeing Jon Ossoff through to victory as we come to the final days of this campaign,” SMP spokesperson Lauren French said in a statement.

Collins’ campaign, in a statement, said they were “grateful to every group that’s standing with Rep. Collins and welcome their continued support.”

“With early voting underway, he’s working every day to earn the vote of every Georgian, because Jon Ossoff is a radical leftist who wants to raise their taxes and make their families less safe. Rep. Collins will keep making that case until Ossoff is held accountable on Election Day,” Collins spokesperson Meyer Siegfried said in a statement.

Ossoff’s campaign didn’t respond to a request for comment.

SMP had pledged in the spring to spend $20 million on television for the race, but as of Friday had only spent or reserved $11.5 million, per AdImpact. SLF had announced an initial $44 million investment, but has so far only spent or reserved roughly $20 million.

No Going Back PAC, which is affiliated with President Donald Trump’s MAGA Inc. super PAC, has also dramatically scaled back its own spending on the race over the last two weeks, according to AdImpact.

Republican operatives are still monitoring Georgia’s governor’s race, where recent public polling shows GOP nominee Rick Jackson slightly ahead of Democratic nominee Keisha Lance Bottoms. Republicans believe Jackson’s strength could keep the Senate race closer than currently expected.

But they have grown increasingly pessimistic about their prospects of flipping Georgia’s Senate seat, as Collins trails Ossoff in the polls and the overall environment for the GOP continues to grow more difficult. SLF’s decision to go dark last week — so close to the election — raises questions about how much more the group will ultimately invest in the state.

“Every dollar Schumer spends in Georgia is one not spent on offense in red states. Republicans’ financial advantage doesn’t just show up in more ads, it keeps Dems on defense,” a person familiar with SLF’s spending plans told Blue Light News.

Ossoff also holds a massive fundraising advantage over Collins, who had just over $1 million cash on hand as of Oct. 1, giving Ossoff a major financial cushion in the final stretch even before the major Senate super PACs pulled back their spending.

The GOP has been triaging races across the map: SLF shifted money out of North Carolina, another perennial battleground, while moving resources toward defending GOP-held seats in states like Kansas and South Carolina, where the Senate contests have become increasingly competitive.

Still, even as the money going into Georgia has continued to slow, Trump appears to be prioritizing the longtime battleground.

At a rally in Dalton on Friday, he urged voters to “pretend” he’s on the ballot, while praising Collins and the state’s GOP governor’s nominee, Rick Jackson.

Meredith Lee Hill and Andrew Howard contributed.