Topline results and crosstabs for the poll can be found at www.umass.edu/poll

One year away from the 2026 Massachusetts gubernatorial election, Mike Kennealy leads the early field of Republican challengers lining up for an opportunity to face incumbent Governor Maura Healey, according to a new statewide University of Massachusetts Amherst/WCVB Poll.

Image

“With the campaign for the GOP gubernatorial nomination still in its early stages, our polling finds that former Massachusetts Sec. of Housing and Economic Development, Mike Kennealy, has emerged as the early leader in the Republican contest to face Gov. Maura Healey next November, with nearly 4-in-10 likely Republican voters indicating their support for Kennealy,” says Tatishe Nteta, provost professor of political science at UMass Amherst and director of the poll. 

“Among key demographics in the GOP, most notably Trump voters, conservatives, working class, middle class and the wealthy, Kennealy has garnered a plurality of support relative to his two challengers,” Nteta continues. “While this comes as welcome news to the Kennealy campaign, with 10 months until the GOP primary and close to 20% of Republican voters ‘not sure’ who they will support, both Mike Minogue and Brian Shortsleeve have a clear opportunity to make their case to Republican voters that they have what it takes to defeat Governor Healey in 2026.”

The poll finds Kennealy drawing 37% support from Republicans and pure independents who plan to participate in the 2026 Republican primary, while Shortsleeve, former Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority chief administrator, and Minogue, former CEO of medical device company Abiomed, pull 22% and 23% support each, respectively.

“While Kennealy and Shortsleeve have previously served in prominent positions in former Gov. Charlie Baker’s administration, and Minogue has been a long-time financial supporter of the state Republican party, our polling indicates that the state’s Republican electorate are still getting acquainted with the three men vying to become the GOP’s nominee to take on Healey in 2026,” Nteta adds. “Fifty-two percent of Republican likely primary voters express a lack of familiarity with the candidates and a plurality is ‘not sure’ about the ideological leanings of the three candidates.”

“Republican voters are split on what they want from a nominee – honesty, strength, or ideological purity – which shows how much the Massachusetts GOP is still searching for a clear identity heading into 2026,” observes Raymond La Raja, professor of political science at UMass Amherst and co-director of the poll. “Voters repeatedly place ‘someone I can trust’ toward the top of their candidate wish list, however. This signals that, even within a highly partisan setting, character still matters. In the GOP primary, this means the winner must not simply emphasize issues these voters care about but must persuade the base that they are dependable and will follow through.”

La Raja looks at the battles over ideological purity being fought in many primary battles nationally and doubts that rightward movement by GOP candidates could prove effective in the Bay State. 

“A relatively large number of Republican primary voters say that supporting President Trump’s agenda is among their top priorities when choosing a gubernatorial candidate,” he says. “That share underscores Trump’s continued influence in the Massachusetts GOP –even in a heavily blue state – while also revealing a party divided between loyalty to Trump and a desire for candidates who emphasize honesty, experience and electability. However, even as Trump remains influential, most Republican voters describe Kennealy, Shortsleeve and Minogue as moderates or somewhat conservative rather than hard-right figures. That mix suggests GOP voters in the commonwealth are still looking for someone who is electable.”
 

An Uphill Fight to Defeat Maura Healey

The results of the new UMass Amherst/WCVB Poll also indicate that whoever ultimately proves triumphant in the Republican primary will likely face a difficult challenge in trying to unseat Gov. Healey next November.

“In hypothetical matchups against Kennealy, Shortsleeve and Minogue, Healey leads each candidate by more than 20 percentage points,” Nteta says. “Surprisingly, most residents of the commonwealth have seemingly already made up their minds about the race, as less than 18% express some uncertainty about their vote choice. As the Republican candidates continue to duke it out for their party’s nomination, our polling indicates that Healey is in good position to remain governor.”

Nteta says that while Healey has yet to achieve the popularity of her immediate predecessor, she still enjoys high approval from voters.

“For years, former Gov. Charlie Baker held the mantle as the nation’s most popular governor with his job approval ratings at times exceeding 70%,” Nteta says. “While Gov. Healey has yet to achieve this lofty standard, close to 6-in-10 (57%) approve of the job that she is doing. The breadth of her popularity is evidenced by the majorities of male, female, young, middle-aged, older, middle class, wealthy, people of color and white residents who approve of Healey’s job performance. Delving more deeply into assessments of Healey’s handling of key issues, such as the economy, education, transportation and health care, a majority of Bay Staters give the governor positive grades, with majorities believing that Healey has handled these issues ‘well.’ Finally, when asked to describe the governor in one word, some of the most frequently mentioned words are ‘good,’ ‘strong,’ ‘competent,’ ‘smart’ and ‘leader.’

“Healey looks well positioned today to return to the corner office on Beacon Hill in 2026,” Nteta concludes.

“Healey is clearly popular with Democratic voters, although among independents she and her prospective Republican opponent are running roughly even with many of them unsure. That’s a key swing bloc in statewide races,” La Raja explains. “But Massachusetts remains a deeply Democratic state and, with more than half of voters identifying as Democrats, she can afford to split independents and still maintain a double-digit advantage.”

La Raja concludes that, “In these polarized times, Massachusetts elections are dominated by partisanship, not swing voters. Unless Republicans expand their base beyond a quarter of the electorate, even a middling performance among independents is unlikely to threaten a Democratic incumbent like Healey.”
 

Issues Facing the Governor: Housing and Immigration

The new UMass Amherst/WCVB Poll also asked respondents of their views of the top issues facing Gov. Healey, including housing, migrant policies, education and more.

“While our polling is likely to be welcome news for Gov. Healey and her supporters, for the three Republican candidates looking for the governor’s Achilles heel, the answer may be in her handling of the state’s housing crisis,” Nteta says. “Given the continued shortage of affordable housing in the state and record-high rent prices, residents of the commonwealth have given Healey failing grades on her handling of housing, with close to 6-in-10 (58%) stating that Healey has not performed well on the issue. With close to one-quarter of our respondents wanting the governor and legislature to address housing in the coming year, Healey will have to tackle the housing crisis head on. Failure to do so may provide the opening that the Republican gubernatorial candidates have been looking for and may imperil Healey’s plan to remain governor.”

Image

One issue on which Healey may be gaining traction and increasing her overall approval numbers, however, is her administration’s response to immigration, according to Jesse Rhodes, professor of political science at UMass Amherst and co-director of the poll.

“Likely in response to troubling reports and images of immigration enforcement under President Trump, Massachusetts residents have become noticeably more opposed to harsh immigration tactics over the past eight months,” Rhodes says. “For example, while 45% of Massachusetts residents opposed using the U.S. military and National Guard to enforce federal immigration law in February, that number surged to 54% in October. Similarly, 41% of Massachusetts residents opposed local or state police assisting the federal government in deporting undocumented immigrants from Massachusetts in February, but that number grew to 49% in October. Ironically, support for immigration enforcement has declined, possibly reflecting backlash to Trump-era policies that appear harsh to voters.

“As opposition to harsh immigration enforcement has grown in the commonwealth over the past eight months, Massachusetts residents have also become more sympathetic to undocumented immigrants,” Rhodes continues. “In February, 64% of Massachusetts residents supported allowing undocumented immigrants to become U.S. citizens if they met requirements and committed no crimes. By October, that number jumped to 68%. Meanwhile, support for deporting undocumented immigrants has fallen slightly. We seem to be in the midst of a backlash against Trump’s deportation agenda.”

“In recent years, in response to the influx of migrant families coming to Massachusetts, millions of dollars have been allocated to providing shelter, food and basic necessities to these newcomers in line with the requirements associated with the state’s ‘right to shelter’ law,” Nteta adds. “Given the financial strain that the shelter system placed on the state, observers might have expected that residents of the state would have abandoned their support for this policy, but surprisingly our polling finds that close to 7-in-10 residents (67%) express support for the ‘right to shelter,’ an increase of 6 percentage points from February. The policy is broadly popular as majorities of gender, generational, educational, class and racial groups similarly express support for this law. Notably, we find that even 4-in-10 Trump voters, Republicans and conservatives are supportive of this law.”

The poll’s results show Bay State residents also indicate that ICE will continue to receive a chilly reception across the commonwealth, should Trump direct increased immigration enforcement actions toward Massachusetts.

“A majority of Massachusetts residents opposes an increased ICE presence in the commonwealth,” Rhodes says. “Opposition is particularly strong – with 59% opposed – to ICE enforcement actions against undocumented immigrants under the age of 18. These observations dovetail with rising opposition among Massachusetts residents to harsh immigration enforcement. Indeed, and ironically, Trump’s harsh measures seem to be eliciting an upsurge of sympathy toward undocumented immigrants, and resistance to ICE, among the commonwealth’s residents.”

Rhodes also says that Massachusetts residents are aligned with policies other states are undertaking to increase transparency among immigration officers. 

“Earlier this year, California became the first state to prohibit federal immigration agents from wearing masks to hide their identities while on duty. Similar legislation has been proposed in the commonwealth and our survey suggests that this legislation enjoys considerable support – indeed, 59% of Massachusetts residents say they support prohibiting ICE agents in the commonwealth from wearing masks to conceal their identity. Given this groundswell of support, it’s possible that Massachusetts could join California in requiring ICE agents to show their identities while performing their duties.”

Rhodes notes that beyond the obvious partisan and ideological cleavages, immigration attitudes in the commonwealth are marked by sharp age and educational differences.

“Younger people are more likely to have pro-immigrant attitudes than older people, sometimes by 20 percentage points or more,” Rhodes says. “Similarly, those with more education are much more likely to hold pro-immigrant attitudes than those with less education. The age gap in immigration attitudes is likely due both to greater racial and ethnic diversity among younger Massachusetts residents relative to older ones, and to more progressive political values. The education gap likely reflects both self-interest – those with more education may perceive less economic threats from undocumented immigrants – and values – those with more education may have had more exposure to the idea that diversity is beneficial. The age and education gaps over immigration in the commonwealth are a microcosm of our national political cleavages, where these factors are playing an outsize role in today’s partisan conflicts.”
 

Methodology

For this University of Massachusetts Amherst/WCVB Poll, YouGov interviewed 800 adults from Massachusetts, 416 of which were likely Democratic primary voters, providing two samples of interest. These respondents were sampled based upon a sampling frame on gender, age, race and education. The sampling frame is a politically representative “modeled frame” of Massachusetts adults, based upon the American Community Survey (ACS) public use microdata file, public voter file records, the 2020 Current Population Survey (CPS) Voting and Registration supplements, the 2020 National Election Pool (NEP) exit poll, and the 2020 CES surveys, including demographics and 2020 presidential vote.

For the main sample, the cases were weighted to the sampling frame using propensity scores. The cases and the frame were combined and a logistic regression was estimated for inclusion in the frame. The propensity score function included age, gender, race/ethnicity, years of education and home ownership. The propensity scores were grouped into deciles of the estimated propensity score in the frame and post-stratified according to these deciles. The weights were then post-stratified on 2024 presidential vote choice as well as a four-way stratification of gender, age (4-categories), race (4-categories) and education (4-categories), to produce the final weight for the main sample.

For the 416 Massachusetts likely Democratic primary voters, a sampling frame of 2022 Vote Smart Massachusetts Democratic primary voters was employed. The cases were post-stratified on a three-way stratification of gender, age (4-categories) and race (2-categories) to produce the final weight for this sample of Democratic primary voters.

The margin of error of this poll is 4.1% among all respondents and 6.1% among Democratic likely voters.

Topline results and crosstabs for the poll can be found at www.umass.edu/poll