Baker vs Coakley

IF I were 18 and eligible to vote, I would cast my vote to elect Mr. Charles Baker to become the next governor of the commonwealth of Massachusetts. I wouald not vote for Martha Coakley because I believe her paritcular focuses are out of touch and would put Massachusetts behind in the ever lasting race to become the best commonwealth in the nation. There are many reasons, however, I would vote for Charley Baker. I believe that Education is important in the early stages of life, where Coakley focuses, but I believe the most opportune time to learn is during grades 9-12, where young minds strive to reach the pinnacle of their childhood educations. Raising the states limits on charter schools would allow for better learning environments for young minds. Higher education is just as important as a secondary education for this is where young minds test the waters of adulthood, trying to get their foot in the door that leads to the real world. Accelerated bachelors and Masters programs for higher achieving students allows them to get an edge on the competition. I believe that higher achieving minds should be rewarded for their achievements and hard work, which is why I would vote Charley Baker in this aspect. This would also reduce the cost of the programs, and get the students out the door earlier. This way they have a smaller debt and a jump start to paying it off. I for one believe that sick time for workers should not be a major point of discussion in an election because it seems like common sense that if someone is really sick they deserve to take time out, however, working in the food business in an establishment of over 100 employees (on the payroll) I have seen firsthand the fraudulent nature of taking a sick day. People should earn their sick days when they are healthy, and to ensure that these days would be paid days, I would vote for Baker's Policy of this being implemented in workplaces with 50+ workers to ensure small businesses aren't hindered by paying these days. One of the main reasons I think Martha Coakley is not right for this position is her criticism of Baker on focusing too much on Welfare Reform. Welfare is a major source of fraud nationwide and requires action to fix it. Coakley doens't seem to think so, why? I do not know, but that is her business. Stricter welfare policies and incentives for businesses to higher welfare recipients A reduces fraud and B gives work to welfare recipients to get them off of it. Simple as that Coakley doesn't know what she is talking about. Boom.