From The Boston Globe:

Patrick, displaying a front-runner’s confidence, responded with a call for eight debates, including two in western Massachusetts, though he did not specify they be televised. He also specifically urged that the debates include both Cahill and Baker, underscoring the benefit he believes will come through a three-way race in which Cahill draws from Baker’s potential conservative vote.

…

“The governor hopes that Tim Cahill and Charlie Baker will join him in one debate a week between Labor Day in September and Election Day in November, for a total of eight debates overall,” said a statement from spokesman Alex Goldstein.

…

Meanwhile, Stein complained in her statement that movie producers and biotech companies continue to receive breaks amid the national recession while state aid to cities and towns is cut.

She said voters “are looking for some way to end the giveaways” and redirect spending to town budgets.

“Charlie Baker and Deval Patrick are ducking debates already,” Stein said. “Governor Patrick has refused to appear on stage with other candidates on multiple occasions, allowing only forums without cross-candidate dialogue and real challenge. Often Charlie Baker is not showing up at all. Their fear of real debate is telling.”

It’s official, Deval Patrick and Charlie Baker are afraid of real debate, and afraid of the people’s candidate, Jill Stein!

From the Stein campaign:

STEIN CONDEMNS BAKER/PATRICK ATTEMPTS TO RESTRICT DEBATES

Green-Rainbow Party gubernatorial candidate Jill Stein issued the following statement in response to a call from Republican candidate Charlie Baker – later echoed by Governor Deval Patrick – for a series of debates that would exclude Stein:

“The important question is not the kind of debates that Charlie Baker or Deval Patrick want to gain an edge for their campaigns, but what the voters want. We’ve heard over and over that voters want change on Beacon Hill.  The business-as-usual candidates feel threatened by debates that include candidates who are advocating for real change.  It would be a terrible disservice to voters and our democracy to let them shut down that debate before it’s begun. Pay-to-play favoritism on Beacon Hill has brought us an economic melt down, rampant job loss, devastating budget cuts, schools in crisis, and escalating taxes and fees.  Now more than ever, people want to hear about alternatives, and not have discussion limited to advocates of the very political parties that created our problems.”

“It’s clear that the two candidates whose party machines have been in charge of Beacon Hill for the last several years want nothing to do with a candidate who is an honest-to-goodness outsider and who is coming to the debates with criticisms of Democrat/Republican failures. They want a strictly controlled dialogue – such as the recent three-man pseudo-debate on WRKO radio, hosted by disgraced former House Speaker Tom Finneran.  That was nothing more than an excuse for the business-as-usual Beacon Hill boys’ club to get together and continue to ignore the very real problems we’re facing. We are not going to see real, enlightening debates unless I am included.”

“The candidates proposing these exclusionary debates have already shown their disinterest in truly informing voters about their choices. Governor Patrick has refused to appear on stage with other candidates on multiple occasions, attending only forums without cross-candidate dialogue or real challenge. Often Charlie Baker is not showing up at all, or is sending a surrogate. Their fear of open dialogue is telling.”

“As a matter of fairness – every candidate who qualifies for the November ballot should be invited to debate.  It’s outrageous that polls are being used as excuses to prevent some candidates from being heard – especially when you consider that these polls only ask where likely voters are leaning at the moment, and are being conducted before the broader public has had a chance to hear all the candidates.  Even voters who lean toward one candidate want to hear about their other options. Debates should drive polls, not the other way around.”

“Exclusionary debates limited to Governor Patrick and Charlie Baker will destroy any hopes for the breath of fresh air that the people of Massachusetts so desperately want in their political life.  Responsible journalists and the people of this Commonwealth should insist upon open and inclusive debates.”