The political landscape in Massachusetts is very competitive. After emerging victorious from a competitive democratic primary, Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley has been locked in a dead heat with Republican challenger Charlie Baker for the Commonwealth's corner office. With three independent candidates further complicating the race, the outcome of the Massachusetts gubernatorial election could very well hinge on independent voters. As the largest voting bloc in the state with more than 2 million voters, unenrolled voters could make or break a candidate, especially since 50 percent of those likely to vote on Tuesday are independents.

In addition to independents, women are also a key demographic not to be underestimated in this year's elections. 2014 has marked a year of progress for women in Massachusetts politics with strong female candidates in the running for five of the Commonwealth's executive offices. Historically, women turnout at higher levels compared to other key demographics, and this characteristic will likely be emphasized by having a historic number of women on the ballot.

As a result, Democrats and Republicans alike have advanced their positions on certain social and economic issues that resonate highly with female voters, such as healthcare, jobs, and education. However, single issue campaigns that focus on "women's issues" such as reproductive health have so far proved ineffective and have failed to resonate with the multi-dimensional female voting bloc. The Republican Party nationwide - and especially in Massachusetts - has worked diligently to close the gender gap, understanding that the support of women is essential for victory. On Tuesday when the polls close, people in Massachusetts and across the nation will find out how successful Republicans were in their efforts to persuade more women to their side.

Massachusetts residents are also keeping a close eye on their neighbor to the north, where former Massachusetts Senator Scott Brown is challenging incumbent Senator Jeanne Shaheen for the U.S. Senate seat in New Hampshire. Although Senator Shaheen has yielded higher favorability ratings than Brown throughout the campaign, Republicans have executed a strong operation focused on linking her performance with President Obama's unpopularity and Congress' low approval ratings. Like many key races across the nation, New Hampshire's U.S. Senate race has received a record amount of spending from independent expenditure groups and Super PACs outside the state; organizations that hope to positively set the stage for their respective party in the 2016 presidential elections.

Last October, we awoke to headlines and news stories about what has come to be known as "the disastrous launch of healthcare.gov," the federal government's health insurance exchange. 

Now, one year later, the folks at CMS have taken a long look at what went wrong from a contracting, systemic and technical standpoint. They promise us that they are better prepared now and will not make the same mistakes again.

But there are larger lessons for all of us - in politics, communications and in business - that grow from the nightmare that was the start of healthcare.gov.  

1. Welcome bad news - It's clear now that lots of folks - at CMS and at prime healthcare.gov contractor CGI Federal - knew the website wasn't ready, but no one told the boss.  Nobody wants to hear bad news, but it is incumbent on leaders to create an environment that welcomes the truth.

2. Take the long view - The website wasn't ready on October 1.  But launching on October 1, rather than October 15 or November 1, became the most important objective.  Would it really have been so horrible to delay the launch 30 days?

3. Be honest with yourself - The prime contractor, CGI, won the bid because they promised to deliver at an unrealistic price.  If you can't do the work for the promised price, don't try.  It's better to pass and move on to the next thing.  Otherwise, there likely won't be a next thing.

4. Don't circle the wagons - It was clear in the first hours that the website launch was going to be more than a little bit bumpy; but CMS and the Obama folks closed the circle, refused outside counsel and discouraged two-way communications, instead of reaching out to allies and supporters with the best information they had and seeking guidance.  As a result, allies were left with little to say, and so many piled-on.

5. Winning isn't everything - From the beginning of the Obamacare debate, the White House was focused only on winning, instead of building consensus in support of health reform.  That has made it easy for Obama opponents (read "Republicans") to attack everything that's gone wrong with the ACA. We all knew the law was far from perfect and that things were going to go wrong.  Imagine how different this debate would be had 20 Republican Senators voted "aye."

6. Stick to your message - Americans have never adequately understood why more people having health insurance is better than fewer people having health insurance.  That's because it was never adequately explained. I'm not suggesting that would have been easy to do, but since "why cover everyone?" tested as "too complicated," it was abandoned far too early.  Now, no one is sure why we're going through all this.

7. Hope is not a strategy - As we tell our clients all the time, keeping one's fingers crossed, lighting candles, hoping no one will notice or that everything will work out... these tactics are insufficient.  Hope for the best, plan for the worst.