Does Anyone in Massachusetts Feel Sorry for the Duke?

DOES anyone else in the world feel sorry for Mike Dukakis?

Massachusetts' Wonder Boy turned Whipping Boy has fallen about as far as a politician can fall in a one-year period.

It was just a little more than a year ago when the Duke marched into the Democratic Convention in Atlanta as a conquering hero. He had just successfully walked a political tightrope, garnering the support of the liberal Rev. Jesse L. Jackson only days after choosing the conservative Sen. Lloyd Bensten (D-Tex.) as his running mate.

Dukakis had a commanding lead in the polls over then-Vice President Bush, who at the time had not shaken the so-called wimp-factor.

The Duke sauntered into the Convention Center with Neil Diamond's "America" blaring in the background. The song, like the speech that followed it, was corny and cliched, but for the first time during the campaign Dukakis was able to make an emotional connection with his audience.

While Dukakis was delivering that speech, I liked him as a person for the first time, and I didn't think there was any way the Duke could lose.

He did.

And it now appears he'll pay for it the rest of his life. The feeding frenzy--by the press, elected officials in the Bay State and the public at-large--has been incredible. And many of those attacking Dukakis now (the Boston Globe and the state's democratic leadership spring to mind) were among his most vocal supporters just 12 short months ago.

MOST of the anti-Dukakis rhetoric has been cloaked in disgust at the state's ever-worsening fiscal crisis. His critics say the Duke let things slide in the state while he was running for president and claim he juggled the economic numbers to make things here look rosy.

Now, the state's credit rating is on par with Mississippi's. Spending is being slashed, and Dukakis just signed the largest tax hike in years into law. Suddenly, the great Massachusetts miracle doesn't seem so miraculous.

When Dukakis tried to bring the budget into balance by slashing state aid to cities and towns, the state Legislature over-rode his veto of the aid. The House of Representatives did it unanimously. That has to hurt.

And this week even Dukakis's home town of Brookline has joined the Duke-bashing by bringing suit against the state over the aid crisis. (Yesterday's Boston Globe featured an editorial cartoon in which a toga-clad Dukakis cries "Et tu, Brookline.")

No one, except Kitty, wants to have anything to do with the governor. Democratic hopefuls for governor, including Dukakis' second-in-command, Lt. Gov. Evelyn Murphy, have distanced themselves from him.

CERTAINLY, some of the criticism is justified. The Duke was very eager to take credit for the state's economic success during good times, and now that times are tough, he obviously must share in the blame.

But much of the criticism of Dukakis has been unfounded. Instead of really analyzing the state's problems--and putting them in the context of a regionwide downturn--the reaction has been centered on Dukakis, the man, and Dukakis, the perceived failure. The attacks are simply the result of his having been a big loser.

There is no room in the American credo for losers. This is a country of hard-working achievers, the logic goes. So, if you lose in anything, it must be because of a deficiency in your character or a lack of dedication.

This formula is especially true in politics.

What is Walter Mondale doing these days? Does anyone care? How about Jimmy Carter or Gerald Ford?

While each of these candidates, like Dukakis, have been perceived widely as laughing-stocks after their defeats, they, unlike the Duke, were able to disappear quickly from the public spotlight after going down.

However, Dukakis had to remain a public figure after his crushing election defeat. There was no cooling off period. Smelling blood, the vultures have repeatedly swooped in on Dukakis who could not run anywhere for cover.

I'M sure the Duke is now counting down the days until he can escape the State House. He'll probably go on to lead a quiet life as an attorney or maybe as a professor.

Of course, the Duke could rise from the ashes and make another run at the White House. Stranger things have happened.

Everyone had written off Richard Nixon after he was edged by John Kennedy in the 1960 presidential race. Tricky Dick was in an even more embarrassing position than the Duke since two years after his defeat he was bested by Pat Brown in the California governor's race.

After laying low for a few years in New York, Nixon went on to be elected to the presidency not once, but twice. And, well, the rest is history.

It remains to be seen whether Mike Dukakis can stage such a dramatic comeback. But whatever his fate, the Duke deserves better treatment than he has been getting lately.

He should be viewed simply as some one whose luck has run out, not as a self-made pariah.