TODAY'S Gubernatorial and Senate races confront Massachusetts voters with two markedly different choices; in one race they will have to pick the lesser of two evils while in the other, they have a choice between two credible, issue-oriented candidates. The state will be able to both tread water and move ahead at the same time. The outcome of the Governor's race clearly pretends to be one of the most critical junctures in the state's history. Democratic nominee Edward J. King has neither offered the voters any sensible vision of the state's future direction, nor has he been able to run his campaign without a disturbing number of ethnic, class and personal slurs. The King campaign is nothing more than an amalgamation of special interests, sparked on by deliberate attempts at creating social discontent. Groups such as the highway lobby, medical associations, state employees and state contractors have provided King with $1.3 million of campaign boodle. His espousal of inflexible mandatory prison sentences, Proposition 13, the death penalty and anti-abortion legislation has earned King the support of New Hampshire Gov. Meldrim Thomson and the ubiquitous Howard Jarvis.

Responsible voters appear to have no alternative but to support the Republican nominee Francis W. Hatch '46. Although the ineffectual Delphic Club alumnus will not be able to provide the creative leadership Massachusetts needs, he is well-intentioned and certainly less dangerous than King. Hatch's strong environmental record, moderate stand on social issues and personal open-mindedness contrast sharply with King's record and stvle. Following his primary victory last September, Hatch broadened his constituency, and sought to represent a disparate group of voters without resorting to false promises or shady deals. If Massachusetts is to avoid a four year convulsion leading it back to the Stone Age of backroom deals and demagoguery, Frank Hatch must win today.

The Senate campaign between Republic Sen. Edward Brooke and Democratic Challenger Paul Tsongas has lacked much of the candor and opportunism found in the gubernatorial race. Both men have campaigned professionally, sticking with the issues and rising above personalities. But still there are sharp differences. Brooke, the sleek Washington insider, deserves great credit for his leadership in the fight for human services and rights, especially in the areas of federal housing and abortion rights. But there is the other side of Ed Brooke; the manipulative politician with an abysmal consumer voting record who has garnered tens of thousands of dollars in contributions from medical associations, realtors, bankers and insurance interests. There is the Ed Brooke who waffled on the Panama Canal Treaties and who favors a moratorium on the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks. Finally, there is the Ed Brooke whose own personal finances are characterized by improprieties if not illegalities; and who has sponsored such incompetent (if not blatantly corrupt) men as former Federal District Judge Willie Davis, former U.S. Atty. James N. Gabriel and former GSA regional chief Albert Gammal for public office.

Legitimate questions have arisen over the value of Brooke as a symbol in the lily-white Senate. But for twelve years Brooke has had that opportunity and for twelve years he has never been more than a moderately good Senator and he has become an increasingly tarnished symbol.

Paul Tsongas gave up a re-election to Congress in order to challenge Brooke several weeks prior to the publication of Brooke's personal problems. As a reformer in Lowell and Middlesex County politics, and then as an outstanding Congressman, Paul Tsongas has shown he has the intelligence and moral fortitude to perform equally well in the Senate. Tsongas's creative approach to energy problems, his sophistication in dealing with third world issues, his work on behalf of state and federal urban revitilization policies, and his support of the Kennedy-Corman national health insurance bill (which Brooke opposes) are representative of his highly progressive politics. With the idealism and sincerity of a Boy Scout, Tsongas offers a more honest and accessible style of leadership than that of the aloof Brooke.