While both candidates were rightfully wary of running a negative campaign--Boston elections tend to be the verbal equivalent of gang warfare--being tough on your opponent and mud-slinging are not mutually exclusive. King waited until almost the half-way point of the five-week final election to seriously question Flynn's professed "liberalism" and "growth," by which time it was already too late.

DESPITE WHAT those who think Boston is too bigoted say. Mel King could have won this election. Ray Flynn, too, is considered an outsider, and if he does win tomorrow he will become the first to reach Parkman House from South Boston.

The difference between the two is that Flynn, though keeping his somewhat dubious liberal credentials intact, has indicated that he is not an ideologue, but a man who will search for the common denominators, or "issues of communality" as he calls it.

In that sense, it is Flynn rather than King who has assembled a real coalition, rainbow pins to the contrary. King wedded himself to the traditional liberal-intellectual-minority axis in a city that, beyond Back Bay and Beacon Hill, is not known for its progressivism.

And this is a shame, because King is more intelligent and has a better conception of city politics and government than Ray Flynn. But he has not been able to convey this message to the majority of the city's electorate.

Ray Flynn has, and that is why he will most likely be the next mayor. But what king of mayor he will be is anybody's guess.