THEY MAY NOT BE able to tell you who will win tomorrow's gubernatorial race, but political analysts and election observers can give you a pretty good idea of who will be showing up to vote: Just about everybody.

Considering how generally disputatious the campaign has been, it isn't surprising that crowds will flock to the voting booths tomorrow. What is surprising is that a large group of these voters may not be able come to a decision until they pull the voting booth curtain closed behind them.

This group is the famed Massachusetts liberal establishment, which has been electing progressive governors and legislators for decades. But in today's election between two fiscal conseratives--Democrat John R. Silber and Republican opponent William F. Weld '66--they have nowhere to cast their vote.

"Many people perceive that there are two Republican choices this year," says Michael Goldman, a Democratic political consultant.

Of the two contenders for Dukakis's corner office in the State House, neither fits the bill for traditional state liberals. And Len Unima, a former Republican now running on the Independent High-Tech ticket, is far too socially conservative for hard-core progressives.

"The traditional liberal voter is going to have to compromise or write-in," says Glen S. Koocher '71, host of Cambridge Inside Out, a local cable talk show about politics.

The problem for these liberal voters is that Silber--despite his strong show of support for the party--fits nowhere within the state's Democratic establishment. Rather than "good jobs at good wages," the 63-year old Boston University president and professor of philosophy is promising fiscal responsibility through fiscal conservatism. Last year, Silber reportedly was even considering a run for the U.S. Senate as a Republican.

Silber has transgressed the normal bounds of Massachusetts democratic politics in other spheres as well. Although he describes himself as pro-choice, Silber has said that he considers abortion homicide, and believes a woman should be required to obtain her husband's permission for an abortion. He also opposes a proposed amendment to the state constitution allowing women access to abortion up to the 24th week of pregnancy, or at any time in cases of rape, incest or to protect the life or health of the mother.

In perhaps his most egregious lapse from the party line, Silber opposese just about every environmental initiative that has been proposed for the state. He opposes secondary treatment for the cleanup of Boston Harbor and has called stricter state auto emissions standards an unfair burden on Massachusetts. He opposes the Massachusetts Recycling Initiative, which would require all packaging in the state to be recycled or recyclable by 1996.

He has refused to guarantee the viability ofstate wetlands, and has said the state probablyneeds at least one more incinerator.

Disappointed with Silber, many state liberalshave viewed Weld as a viable alternative,encouraged by his progressive stances on theenvironment and abortion.

For example, Weld has actively voiced hispro-choice stance and has said he supports theproposed constitutional amendment.

Weld also boasts a much stronger environmentalrecord. He favors secondary treatment for BostonHarbor and supporting the newly-created Cape CodCommission limiting development on Cape Cod. AndWeld is an original sponsor of recyclinglegislation that would require 50 percent of stateproducts be made of recycled materials over thenext six years.

But applying such liberal litmus tests ascapital punishment (Weld is in favor of it) toMedicaid (he wants to trim it), left-leaners havefound the former U.S. attorney too far to theright for their liking.

"It makes for a more difficult choice on theirpart," says Paul Watanabe, a political scienceprofessor at the University of Massachusetts atBoston. "It's going to involve some compromise onthe left."