Google Ads


Site Stats

On Martha Coakley, and the Bay State Debacle

by: JFM110

Sat Jan 16, 2010 at 2:24 AM EST


I recognize that there is an intense level of anger and frustration among we of the Democratic base right now, faced as we are with a scenario most of us could not have conceived in our worst nightmares, however I think the rabid anti-Coakleyism spreading around the internets these days is getting just a wee bit unfair. In this respect I largely agree with Nate Silver - yes, she is a boring candidate, and yes, she did run a dull, almost absentee campaign... but when you're in Massachusetts, and you're a high-profile statewide elected official, and you're running as a Democrat against a fairly obscure state senator to succeed Ted Kennedy, none of those things should be unforgivable offenses. Let's face it: there is a LOT of Monday morning quarterbacking going on here. To be sure, there were plenty of people (myself included) who had reservations about her in the primary, but clearly none of those concerns translated into anything near the blind, existential panic we are now facing as we creep up upon January 19th. If anyone can point to a post he/she left, here or anywhere else, indicating his/her grave uneasiness about the threat posed by Scott Brown in a general election, I'd love to see it - I'm genuinely curious.

This is obviously not to say Coakley's camp is blameless. Going dark for a month was malpractice of the highest order, and her campaign manager should never be allowed to work in American politics ever again. But the over-the-top vitriol being directed at the candidate herself is starting to become unseemly, and frankly sort of classless. I doubt any of us can imagine what its like to be in her shoes at this very moment, being pegged by pundits and partisan activists nationwide as the pariah who single-handedly flushed the Democratic supermajority - and by extension, Ted Kennedy's dream of universal healthcare - down the drain. By all accounts, Martha Coakley is a capable public servant, a fairly committed progressive, and by almost any measure a more qualified candidate for the United States Senate than Scott Brown. Yes, her probable defeat on Tuesday will almost certainly mark the end of her political career, and that can be argued as being perfectly appropriate, but I hardly think it cause for open celebration.

Just as determinate as any particular fault of the Coakley campaign is, I think, the basic issue highlighted by PPP in the poll that touched off this horrific week: a profound disparity in enthusiasm between D's and R's, the very same one reflected in the outcomes of the gubernatorial races in New Jersey and Virginia. The electorate turning out for special/off-year downballot elections is simply a different universe of individuals than those who came to the polls in 2008. Beyond the predictable backlash from the right, who knows how many people voted for Obama having never voted in their lives, and may never vote again? I think we can anticipate the relative drop-off from here out to be comparable to what we have seen thus far, and that alone augurs poorly for our near-term electoral prospects - whether or not we have Coakleys or Capuanos on the ballot.

JFM110 :: On Martha Coakley, and the Bay State Debacle
Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

Yeah but
Coakley knew the stakes, and she took the voters of Massachusetts for granted.  She did not ask for their votes, but rather assumed she was going to get them.  Martha Coakley largely put herself in this box.  It's hard to sympathize.  However, she's definitely not alone in the blame game.  Blame Congress for months of piddling with healthcare reform.  Blame the national Dems for not working to assure a blowout victory here much sooner.  Blame the Democratic (un)faithful who aren't planning to show up.  

And perhaps most of all, credit Scott Brown.  Some of you no doubt remember the Cowboys-Bills Super Bowl in the early 1990's, when Leon Lett of the Cowboys ran towards the end zone with nobody near him and started celebrating with his hands up when he got inside the 10 yard line.  Don Beebe of the Bills streaked down the field and knocked the ball out of Lett's hands just before Lett reached the end zone, and the Bills got the ball back.  Scott Brown is Don Beebe.  Martha Coakley is Leon Lett.

Let this be a lesson to everyone not to take things for granted.  All good things in life must be earned, unless you are a member of the Bush family.

34, WM, Democrat, FL-11


agreed
You have to ask for their votes. She just hasn't done that, and even with polls tightening she doesn't give the impression that she's willing to work hard.

[ Parent ]
To be clear
I'm definitely not trying to say that Martha Coakley has, in any respect, run an adequate campaign. Clearly, it's Politics 101 to never take a single vote as a given, and she seemed to act more or less entitled to every single one - a mindset I highly doubt would have been held by Capuano, Khazei, or Pagliuca, none of whom I think would find themselves in quite as dire the straits as Coakley is today. What I am saying, though, is that while we obviously ought to expect a greater degree of savvy on the part of experienced campaign professionals, it is ridiculous for us to pretend that we, as a community (be it here on SSP or in the progressive blogosphere in general), saw this coming. Again, I ask: was there ANYBODY who foresaw how formidable Scott Brown's candidacy could ultimately prove against the sitting attorney general of Massachusetts, however middling her campaign may have been? I highly doubt it, so let's stop pretending that all of us (as you alluded to) didn't get complacent and let this thing slip away from us.

Male, 23, DC-At Large

[ Parent ]
the DSCC also deserves some blame
The negative ads they swooped in with appear to have backfired in a big way.

I think
the problem was, they let Scott Brown sink in the image that he was your everyday guy who's concerned about the way the country is going. Once that image got into the voters' minds, it's hard to change it in a 1 week time frame. The DSCC didn't help themselves by accidentally imposing Brown's image on an picture of the World Trade Center though.  

19, Male, Independent, CA-12

[ Parent ]
Tactical retreat
Do you think Obama doing a "quick" visit is the writing on the wall, or is the WH expecting a turn around over the next 48 hrs?

If the environment is an obvious loss on Tue., is there possiblity of saving resources (ad cash), or drag this one over the finish line?  Still can't believe the DSCC/Coakley ads have had a negative effect, this may be WAY over saturation to have any effect this late in game.

This has been an amazing race to watch as a political science major, as a non-typical blue state race, but also highly sad.


I don't think Obama would go
if they thought this race was hopeless. They try not to put him in situations where he will suffer a political defeat. They must think there is a chance of motivating better D turnout.

Going up there is a risk for him, but if he didn't go and she lost, people would be furious.


[ Parent ]
Obama stumped for Deeds when he was already down double-digits
He has to show face. Otherwise, all eyes will turn to him when it comes time for blaming (*coughBillThompsoncough*).

For daily political commentary, visit me at http://polibeast.blogspot.com/ and http://twitter.com/polibeast

[ Parent ]
Will Obama really help, though?
Ted Kennedy supported Obama, and i assumed campaigned some, and Hillary still won big in the primary. Although you can certainly make the argument that without his endorsement & campaigning Obama would have lost by much more. Basically i just wonder how much of a difference it really makes to the MA electorate.  

[ Parent ]
A lot...
Obama's going up there isn't going to magically make people who didn't like Coakley vote for her. The idea is to GOTV.

21, dude, RI-01 (registered) IL-01 (college)
please help Japan. click "donate funds" in upper right and then "Japan Earthquake and Pacific Tsunami." http://www.redcross.org/


[ Parent ]
No obituaries while the patient is still alive!
When the media, the blogosphere, and party activists are performing post-mortems on a campaign that pundits rate as a toss-up, it seems very premature to me.  (Not dissing the folks writing and weighing in with opinions here or elsewhere - just pointing out that the election isn't over.)

I understand that there is a great deal of angst (which I share) about the possible outcome on Tuesday -- but this race is far from over, and there are many many reasons to believe that Coakley, not Brown, is going to win.

Yes, Scott Brown and the political environment in MA caught Coakley and others off guard, but the dynamics of a special election are often different than what happens in a general election - and there are unique circumstances of MA that may not be repeated in November (a primary/special election period spanning the holidays, a lack of national party involvement until very late, a surprisingly capable Republican candidate catching a duller Democrat unawares,a Democratic campaign that was designed on a faulty set of assumptions about the likely voter pool, low/unpredictable turnout, etc).

But the wake-up Democrats in MA (and nationally) have received in the last week MAY be enough to pull this thing out -- hence the Obama appearance, the Vicki Kennedy ad, the infusion of MA and national political talent into the campaign, the rapid development of a significant GOTV effort, the sudden involvement of unions and advocacy groups, enhanced examination of Brown's record, and the "nationalizing" of the campaign).  

It remains to be seen if it will be too little too late, but there is a good chance that it will work. I remember a very very similar dynamic at work when John Kerry was challenged by William Weld in 1996 -- in the closing weeks it suddenly looked as though Kerry might lose, and the Kennedy folks and national party went into overdrive, producing a 52-45 Kerry victory. Brown will only win if we don't manage to rouse the Democratic voters in the state into understanding what is at stake, to not allow Ted Kennedy's legacy to be destroyed by a right-wing Republican taking his seat.

Before we write this thing off as a "probable" Brown victory, we've still got 3 1/2 days to make sure it doesn't happen. (I'm heading to Springfield tonight and will be there through the election volunteering). Even if you can't get to MA, there are plenty of opportunities to do GOTV calls from home, as well as contacting all family and friends in MA. That is a far better way to be spending our time and energy instead of attempting to dissect the remains of a race that we still can (and must) win - there will be plenty of opportunity to analyze what happened and the national implications after the votes are counted - when Senator Coakley is sworn.


'96 was a MUCH better environment for Dems (and incumbents)
At the top of the Dem ticket was none other than Bill Clinton, who carried Mass 61-28-9. Just look at how many Dems crossed over to vote Weld in that race.

For daily political commentary, visit me at http://polibeast.blogspot.com/ and http://twitter.com/polibeast

[ Parent ]
thank you!
Seriously, I don't think we need to conduct any post-mortems about this race until it's over.

Seriously, talk to your friends in Massachusetts, your family, your ex-significant other or whatever. Get them to talk to their friends.

Martha Coakley may not be the best candidate and sure, she's had her share of fuck-ups. But they're our fuck-ups too, especially if we want any even remotely progressive legislation to pass the Senate in the foreseeable future. Maybe you wanted Senator Capuano, or Senate Khazei, or maybe even Senator Pagliuca. Regardless of what you may have thought then, a Senator Coakley will be sure as hell of a lot better than a Senator Brown (unless it's Sherrod).

If I can get my ex-girlfriend's sister to vote for Coakley (who otherwise wouldn't have voted), you can get someone else to turn out and vote too!


[ Parent ]
sigh
just found out that my sister is still registered at her college address in Missouri instead of her home address in Mass...and she graduated in 2008! Dammit.

21, dude, RI-01 (registered) IL-01 (college)
please help Japan. click "donate funds" in upper right and then "Japan Earthquake and Pacific Tsunami." http://www.redcross.org/


[ Parent ]
they don't have same-day registration?
In many states she would be able to show up at the polling place on election day and register with some proof of address. Don't know about MA.

[ Parent ]
no
just googled the Mass BoE and it says you have to register 20 days in advance.
My sister said she's waiting for her Massachusetts driver's license (so I guess that means when her RI license expires; not sure when that is). Not sure why she can't just use a utilities bill. Then again, I think most people would rather vote in MO than MA.

21, dude, RI-01 (registered) IL-01 (college)
please help Japan. click "donate funds" in upper right and then "Japan Earthquake and Pacific Tsunami." http://www.redcross.org/


[ Parent ]
I appreciate your enthusiasm...
... and have made a bunch of GOTV calls from home over the past few days.

Rationally, I realize that this race is indeed winnable - if Brown were truly favored, I think we'd see it reflected in the hypersensitive rating changes of Cook, Rothenberg, and the like. The only reason I've personally "written off" Coakley's chances is a) the quantitative evidence we've seen in polling trends over the last couple of days (which is admittedly somewhat contradictory and, in many instances of internal polling, unverifiable), and b) to try and blunt the emotional devastation that would otherwise result from a Republican victory.

Male, 23, DC-At Large


[ Parent ]
JFM, I, like you, am pessimistic, but I still made calls today because...
...while polling information makes it look bad, and that information usually is right, it's wrong often enough to make keeping hope something far less than crazy.

Obama wasn't supposed to win Indiana, but he did.  McCain shouldn't have won Missouri on the same day he lost virtually every other swing state plus a few that never go the Democrats' way, but he did.

I'm not delusional, it doesn't look good for us.  And like you, tempering my own expectations is always key for how hard I fall emotionally.  But with health care reform and the trajectory of the entire Obama Presidency on the line, all because of one stupid fucking special election that we never imagined until a couple weeks out that it could bring us to a halt, I'm probably going to take a very hard emotional fall no matter what if Coakley loses Tuesday night.

I made 25 GOTV calls on Thursday night, and another 25 just now.  My kids and wife are napping, I would rather tune out politics and try to get this knot out of my stomach by watching the deliciously bloody Joy Ride 2 on ScyFy Channel.  I rolled around the floor with my toddler son this morning, we hosted my mother-in-law for a small birthday celebration, my little daugher ran around in a beautiful blue dress after getting home from the supermarket with mommy, and for all that I still couldn't completely get this race out of my head.  So at least I went ahead and did something about it, by making GOTV calls, rather than just obsessing at the computer.  All this from McLean, VA, I've never done out-of-state volunteering before, but thank God we live in an era where I can do that from the comfort of my own home.

I think, honestly, for any loyal Democratic political junkie, there is just too much at stake in this single stupid election to pretend lowering our expectations can reduce the hurt from defeat.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10


[ Parent ]
The only thing that is giving me hope is the strength of the local party apparatus
And the inherent weakness of the Republican apparatus in Massachusetts. If this weren't a special election, I doubt I'd lend credence to it, but in low turnout elections (such as a special election) these intangibles can very often be the thing to grasp victory from defeat.

My own expectations are tempered, and I'm prepared for a loss (as much as one can prepare emotionally for it, given what you've already astutely pointed out) but polling in special elections are more likely to underestimate the dominant party's strength (relative to a more "normal" election).

A plus is also that setting up Brown as the favorite to win and having him lose will probably be a big shot in the arm to the Democrats and a blow to the Republicans (at least short term). Of course, that's just me trying to find a silver lining, so take it for what it's worth!

Politics and Other Random Topics

24, Male, Democrat, NM-01, Chairman of the Atheist Caucus, and Majority Leader of the "Going to Hell" caucus!


[ Parent ]
Listen People this race is winnable
Get out and vote. Get your friends out to vote. Make phone calls hold signs. Use Facebook, twitter, anything. We can do this!!!!!!!!!!

No, don't hold signs. Make GOTV calls or knock on doors. I'm in Virginia and...
...I've made 50 GOTV calls over a couple sessions from behind the same computer screen I'm typing at right now, in my basement.

If I can do it from here, you can, too, from wherever you are.  (By "you" I mean everyone reading this comment, not particularly the commenter to whom this replies.)

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10


[ Parent ]
At the Coakley campaign
There has been a flood of volunteers at the campaign, in Massachusetts and countrywide. Make as many calls as you can where ever you are in the county. Call your friends, neighbors, use twitter, facebook. There are thousands and thousands and thousand and thousands of loyal democrats in Massachusetts who don't know an election is happening on Tuesday and will gladly, if informed go out and vote. Lets win this!!!!!

Coakley didnt help herself
With that recent statement, on a radio show, saying devout Catholics shouldnt work in an emergency room. Or 'probably shouldnt' (not that it makes much of a difference). I can only guess because of the whole abortion thing. MA may be a secular state but it still has alot of devout Catholics (South Boston, the South Shore, the industrial cities/towns, etc)...many of whom are also devout Democrats. The last people she wants to piss off are devout Dems. Even many pro-choice devout Dems would feel insulted by that comment. Now maybe she was taken out of context but the quote will still hurt her. I just dont know if the Brown campaign or anyone else will take advantage of it in a big way. As that is a pretty darn negative attack.

Really, i think this goes to show shes just not a competent campaigner.


Correction:
Even many pro-choice devout Catholics would feel insulted by that comment.  

[ Parent ]
That...and the Curt Schilling spat...
In a way, it's sad if people let baseball allegiances affect their votes, but in another way, Coakley seriously needs to stop making these gaffes.

In the oh-so-thin silver lining department, if Brown somehow manages to win, at least we could get Senator Capuano in 2012?

Of course, I'd much rather have Martha Coakley now than Michael Capuano in two years.


[ Parent ]
I have a question
If a Democrat cant win in what is probably the bluest state in the country, how can a Democrat like Charlie Melancon or even Paul Hodes win in a state that is far less favorable?

Because...
1) They're not running in low-turnout special elections, 2) they are capable candidates, unlike Martha Coakley, and 3) the political environment in November very well may be different from the political environment now.

Male, 23, DC-At Large

[ Parent ]
I dont know if I would call Paul Hodes "capable"
It took the Democratic wave in 2006 to initially carry him to victory.  Many of the Democrats who won in 2006 were incredibly weak canidates who will wilt away under a anti-Dem or even neutral environment.  

[ Parent ]
Re: Hodes, I think that's a debatable assessment
But your larger point is probably a valid one. Obviously, many of our '06-'08 candidates, who squeaked in due to a positive national climate for Dems, are going to find themselves in a much more heady situation this year. They will be tested like never before, and in all likelihood many will not pass muster. People like Carol Shea-Porter, Steve Driehaus, John Adler and Mary Jo Kilroy are probably going to have to campaign like never before in their political careers if they want to stay in office.

Male, 23, DC-At Large

[ Parent ]
I hate to say it
And this probably goes against the CW, but I think what PPP seems to be seeing is better news than you'd think:

If today's interviews hold up through tomorrow I don't think we're going to be able to make a clear prediction of the winner in our final poll- still too close. Expect the final results tomorrow night between 10:30 and 11.

For me, close favors Coakley, just because the strength of the Massachusetts Democratic machine is probably worth a couple of points for Coakley. Of course, that could just be my overly hopeful side (I try to get rid of that, but I guess I'm just an optimist at heart!)

Politics and Other Random Topics

24, Male, Democrat, NM-01, Chairman of the Atheist Caucus, and Majority Leader of the "Going to Hell" caucus!


First night polling
I think they are hinting at a tie or a 1 pt Coakley lead for the first night of polling. The fact that the electorate went from +16 Obama to +20 shifts the race, despite Brown picking up a slightly higher % of O voters than in the first poll.

[ Parent ]
Like I said
I'm trying not to get too excited just because I don't feel like getting all excited just to fall hard on Tuesday.

That said, I'm still feeling better about MA-Sen.

Politics and Other Random Topics

24, Male, Democrat, NM-01, Chairman of the Atheist Caucus, and Majority Leader of the "Going to Hell" caucus!


[ Parent ]
No Democrat should be losing Obama votes
No excuse for that whatsoever.  

[ Parent ]
Here comes the lawyers
http://blogs.abcnews.com/polit...

"One option no one seems to be seriously discussing is delaying Brown being seated, though Republicans have already dispatched legal teams to Massachusetts in anticipation of any possible recount or other legal challenge that could delay Brown's certification -- if, of course, he wins."

19, Male, Independent, CA-12


If Brown wins by more than a point and Dems refuse to seat him, they should be sued.
In fact, it's the worst thing politically they could do.

[ Parent ]
Look what happened in Minnesota at about this time last year...


My blog
Twitter
Scribd
28, New Democrat, Female, TX-03 (hometown CA-26)


[ Parent ]
Well
you're not the only one who's thinking about doing some drastic measures:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

19, Male, Independent, CA-12


[ Parent ]
True but the spread of that race was much much much closer than 1%.
I'm arguing against the Dems not seating Brown if it looks like he's the clear winner.

[ Parent ]
I disagree that this race is a toss-up
I would like nothing more than for Scott Brown to win and for Obamacare to be defeated, but I think this is an instance where the polls have missed the point. This isn't some sleepy special election where a disenchanted base and a lackluster campaign leads a party to lose a safe seat, like with Travis Childers in 2008 or Dick Thornburgh in 1991. This is attracting huge national attention, since the fate of the Obama administrations, and indeed the nation, falls upon this one Senate seat.

Thus, I suspect that the composition of the voters that turn out will be a lot different than the models which these pollsters are using indicates. Turnout will probably be upwards of 60%. And as we all know, as aggregate turnout increases, the performance of the Democrat increases, as most disengaged non-voters are liberals.

Yes, Martha Coakley is an incompetent politician and has run one of the worst campaigns in recent memory. Certainly worse than Creigh Deeds. But I remain deeply skeptical that a Scott Brown victory is possible in this environment. If the media hadn't latched onto this race and if the fate of the nation didn't hinge on it, then I'd be more optimistic that the good guy could win. But the notion that Scott Brown can win is based on screwy special-election turnout, which isn't going to happen.

I will make a radical prediction- Marth Coakley wins by 10 points.


Worse than Creigh Deeds?
no, if she were worse than Creigh Deeds her only argument would be "hey guys, naked shot in Cosmo!" which is basically what Deeds tried to do with the thesis.

21, dude, RI-01 (registered) IL-01 (college)
please help Japan. click "donate funds" in upper right and then "Japan Earthquake and Pacific Tsunami." http://www.redcross.org/


[ Parent ]
Very astute
Thanks for bringing up Thornburgh v. Wofford. Goes to show that the present scenario isn't quite so unprecedented as many would have us think.

Male, 23, DC-At Large

[ Parent ]
Not quite as big as an upset
Wofford was appointed Senator and had several months to make his case.  Pennsylvania also leaned slightly Democratic.    

That is nowhere near as shocking as a no name conservative Republican beating a state AG to replace a national icon where the Democrats have been completely dominant at the federal level.  Nor was the Democratic candidate scandal-ridden.  

This completely blindsides me, and I'm sure most Democrats.  I doubt that on January 1st many really believed that Martha Coakley wasn't going to walk into this seat.    


[ Parent ]
I agree
That was sort of my point in writing this diary in the first place. Scott Brown blindsided all of us.

Male, 23, DC-At Large

[ Parent ]
Just a quick question
Why is it that conservatives always refer to the health care bill as "ObamaCare"? I don't mean for this to be a partisan attack/debate, I'm honestly just curious as to where the term came from and why It's so popular. I think if anything its ironic that conservatives are trying to put Obama's name on this, since (from my perspective) the President's willingness to insert himself into the policy debate going on in congress has been actually rather lacking (on the public option, for example).

Anyway, just curious


[ Parent ]
Because there are people who hate Obama
and like healthcare reform, so calling it Obamacare makes them not like it.  

[ Parent ]
"Hillarycare" worked wonders for them.


My blog
Twitter
Scribd
28, New Democrat, Female, TX-03 (hometown CA-26)


[ Parent ]
What else are we supposed to call it?
'Socialized health care' is played. Also, conservatives are hoping to tie the fate of the Obama administration to his health care initiative, since it's been an albatross around his neck since the summer.

[ Parent ]
The albatross was a good omen until it was killed
The same is true of Health Care, if and when it is passed, it will become a strength for Democrats.

Politics and Other Random Topics

24, Male, Democrat, NM-01, Chairman of the Atheist Caucus, and Majority Leader of the "Going to Hell" caucus!


[ Parent ]
Scott Brown nabs HUGE endorsement, race effectively ends
Sunday, January 17, 2010

WHAT:
Scott Brown for U.S. Senate , "The People's Rally"

WHO:

Scott Brown, candidate for U.S. Senate
Curt Schilling, Red Sox legend
Doug Flutie, former Boston College star and NFL great
***JOHN RATZENBERGER, FROM CHEERS***
Ayla Brown, Scott's daughter

For daily political commentary, visit me at http://polibeast.blogspot.com/ and http://twitter.com/polibeast


Is that snark?
The Schilling endorsement is in no way a surprise, nor is Ratzenberger's.  Not sure what Flutie's political proclivities are.

Male, 23, DC-At Large

[ Parent ]
Well, I know both camps have been heavily courting the Ratzenberger endorsement. This should seal a double-digit victory.


For daily political commentary, visit me at http://polibeast.blogspot.com/ and http://twitter.com/polibeast

[ Parent ]
Ratzenberger campaigned for McCain
Not at all a surprise he's on Brown's side.  

Personally if I were a swing voter I'd think it'd be cooler to see his co-star and fellow Hollywood Republican Kelsey Grammer.  Love to hear him say in his Sideshow Bob voice "No children have ever meddled with the Republican Party and lived to tell about it."

21, male, CA-15 (home and voting there), LA-2 (college)



[ Parent ]
Unfortunately, both Ratzenberger and Grammer are Rs
Assuming Wikipedia is correct, ref http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J...

Ratzenberger, a Republican, has said that he is considering running for the U.S. Senate in Connecticut in 2012.[13]

During the 2008 presidential race, Ratzenberger campaigned for John McCain, appearing with former Cheers co-star Kelsey Grammer at several Republican party events.[14][15] He also has been outspoken in opposition of the 2009 health care reform bill, calling it socialism.[16]

It does sound like Ratzenberger could take teabagger support away from Lieberman in 2012.


[ Parent ]
That'd be a fun race
Wouldn't bet on it happening but who knows?  

But of all the endorsements to freakout about this isn't one of them.

21, male, CA-15 (home and voting there), LA-2 (college)



[ Parent ]
(I was kidding, obviously)
Now, if George Wendt were to endorse someone, on the other hand...

For daily political commentary, visit me at http://polibeast.blogspot.com/ and http://twitter.com/polibeast

[ Parent ]
My sarcasm filter is a bit off lately
Besides I wanted to get a Sideshow Bob quote in.

21, male, CA-15 (home and voting there), LA-2 (college)



[ Parent ]
Doug Flutie...
...actually for Massachusetts that is an impressive endorsement.  After that one throw at BC many years ago he's regarded by many as something akin to Jesus.  There are still Patriots fans angry that he got cut a few eons ago.

I thought he was a moderately left of center?  Kinda surprised he endorsed.  Usually stays out of these things.

NY-13, Democrat. Blog @ http://infinitefunction.wordpr...


[ Parent ]
Don't
football players lean Republican though?  

19, Male, Independent, CA-12

[ Parent ]
Brown's
supporters are acting naughty

http://twitter.com/DemocratsDo...

BROWN BULLYING TACTICS WATCH: Reports of Brown signs going up on property of Coakley supporters. Hint: yard signs don't vote, Scott.

BROWN BULLYING TACTICS WATCH: Report of Coakley signs burned in Hyannis...hearing arrests made-send photos/accounts

Report intimidation by Brown supporters and voting problems here:

http://www.marthacoakley.com/c...

19, Male, Independent, CA-12


Another message to those who want Coakley to win
 I bet alot of you (including myself) are doing this already but just in case you are not and you are able to, call Massachusetts. We have to get Coakley supporters out!
http://my.barackobama.com/page... This link will take you to the call site. Also, please post comments on daily kos, open left and other Liberal blogs urging people to call Massachusetts. It's all about turnout! We need Obama's agenda and health care reform!

for more election analysis, visit  http://frogandturtle.blogspot....




17, CA-06,  


Actually
 Alot of people have been saying they have already been contacted. I have stopped for the time being. It could just be the list I have but if you hear alot of people saying they have already been contacted, maybe you should call less.

for more election analysis, visit  http://frogandturtle.blogspot....




17, CA-06,  


[ Parent ]
Has anyone else noticed that the phone bank option is gone from OFA's site?
Yesterday everything was fine.  Today when I clicked to volunteer it brought up a page saying "Thanks for Using Neighbor to Neighbor. We'll be back in touch soon!"  Did we crash the site?  

Also all those Democratic strategists anonymously saying Coakley's doomed should be found out and fired unless their intention is to convince volunteers we're wasting our time.  

21, male, CA-15 (home and voting there), LA-2 (college)



No
 I just checked, they changed the script and the format. Earlier, it appeared to be more focused towards identifying supporters and getting them out. Now, it is solely for the purpose of getting people out to the polls. I think it is a bit too late to call but we should all work hard tomorrow!

for more election analysis, visit  http://frogandturtle.blogspot....




17, CA-06,  


[ Parent ]
I just checked and it's still like that for me
Weird.  Assuming it works tomorrow I'll give it another go.  

21, male, CA-15 (home and voting there), LA-2 (college)



[ Parent ]
Never mind, works now


21, male, CA-15 (home and voting there), LA-2 (college)



[ Parent ]
iirc the term was 'Democratic insider'

not 'Democratic strategist' as the source of the leak.

There are plenty of asswipe insider conservative Democrats in the Massachusetts Democratic party establishment.  Plenty of them wouldn't mind Coakley losing; to them that just translates to benefits for themselves, i.e. upward mobility for themselves or their buddies.


[ Parent ]
Biggest political upset in 100 years
in any major race (President, Senate, House, Governor) if Brown wins (and if the election was today, he likely would).  

Anyone have a bigger upset that I forgot?


Dave Loebsack over Jim Leach
Jim Wright's defeat in Texas, Tom Foley's too I think, Tom Bradley losing California Governor 1982, Truman over Dewey.  

[ Parent ]
Jim Wright was never defeated in Texas
he resigned.  Tom Foley was an upset, but it was a GOP area.  The potential for that upset were clear for months.  When Foley got 35% in that open primary in September 1994, it was clear that he was in trouble.    

California had went for Reagan by 18% in 1980, and Bradley was black.  Still it was a surprise.

Loebsack over Leach would be equivalent if IA-2 was R+12 and the GOP had basically dominated everything at the local level. But instead it is a Democratic district, and while the result was an upset, but not that big of one.  

Truman-Dewey is the only one here that I see a case for.  But Truman was still the incumbent

Two that came to my mind was the defeat of jack Brooks and Dan Rostenkowski.  The latter would take the cake, except that everyone knew that Rostenkowski had been indicted.  It puts it at the same level as Jefferson in 2008, it was within the realm of possibility of an upset.  At the beginning of this month, the GOP winning this race wasn't, and there was no major revelation about Coakley that put her at risk.  The idea of the Republicans winning Ted Kennedy's seat with a no-name wingnut was unthinkable.


[ Parent ]
meant Jack Brooks, sorry


[ Parent ]
no, Loebsack beat Leach
in a D+7 district in a Democratic wave election.

That is really different from a Republican winning a U.S. Senate seat in a state that hasn't sent a Republican to Congress in many years.


[ Parent ]
Here's a good list
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U...

I don't agree with them all, but Wellstone over Boschwitz (sp?) in '90 is my favorite. Holtzman over Celler in '72 is probably the most amazing, even though that was "just" a primary. Celler was chair of Judiciary, and there was no scandal associated with his name.

One bit about more recent "upsets" is that they're no longer so unexpected with advances in polling. With that in mind, I think Tom Perillo's victory in '08 is comparable.


[ Parent ]

Copyright 2003-2010 Swing State Project LLC

Primary Sponsor

You're not running for second place. Is your website? See why Campaign Engine is ranked #1 in software and support among Progressive-only Internet firms. http://www.mediamezcla.com/

Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


About the Site

SSP Resources

Blogroll

Powered by: SoapBlox