Apparently knocking Coakley means taking a shot at Kerry.

[beachmom]

Go to the front page of TPM. "Dems Worry: Coakley Is More Kerry than Kennedy". Read Andrew Sullivan who is also saying she's like Kerry, but worse.

I can't wait until this dumb special election is over. The media seems to favor Brown. I'm also mad that Andrew Sullivan completely ignored the article I sent him showing Brown IN FAVOR of torture and waterboarding.

I am not ready to knock Martha Coakley, because I don't feel knowledgeable enough about the race to do so. The worst thing? Sully quotes Blue Mass Group, the worst state blog in the nation. Ugh.

[karynnj]

1. That really stinks

especially if the candidate were a "Kerry", she would have been out there fighting and she would have been a whole lot more eloquent than she is. The fact is that, like Kennedy, Kerry is exceptional. And... he soundly beat the favorites of people who write for TPM - either Dean or Edwards. So, if he is a poor candidate, what does that say about their darlings. Not to mention, it was Kerry, who beat the most popular Republican of the last half century.

[ObamaKerryDem]

5. Exactly! If I were Martha Coakley, I'd take being compared to JK as a big compliment. :)

That said, I'm rooting hard for her to win. To say it would suck to see Teddy's seat go to a Republican--and an enemy of his life cause, health reform, at that--would be the understatement of the century! :thumbsdown:


I think she will win, though--and I think a lot of folks in the media who seem to be pushing for a Brown win will have egg on their face Tuesday night. :D

Hope everyone who can gets out and votes! The only way we WON'T win is if they don't!

[CBHagman]

2. However, Kerry got 66 percent of the vote when reelected.

I hate when the media indulges in such lazy labeling and speculation, and calls it analysis. It's like when Chris Cillizza wrote the following bit of dumbassery for The Washington Post.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/01/AR2006090101392.html

Modern presidential politics is littered with candidates who committed fatal food faux pas. Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry's request for Swiss cheese rather than Cheez Whiz on his cheese steak at a stop in Philadelphia during the 2004 campaign cemented the public's view of him as an out-of-touch Brahmin.

What Cillizza doesn't mention is that in Philadelphia Kerry picked up 80 percent of the vote and indeed won Pennsylvania. Apparently the public in THE cheesesteak capital of the country wasn't much troubled by the candidate's lunch order.

But I digress. Here's the link to the TPM article, if I can call it that. It seems to consist of fretting and a few quotations, all pasted together as a substitute for analysis.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/01/dems-offer-possible-reason-for-tight-race-for-ma-sen-martha-coakley-they-just-arent-that-into-you.php

Anyway, I better go off and donate some more to Martha C.

[Blaukraut]

3. Coakley only wishes she were anything like Kerry

She would have been out there, stumping, instead of waiting for her crown.

[beachmom]

4. I am so happy to hear Pres. Obama is coming to Mass.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/1/15/824135/-BREAKING:-Obama-going-to-Massachusetts-on-Sunday!

In fact, I am now feeling like she is going to win. Why? Obama did not come to Georgia for the Senate runoff in late '08. He knew we would lose, and we did. Here, he thinks chances are better than not that we will hold this seat. And he doesn't want to leave anything on the road.

[Mass]

6. She is like Kerry and will make a good senator. She is competent

and hardworking.

And talk about a title that does not reflect the article. The reference to Kerry was positive, by a Coakley supporter, noting that her reserve was not an impediment, see Kerry. It was not a worry, but a reassurance.

Certainly totally stupid. I dont know who makes these titles, but they certainly value sensationalism. It is not the first time there is a total dissonance between the title and the article.

[beachmom]

7. Oh, my. Hmm. Well. Gee.

andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/01/brown-on-torture.html

(copy, paste, add http://)

To be clear the "reader" was not for Bill Weld in 1996. Just that he is more of a moderate Republican fit for MA, in general.

I'll eat my words in one respect in my OP, I guess.

[karynnj]

8. Your letter did seem to move him though

and the reader didn't say that the reader voted (or would have voted ) for Weld. It is weird that even after you wrote that Brown was NOT a moderate Republican, he refers to him as relatively moderate.

[Mass]

9. All rather than aiming at the democratic leadership - Weep at the latest ad of the Dems.

We certainly did not need that. Are these people in DC invested in making her lose?

http://www.salon.com/news/politics/2010_elections/index.html?story=/politics/war_room/2010/01/15/dscc_ad

[Blaukraut]

10. this has to be odd coming from me, but I don't think it's a big issue

I saw the ad on TV and didn't even really pay attention or notice the background until I read about it online. They can quietly pull the ad and redo it.

[Blaukraut]

11. Is all the national media attention to this race a good thing?

As I've been reading blogs and watching tv, all I've been told was that Coakley might lose...toss-up....Brown has a good chance of winning....etc etc. You guys read and heard it all, too.

Brown allegedly raises 1 million bucks a day (probably most of it from out of state teabaggers) and Coakley raises....exactly how much IS she raising? Nobody is informing me of this in the media. Brown must be outraising her, he definitely has the momentum, and Martha lacks warmth. (Thank you Chuck Todd and Chris Matthews, for that astute and unbiased opinion :eyes: )

So is all this talk *creating* momentum for Brown, or is it alerting Dems to get motivated, or a combination of both?

[Mass]

12. A combination of both. My only concern is that Democrats are whining rather than being feisty,

I liked that Gibbs refused the premise she would not win. I wished blogs and Democrats do the same thing. The national attention would be good if the chatter was not that the national Dems think she has lost. Right now, what we hear discourages our side.

I hope that the unions, GLBT groups, and Democratic networks in MA will work for her in an effort to get the vote out. If they do, she will win. If not, all odds are off.

But the only thing that will make us lose this race is that we psyched ourselves out of this race.

[beachmom]

14. I read on Twitter that Rahm & Axelrod made some calls, and came

to the conclusion that the race was still winnable. So that is why Pres. Obama is going there.

[Mass]

15. It is still winnable. MA is a blue state. Republicans win when Democrats dont come and vote.

It is clear that the difference in the polls is due to a different model of likely voters (who, where, and how they are leaning). the independent Suffolk polls are a lot more conservative than in RS2000 polls, and given they are the largest voting group in MA, it makes the difference between winning and losing.
Now, this means both polls polled different voters. The RS2000 poll is more in line with the normal MA voters, no doubt about that. And those are the people who will show up on Tuesday if the GOTV operations do their job. However, if they do not (and this is where morale matters), Brown will win.

But, for what it is worth, I have been told earlier today by a political scientist that follows these issues closely that she will win. The polls he has seen not done for media consumption show her winning, and he says that media polls are done with an intent to create sensation. We'll see Tuesday if he is right.

[Blaukraut]

16. It better be winnable!

Seems like the Mass Souls are pretty confident that she'll pull it off, and that the outside punditry, media, and others are the ones panicking. Glad Rahm and Axelrod are on the ball.

[karynnj]

17. What a coward

Given the fact that the problem is that the models (maybe correctly) show our side not coming out to vote to the same degree - even though there are more of us --- This is winnable if someone could wake people up to the threat. The level of Democratic whining is pathetic as we actually have made gains this last year in the face of obstruction.

(What is funny is that the same element here that typed that various politicians had no spine, are the ones willing to quit one year into Obama's Presidency. They are the biggest whimps around.)

What is scarier is the increasing bias in the media. I googled Coakley Clinton and Coakley Kerry then clicked new for each - I then looked at all the links for the rally and - without going into them - read the titles.It is really amazing how excited they are for the GOP to win.

I also had WBZ on when I ran an errand (I can get it after dark - they had audio of Guilliani speaking of Brown and speaking of their rally - the Clinton rally was mentioned - though Kerry was not. Now, Guilliani spoke of how Brown was like other moderate Republicans and spoke of how with his military service, he had real conservative national security knowledge that the Democrats don't have. (Note that neither Brown or Guilliani have military experience) He spoke of Brown being a fiscal conservative. I am shocked that Guiliani was given more coverage than Clinton (and none at all for Kerry, who is actually more powerful and influential than Guiliani).

[beachmom]

18. Who do you think is a coward?

[karynnj]

19. Either Axelrod or Rahm if they would advise not even trying to reach

people who usually are Democrats here. Going only if it is NOT all that needed seems like they are afraid to risk embarrassment. (But, I guess the word coward is too strong.)

[sandnsea]

20. He did do an ad, right?

The impression I had was that they thought the ad was enough originally, then word of the supposed tie got out. (I still don't believe that.) So then they had to decide whether to take time to go up there or not. I would guess that considering whether it is winnable has as much to do with using the President's time wisely, especially considering Haiti, as political capital. If it's definitely winnable and the Pres can make the difference, then go; if it's a true lost cause then focus on Hillary and Haiti tomorrow. I just don't think Axelrod, or even Rahm, are completely one-sided when making these kinds of decisions.

[beachmom]

13. Actually, what I read is that she matched it. Vicki Kennedy's e-mail

plus Act Blue, etc. etc. Of course, I can't prove it but I swear I read Vicki raised $750K and then the rest was from other places.

[TayTay]

21. It's not about John Kerry

He is doing fine in-state. However, fairly or unfairly, it is, in a very low-key way, about the perception around John Kerry.

Before I say this let me point out, again, that life is unfair. That goes double for politics. Perception is perception, not truth.

Sen. Kerry still suffers from a perceived lack of involvement in constituent services. (I think this is unfair. Ah, see above.) Teddy Kennedy, fairly or not, was viewed as "the go-to guy" for constituent services. This is not a fatal thing. People in MA, as I see it, think John Kerry is a fine US Senator. But they want another US Senator who is "theirs."

I hope this makes some sense. MA has a reputation for producing national leaders. John Kerry is indeed such a leader. There are many people who think that's fine and dandy and even a source of some pride. But they also want a "homer" who is "theirs" not a national figure. It does make a sort of sense and is not a knock on our Senior Senator.

[JI7]

22. ok, even if that is the case, they see Brown as being that Senator

that is their own ? none of this makes sense to me. maybe if the opponent was someone like Bill Weld i can see it. but i don't see the appeal of this guy in any way.