" LESSONS LEARNED" 5 TOP Lessons!

[Cha]

.... Given that the results in Massachusetts were not quite what the political world was expecting as of, say, two weeks ago, there will be plenty of "what just happened?" questions over the next several days. We're already hearing ample talk about what lessons Democrats should have learned from this painful defeat.

I think it's probably a mistake to overstate the larger significance of a special election 10 months before the midterms, but it'd be foolish to pretend Scott Brown's victory was some random fluke, never to be repeated again.

With that in mind, here are my Top 5 lessons to be learned from the Mess in Massachusetts.

1. Successful candidates hit the campaign trail. Candidates seeking office should probably campaign while voters are making up their minds. It's old-fashioned thinking, I know, but winning a primary and then dropping out of sight -- while your opponent is working hard to reach out to voters -- tends to be a bad idea.

For much of the post-primary period, the campaign calendar on the Coakley website was blank. Dave Weigel noted yesterday, "From the primary through last Sunday, Scott Brown held 66 events of varying size. Coakley held 19." Part of this is because Brown had to introduce himself to voters who had no idea who he was, while Coakley was already well known. But 19 events in 40 days is evidence of a Senate candidate who was taking victory for granted -- and in the process, throwing victory away.

2. Voters like likeable candidates. Some voters care more about policy and substance than which candidate they most want to have a beer with, but these voters tend to be outnumbered. We've all seen races in which the thoughtful, hard-working, experienced candidate who emphasizes substantive issues loses out to the fun, likable opponent (see 2000, presidential election of).

The Massachusetts race fits this model nicely. Chris Good noted this week, "hile Coakley focused on the issues in this race, Brown can credit his lead in multiple polls to his own personality and personal image, which he crafted with a series of successful ads portraying him as an average, likable guy." It's tempting to think voters in a mature democracy, especially in a state like Massachusetts, would prioritize policy over personality, and appreciate the candidate who "focused on the issues." But yesterday was the latest in a series of reminders that personal qualities often trump everything else.

3. Saying dumb things will undermine public support. When the pressure was on, Coakley insulted Red Sox fans -- twice. She kinda sorta said there are "no terrorists in Afghanistan," and that "devout Catholics" may not want to work in emergency rooms. When the Democratic campaign realized it was in deep trouble, and readied an effort to turn things around, it had trouble overcoming the distractions caused by the candidate's public remarks.

Maybe, if the campaign had been in gear throughout the post-primary process, Coakley would have been sharper on the stump, had more message discipline, and been less likely to make these costly, distracting errors.

4. Learn something about your opponent. Because the Democratic campaign assumed it would win, it didn't invest much energy in understanding its opponent (who, incidentally, won). They didn't identify Brown's weak points, and seemed to know practically nothing about his background. When the race grew competitive, nearly all of the damaging stories about the Republican candidate came from well-researched blog posts, not the campaign's opposition research team. "Get to know your opponent" is one of those lessons taught on the first day of Campaign 101, and campaigns that forget it are going to struggle.

5. Enthusiasm matters. No matter how confused and uninformed Brown's supporters seemed, they were also motivated. Dems liked Coakley, but they weren't, to borrow a phrase, fired up and ready to go.

Looking ahead, chances are pretty good that organized right-wing voters will be mobilized and itching to vote in November. They certainly were yesterday. Democrats can't expect to do well with an unmotivated, listless party base.

—Steve Benen 6:30 AM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (51)

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/

And, now Mass has a interim Senator who "believes in torture".

[quiet.american]

1. Good post. Bookmarked. nt

[Cha]

2. Thanks for reading..

I want to keep these facts up there for awhile to get some perspective in Mass election since so many are bring their own "facts" into the equation.

[ginnyinWI]

3. Cliff Notes version:

The seat was hers to lose, and she lost it. I don't think it says anything about the party, or politics today. She must have assumed this was a cake walk and underestimated the guy who could define himself better than she apparently did.

[Cha]

4. Right..and what he defined what not what he is..

"A NOTICEABLE DROP-OFF IN QUALITY"

Sen.-elect Scott Brown (R-Mass.) offered an interesting peek into his worldview last night during his victory speech.

" In dealing with terrorists, our tax dollars should pay for weapons to stop them, not lawyers to defend them.

"Raising taxes, taking over our health care, and giving new rights to terrorists is the wrong agenda for our country."

Perhaps now would be a good time to note that this is a Senate seat once held by John F. Kennedy, Ted Kennedy, Henry Cabot Lodge, and John Quincy Adams, among others.

It now belongs to Scott Brown -- a conservative who supports torture, opposes Wall Street accountability, supports more tax cuts for the wealthy, opposes economic recovery efforts, opposes Ted Kennedy's life's work on health care reform, and doubts that global climate change is the result of human activity.

And says things like, "In dealing with terrorists, our tax dollars should pay for weapons to stop them, not lawyers to defend them."

It's admittedly tiresome to hear any political observer say, "In the good old days...." Those days were rarely as good as anyone remembers, and prominent thinkers of the day have been complaining about the next generation being less impressive than the last for as long as we've had the printed word.

But a once-storied Senate seat that belonged to Adams and Kennedy is now filled by a dim-witted wingnut, and that's a real shame -- for Massachusetts, for the Senate, and for all of us.

—Steve Benen 8:00 AM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (50)

Thanks Steve Benen for pointing out the obvious that might take some in Mass a while to fathom. They say they want their country back? Some slogan the teabags came up with and they have no idea what it means.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/

[TheBigotBasher]

5. She went on holiday during the campaign.

That is quite simply stupid and unforgivable.

There were so many failures in this campaign that they became a GOP laughing point. The Red Sox stuff could have been laughed off if she had turned around and asked why is she expected to know about macho sports?

There were however many many more gaffs than that. If her campaign had lasted 10 more days the lead would have been 10 points higher.

[Cha]

6. Yes, I'm afraid

a Perfect Storm was swirling around Martha and she got sucked it.

[ginnyinWI]

7. There was a discussion on TV--I think on Rachael's show

where they were pointing out the difficulty women politicians have. They get where they are by being steely-eyed tough, smart and capable, but when it comes to connecting with the people it's hard for them to strike a balance between that personna and someone who is compassionate and real. They are more wary of seeming weak and emotional I guess. So it's harder for women than men, who are assumed to be tough enough inherently.

This might have been one of Coakly's troubles but it doesn't explain the whole election. Did Hillary face a similar difficulty? One thing that held her back was appearing to change so much from day to day. One day tough, the next day angry, the next day sweet and emotional. Some people were doubtless confused by this.

[Cha]

8. I don't know..

It seems like Martha did most everything wrong from the time up until she had Pres Obama come up for the Campaign Rally..which was awesome. Now if the whole campaign could have been with that much enthusiasm, it might be a different story.

There are some women who are meant to make it and some don't(like men). Nancy Pelosi comes to mind..and some day it would seem the right woman will come along who is actually meant to be President.

Personally don't look at the gender but the right person for the right time.

The job now is to work on getting someone in Mass ready to run against brown in 2012..we'll see if he works as hard for the people of Mass as he worked to get elected.