Poll: The MAIN reason Coakley lost is:

[woo me with science]

Poll question: Poll: The MAIN reason Coakley lost is:

The MAIN reason Coakley lost is:

[tekisui]

1. 1 and 3.

[Tesha]

14. Right. Last week, I was driving around the northern 'burbs...

and in a fifteen minute drive, I passed a dozen or
more "Brown" lawn signs. I have never even seen
a Coakley sign live-and-in-person.

Same story for bumper stickers. Lots of "Brown"
bumper stickers, but it wasn't until *THIS MORNING*
(literally, a day late and metaphorically, a dollar short)
when I first saw a Coakley bumper sticker. But it was
on a car driving into Mass from New Hampshire.

There's no doubt liberal Democrats were unmotivated.
And there's equally no doubt that Coakley ran an
attrocious campaign, as though she could just "phone
it in" and her voters would magically turn out to coronate
her.

Tesha

[Selatius]

21. This is what happens when you ignore your base of voters.

You win by forging a policy both acceptable with your base and the middle. You don't do that if you just cater to the middle and totally cut out the left. FDR was a master of uniting the left and the middle with policies that were widely popular. That, and you actually get out on the ground and meet the voters, not run a cold and distant campaign. Bernie Sanders could've taught Coakley ten times over on how to run a ground-game and how to glad-hand voters. He destroyed his competition even though he's been widely tagged with the "socialist" label.

[derby378]

18. That's the best answer

We put Obama in office, and now we want results.

[woo me with science]

20. This is the right answer.

Number one was the initial reason she struggled. People are angry at being told to sit down and shut up while the government pushes through legislation they have repeatedly said they HATE.

And number three crystallized those feelings. If the people's frustration stems from being ignored by their supposed representatives, Coakley's smug assumption that she could sail into Teddy's seat without even talking to voters drove their rage over the top.

[TheKentuckian]

32. We have a winnah!!!! Or pretty close I think #3 trumps #1

If she ran a credible campaign then she'd overcome the crappy external problems.

[BrklynLiberal]

29. yep.

[monmouth]

2. Tim Kaine didn't do his job. Get Dr. Dean back now!

[tekisui]

4. Kaine is useless.

He is a horrible leader. So what he got elected in what was a blue state. If he can't win an election in MA, he isn't deserving of shit.

[Mass]

3. 3 and 1

[arthritisR_US]

33. +1. n/t

[alfredo]

5. She got fewer votes

[elocs]

6. The "main", not only reason is that Coakley ran a sucky campaign.

Democrats really needed a candidate with a fire in their belly to campaign hard and long for the Senate seat that Ted Kennedy held for so many years and not somebody who smugly felt they were entitled to it and pissed away a double digit lead.

[lapfog_1]

7. All of the above (except number 2). - n/t

[MineralMan]

8. Other: Polls on DU distracted the "base."

:evilgrin:

[woo me with science]

10. LOL.

Sorry.

[uponit7771]

9. ******COAKLEY LITERALLY WENT ON VACATION DURING A SPECIAL ELECTION WITHOUT DAILY TRACKING!!*****

[QC]

12. You know, I think you forgot to post that in some of the gardening and travel forums. n/t

[MineralMan]

17. Do the caps, asterisks and exclamation points really work?

Or is it the posting the same thing everywhere that does the trick. I'm just trying to learn how to post effectively here, you understand...

[sabrina 1]

30. Caps, sterisks and exclamation ponts are irrelevant.

What doesn't work are posts like yours. Party loyalists telling the base to get lost. We've seen nothing from those people except mockery and empty rhetoric. It is a failed policy to command people to get on board for policies and politicians they do not support.

People vote for their own and their country's interests first. Then they choose a party that represents those interests. When that party no longer listens to them, they find other solutions. Those are facts, reality, and it is to use one of the party loyalists favorite words which they clearly never understood, pragmatic to understand this reality, IF you want to win.

The DLC and Rahm Emanuel are destroying the Democratic Party. They turned off the base, not only with their assumption that the base 'had nowhere to go' but with their rightwing policies on major issues that are not traditional Democratic Party policies.

They were spoiled by Bush. The base held their noses many times back then and voted AGAINST candidates rather than for someone they really supported. Rahm misjudged people's reasons for doing that. But those days are over and they were warned not to take the base for granted anymore.

Now it's time for real Democrats to take this party back and elect Democrats, not rightwingers with a 'D' after their names and remove from the party all the rightwing obstructionists who infiltrated the party and whose agenda was to take the party to the right.

[RainDog]

11. economy combined with insurance pay off via HCR

the only people who like the current HCR are the pharma and insurance cos.

incredible that democrats could produce such a shitty health care reform and then be surprised that people vote against it.

incredible that democrats think that they can continue bush policies and think that independents on the left would bother to vote for them.

I think many people voting for Brown are pissed at the current govt and they voted against it. sadly, repukes offer more of the same and worse, but that's what happens when you have two "parties" who more or less represent the same moneyed interests.

[Romulox]

13. Delusional to think this wasn't a referendum on HCR. nt

[woo me with science]

25. I think that's primarily what it was, but

it also touches a broader recent frustration with being ignored and taken for granted by supposed "representatives."

People screamed that they don't want this bill, and they were told they can't possibly know what's good for them.

Ditto for bank bailouts.

Coakley ran a detached, arrogant campaign in which she didn't even bother to talk to voters. Talk about highlighting the problem and rubbing salt in the wounds.

But you're right. The center of this particular election was anger over the healthcare bill.

[Mixopterus]

15. Massachusetts native here

Wish I could select multiple things, but here is my take:

Coakley ran a shitty campaign, that much is obvious. But Brown's campaign really wasn't that hot either, save maybe one critical factor: He postured as a populist, a faux-populist sure, but that is still a populist to the independent majority in Massachusetts. Coakley came off as detached, aloof, and uncharismatic to the extreme, giving us the choice (image, not in the nut and bolts) between a cold fish and a "charming" moron.

But that's not really the whole picture. I can't speak for Boston, but I know for a fact that on the South Shore we have large pockets of areas, that while socially conservative in many ways, has a remarkable tolerance and even desire for progressive economic positions. These are areas that could use some real TLC in a big way, and nearly every person I know from these areas is not so much against the progressive left as they are frustrated with an out of touch democrat on the local level (Coakley) and an increasingly out of touch president who appears to not even be poised to address some fundamental problems in our economic system at any point in the future. The result is that some stayed home, some held their nose and voted for a dem they didn't care for, and others voted for the -appearance- of a populist. You are talking about an area where Barney Frank is a sort of folk hero, people, these independents are NOT right wing, they just want someone who will stick up for the working class and deliver.

Trust me, the folks we have up here who do vote for a Republican (save a handful of right wing enclaves) do it out of a desire for someone, anyone who will even give the appearance of someone with the interests of the working and middle class in mind, not because they love right wing policies (by and large we are still among the most economically progressive in practice, socially left is up to debate, I think.)

[woo me with science]

26. Great post. nt

[leftofcool]

16. Okay, I went for the Illuminati

Just to be different

[woo me with science]

24. No, you did it

because they told you to.

[leftofcool]

31. Yes, I was told to by the head Illuminus

We held a secret meeting this morning and discussed this poll (our secret decoders/hackers know the poll questions before they are posted on DU)

[onehsaquestion]

19. Just leave the option that Brown campaigned on and that

the teabaggers were chanting about during the celebration off of the list why don't you...

[crim son]

27. What did you say?

Your post is gibberish. No offense, pls clarify.

[woo me with science]

35. What? nt

[Tailormyst]

22. Combination of 1 and 3

[Cleita]

23. She's another DLC drag. You might as well have a real Republican

with a shiny new truck instead of a fake one and that's what happened. The people of Mass have shown us what can happen if we keep allowing the DLC to rule the Democratic Party. The only choice is between Republican and Republican Lite. So the candidate with the better funded and run campaign will win. That would be the Republican candidate.

[Greyhound]

28. "Given the choice between a Republican and

someone who acts like a Republican, people will vote for the real Republican all the time". Harry T.

[cilla4progress]

34. Can't fire CEOs

You know, populists can't fire CEOs. They CAN fire politicians. I do believe they are taking out their anger about the current economy, etc., on incumbents, to some degree.