Twist of events: Martha Coakley wins the Democratic nomination (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
May 18, 2024, 06:31:29 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election
  Twist of events: Martha Coakley wins the Democratic nomination (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Twist of events: Martha Coakley wins the Democratic nomination  (Read 1214 times)
Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,838
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P

« on: March 31, 2015, 12:39:40 AM »



Generic R - 406
Coakley - 132

Logged
Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,838
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P

« Reply #1 on: March 31, 2015, 01:43:34 AM »

In all seriousness Coakley likely wins MA. There's quite a big difference between losing to Charlie Baker and losing to Scott Walker or Jeb Bush.
Coakley lost a SENATE race. Massachusetts has been a purple-blue state in terms of governors for DECADES, that's not a new thing. Yes, Patrick was a democrat, but before him, you had Romney, then Jane Swift, then William Weld, all (moderate at the time) republicans. But in the Senate races, Coakley is the SOLE exception to a deep-blue trend that began in 1976. Even if she somehow won MA presidentially, it would be a narrow 1-3% victory.
Logged
Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,838
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P

« Reply #2 on: March 31, 2015, 02:40:25 PM »

In all seriousness Coakley likely wins MA. There's quite a big difference between losing to Charlie Baker and losing to Scott Walker or Jeb Bush.
Coakley lost a SENATE race. Massachusetts has been a purple-blue state in terms of governors for DECADES, that's not a new thing. Yes, Patrick was a democrat, but before him, you had Romney, then Jane Swift, then William Weld, all (moderate at the time) republicans. But in the Senate races, Coakley is the SOLE exception to a deep-blue trend that began in 1976. Even if she somehow won MA presidentially, it would be a narrow 1-3% victory.

Would Rick Berg lose North Dakota against Hillary Clinton? Would Alexi Giannoulias lose Illinois to Ted Cruz? Similarly, it will be a cold day in hell before MA would vote for Scott Walker over a piece of dog crap (D).

Losing in a ND senate race is not unusual for republicans, you only have to go back to 2006 to find a win before the one that Heitkamp got in 2012. Illinois did not have a since-1976 deep blue senate trend before Kirk - Sen. Fitzgerald (R) was elected in 1998. Massachusetts is objectively the most partisan of those three states on the senate level, and Coakley still lost.

A piece of dog crap might win simply because it has no record to be attacked. But Coakley - she's worse than a deadly virus.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.023 seconds with 11 queries.