Was Martha Coakley's 2014 loss really her fault?

[Oldiesfreak1854]

Was Baker really beating the other Dems in the polls?

Anyway, Coakley seems to have a habit of throwing away winnable elections, much like the Tea Party movement does for the GOP.

CORRECTION: I originally asked whether Baker was beating the other Republicans.  I meant Democrats; my mistake.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

Maggie Hassan (aka Climbing Maggie) and Jeanne Shaheen were the safest incumbents running in 2014, no one could have beaten them. NO ONE.

Jerry Brown

Yeah, no campaigning except for pet props and getting 60% in a wave...couldn't ask for safer circumstances than that for an incumbent.

I wouldn't really call 2014 a wave, because as well as Republicans did, they did lose a handful of seats.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

Just FTR: I think Coakley played a role in her own defeat, but I don't think it was the only factor.  Given the fact that Baker is more of a moderate, socially liberal Republican, and that Massachusetts has a history of electing moderate GOP governors (or even center-right in the case of Mitt Romney), I was not at all surprised to see him win.  Plus, Governor Patrick wasn't especially popular, IIRC.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

Note that everyone who actually followed the race at the time will (no matter their political leanings) answer this with a 'yes'. The best part of this answer is that it applies to both elections.

I would take exception to that. Coakley ran a fine campaign, but it was a Republican year, Massachusetts often chooses Republicans for state office, and Baker ran a much better campaign as a non-ideological technocrat than he did in 2010 and has gone on to maintain high popularity ratings. Social issues were mostly off the table.

I'd agree with you, except that I don't think Coakley's campaign was especially good.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

Note that everyone who actually followed the race at the time will (no matter their political leanings) answer this with a 'yes'. The best part of this answer is that it applies to both elections.

I would take exception to that. Coakley ran a fine campaign, but it was a Republican year, Massachusetts often chooses Republicans for state office, and Baker ran a much better campaign as a non-ideological technocrat than he did in 2010 and has gone on to maintain high popularity ratings. Social issues were mostly off the table.

I'd agree with you, except that I don't think Coakley's campaign was especially good.

True. I think people were just surprised that she ran a competent (if not especially good) campaign in 2014 after the disaster of 2010.

The fact that she lost in 2014 despite have a much better campaign than in 2010 says a lot about her ability to win higher office.