MA Special Election Watch Thread

[Meeker]

He ran for the senate in the first place to raise his profile for a run for state office like AG. No one thought he'd actually win and go to Washington.

It may well be supposition, but it's grounded in the fact that running for governor is the most rational and rewarding choice he could make right now.

That makes sense. I guess it all depends on how much he enjoyed D.C.

[Seattle]

It might be too soon, but what about that Kennedy that just got elected? Obviously he'd be running on his name, but I imagine he'd like an upgrade eventually.

[Dan the Roman]

I also don't know where people are getting the idea Brown would be a shoo-in for Senate from as well, what are the odds the Democrats will nominate someone as godawful as Coakley again?

It's not the Democratic candidate, it's the Republican candidate...the logic goes like this: before Elizabeth Warren declared her run against him, Scott Brown was basically safe. Warren won't be running against him. Therefore, while he certainly took a hit from the 2012 campaign, his approval rating remains positive and he is better-known than any potential opponent and, considering the sort of voters with a propensity to turn out in special elections like this, the electorate will be more favorable: therefore, he is slightly favored. Also, while you mention Coakley, ironically Coakley herself and Deval Patrick, the two most popular statewide officials in MA today, are probably the two strongest Democratic candidates. Alas, Capuano is probably the likeliest candidate. Coakley is never running for the Senate again and Patrick doesn't want it.

The argument against this is obvious (Massachusetts is so Democratic none of this matters!), but we'll basically have to wait for polling, probably from PPP, to see if that's really the case. (I actually recall back in January of 2010 the first polling company to show Brown in the lead was PPP, 44-43. Correct me if I am wrong...ah, those were interesting times, politically speaking.)

Given what happened, I don't think Brown could have beaten anyone in 2012. That said, a lot of the problem he had then will be worse now.

Coakley was the worst candidate Democrats could have run for reasons that had zero to do with her personal ineptitude as a candidate. The dominate feature in Massachusetts politics from 2004 onwards were the internal divisions opened up by the Gay Marriage issue. On one hand it swamped Romney, but less noticed is its effect on the state Democratic party. It brought in a wave of new activists, and probably made possible Deval Patrick's entry into the 2006 governor's race. While almost all Democrats supported it by 2007, there was a lot of resentment at the takeover of the party by activists, and Coakley, who was a protege of Reilly, was a big part of that.

Patrick made the situation worse by all but ignoring if not insulting traditional democratic players, even bringing up busing at his first St. Patrick's day Dinner. This culminated in the 2008 Presidential Primary, where the Coakley-Cahill wing backed Clinton, and Patrick backed Obama. Of course, Kerry/Kennedy treacherously backstabbed the Clintons, or at least that was the view of a lot of Democrats. The truth is, there wasn't much good feeling towards Kennedy in the final 18 months of his life in a lot of Democratic circles, and if anything, his high-handed endorsment actually backfired, leading to Clinton's 18 point romp.

Coakley was a die-hard Clintonite bordering on a Puma, voting for Hillary and then insisting on abstaining at the DNC. She entered the race for Senate as much to prevent a Patrick(and by extension Obama-aligned candidate) from taking the seat and to partially get vengeance on Kerry and the Kennedy's. It was a bizarre campaign, but one where she ran hard.

Of course she stopped campaigning altogether after the primary, because that was the campaign she cared about. She then planned to head to Washington where she would be a conservative for Massachusetts senator dedicated to making life hell for Kerry and Obama. Of course that didn't happen. Voters who felt the same way she did suddenly turned on their TVs over Christmas and saw a better version of what she was offering.

Coakley, when she got in trouble in early January, was therefore in the worst position imaginable to reactivate the Democratic coalition. She had based her primary appeal on being at least partially a vote against Obama, and the urban/yuppie/activist/minority domination of the party, and she suddenly needed general election turnout among all of those groups. And she was far too proud to ask for help.

None of those divisions exist anymore. The 2008 elections are years in the past. Brown will not fly under the radar. He will have to take positions on taxes, the debt limit(when it explodes again in March) and the Supreme court, and you can bet his Scalia statement from the debates would be everywhere.

[Landslide Lyndon]

I also don't know where people are getting the idea Brown would be a shoo-in for Senate from as well, what are the odds the Democrats will nominate someone as godawful as Coakley again?

It's not the Democratic candidate, it's the Republican candidate...the logic goes like this: before Elizabeth Warren declared her run against him, Scott Brown was basically safe. Warren won't be running against him. Therefore, while he certainly took a hit from the 2012 campaign, his approval rating remains positive and he is better-known than any potential opponent and, considering the sort of voters with a propensity to turn out in special elections like this, the electorate will be more favorable: therefore, he is slightly favored. Also, while you mention Coakley, ironically Coakley herself and Deval Patrick, the two most popular statewide officials in MA today, are probably the two strongest Democratic candidates. Alas, Capuano is probably the likeliest candidate. Coakley is never running for the Senate again and Patrick doesn't want it.

The argument against this is obvious (Massachusetts is so Democratic none of this matters!), but we'll basically have to wait for polling, probably from PPP, to see if that's really the case. (I actually recall back in January of 2010 the first polling company to show Brown in the lead was PPP, 44-43. Correct me if I am wrong...ah, those were interesting times, politically speaking.)

Given what happened, I don't think Brown could have beaten anyone in 2012. That said, a lot of the problem he had then will be worse now.

Coakley was the worst candidate Democrats could have run for reasons that had zero to do with her personal ineptitude as a candidate. The dominate feature in Massachusetts politics from 2004 onwards were the internal divisions opened up by the Gay Marriage issue. On one hand it swamped Romney, but less noticed is its effect on the state Democratic party. It brought in a wave of new activists, and probably made possible Deval Patrick's entry into the 2006 governor's race. While almost all Democrats supported it by 2007, there was a lot of resentment at the takeover of the party by activists, and Coakley, who was a protege of Reilly, was a big part of that.

Patrick made the situation worse by all but ignoring if not insulting traditional democratic players, even bringing up busing at his first St. Patrick's day Dinner. This culminated in the 2008 Presidential Primary, where the Coakley-Cahill wing backed Clinton, and Patrick backed Obama. Of course, Kerry/Kennedy treacherously backstabbed the Clintons, or at least that was the view of a lot of Democrats. The truth is, there wasn't much good feeling towards Kennedy in the final 18 months of his life in a lot of Democratic circles, and if anything, his high-handed endorsment actually backfired, leading to Clinton's 18 point romp.

Coakley was a die-hard Clintonite bordering on a Puma, voting for Hillary and then insisting on abstaining at the DNC. She entered the race for Senate as much to prevent a Patrick(and by extension Obama-aligned candidate) from taking the seat and to partially get vengeance on Kerry and the Kennedy's. It was a bizarre campaign, but one where she ran hard.

Of course she stopped campaigning altogether after the primary, because that was the campaign she cared about. She then planned to head to Washington where she would be a conservative for Massachusetts senator dedicated to making life hell for Kerry and Obama. Of course that didn't happen. Voters who felt the same way she did suddenly turned on their TVs over Christmas and saw a better version of what she was offering.

Coakley, when she got in trouble in early January, was therefore in the worst position imaginable to reactivate the Democratic coalition. She had based her primary appeal on being at least partially a vote against Obama, and the urban/yuppie/activist/minority domination of the party, and she suddenly needed general election turnout among all of those groups. And she was far too proud to ask for help.

None of those divisions exist anymore. The 2008 elections are years in the past. Brown will not fly under the radar. He will have to take positions on taxes, the debt limit(when it explodes again in March) and the Supreme court, and you can bet his Scalia statement from the debates would be everywhere.

Fascinating. Thanks for the insight.

[badgate]

It might be too soon, but what about that Kennedy that just got elected? Obviously he'd be running on his name, but I imagine he'd like an upgrade eventually.

That's who I was thinking of too.

[Keystone Phil]

It might be too soon, but what about that Kennedy that just got elected? Obviously he'd be running on his name, but I imagine he'd like an upgrade eventually.

Like an upgrade eventually? Sir, the man is a Kennedy! He's entitled to that upgrade at birth! It was an incredibly humbling move that he even ran for the House in the first place. See, the talk should at least be about him running for the Senate and President soon enough. It's really unfair to expect him to settle for a position that bores him. But if he just wants to sort of hang out in an office where he has no interest of serving, doesn't intend to "work a day in his life," etc. and have a nice easy ride, he is more than welcome to. And he won't be questioned. He's a Kennedy and we will admire him...because, you know, we're told that we should. 

If, for whatever heinous reason, a Senate run doesn't work out, Joseph Kennedy XLIII can very easily and without consequence move to a state he's never lived in and run to represent voters he doesn't know even if he can't vote for himself. This is the least that can be done for a member of "America's Royal Family."

[Brittain33]

Phil, not in this thread, please. Thx.

[Keystone Phil]

Phil, not in this thread, please. Thx.

Who should set up the MA Special Coronation Thread?

[Brittain33]

Phil, not in this thread, please. Thx.

Who should set up the MA Special Coronation Thread?

Why don't you start a Kennedy Coronation Watch thread? Then if it happens, there will be plenty to talk about.

I truly don't expect him to be tapped this time, and contrary to your post, I don't think he has the sense of outrageous entitlement you're criticizing to try to get the nomination. But it's not impossible it happens.

[RogueBeaver]

He wouldn't run so soon, if at all.

[DrScholl]

It's important to note that Brown only won by five against a candidate that didn't even campaign, if he's running against someone who does campaign, he doesn't win at all. He's a one hit wonder. It's not like he's Heidi Heitkamp or something, who actually won statewide races without any flukes.

[Keystone Phil]

It's important to note that Brown only won by five against a candidate that didn't even campaign, if he's running against someone who does campaign, he doesn't win at all. He's a one hit wonder. It's not like he's Heidi Heitkamp or something, who actually won statewide races without any flukes.

Coakley campaigned. It's just that she was absolutely horrible at campaigning.

[Ogre Mage]

She was a completely inept campaigner but she also took a week-long vacation three weeks before the special election. 

[RogueBeaver]

Howie Carr hints Brown will run, but just nudges and winks, nothing remotely confirmed.

http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/columnists/howie_carr/2012/12/one_thing%E2%80%99s_certain_he%E2%80%99ll_be_back

[socaldem]

So will it be Michael Cuapano or Ed Markey representing the Dems?

[Talleyrand]

So will it be Michael Cuapano or Ed Markey representing the Dems?

I hope not. Both are longtime Washington hacks who'd struggle to compete with Brown, in my opinion. I'd like someone like Carmen Ortiz or Ben Downing.

[RogueBeaver]

No sure thing, and we don't know who Patrick will appoint.

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=20ECBC96-82CF-4E43-9EAD-40E737785FF2

[© tweed]

how about Mitt Romney?

[RogueBeaver]

Patrick is leaning towards an interim appointment, McGovern says he won't run and he expects a contested primary.

http://bostonglobe.com/metro/2012/12/15/democrats-face-dilemma-how-hold-onto-kerry-senate-seat/khjBeJqYL4rlfsUs5N3A2L/story.html

[CatoMinor]

Maybe a Kennedy will step up and claim the office that is their birthright.

[Vosem]

Looks like Brown vs. Markey is the most likely match-up, with some kind of placeholder in the meantime. (Apparently, last time Patrick ended up picking Paul Kirk over Mike Dukakis -- Senator Dukakis, even if only for a couple months, could be fun). It's impossible to predict without polling, considering dantheroman's points, but I personally have a hunch that Brown would be favored if he run.

[RogueBeaver]

I'm sure PPP will do a poll soon enough.

[Dan the Roman]

Looks like Brown vs. Markey is the most likely match-up, with some kind of placeholder in the meantime. (Apparently, last time Patrick ended up picking Paul Kirk over Mike Dukakis -- Senator Dukakis, even if only for a couple months, could be fun). It's impossible to predict without polling, considering dantheroman's points, but I personally have a hunch that Brown would be favored if he run.

Brown will start out ahead, but his performance under campaign pressure this time around was not great.  Gaffes on Scalia, Taxes, and in the final accounting a far too personal campaign involving hitting Warren personally on the Indian issue, and thereby moving it off the table.

A lot will/would depend on wider dynamics. What happens with the debt deal? What does Brown vote for this week? What happens with the debt limit in March? What happens with gun control in the aftermath of Newtown?

Brown is a better candidate with Markey, but really, its all downhill as it was for him in 2012 from September onwards. There is so little middle ground in DC, and the truth is he as a Republican is on the wrong side of it.

I would argue that Brown is much stronger than in 2009, but the environment is much, much worse for him for the reasons I noted above, and because both Obama and the MA Dems are in much better shape.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Mark my words: Brown won't win, unless Obama's approvals massively plummet in the upcoming months.

[Skill and Chance]

You know, Obama should really find a Cabinet position for Susan Collins while he's at it.  Just saying.