Don't See What's Wrong with Coakley's Campaign

Discussion in 'Politics' started by SwingVoter, Jan 17, 2010.

  1. SwingVoter
    Offline

    SwingVoter VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2008
    Messages:
    1,246
    Thanks Received:
    123
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Richmond, Virginia
    Ratings:
    +129
    The current Dem spin for every losing candidate is he/she's "running a bad campaign". Saying it about Coakley, they said here in Virginia about Creigh Deeds, but they also said it in 1993 about Mary Sue Terry, who lost the governor's race that year.

    Just as they missed the bigger point in 1994, the Dems are missing it again in 2010. It's not about "bad campaigns", but that most of the country just doesn't want the health care bill and the big government agenda, and the Dems just can't seem to get over that fact.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. Baruch Menachem
    Offline

    Baruch Menachem '

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2008
    Messages:
    14,204
    Thanks Received:
    3,235
    Trophy Points:
    185
    Ratings:
    +3,305
    I think the problem is internal to the soul of them. They feel the only reasons you can disagree with them are because you are dishonest or stupid. As far as they are concerned, smart folks are democrats. Any intelligent Republicans are criminals.

    Since, for them, their policy is right, QED, then any time they loose it is not because of the policy, but because the person explaining the policy did a bad job.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  3. PatekPhilippe
    Offline

    PatekPhilippe Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2009
    Messages:
    8,171
    Thanks Received:
    1,200
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Sasebo Japan
    Ratings:
    +1,200
    Her campaign is not the problem...she's the problem. The Dem's hung their hat on a questionable candidate who is weak against the Republican challenging her.
     
  4. Baruch Menachem
    Offline

    Baruch Menachem '

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2008
    Messages:
    14,204
    Thanks Received:
    3,235
    Trophy Points:
    185
    Ratings:
    +3,305
    I think the problem is the message, not the messenger.
     
  5. jillian
    Offline

    jillian Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    69,551
    Thanks Received:
    13,012
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    The Other Side of Paradise
    Ratings:
    +22,427
    well, first off, there's huge anti-incumbant feeling right now on both sides

    mostly, she shouldn't have taken the seat for granted. and her first two campaign ads had to be pulled...the first b/c the DNC spelled Masachusetts incorrectly... for real.

    oh..and obama has a 57% approval rating in Massachusetts and they're for health care reform by 52%
     
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2010
  6. Navy1960
    Offline

    Navy1960 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,821
    Thanks Received:
    1,188
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Arizona
    Ratings:
    +1,189
    Coakley, is a weak candidate first of all, and given the political climate she just assumed for a long time that it was pretty much a given she was the annointed candidate for Senate. The election was just a mere formality and that has come across to a LOT of voters or appears to in MA. Look at the following as of just last week Brown had 50 something statewide since the campaign started and Coakley had 19, Brown had 5 statewide offices, and Coakley had 2. This when Coakley up until this past week from a finanacial standpoint had much more money that Brown did. Now, top that off with the sheer number of gaffes she has had on the trial its a combination of both. If she is elected it will not be because she is a qualified candidate for the job thats for sure.
     
  7. MaggieMae
    Offline

    MaggieMae Reality bits

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    24,043
    Thanks Received:
    1,599
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +1,601
    Oddly? The reason the Republicans lost in 06 and BIGGER in 08 was because most of the country was sick of its agenda. And that's why nothing will get back on track until middle ground is found on all of the major issues. I'm actually getting anxious to see what Republicans will do to "fix things" since they weren't capable before.
     
  8. NYcarbineer
    Online

    NYcarbineer Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    95,752
    Thanks Received:
    11,231
    Trophy Points:
    2,060
    Location:
    Finger Lakes, NY
    Ratings:
    +30,094
    This is funny. Somewhere else earlier today I predicted that if Brown wins, which will be ONLY because Coakley is a shit candidate, the right was going to do everything they could to deny that.

    thanks!!
     
  9. MaggieMae
    Offline

    MaggieMae Reality bits

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    24,043
    Thanks Received:
    1,599
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +1,601
    The DNC also erred in assuming the seat was theirs, when in reality they should have GUARANTEED it would be theirs because they need that 60th vote. Where oh where is Howard Dean when you need him?
     
  10. SwingVoter
    Offline

    SwingVoter VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2008
    Messages:
    1,246
    Thanks Received:
    123
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Richmond, Virginia
    Ratings:
    +129
    36-51 against health care per this morning's Boston Globe

    country didn't want Hillarycare, and it doesn't want Obamacare, Dems overplayed their hand in 93, did it again in 09

    yeah, Bush was incompetent, but shifting the discussion to Republicans doesn't change the fact that the Dems have repeated the mistake of trying to impose an unpopular agenda
     

Share This Page