Martha Coakley: One Lousy Poker Player
by Brian Maloney, December 13th, 2009 at 04:28pm
After convincing most of us she wasn’t worried about coasting to victory in January’s special US Senate election, Martha Coakley’s actions tell a different story. The Democratic Party nominee’s cynical move to include phony candidate Joseph L Kennedy in upcoming debates is designed to eliminate the unpleasant prospect of directly facing Republican Scott Brown on camera.
As Coakley has a reputation for weak campaigning skills (due to a lack of opponents over the years) and a cold, distant public speaking style, adding fraudulent faker Kennedy (who is attempting to capitalize on surname confusion, he is unrelated to the family) is a ploy to undermine Brown.
If the general election was truly a cakewalk, Coakley wouldn’t waste the energy making a silly move like this, as it wouldn’t matter. Clearly, her internal polling shows this to be a tighter race than the public would believe (especially due to incredibly low expected turnout). She’s a lousy poker player.
So that begs the question: WHY is there cause for worry from the Coakley camp?
I think it’s directly tied to the last comparable open seat free-for-all in Massachusetts: the 2007 race between Democrat Niki Tsongas and Republican Jim Ogonowski in the Fifth Congressional District. In that one, Tsongas should have won by 20 points, given warm feelings toward her late husband, Paul.
Instead, she won in a relative squeaker, slightly more than five percentage points ahead of Ogonowski, a badly underfunded Republican whose claim to fame was based on his brother’s heroic role as a pilot during the 9-11 attacks.
Here’s the kicker: the national political climate two years ago heavily favored Democrats, as Bush’s popularity faded and the GOP lost control of Congress. It never should have been a competitive race, yet just a bit of attention from the increasingly inept national party could have put the Republican over the top.
In 2009, we’ve got the opposite environment, with Obama’s popularity fading fast and Republicans now leading Democrats on the generic congressional ballot (historically rare).
If Scott Brown were to run a more effective (aggressive) campaign than Ogonowski in 2007, Martha’s cakewalk vanishes and this becomes a truly tight race.
Coakley’s also got an even bigger problem: many of her voters may wrongly assume the race ended on primary day. Or, if they’re aware of the general election, they assume Coakley will sail to victory, so there’s no need to vote.
By contrast, the opposition is chomping at the bit to get a chance to go to the polls and express their disgust. It’s up to Scott Brown to channel that energy and get his own side fired up as much as possible.
Entry Filed under: Uncategorized
11 Comments Add your own
1. Jim | December 13th, 2009 at 4:37 pm
Did anyone post the column about Coakley that Ann Coulter wrote? ouch
2. Piratetoby | December 13th, 2009 at 5:56 pm
I read Horseface Coulter’s Coakley column. Funny how a piece of garbage like Coulter thinks her opinion of anyone’s immorality is worth the paper it’s printed on. She’s irrelevant now- she’s a joke who’s past her brief 15 minutes.
And Brian, your columns regarding Coakley are becoming more and more convoluted. Really.
3. Cap'n Spackle | December 13th, 2009 at 7:51 pm
She’s spent a lot of time on the bestseller lists — spanning the Cigar Shover and Jug Head administrations — for someone who’s “past her brief 15 minutes”,
4. Cap'n Spackle | December 13th, 2009 at 7:54 pm
…But lest you think I only listen to conservative pundits, here’s some advice from Olbermann to Coulter that I can agree with.
5. Antenna10 | December 13th, 2009 at 9:00 pm
Some advice for the Scott Brown campaign. Lose the Massachusetts lapel pin. Replace it with a U.S. flag. You’re running as the anti-Massachusetts, anti-big government candidate for a United States Senate seat and a picture can be worth a thousand votes.
6. swami | December 13th, 2009 at 9:43 pm
Good point, Antenna. At first I couldn’t figure out what the hell Brown was wearing on his lapel.
7. subman47 | December 14th, 2009 at 7:05 am
I heard a sound bite of moron Capuano telling a crowd that there was no way in hell that Ma. would elect a republican to the US senate. It’s that type of attitude democrats continually get away with in this state. This state keeps reelecting these tax and spend democrats and the people complain about constantly getting screwed. One solution, VOTE THERE ASSES OUT! That’s the only way to get their attention.
8. Larry | December 14th, 2009 at 11:31 am
If the Brown Camp is smart, they will agree to include Kennedy the Libertarian in the debates. Then Brown should compare the extreme views of Coakley to the extreme views of the libertarian. I would prefer to see Brown and Coakley alone. But if Martha’s braintrust wants it the other way, Brown should agree and paint Coakley as obstructionist and afraid to make her views known to the voters.
9. Anti Brian | December 15th, 2009 at 6:35 am
“By contrast, the opposition is chomping at the bit to get a chance to go to the polls and express their disgust. It’s up to Scott Brown to channel that energy and get his own side fired up as much as possible.”
Scott Brown will big lucky to get more than 30%
10. Anti Brian | December 15th, 2009 at 6:40 am
“Clearly, her internal polling shows this to be a tighter race than the public would believe (especially due to incredibly low expected turnout). She’s a lousy poker player.”
Clearly Brian? What is your source for this info? Have you cultivated a source inside the Coakley campaign.
We know how insiders race to the phone to give you tips. I still remember the Entercom receptionist who told you Marjorie Claprood was at a Guest Street meeting. You posted how it was just a matter of days before she returned to the morning shift at RKo. When in fact she was at RKO to discuss a charity event.
Coakley will sail to victory with between 65% and 70% of the vote.
11. Marco | December 16th, 2009 at 7:36 am
Another “Hope” article from Brian. It’s like he’s writing these more to convince himself that Scott Brown will win than he is to the public.
As I’ve said before, Brown has an -R next to his name. He’s going to lose.
However, he will use this as a stepping stone to throw his hat in the ring to run for Governor as nobody knows who Charlie Baker is (or cares).
Also, The DNC knows this seat is valuable do you really think they won’t throw everything they have at it to make sure Coakley wins? The RNC on the other hand knows what they are up agaimst and won’t spend much on this Brown. Coakley will coast to victory here.
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed