Coakley vs. Brown

[AGDee]

The media story I saw about it yesterday morning implied that this is essentially an election about national health care and that, since Massachusetts already has their own health plan, many are against national health care. What do those closer to this state think of this analysis?

[KSigkid]

Originally Posted by AGDee

The media story I saw about it yesterday morning implied that this is essentially an election about national health care and that, since Massachusetts already has their own health plan, many are against national health care. What do those closer to this state think of this analysis?

A couple of issues with this (I think the healthcare issue is overblown as it relates to MA):

1) While the MA legislature is heavily Democrat, most of the Governors over the past 10-15 years have been Republicans (and not just RINOs). The voters aren't afraid of voting in a Republican if they think he/she is the best person for the job.

2) It can't be overstated that Coakley has run a TERRIBLE campaign, as in historically terrible. She assumed that her party affiliation, when combined with name recognition, would float her into office. She completely underestimated the fact that Brown would seriously campaign for the seat, and that he'd have a lot of support in doing so. Everyone talks about how this election is "too important," and I understand that sentiment. However, Coakley didn't seem to put a lot of effort into the thing until the last week or two.

On this: I have a ton of respect for what Kennedy did as a Senator, and I think he worked tremendously hard for Massachusetts. Massachusetts residents felt the same way, and I think they're really turned off by the fact that Coakley has done so little in pursuing the seat.

3) The economy issue is huge, especially in the poorer areas of the Commonwealth. Brown has at least tried to answer those concerns, and again, Coakley waited too long to do so.

I'm not naive enough to think that the healthcare debate is completely absent from people's minds. I think it's an issue, and there are probably a lot of people who are voting based on that issue (on both sides). However, I think there are a lot of other issues at play.

ETA: I'm not saying that any one of these reasons is a good reason to vote for one candidate or the other. These are just things I've heard from people who live in MA or who work in politics in MA.

[ASTalumna06]

Originally Posted by KSigkid

A couple of issues with this (I think the healthcare issue is overblown as it relates to MA):

1) While the MA legislature is heavily Democrat, most of the Governors over the past 10-15 years have been Republicans (and not just RINOs). The voters aren't afraid of voting in a Republican if they think he/she is the best person for the job.

2) It can't be overstated that Coakley has run a TERRIBLE campaign, as in historically terrible. She assumed that her party affiliation, when combined with name recognition, would float her into office. She completely underestimated the fact that Brown would seriously campaign for the seat, and that he'd have a lot of support in doing so. Everyone talks about how this election is "too important," and I understand that sentiment. However, Coakley didn't seem to put a lot of effort into the thing until the last week or two.

On this: I have a ton of respect for what Kennedy did as a Senator, and I think he worked tremendously hard for Massachusetts. Massachusetts residents felt the same way, and I think they're really turned off by the fact that Coakley has done so little in pursuing the seat.

3) The economy issue is huge, especially in the poorer areas of the Commonwealth. Brown has at least tried to answer those concerns, and again, Coakley waited too long to do so.

I'm not naive enough to think that the healthcare debate is completely absent from people's minds. I think it's an issue, and there are probably a lot of people who are voting based on that issue (on both sides). However, I think there are a lot of other issues at play.

ETA: I'm not saying that any one of these reasons is a good reason to vote for one candidate or the other. These are just things I've heard from people who live in MA or who work in politics in MA.

4) Scott Brown is a GOOD GUY. Everyone who meets him says that he truly listens to the citizens of the state, and he's someone they can trust. Being from this state originally, I still know a lot of people from there. Interestingly enough, I have had both Republicans and Democrats of MA tell me that a reason they're voting for Brown is because he reminds them of Senator Kennedy. Many people, even if they didn't agree with his policies, could agree that Kennedy was someone that was passionate about what he believed in, and was a "man of the people". They also see that in Scott Brown.

[KSigkid]

Originally Posted by ASTalumna06

4) Scott Brown is a GOOD GUY. Everyone who meets him says that he truly listens to the citizens of the state, and he's someone they can trust. Being from this state originally, I still know a lot of people from there. Interestingly enough, I have had both Republicans and Democrats of MA tell me that a reason they're voting for Brown is because he reminds them of Senator Kennedy. Many people, even if they didn't agree with his policies, could agree that Kennedy was someone that was passionate about what he believed in, and was a "man of the people". They also see that in Scott Brown.

Definitely, likeability is a big factor. On the other side, Coakley has not played up the likeability factor (or really any other factor) in her campaigning.