January 14, 2010

HMMMM, WHY WOULD A DEMOCRAT BE AFRAID TO DEFEND HER BELIEFS?:

Brown’s best hope is a chilly Coakley (Joan Vennochi, January 7, 2010, Boston Globe)

The Coakley-Brown showdown comes at a challenging time for Democrats. President Obama’s ratings have been dropping. Two longtime Democratic senators - Christopher Dodd of Connecticut and Byron Dorgan of North Dakota - are not seeking re-election. In Dodd’s case, there was a good chance he could not win.

In Massachusetts, Governor Deval Patrick is having trouble raising money. Charles D. Baker, a Republican gubernatorial hopeful, has amassed a $1.85 million war chest over five months. Against that backdrop, Coakley is running a flat campaign.

It’s an extension of the strategy that ended in victory against three primary rivals who were wary of roughing up the only woman in the race. But it’s dangerous up against Brown. Like George W. Bush, he’s making the case that he stands for something, like it or not.

Coakley seems afraid to say what she believes in, giving voters reason to conclude she believes in nothing. With healthcare reform, she sounds like she believes in what’s necessary at any given moment. During the primary, she said she would vote against a bill that restricted abortion funding. Now, she supports a Senate bill that includes restrictions less severe than those in the House version.

There are other examples of a campaign lacking in soul and a candidate lacking in heart.

Posted by Orrin Judd at January 14, 2010 6:57 AM
blog comments powered by Disqus
« SPENDING, SPENDING, SPENDING: | Main | DO WE REALLY NEED TO KNOW ANY MORE...: »