Somehow I just knew it. (Sigh)

[Paper Roses]

Martha, please retire. Maybe the next time we will have a candidate for governor who connects with the voters. Sad news for this 'blue' state. At least Seth Moulton was elected. One can only hope he makes a difference.

[MADem]

1. Don't blame Martha.

Blame the sexist nature of Massachusetts politics.

It's not an easy topic, but someone needs to bring it up.

Through the mists of invented history, Elizabeth Warren sailed on a golden cloud of cheering supporters to a sure victory....only that was NOT true. It took SHITLOADS of money--a lot of it out-of-state money--and people like me getting down to the "all politics is local" level and doing the GRIND to GOTV.

Also, we were fortunate that Brown played the "Pow Wow, The Indian Boy/Tomahawk Chop" race card--and that offended a LOT of people. Then, he fell on his ass with horrible, snarky performances (calling Warren "perfesser" like a cartoon character didn't help him) as he sneered his way through the debates.

Warren was the FIRST woman EVER elected in Massachusetts to the Senate. THE FIRST. In liberal MA. She should have been a walk from the start with her credentials, but it was neck and neck up until September or later, when she finally got some distance owing to Brown's blatant mistakes.

How many women governors have we ELECTED? NONE. Jane Swift doesn't count, she fleeted up.

Massachusetts has a "woman problem." We are loathe to elect them to major office. Even Niki Tsongas --- talented as she is -- is kiting on dead Paul's coat-tails.

That's just brutal fact, and it's sad, in this day and age.

[yeoman6987]

2. I hadn't realized that until last night

Very shocking for a progressive state.

[MADem]

3. I live here in the Bay State, and I see it.

And what surprises me, too, is that there are more than a few women who do like the dumb-ass poor Republicans do--they vote AGAINST their own interests. It's like some of 'em don't want to see a woman succeed. Others are trapped in learned, phony sexist paradigms that executive office is a "man's" job.

I find it ... distressing.

So I guess, absent a miracle, it's "Here Comes PHoney Boo Hoo" Baker in the corner office.

The guy is six kinds of a fake bullshitter. We're stuck with a fucking con man governor. UGH.

[pipi_k]

16. Nothing to be shocked over, really...

I mean, Martha Coakley did serve two terms as AG.


Also, in the Democratic primary this year she did beat out TWO men


http://www.politico.com/story/2014/09/2014-primary-election-martha-coakley-massachusetts-110793.html


I (and a few others as well) felt that she did not run a very good campaign, not that the residents of Mass are sexist.

[merrily]

17. She also beat out three or four males in the Dem primary for Kennedy's seat.

That was, IMO, because she was a woman. All three of them were stronger than she was in debates. However, Bubba campaigned for her--and against a great incumbent US House member, among other others, reportedly because she had done so much for Hillary in 2008. Then, EMILY's List, which works closely with the Democratic Party, threw money at her. Then, everyone outside the state left and Koch money and a remarkably bad campaign caused her loss to Brown. Not, in my opinion, her gender.

In fairness, electing a woman to the US Senate would have been a shocker when Kennedy and Kerry got those seats and then they held them for a very long time. A woman got nominated over several men to fill Kennedy's seat, but lost. However, a woman, probably not known to low info voters, then beat an incumbent male. A relative unknown of any gender beating an incumbent Senator of any gender so soon after he was elected for the first time is nothing to sneeze at.

The Massachusetts Senate has had a female majority leader for some time. And Martha herself has been AG, for a while, an important position in which she served the state very well, IMO.


Massachusetts Governors, however, are another story. Based on history, WASP Republican males definitely have an edge. Few exceptions, in a few hundred years.

Could Massachusetts use more women? Sure.

[Agschmid]

6. Yup.

[seaglass]

7. Niki is my rep and I find your comment about her uncalled for. I do not believe MA has a problem

electing women. You do know Hillary won the primary here, even though both Senators had already endorsed Obama? I would really like to see a deep analysis before I accept that MA has a problem voting for women. And I do not believe it is the reason Martha Coakley lost.

MA political demographics is:
1.5 million registered dems
.5 mil registered republicans
2.8 mil registered UNENROLLED (this includes me, my husband and kids)

[MADem]

9. Well, too bad--I KNOW Niki and I like her.

I knew her husband too.

And the bottom line is this--she RAN on her husband's excellent reputation. If you don't realize this, go do some reading. She wouldn't have run, and she wouldn't have won, were it not for Paul.

She referenced him--OFTEN--in her first run. He got her in the door.

[seaglass]

10. I do not disagree that she won the first time on her husband's name. I disagree that is why

she continues to be re-elected. She has proven herself.

[MADem]

11. She didn't win on her own merit--that was my point.

Massachusetts is a sexist state. You can try to minimize and mitigate it, but it is.

And, FWIW, Niki gets a check from me, so it's not like I don't support her--I just see clearly how things are in Massachusetts, and when it comes to local politics, we are assholes towards women. It's nothing to be proud of and it needs to be corrected.

Name all the other prominent women in MA politics....anyone? Beuller?

Here's the sad truth:

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/06/can-elizabeth-warren-beat-the-curse-of-female-massachusetts-candidates/258041/


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/25/us/25mass.html

Shannon O'Brien can tell you how the Old Boy's Club supported her in her fight against Mittsy--not. They all but rolled over and welcomed our greasy-headed GOP overlord. Bros before...well, whatever.

It's a failing.

[seaglass]

12. Name the women who have run and lost. Um Kerry Healey - check. Did she lose because MA

voters are sexist or because Deval Patrick was a better leader?

I do not disagree that there is an Old Boy's Club that exists in MA and frankly across the country which makes it more difficult for women to get into politics. I just don't think the voters of MA have a particularly sexist bent.

[MADem]

13. Kerry Healey was a fucking idiot.

She was an anti-woman woman. She showed up when Lawrence, MA was flooded, people thrown out of their homes, crying on the street waiting for the Red Cross to show up and give them a cup of weak tea and a foil blanket, hopped out of her SUV, put on a hard hat, POINTED at the floodwaters while her lackey took pictures, then hopped back into her SUV and LEFT, without saying a word to those assembled.

She must have been looking for photographic accompaniment to her campaign literature. From all accounts, it was a SMH moment.

She wasn't a politician, she was a useful tool from Mittsy's "bindersful of women."

We don't elect women in MA. We are sexists in that regard. If Liz Warren hadn't gotten a shitload of out of state money and a ton of press, she'd be in the "Step Aside, Little Lady" line along with a lot of other deserving women who just did not get a fair shake from the MA media, both print and TV, and did not get a fair shake from a lot of MA voters.

[pipi_k]

14. My memory fails me...

and I've been trying to look up the information but having no luck, but anyway...

Either Kerry Healy or Shannon O'Brien...I forget which...lost an election because of a really stupid thing one of them said during her campaign, which was that elders living in their homes that they've had for 30, 40, etc. years should move out...basically, surrender those homes to people with families.

OK, on a logical level it does make sense. But on an emotional level...

No.

So, like you said, sometimes it's not about sexism at all.

[seaglass]

15. That was Kerry Healey, link below.

http://bluemassgroup.com/2006/09/healey-changes-her-tune-on-seniors/

“My opinion is that to extend tax breaks to seniors in order to keep them overhoused and isolated in the suburbs is not necessarily the right answer,” Healey told a State House News Service reporter two weeks ago, in an interview that was made public yesterday. “It’s an answer, but the best answer would be to bring them into our city and town centers, into more appropriate housing, and free up those properties to get back on the tax rolls of the community.” …

“Right now, the situation that’s causing an imbalance in our suburban communities is that many of our seniors are aging in their homes …. Plus, they may have three or four bedrooms and only be using one of them. There are families that need that housing.”

[MADem]

22. That's because Mitt Romney had shut down the Circuit Breaker option for seniors.

There were several years in the RMoney era that a lot of seniors didn't qualify for circuit breaker. He wanted to push them out of their homes so that taxpayers paying "full fare" would get in there.

When Deval came along, it came back on line. I'll bet Charlie will ratchet it back again. Tough times for the elderly. Buy those cans of beans now!

[merrily]

29. Did Romney do that without the state legislature?

[MADem]

31. Line item veto.

He used it to shave thirty one million off of Big Dig Tunnel maintenance too. See this old DU thread from a zillion years ago to walk down memory lane: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1657469

Post seven, particularly.

As a result of the deferral of the scheduled maintenance, a ceiling tile fell on a vehicle heading to Logan, crushing a woman in the passenger seat. IIRC, she was a newlywed.

The state paid out more than twenty five million to her heirs. Who knows how much the legal work cost.

He fucked over the firefighters, too.

The legislature overrode something like 700 of his 850 or so vetoes, but they didn't get 'em all.

[merrily]

33. Exactly. The legislature had enough Dems to override any Romney veto.

I am surprised he shaved it from the Big Dig. A lot of the Big Dig contractors were his donors. After that woman was killed, he had the same contractors who used glue inspect the tunnel. IIRC, no independent inspections.

I don't know if she was a newlywed, but she had kids and a husband, which made the tragedy worse. Probably parents and siblings, too. Regardless, people have a right not to have newish ceiling tiles kill them as they drive through a tunnel.

[MADem]

36. Dems in MA don't vote as a bloc unless motivated in some fashion.

They disliked RMoney enough to do it 700 times, but they can be bought like any politician can.

He was pissed that the legislature laughed loudly at him when he wanted to name the Tip tunnel the "Liberty Tunnel." They invited him to kiss their collective asses.

She was a newlywed--the children (grown) were from a previous liaison.

[merrily]

37. As you noted, they voted as a bloc enough times to override hundreds of Romney's vetoes.

They simply did not choose to override that one.

[MADem]

39. And a hundred and forty some odd others. nt

[merrily]

40. Yup, 140, including that one compared to the many they overrode.

[merrily]

19. If Nikki doesn't win elections on her own merit, how did Hillary become Senator?

[MADem]

21. I did NOT say doesn't, I said didn't. She would not have won that first run were it not for Paul.

And HRC won her first election with help from the name recognition she got from being the wife of the POTUS. That smoothed the path for her, certainly. Her performance in the job is what kept her in it. If she wanted the job permanently, she could have had it. She was highly effective.

Not sure what the point is there. This is just fact. Pretending otherwise just doesn't make sense.

[merrily]

24. Saying she didn't win on her own is not a statement limited in time.

You did not specify you meant only her first election. I resent your implying that anything about my post was a pretense of any kind. It wasn't.

That said, no, it is not "just fact" that she won her first election solely because of her husband. That is your assessment,your opinion. She was a well educated, successful lawyer woman with good campaign skills. Yes, name recognition helps any candidate, but she could have blown it, as did Allison Lundergan Grimes. However, Nikki didn't blow it. That cannot be attributed to her husband.

U.S. House of Representatives
Elections

After Marty Meehan resigned in 2007 to serve as Chancellor of the University of Massachusetts Lowell, Tsongas ran in the special election. Tsongas defeated four other candidates to win the Democratic primary with 36% of the vote.[12] During her initial campaign Tsongas received endorsements from The Boston Globe, the Boston Herald, and the Lowell Sun.[13][14] During the general election, former President Bill Clinton, who defeated her husband for the Democratic nomination in 1992, campaigned for her. At an event in Lowell Clinton remarked: "Congress will be a better place because she is there."[15] Tsongas won the special election against Republican Jim Ogonowski with 51% of the vote on October 17;[16] she became the only female Representative from Massachusetts, and fourth in the state's history.[17]

After running unopposed in 2008, in 2010 Tsongas faced Republican Jon Golnik, a small businessman and former Wall Street currency trader. During the campaign Tsongas attacked Golnik's history as a Vice President of AIG,[18] which Golnik called hypocritical, as she had stock in AIG and other large corporations.[19] Tsongas defeated Golnik with 52% of the vote.[20] Following redistricting after the 2010 census, Tsongas ran for re-election in the reconfigured Massachusetts's 3rd congressional district in 2012. In a rematch, she again defeated Golnick.[21]

I see no reason to conclude that all the above was attributable solely to her husband, let alone to declare it a fact.

In 2008, I would not let Republicans say that Hillary had never done anything on her own; and I was totally for Obama and therefore against her.

[MADem]

32. Well, you can resent all you want. She cashes my check, I don't think she resents me one bit.

I knew her husband pretty well--he was very helpful to me many, many years ago. And I don't need a lecture on the history of her campaign, either.

You have a nice day.

[merrily]

35. Yes, I resent the baseless implication that I am pretending. Wouldn't you?

As far as your not needing a lecture on her campaign, you are not the only reader in this forum and copying and pasting facts from wiki is not much of a lecture, anyway.

[MADem]

38. Whatever. nt

[Paolo123]

26. Martha Coakley is an unlikeable person

It's as simple as that.

[MADem]

27. I think she's swell. Republicans might not like her, but that's their problem. nt

[merrily]

30. I like her, but she is not charismatic. Then again, I thought Baker was as charismatic as a fish

that's been dead for two days, going on three.

Even in Massachusetts, money makes a big difference in elections. (In 2006, Patrick's campaign team was headed by Axelrod. I think Axelrod may have been practicing for 2008, but he is probably one of the best.)

That's the only thing I can think of. That, and maybe Coakley was just not able to overcome the reputation she got when she ran against Brown. She ran a far, far better campaign this time, I thought, but most people just don't follow the ins and outs of politics very closely. Maybe they formed an impression last time and were "stickin' to it"

[Little Star]

4. Massachusetts has a record of electing socially liberal Republican governors

Though Massachusetts is heavily Democratic, it has a record of electing socially liberal Republican governors, and Mr. Baker, who supports abortion rights and gay marriage, fits that mold. Political experts said Mr. Baker ran a mostly nonpartisan race and many voters didn’t view him as a threat to left-leaning policies in the state.

In addition to improving how state government functions, Mr. Baker wants to expand the number of charter schools in the state as a means to improve early-childhood education, and to reduce the costs of college education, a top voter concern, potentially through changes like shortening the time required to earn a degree. He has also made implementing welfare reform a priority.

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2014/11/05/gops-charlie-baker-defeats-martha-coakley-in-massachusetts/

Since 1914, 14 Republicans/12 Democrats. Baker makes it 15 Republicans since 1914.
http://www.masshome.com/governors.html

I thought I read somewhere that this was her last time running for anything. I'm sad she lost but not surprised.

[MADem]

8. I don't buy one word of Phony Boo Hoo's "new" attitude.

He wasn't always Mister Happy Happy Pro-Woman.

Don't buy the talking points that HE put out. They're as fake as that ad he did with his daughter.

Every kid that goes to a charter school takes thousands away from the budget of the public schools. I'd rather see a candidate that invests in the public schools, myself.

Rupert Murdoch's Wall Street Journal is going to try to jolly him along as an everyman, of course. In reality, he's a condescending and smarmy ass:

http://www.masslive.com/politics/index.ssf/2014/09/republican_charlie_baker_apolo.html

"OK, this is going to be the last one, sweetheart."

And "welfare reform?" Watch that welfare reform have plenty to do with denying people benefits.

I'm not sanguine about Charlie. The only thing that keeps him in check is a Democratic legislature...if he wants to be a successful governor, he will HAVE to play ball with them. Romney learned, to his chagrin, how thoroughly MA lawmakers can stick it to a governor they don't like.

[merrily]

20. I hope the legislature hates him. We don't need them to compromise or play ball with him.

[TheCowsCameHome]

5. She gave him a good run for the money.

She fared better that I expected. I don't like Baker, but it could have been a lot worse.

He still has to deal with a deep blue legislature.

[merrily]

18. Yes, but he still gets to make appointments in the Executive and Judicial branches and also

to appoint a replacement if a US Senate seat becomes vacant. The last is only for a relatively short time, but the appointee becomes an incumbent and an incumbent always has an advantage. Hence, the dog and pony show of making Senator Kennedy's place holder swear publicly that he had no intention of running for the seat.

I think Romney issued about 300 vetoes per year, almost one per day. And the legislature either overrode all of them or all but a handful.

[MADem]

23. Had Palchuk not run, she would have won. nt

[TheCowsCameHome]

25. Yep, his 3% did her in.

And he got his moment in the sun at her expense.

I guess we should be thankful Charlie Baker isn't Scott Lively.

[merrily]

28. Maybe. He was to her right. He could just as easily have taken votes from Baker as from Coakley.

[MADem]

34. Really? Free college for everyone is to the right of Coakley?

He was all over the map, but not to the right of her.

Free college, everyone is equal, fiscal responsibility was his platform. Simplistic.

[merrily]

41. Hmm. I seem to remember your posting to me that he was to her right

when I posted that I was not sure.

[MADem]

42. Lively was to everyone's right. He was a rapture Nazi or something. nt

[TheCowsCameHome]

43. "Fringe" doesn't begin to describe Scott Lively

That guy was waaaaaaaaaay outside the margins.

[MADem]

44. You said it--I couldn't believe he had the chutzpah to even run in this state.

He was too weird to pull much if anything from Baker, sadly.

[TheCowsCameHome]

45. I got a kick out of watching him.

To see him live in the debates was more fun that reading about what he said the next morning.

Everyone present cringed when was speaking.

[MADem]

46. You're absolutely right! He was cringe-worthily entertaining! nt