Having seen a post (somewhere, although I cannot find it now) about Martha Coakley running for Governor, it made me think that if the Democratic party put forth an exciting slate of candidates for its top offices it would energize the electorate. We have all read the stories of declining enrollment, and although Massachusetts remains the bluest of states, activists age, with no real excitment for new or younger voters. Robert Reich pulled new folks, but the party didn’t foster their participation in the ongoing process, and although there is a great appetite in Mass. for innovative ideas, we leave the Romney’s and McCains and Perot’s to provide the outlet.
Swift was a sure loser four years ago, but Romney skated onto the scene, and yadda yadda yadda. If Swift hadn’t self destructed, she would have been nominated, and the Dems would have taken back the corner office at that time.
Could Reilly be our Swift? Is Patrick our Romney. Perhaps. But what if we take what we know, that Reilly is a really really bad candidate (by his own admission at today’s press conference). Patrick has excited the base, but why can’t we have a TRUE RACE that excites us, in a way that the base hasn’t been engaged since 82?
Let Reilly run for reelection, and encourage Coakley to run for Governor. Let’s have the two bright lights of the future of the party duke it out, with the victor taking back the corner office, and the runner up getting instant front runner status for John Kerry’s seat (when he, as Don Quixote, with his faithful sidekick Bob Crowe, go off to Iowa)
What’s wrong with a true competitive race? Dukakis was better after the primary with King, Kennedy has been a better senator after Romney. Patrick wins because Reilly self destructs? I hope not, but let’s step in and put our best candidates forward for the highest posts. Or others will provide the excitement.
by all the sudden enthusiasm for Martha Coakley for Gov (there are comments in some past posts, though I think not an actual post before this one, on the topic). What makes everyone think she’d be such a great Gov candidate? Sure, she’s done a good job as Middlesex DA, but … has she even given a moment’s though to a serious education or economic development plan? I think her jumping into the race would look like total desperation on the party’s part. Plus, if Patrick does manage to knock off Tom Reilly, however much Reilly has managed to weaken himself, he will still have pulled off a tremendous upset (because of the imbalance in $$ if nothing else) and will have that much more momentum going into the general.
<
p>
Coakley will do a fine job as Attorney General, and it’s a great move for her. She can worry about the other stuff later, if she even wants it.
don’t let the discussion immediately go to specifics about named potential candidates. I throw out Coakley because others have mentioned her, but more to show that we don’t need to stick to the rigid (losing) strategies of the past dozen years. We have some exciting possibilities, despite money concerns and past foibles. Rather than celebrate them (Patrick) or cringe (St. Fleur) when they bubble up, maybe as a party we could cultivate them. Wouldn’t that be innovative.
It must have been your suggestion that Coakley jump in to the Gov’s race that led me astray! đŸ™‚ I take your broader point.
Well, I concede. The downside of trying to be provocative but missing. But Reilly is the “front runner” it appears, absent of any other front runner quality because of his money. Should the party be encouraging candidates to compete at the highest level? I think so.