
It didn't take long for the Dems to start the finger pointing in the wake of Martha Coakley's loss in the Massachusetts special Senate election.
As the election night returns came pouring in so did the blame. Coakley, a Democrat and the Massachusetts Attorney General, was ahead of Republican State Senator Scott Brown by double digit margins well into December. But, her lead faded in early January and her campaign was never able to recover.
State and national Democrats began trading barbs almost as soon as Coakley's poll numbers started plunging. In the days leading up to the election, high-level Democrats were calling Coakley weak and ineffective. According to the Associated Press, the polls hadn't closed on Tuesday before White House aides began anonymously contacting reporters to blamed Coakley for her troubled campaign in an attempt to shape the narrative after the race.
President Obama's top advisor, David Axelrod, did make a few comments on the record. "I think the White House did everything we were asked to do," he said. "Had we been asked earlier, we would have responded earlier."
Obama himself was said to be "surprised and frustrated" and "not pleased" by the state of the race in Massachusetts. The president campaigned for Coakley on Sunday.
Earlier today, Politico reported that a Coakley adviser leaked a memo blasting national Democrats for failing to help the struggling campaign until it was too late.
The memo, according to Politico, also states: "Coakley's failure to release television advertisements until 12 days before the election was the result of a fundraising problem that national Democrats failed to resolve. Meanwhile, right-wing groups pumped significant amounts of money into Brown's campaign, allowing him to go up with ads first, including negative attack ads funded by the Swift Boat and Willie Horton groups."
Coakley has been criticized for taking a laissez-faire approach to the campaign. It wasn't until Brown started surging in the polls that her political operation ramped up, and she has been accused of taking the race for granted.
Politico also reported on Tuesday officials at the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel were trying to blame Coakley for potentially losing a seat that had been held by the late Sen. Ted Kennedy for close to five decades.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) also weighed in on Coakley's misfortune and took a shot at her colleagues in the Senate.
"We're always in touch with our members," Pelosi said at an afternoon press conference. "In the House, we don't have surprises when it comes to elections."
The blame game continued late into election night.
In an interview with MSNBC, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) said late Tuesday night that it was clear the Coakley Campaign treated the primary as the election. "The buck stops with the candidate at the end of the day," Wasserman Schultz said.
Viva!America!
January 20, 2010 12:04 AM
Dems need to start acting like a sports team. Keep this kind of stuff behind closed doors, present a united front and play to win. And when you lose, the whole team takes responsibility - in public. Right now, they all just need to really shut up and get back to work.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Sailormarlowe
January 20, 2010 7:38 AM in reply to Viva!America!
Under the caption, "Mr. Brown goes to Washington" on her Facebook page, Gov. Sarah Palin offers interesting reflections & pertinent political commentary on Scott Brown's Victory in Massachusetts.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
USgreentech
January 20, 2010 12:06 AM
No reason to blame a specific person. They had a very good candidate and ran a great campaign. I don't see why a person would point a finger. They would keep up the great work and move forward into November.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
psyclone
January 20, 2010 12:20 AM
The Dems deserve this embarrassment. They've played terrible politics the past year and the Senate Dems especially have handled the entire health care reform issue as cluelessly as the Reeps did just 4 years ago with Social Security reform. It's like these knuckleheads never learn anything.
Hopefully the Senate version of the health care bill dies right along with the Coakley campaign. It's a shame, because it never had to be this way.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
wbgonne
January 20, 2010 12:40 AM in reply to psyclone
Yup. You reap what you sow. Chickens home roosting. And all that. So true yet so difficult to remember.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ericf
January 20, 2010 1:11 AM in reply to psyclone
I too blame the Senate. The House got it done, and the Senate did everything wrong. Nonetheless, if the Senate bill fails, it might be as long before anyone tries health care reform again as it was after prior failures. That being the case, we'll have to wait for Congress to mostly turn over, so we're looking at the 2020's. Can anyone reasonably say it's a good idea to live with the current system that long instead of passing the Senate bill?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nova voter
January 20, 2010 1:49 AM in reply to ericf
yeah, the house got it done and the senate didn't. and if the house had a filibuster mechanism with a 60% supermajority requirement to vote it down, those 220 votes pelosi got would have meant exactly DICK. she barely managed to get a simple majority. she was miles from anything remotely resembling 60%.
but don't let the details get in the way of a good tantrum, right?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
gharlane
January 20, 2010 3:24 PM in reply to nova voter
Um, Nova.... can you name the year the Republicans last had 60 seats in the US Senate?
(Hint: It was at a time when 60 seats wasn't even enough to overcome a filibuster.)
But don't let the details get in the way of a good tantrum, right?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
inokeah
January 20, 2010 12:29 AM
Anyone that watched the President try to inspire the voters in Boston yesterday knows why Martha Coakley lost. He gave the standard "Hay, hay, Ho, ho" SEIU rally cheerleader durge, all he needed was a cigar sticking out of his mouth. The President has no clue how mush American's love there trucks. His speech writters need to be replaced with real live people that dont read New Yorker or Vanity Fair.
Imagine him saying, "And I was riding around in my limo with George Cloony and Sean puppy Combs".
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nova voter
January 20, 2010 1:39 AM in reply to inokeah
"The President has no clue how mush American's love there trucks."
fuck health care and fuck jobs. we need to do something about our schools PRONTO.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Overreach THIS!
January 20, 2010 6:59 AM in reply to nova voter
Curious posting.
Fuck jobs, health care, and schools! Soil run-off is the key! Stop soil run-off now!
No, come-to-think-of-it, fuck that too! Pilots are underpaid! Let's get fair pay for pilots before we do another blessed thing!!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nova voter
January 20, 2010 8:05 AM in reply to Overreach THIS!
what?
like i said, we really need to do something about our schools.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
SchrodingersCat
January 20, 2010 8:27 AM in reply to Overreach THIS!
It was a joke. Grab another cup of coffee and then try reading it again.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Fitgerald
January 20, 2010 1:12 AM
Time would be better spent not assigning blame, but to use this as something to learn from so other races can recalibrate their recruitment, message, etc.
I will spend this quick moment, if the unemployment rate in Massachusetts was 5-6% no one would have known, or cared who Scott Brown was.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nova voter
January 20, 2010 1:38 AM
steele's statement is a typical doozy. among other things, "His message of lower-taxes, smaller government, and fiscal responsibility clearly resonated with independent-minded voters in Massachusetts who were looking for a solution to decades of failed Democrat leadership."
i don't even know what to make of that. i mean, is he talking about the executive branch? because by my count, since 1980, 9 years have been under democratic leadership, and the rest was republican.
or is he talking about the seat, specifically? is he suggesting that ted kennedy provided "decades of failed leadership?" if that's what he means, then what can you say other than "fuck you"?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Viva!America!
January 20, 2010 1:45 AM in reply to nova voter
Michael Steele doesn't say or mean anything. He's full of nonsense.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
dem4life
January 20, 2010 9:03 AM in reply to Viva!America!
Mike Steele is a token Boy
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
eratosthenes8
January 20, 2010 1:41 AM
Who doesn't deserve blame here?
A terrible candidate.
A clueless president.
A feckless Senate majority leader.
The American people gave the Democratic party their trust in 2008 and the Democrats squandered it.
The only person that doesn't deserve to be tarred and feathered, in my opinion, is Nancy Pelosi.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
eratosthenes8
January 20, 2010 1:44 AM in reply to eratosthenes8
If it isn't clear by my post, I'm particularly referring to the demise of the health care legislation (which, considering Barney Frank's and Jim Webb's comments is pretty much a fact of life, at this point).
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Overreach THIS!
January 20, 2010 6:55 AM in reply to eratosthenes8
Interesting you don't blame rank-and-file Democrats and other Obama voters who didn't work and didn't organize.
It would be so impolitic to hold ourselves accountable for our failures.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Official A
January 20, 2010 9:03 AM in reply to Overreach THIS!
Bullshit. Progressives (who are the rank-and-file) have been repeatedly told they don't matter. Don't expect them to come in with money and enthusiasm to bail the "centrists" out. Rahm is chief of staff and Howard Dean has been exiled.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Overreach THIS!
January 20, 2010 1:02 PM in reply to Official A
Right! Not your fault!
Glad we got that cleared up! Whew!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
SteinL
January 20, 2010 2:50 AM
Fineman said it well - Obama came in with tremendous political capital, and gave it to Baucus.
But seriously - you'd think he knew that Americans were hoping to see some payback after the Bush Blow-Up of the nation. They got none - and he left the field to the GOP, while being the "statesman."
I'm personally fed up with the Mellifluous One. It's not speeches we want, it's action. And he's not into action - deliberation, consideration, prognostication, defection from principles -- that's him.
Some have said the Obama team is playing multi-dimensional chess. They aren't.
Dean: If you don't use your majorities, you lose your majorities.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
gingerman
January 20, 2010 3:15 AM
SteinL
I am afraid the emperor has no clothes...Rhetorician extraordinaire but alas he is poltician first and a leader second if at all
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Official A
January 20, 2010 9:13 AM in reply to gingerman
I am mightily disappointed, too, but everytime I regret the money and time I devoted to the Obama campaign I remember McCain and Palin and feel a little better. Still, at this point I'd welcome an alternative for 2012.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
philogratis
January 20, 2010 4:50 AM
I hit the wall a few times but I've come to calm down. Keep in mind that Dems were unlikely to have 60 votes in a year anyway, and a half dozen of those votes are unreliable.
Exactly a year ago the Democrats had 58 senators, a Lieberman, and the Republicans had been engaged in a circular firing squad following their loss in the election. Obama's popularity was much higher at the time, but the economy sucked, so the Democrats passed a massive stimulas package, the Republicans got their shit together and organized a unified front, and the battle went on.
It can be that way, but if the Democrats let health care die they will be massacred in November. No government can invest so much political capitol in a bill and watch it go down. Naked political self interest should force the House to pass the bill.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Overreach THIS!
January 20, 2010 7:06 AM in reply to philogratis
Pass health care to avoid massacre in November?
A lot of people here have different advice. Bill not good enough, Bush's unemployment not fixed, Al Qaeda not defeated, and what about more support for the gays?!!
Losses in November, you say? Who knows when that month even *is!!* Main thing now is to fight talk of confronting Yemen! And we couldn't get too far with this health care, so let's write a more *liberal* one and see where that gets us!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Glix
January 20, 2010 5:07 AM
This may have something to do with internal Democratic Party strife within Massachusetts. Apparently, the people who supported Coakley and the people who supported her opponent in the primary didn't get along...different parts of the state. The party machine there was not in Coakley's camp and never did get over her winning the primary. The mayor of Boston and others didn't endorse her.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
delmoi
January 20, 2010 7:05 AM
You know what I'm sick of? All the whiners. And the garment rending. The democrats have a 58 seat majority, and they have already passed HCR in the senate. All the house needs to do is pass this thing and done. We're done and we can focus on jobs.
But no, people have to bitch and moan about everything. You know what? Let me indulge in it. The democrats, and I mean those in the house and senate are LOSERS. They have the attitude of LOSERS. They give up at the drop of the hat, they're scared of everything and they can't govern.
Frankly, I think the brown victory could light a fire under their asses, and they need it. They need to PASS HCR. And move on. If people are going to lose their seats, let 'em lose 'em.
They need to stop being cowards. They need to stop being losers. God damn.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Steve LaBonne
January 20, 2010 7:12 AM in reply to delmoi
I wouldn't hold my breath. I think the fact that we're seeing a rerun of the early 90s confirms that under current conditions- the congressional Democratic party including as many DINOs as it does, and especially the Senate rules as they are- Democrats simply cannot govern at the national level. So from this point on, practicing mainstream Democratic politics as usual fits the well-known definition of insanity.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
January 20, 2010 10:07 AM in reply to delmoi
Good post. I agree.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Alex Carson
January 27, 2010 5:05 AM in reply to delmoi
Wow, well said! Whatever of the Filibuster, we've passed the filibuster, now pass the bill that is a hell of a lot better than nothing!!
I don't know if anyone here remembers this, but Medicare Part D was widely considered to be a terrible of a bill by a number of Republicans but they passed the thing anyway back in 2003. The Republicans won in 2004. You know how they could have lost in 2004? If they'd whined about getting this or that provision and refused to vote yes until it was fixed - dragging Medicare Part D into endless negotiations until it finally died.
Now we have a bunch of whiny Democrats who have an ideological purity test that they apply to any health-care bill, and would rather let people without insurance die than pass a bill they don't like. What have Democrats done for health-care? Nothing. The Republicans at least passed (an overpriced dumb Medicare Part D) and Health-care savings accounts. If I'm Joe average voter, who will I vote for: The ideological die-hards on the Democratic side that have done nothing for me, or the Republicans, who pass over-priced bills but actually help my situation? Not a hard choice.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dredd
January 20, 2010 7:18 AM
There were lots of blogs and lots of articles that warned this was coming as a result of continuing Bush II policies as placation under the false flag "bi-partisanship".
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
shooter242
January 20, 2010 7:34 AM
It's time for you folks to escape the liberal fantasy farm and get back to practical politics. The country IS more conservative than liberal.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Steve LaBonne
January 20, 2010 8:14 AM in reply to shooter242
Nope. Polls on actual issues continue to show the opposite. (For example, the public health insurance option was always more popular than the corporatist monstrosity the Dems came up with.) And there remains lots of healthy populist anger at Wall Street all across the political spectrum. Washington corporate conservatism connects with nobody except the elite that funds it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
shooter242
January 20, 2010 8:54 AM in reply to Steve LaBonne
Let me amend that then, VOTERS are more conservative than liberal.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
dem4life
January 20, 2010 9:04 AM in reply to shooter242
Pretty sad....our future is the racist, teabaggers.
A bunch of illiterates
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Official A
January 20, 2010 9:10 AM in reply to shooter242
Disagree. It's time for progressives to exert their political power, which is considerable. Otherwise the Republicans move right dragging "centrist" Dems with them and the Democratic Party will look like Ronald Reagan. Compromise is a two way street.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AllanCook
January 20, 2010 8:38 AM
A tremendously dull and uninspiring candidate running a misguided campaign that badly underestimated the resentment of the economically strapped majority of Bay State voters and badly overstated the value of the Kennedy brand. As one who lived there for 15 years, this wasn't hard to predict.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
dem4life
January 20, 2010 9:02 AM
JOBS! JOBS! JOBS! Health insurancve is not a great issue in MA.
Maybe Scott can really focus on undocumented workers in MA that receive health insurance.
If we get penalized on out taxes so should they. Thanks Mitt for the mess
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
January 20, 2010 10:05 AM
Froma poster at dailykos
My Mom is a Democratic machine operative in Boston - here's her explanation
Tue Jan 19, 2010 at 07:50:30 PM PST
My mom has been a Democratic machine operative in Boston since the 70's. She knows about Massachusetts politics, and she knows about this election. Here's what she says happened:
* catlover72's diary :: ::
*
First of all, this is not a referendum on Obama or Washington.
This is about local infighting in the Massachusetts Democratic Party, plain and simple.
In this particular race, there has been a great deal of conflict between the Democratic insiders in Western Mass and the Democratic insiders in Boston.
During the primary, Western Mass backed Martha Coakley (who is from Western Mass) because her primary opponent, Mike Capuano, a current U.S. House Rep from Somerville, was from Somerville not Western Mass.
According to my mom, the Western Mass Democrats got a lot more momentum in the primary because no one in Boston believed that Capuano could lose. Western Mass turned out, Boston and vicinity did not.
Mom says Capuano would probably have won easily had he not lost the primary (he never has a serious challenge when he runs for his House seat).
Coakley, on the other hand, not only dropped the ball as everyone knows, but no politicians in Boston wanted their names associated with her after she won the primary. My mom isn't high enough up the chain to know why this is (or maybe she is holding out on me because she doesn't want anyone to read this and recognize her dishing the inside scoop - she is old school and thinks she shouldn't be talking publicly about this).
As the race went on, she (mom) asked around as to why she hadn't been called out to phone bank, check lists of registered voters, etc, for the campaign as usual. She was told "we're not backing anyone" by "someone on the committee" (she is not telling me what committee because this blogging thing is making her uneasy).
Menino never backed her publicly ("Don't name names!" says mom. "Everyone knows he's the mayor!" I say). He never backed her secretly either, the machine was not turned out for Coakley.
"Nobody likes her" says mom. What she means is, Coakley had no friends in politics. The Democrats in Massachusetts let this happen because - "I don't know" says mom.
Maybe they weren't about to let Western Mass manipulate them. Maybe it all comes down to nothing more than who is friends with whom.
All Scott Brown did was see an opportunity and turn it to his advantage.
There is no deeper national implication. This is not a death knell for the Democratic party or Obama. This is a story of a domestic spat between "parochial divisions" in Massachsetts.
The proverbial house divided among itself, fell.
UPDATE: Rec List! Thank you everyone, for listening to my mom's perspective.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
again
January 20, 2010 1:22 PM in reply to lousgirl84
Denial is not a river in Egypt...
Yesterday's vote was also a referendum on weak Presidential and Democratic leadership.
Despite what anyone's "Mommy" says.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?