Martha Coakley is attempting to blunt Scott Brown’s recent momentum with the first significant campaign event I can recall her having since the Democrat unity event the day after the primary. She has also returned to the airwaves with her first general election television ads, with less than two weeks to go in the race.
In an announcement that should surprise no one, Victoria Reggie Kennedy is today endorsing Coakley’s bid for the US Senate. It’s a nice event that is an easy, positive media story for Coakley.
Just because this announcement is not a surprise doesn’t mean it’s not newsworthy. It simply doesn’t rise to the level of a “major endorsement,” given that we’ve known all along that the Kennedy clan would be with the Democrat nominee, whoever that person turned out to be. Acknowledging their active support does not change the underlying dynamics of this race, however.
A few have gone so far as to suggest the endorsement could be a negative factor, spinning this as a sign that “the Washington establishment” is behind Coakley at a time when incumbents are running scared. This argument is absurd. Any time the widow of a long-serving member of Congress offers you her endorsement to succeed her husband, you take the endorsement. I worked a special election campaign in 1991 to succeed US Rep. Silvio Conte and we happily accepted his widow’s endorsement although there was little surprise there, either. By the way, we used “no one can fill his shoes, only walk in his footsteps” back then!
The bottom line, as I’ve argued in previous posts, is that this election remains about turnout. An endorsement such as this one would potentially be more significant in a regularly-scheduled general election when casual voters participate in high numbers; casual voters might be swayed by this type of association. This election, however, will be dominated by hard-core committed voters on both sides, many of whom have long known for whom they would vote. This endorsement won’t sway any of them.
What this might do is give Coakley a reprieve from the negative press of the past couple of days (see previous post here) and instead give her a day or so of nice soft, news stories. Then she needs to get to work identifying and turning out her vote. What this week’s Rasmussen poll showed was that Brown and Coakley each have enough support to win, depending on whose voters go to the polls on January 19.
In an announcement that should surprise no one, Victoria Reggie Kennedy is today endorsing Coakley’s bid for the US Senate. It’s a nice event that is an easy, positive media story for Coakley.
Just because this announcement is not a surprise doesn’t mean it’s not newsworthy. It simply doesn’t rise to the level of a “major endorsement,” given that we’ve known all along that the Kennedy clan would be with the Democrat nominee, whoever that person turned out to be. Acknowledging their active support does not change the underlying dynamics of this race, however.
A few have gone so far as to suggest the endorsement could be a negative factor, spinning this as a sign that “the Washington establishment” is behind Coakley at a time when incumbents are running scared. This argument is absurd. Any time the widow of a long-serving member of Congress offers you her endorsement to succeed her husband, you take the endorsement. I worked a special election campaign in 1991 to succeed US Rep. Silvio Conte and we happily accepted his widow’s endorsement although there was little surprise there, either. By the way, we used “no one can fill his shoes, only walk in his footsteps” back then!
The bottom line, as I’ve argued in previous posts, is that this election remains about turnout. An endorsement such as this one would potentially be more significant in a regularly-scheduled general election when casual voters participate in high numbers; casual voters might be swayed by this type of association. This election, however, will be dominated by hard-core committed voters on both sides, many of whom have long known for whom they would vote. This endorsement won’t sway any of them.
What this might do is give Coakley a reprieve from the negative press of the past couple of days (see previous post here) and instead give her a day or so of nice soft, news stories. Then she needs to get to work identifying and turning out her vote. What this week’s Rasmussen poll showed was that Brown and Coakley each have enough support to win, depending on whose voters go to the polls on January 19.
No comments:
Post a Comment