I UNDERSTAND the premise of Joan Vennochi’s column criticizing efforts by the “party elite” to anoint a Democratic nominee in the Massachusetts Senate special election (“Democrats for democracy? Not in Mass.,” Op-ed, Jan. 3). There are certainly times when that is not in the public’s best interest.
We had a primary in 2009 for the Senate special election. No one paid attention. No one watched the debates. Very few people bothered voting. What happened? The most apathetic, entitled Democrat won handily, thanks only to name recognition. She then got her clock cleaned by a mostly unknown state senator who then spent two years pretending his constituents didn’t exist.
Comments
I think the only thing that Martha Coakley did wrong was to think she didn't have to run her campaign like a man. She got derided for not standing outside the Fenway in the cold. Was this apathy or maybe she just thought the state had matured beyond the sports and military meet, greet and keep it simple type of campaigning that comes more naturally to men. I can't think of many women whose family and work committments would make them think that spending time shaking hands outside a sports event is more worthwhile than debating or presenting their views on issues in an organized forum. It's time to stop evaluating a candidate on their campaign skills rather than on their views and actual work history. It seems like many of us learned from Scott Brown that being an extraverted "one of the guys" doesn't necessarily translate into being a great senator.