Someone explain to me why Martha Coakley is allowed to run for any office in Mass. for the Dems?

[LynneSin]

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2014/governor/ma/massachusetts_governor_baker_vs_coakley-3266.html

Seriously, this is a state that should be an easy win for the Democrats. And back in March she had a 12 point lead. What's crazy is the Democrats are looking to pick up some serious Governor houses and yet we might actually lose Massachusetts. Did Martha Coakley decide to stop campaigning or shaking hands again?

I just don't get it. I'm sure she's a nice person but I can't imagine a great state like Massachasetts that has elected some amazing democrats in its history can't find someone better than Martha Coakley to run for governor. I hope this Baker guy isn't a Tea Party nut job!

[MannyGoldstein]

1. I voted for Berwick.

But here we are.

[valerief]

3. Me, too. I knew it was in vain. The PTB wanted Coakley. nt

[yeoman6987]

2. I feel the same way about Charlie Crist

Not a single Democratic person in Florida apparently.

[Proud Public Servant]

4. It's her turn

And the fact that she lost her previous election, in spite of being inevitable, shouldn't matter.

Please save this post for reuse in 2016.

[Arkana]

5. Because MA is bad at picking governors and Coakley isn't a dynamic campaigner.

Anyone who thought anyone but the second coming of Obama would win Massachusetts walking away for the Dems is fooling themselves. This state likes to pick "moderate" Republicans for governor. Remember, we gave Mitt Romney the only elected post he's ever had.

[Onlooker]

6. Martha Coakley's a nerd

Coakley deserves to win. She's very smart, and generally very good. But, she's a nerd, and sadly I think a lot of people judge her negatively because of that. I think she'll win because Charlie Barker is no William Weld, and Coakley this time around is campaigning hard. Also, recently she has been trying to connect emotionally, and has talked about her brother who committed suicide and put out an ad about mental health. I think they're pretty effective, and most now polls show her with a small lead.

[blkmusclmachine]

7. Coakly's probably suppossed to take a dive/throw it to the GOP.

[Chan790]

8. View from a neighboring state.

I'm familiar with Coakley as someone who lives in CT and close enough to the border to be exposed to that race. It's pretty simple...Martha Coakley has a moderately-sized base of very-passionate supporters that turn out with fervor to support her in what are typically low-turnout primaries.

They feel that she's very smart and deserves the seat. They believe that her political ascendency is inevitable. They believe that the primary causes of her past statewide failings are external (An unfair shake from the media, misogyny, misrepresentation) rather than integral. (She's about as likeable as dry toast, her positions make her somewhat unappealing to real Democrats, she insists on trying to position herself as more-moderate than the electorate when she should run left to win, she's a terrible campaigner.)

[davidpdx]

14. I kind of got a chuckle from reading the second paragraph

Because I was actually thinking about someone else when I read it and thought to myself that most of it could be subsitituted for another well known Democrat (except for the very last part).

They feel that she's very smart and deserves the seat. They believe that her political ascendency is inevitable. They believe that the primary causes of her past statewide failings are external (An unfair shake from the media, misogyny, misrepresentation) rather than integral. (She's about as likeable as dry toast, her positions make her somewhat unappealing to real Democrats, she insists on trying to position herself as more-moderate than the electorate when she should run left to win, she's a terrible campaigner.)

[whistler162]

9. Simple...

The Massachusetts Democratic Party knew you would be irritated with her running! Why else would they have her run?

[RBInMaine]

10. Enough trashing democracy. She has the right to run. We don't need a circular firing squad.

She won the primary fair and square. So enough trashing the democratic process.

She has campaigned LIKE HELL, learning her lesson from mistakes of the Scott Brown race.

Remember, it is a non-presidential year, they are coming off 8 years of a Dem, and they do have a history of
electing moderate R's for governor there.

Also, Baker ran last time against Patrick, so he is a known quantity too.

Coakley admittedly isn't the most dynamic personality, but neither was Mike Dukakis who won the governorship there I think three times. We need smart and thoughtful people, not just flashy personalities.

Defining the R as too far to the right for MA, hard campaigning, and a strong GOTV operation will most likely result in a Dem win.

[sketchy]

11. Thank you for this post

Enough already with the defeatism and circular firing squads!

[calimary]

12. I've wondered about that ever since her arrogance and complacency handed Ted Kennedy's

Senate seat to fucking idiot know-nothing scott brown (but he photographs well!). She went on VACATION. DURING THE CAMPAIGN. WTF?????????

That should have disqualified her PERIOD. Manifestly bad judgment that she displayed there. What else can we expect from her? Well, it may not matter. She may blow this one, too. If they go back to her to run yet again for something else, it's their own fault and their own blind stupidity and bad judgment. She shouldn't have gotten another chance. It's too big a risk.

And more. That governor's term is four years, if I'm not mistaken. If the bad guy wins this time, he'll run again, which would be in 2018. And if he wins, with the incumbent advantage he'd have - GUESS WHEN HE'D STILL BE IN OFFICE???????? 2020. Another "Zero Year." The Zero Years are the ones when the census is taken. That's when reapportionment happens. Guess what any self-respecting republi-CON governor would do in a reapportionment year? Yep, gerrymander as many districts as possible to force an artificial advantage to his own tribe and screw the opposition. Build it in semi-permanently so you can then change the whole of Massachusetts over to a red state.

Doesn't anybody supposedly in charge think of these things???