Why primaries matter

[Kaleva]

Was reading articles discussing the Dec. primary election which Coakley easily won. Turn out was low.

""Nicola M. Manion, the precinct warden, labeled the low turnout “disgusting.” Manion said a number of people she knows did not show up at the polls.

“I am very very surprised at the people I have not seen,” she said. “They just don’t take these primaries seriously.”

“I know they’re educated. I know they have good jobs, and I do not see them here,” Manion added.

Vincenzo Ferraro, who has been the Ward 6, Precinct B warden for more than a decade, said usually when the polls open on Election Day there might be 10 or 12 people waiting to vote. On Tuesday, there were two.

There was also only one sign in front of the school, a Capuano sign stuck in the ground. Ferraro said there are usually campaign workers holdings signs for their candidates, but not for this primary.

“I think a lot of people didn’t even know there was an election today, you know?” Ferraro said."

http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2009/12/coakley_brown_win_light_wester.html

My guess is that Coakley won simply because she had the greater name recognition and not that she proved herself to be the best candidate.

[sabrina 1]

1. Capuano, I have read, would have won this race if

he had won the primary. Where was the effort behind him? I would love to have worked for him but wasn't even aware of the primaries. All those Democrats who voted for Brown, probably did so because of issues like the Health Care bill. It is very unpopular in Mass with only one third of those polled saying they support it.

Capuano is very progressive on the issues.

We better not ignore the upcoming primaries. Eg, the Jane Harman/Marcy Winnograd race. The DLC machine is behind Harman who badly needs to go. Winnograd is very progressive but if there isn't a real effort to start supporting her now, we will have another two awful years of Harman who may as well be a Republican.

You are so right about the importance of primaries.

[Kaleva]

2. Interesting comments posted December 8th, 2009

Did a google search for more articles and found one but won't post a link to it as it's clearly a right wing site but here is a section of the article:

"With the results in, it’s already clear that Michael Capuano blew an enormous opportunity to win the Democratic nomination by failing to go negative against Martha Coakley (for fear of a backlash) and draw a clear distinction on the issues.

Now, Republican nominee Scott Brown has just six weeks to learn from Capuano’s mistakes and take a wildly different approach.

Think Brown can’t win? Here’s why he can:


— With local media outlets already declaring Coakley our next senator, Martha’s infamous coasting will become even more pronounced. She will put next to nothing into her effort from here, saving campaign funds for future purposes.


— Since Coakley’s supporters now assume the race is over, they will do little campaigning over the holidays."

The article goes on to say Brown has a chance to win over enough Independents to clinch victory (which happened) and that turn out will be very low (which didn't happen).

[sabrina 1]

4. Interesting, and turned out to be pretty accurate, at least as far

as the outcome. Obviously the Republicans were watching this race and working on it. There was nothing on it that I recall on most Dem. boards. Who was in charge of that? I never saw a single ad for either Capuano or Coakley.

If we had been talking about the primaries and people had gotten to know Mike Capuano, I think the turnout would probably have been higher and he might have won the primary. He IS someone progressives could have been excited about.

What a lost opportunity, not only to defeat the Repub. but mostly, a chance to get a real progressive Senator elected.

On the good side, Brown only has two years. Progressives HAVE to get organized and start watching these races and backing the progressive candidates. The Repubs are motivated, the Dem base is not and if that doesn't change, this will be repeated over and over again in the Fall.

[Kaleva]

6. Looks like interest here at DU in the race was pretty much zilch.

Been doing some searching and haven't found threads posted back in December here in GD with either Coakley or Brown in the subject line.

[sabrina 1]

7. I couldn't remember hearing anything about this race

until recently. Then I looked up both of the Democrats and couldn't find much on Coakley of any depth. Mike Capuano otoh, is excellent on the issues. If I had known anything about him I would have been posting about him and I'm sure, so would others. We probably could have gotten out the disenchanted Dems in Mass with phone banking etc. And then we would have had a real interest, and motivation to work on the election.

I'd like to know who is responsible for that election, it was Ted Kennedy's seat and there was no effort to get people involved.

I think the blame goes to the DNC Chair. But now we know, they will not be working on the Nov. primaries so we'll have to do it ourselves. Marcy Winograd is another great candidate. But the DLC wing of the party is supporting the Repub/lite, Jane Harman. So, that's one race where we could get rid of a Blue Dog/DlCer. Going to have to do some checking on other races so this doesn't happen again and we don't lose a chance to replace Rightwingers in both parties with decent progressives.

[Kaleva]

10. I didn't hear about this race until the polls showed it to be a close one.

[sabrina 1]

11. I wonder if that was deliberate. I hadn't heard about it either.

It's possible that the DNC knew progressives would work and vote for Capuano if they had focused on the primaries. If he had won, he might not have been an automatic vote for the Senate version of the HC bill. Coakley would have been so they may have calculated on her winning the primary, being better known and then a shoo-in in the final election.

I don't trust them at all now. The DNC/DLC does not want progressives in Congress. Their backing of people like Harman makes that obvious. Even Waxman and Woolsey are supporting Harman against a far better candidate.

Hopefully this will wake them up, but will it change their minds about the direction of the party? The grass-roots will have to work hard to find who is running and who to support. I don't think we'll be getting much help from the DNC.

[Recursion]

3. I like Capuano, but our only hope was Khazei, IMO

Oh well. On to reconciliation...

[liskddksil]

5. This is why we cannot let DCCC, DSCC, and establishment groups

tell us who to vote for.

[Jamastiene]

9. Exactly.

That is the secret to the whole thing; the best ace in the hole that we have.

[Freddie Stubbs]

12. Who did the DCCC and the DSCC tell people to vote for in the MA primary?

:shrug:

[Jamastiene]

8. Actually, the primaries determine the direction of the party.

During the primaries, we have a real chance to elect the most progressive candidates we have. The primaries are more powerful in shaping the party than anything.

We need to stop listening to the talking heads and powers that be, who shape public opinion, and, instead, vote for the most progressive candidate. Whether they are seen as strong candidates to the talking heads or not, we need to learn to not let the talking heads choose for us.

If we do not choose the best and most progressive candidates on the ballot in the primaries, we end up having to choose between wrong and wronger in the general election. That never helps. That just keeps us demoralized and defeated.

[Kaleva]

13. True but interest here at DU in the primary appears to have been near zilch.