Tuesday, January 19, 2010

NYTIMES ON WHY BROWN WON AND CROAKLEY LOST: DENIAL DENIAL DENIAL!

NYTIMES ON WHY BROWN WON AND CROAKLEY LOST: DENIAL DENIAL DENIAL!

3 Reasons Why Mr. Brown Won | 10:03 p.m.

1. He ran a better campaign – period. Putting policies aside, his strategy took a page from the Obama playbook. He tapped into the discontent in an electorate hungry for change. He won over independent voters. He captured his base. (Initially, some Republicans said he wasn’t a pure conservative, but those voices died down after his candidacy took off.)

2. He was likeble. His guy-next-door persona – in television ads and on bus tours across the state – appealed to voters.

3. The discord that is very much alive inside the Republican Party was not visible in this race. Republicans from outside Massachusetts largely stayed away – unlike last year’s race in New York’s 23rd Congressional district – so Mr. Brown could surround himself by sports stars and John Ratzenberger, who played the affable mailman, Cliff Clavin, on “Cheers.”

3 Reasons for Ms. Coakley’s Loss | 10:02 p.m.

1. Her candidacy was uneven and she came across in television ads and public appearances as a less likeable person. She had no emotional connection with voters, while her opponent developed a movement-like following.

2. Her strategists failed to define Mr. Brown. She won the Democratic primary on Dec. 9 and soon began running what appeared to be a Rose Garden-like strategy. Yes, she took a vacation over the Christmas holidays, but she also didn’t start running TV ads until after Mr. Brown had already introduced himself to voters.

3. Democrats in Washington were not properly focused on the race. An air of overconfidence – it was, after all, Senator Edward M. Kennedy’s seat – caught Democrats off guard until it was far too late. There was a failure to recognize the anger percolating in the electorate.

NO MENTION OF OBAMACARE.

No comments:

Post a Comment