David Weigel hits on the reason why Elizabeth Warren may be a stronger candidate than some of the other women who have failed to get elected governor or US Senator from Massachusetts, such as Martha Coakley:
...if Republicans think they can Coakley-ize Warren, they're going to snow some lazy bloggers but they're not going to snow voters. Coakley was not a uniquely bad politician; she came from a uniquely bad farm system that produced politicians. She was the second consecutive Massaschuetts Democrat who won the high-profile job of Suffolk County DA*, was promoted inside the party for the Attorney General nomination, and flopped like a wounded dolphin when she actually had a tough race against an innovative candidate. The other flop was Tom Reilly, the AG who was outplayed by Deval Patrick in the 2006 gubernatorial primary. Reilly was counting on the Democratic party's organization; Patrick, with no base, built his own. The 2010 U.S. Senate special played out along similar lines, because Coakley was counting on the machine to grind out a win, while Scott Brown, with no reliable Republican machine, had to practice entrepreneurial suburban politics.
*Actually Middlesex County; Weigel may be under the misapprehension that the most important county in the state is the one that includes Boston rather than some of Boston's wealthiest suburbs.
Coakley wasn't the first female pol with this problem. Others included gubernatorial candidates Kerry Healey (Mitt Romney's lieutenant governor, unsuccessful GOP nominee in 2006); Shannon O'Brien (state treasurer whose father was a Democratic Party stalwart, unsuccessful nominee in 2002); Patricia McGovern (legislative leader and ultimate backroom player who failed to get the Democratic nod in 1998); and Evelyn Murphy (Michael Dukakis's lieutenant governor who didn't even make it to the Democratic primary in 1990). All of them hypercautious, follow-the-party-playbook candidates who offered gender change but otherwise represented the status quo at its dullest. (I foolishly thought, briefly, that Coakley might be different.)
Warren is more in tune with the Bay State electorate, which prefers outsiders, reformers, and candidates with strong grass-roots organizations.
Her biggest obstacle is not money but the uncertainty of media coverage. If she's behind Scott Brown in early 2012 polls, Boston journalists might lose interest in the US Senate campaign — especially given the excitement of the presidential race and, perhaps, the post-redistricting congressional races that might include one incumbent running against another. Warren could be a formidable debate opponent against Brown, but she's got to get enough visibility to force Brown to debate her and force voters to watch. No guarantee of that yet.
Comments