The morning news has been punishing today. More precisely, the advertisements in-between segments of the morning news have been punishing, because every other commercial has been for Scott Brown or Martha Coakley, and I think both sides are running nothing but their slate of negative ads.
Thank you both for souring me on this election.
I was soured on Brown from almost day one, because — as a recipient of his campaign e-mails — I’ve seen nothing from him but condemnations of everything Coakley said or did throughout this process (“Martha Coakley drinks Pepsi Throwback, deprives the high-fructose corn syrup industry of vital revenue!”), followed by very superficial retorts meant to extol Brown’s virtues (“Scott Brown will support high-fructose corn syrup by drinking one bottle of Karo every day”).
His denouncement of Coakley’s negative ads are, in this light, hypocritical, but I have to agree: they’re low-road politics and are distracting voters. That Coakley ran negative at all, much less launched the first high-profile volley, is hugely disappointing and, as WHDH-TV’s Andy Hiller observed, not something a candidate with any confidence in her campaign would do.
This always has been Coakley’s race to lose, and she may well lose it. Eschewing on-the-street meet-and-greets with Massachusetts voters to go to out-of-state events? Jeez, Coakley, who are you? Mitt Romney? Running negative instead of pushing hard your considerably positive record as AG? WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU?!
Should Brown win Tuesday, well, first I’m going to bang my head against a wall to dull the pain of seeing Coakley blow the election, then I’ll start looking for candidacy announcements from people looking to boot Coakley out of the AG’s office (because if she loses Tuesday, the GOP is going to just see blood in the water). Then I’m going to hope all this talk about intentionally dragging out the certification process to delay Brown’s entry into office is just that — talk — because I don’t know if I could calmly handle with any degree of aplomb the second most flagrant flouting of good public process since Massachusetts changed the Senate succession laws to allow Deval Patrick to plop Paul Kirk in Kennedy’s seat. If Brown wins, then he wins. Seat him.
Otherwise, everyone involved with such an affront to the political process will be facing voter wrath come November.
Tags: 2010 election, Governor Deval Patrick, Martha Coakley, Scott Brown, US Senator Ted Kennedy
The views and opinions in the Enterprise blogs are those of the author and are not neccessarily shared by Falmouth Publishing.
Coakley, another typical elitist. You all need to remember this is a REPRESENTATIVE government. The elected officials are to represent the people, not the political party. A very wise man predicted this mess America is now in because of the political parties. His name: George Washington in his farewell speech. Wake up America. If the politicians don’t represent you the people vote them out regardless of party.
Ah, “elitist,” another popular buzzword people throw out to rally the masses to vote Republican…they guys that approved tax cuts for the top earners in the country. Yep, they love the working class all right.
And be honest: Brown will be as beholden to his party as Coakley would be to hers. They’re no different in that regard and it’s naive to believe otherwise.
Mike – Any thoughts on the recent US Supreme Court Decision on corporate and union contributions for campaign advertising?
I’m interested in your perspective.