Can Dems hold Kerry’s seat?

[DonViejo]

A heated Democratic primary might be the party's best shot at defeating the presumptive favorite, Scott Brown

BY STEVE KORNACKI

Typically, the view of party leaders is that primaries are best avoided. Better to coalesce around a consensus candidate early, help that candidate amass a mighty bankroll, and focus the attention of volunteers, activists and other stakeholders on the general election. But that is not the prevailing attitude among Massachusetts Democrats as they face the state’s third Senate in three years.

John Kerry’s confirmation as secretary of state will come either Tuesday or Wednesday, but it’s such a formality that the Massachusetts secretary of state has already gone ahead and scheduled the special election to replace him, with primaries in April and the final vote on June 25. Right now, there’s only one declared candidate from either party: Ed Markey, a Democratic congressman from outside Boston. But Democrats are convinced that Scott Brown, the Republican who won a January 2010 special election only to lose to Elizabeth Warren last fall, is going to jump in the race – and because of that, they are hoping that a second Democrat will also enter the fray to battle Markey in a primary.

This is not, by and large, because they don’t like and support Markey. The 66-year-old congressman has already racked up endorsements from Kerry, Vicki Kennedy, and several other statewide elected officials. He’s also the preferred choice of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, and with his lengthy and reliably progressive record, he figures to be an acceptable candidate to many of the party’s key coalition groups.

What Democrats wonder about, though, is his work ethic as a candidate. Markey was elected to the House in 1976, but the state’s partisan bent and a series of favorable redistricts rounds have insulated him from a serious electoral challenge for decades. The last time he faced a suspenseful contest, in fact, was when Kerry’s Senate seat was last open – back in 1984, when the late Paul Tsongas declined to seek a second term. Markey was one of several Democrats to enter the race to succeed him, but early polling showed him lagging behind Kerry and then-Rep. James Shannon, prompting Markey to back out of the race and return to his safe House seat.

-snip-

read more:
http://www.salon.com/2013/01/29/the_primary_fight_democrats_want/

[NewJeffCT]

1. That is my concern about Markey as well

He has never had a tough race in his life, while Brown has been in tough races in both 2010 and 2012, and only lost to dream candidate Elizabeth Warren by 7 points.

Connecticut is a blue state as well, though not as blue as Massachusetts. However, Democrats ran very popular congresswoman Barbara Kennelly against Republican governor John Rowland. Kennelly had easily won several terms to Congress, but ended up getting swamped by Rowland by near record margins because she had never had to work hard to run for office, had never been challenged, etc. Of course, the strong economy of 1998 helped Rowland as well, since he was the incumbent, but it was like 63%-35% - meaning most indies and many Dems voted for Rowland as well.

[graham4anything]

2. Markey is a very bad candidate. I said this months ago. Vicki Kennedy is needed.

Putting a male up for the post is a losing situation.
They already have one running on the republican ticket.

At this point in time, we need Vicky Kennedy.

Vicky should be appointed both interim and then even though they said it wouldn't happen,
run for the 2 year end.

Markey is a poor choice, he reminds me of how Walter Mondale was chosen to run for Wellstone's seat.He was lethargic and ran the same type of terrible campaign he did as he did in 1984 for President(and he was a horrible choice to run for President in 1984 anyhow.

I would in this case like to see a challenge up to primary time in April, then a surprise late entry when neither candidate excites the masses.

[Mass]

4. Because your knowledge of MA is so great.

[Mass]

3. Same person who, one year ago, said Scott Brown was not beatable.

And yes, this is after Warren had entered the race.

So, f*ck him. We dont need Lynch. If we needed a moderate anything, Scott Brown fits the bill.

BTW, the race will not be easy, but it is up to the Dems in MA to campaign, rather than whining against a candidate in a campaign that has not started yet, largely on the basis of a push poll.

[graham4anything]

6. Thankfully, Barack Obama's coattails got the edge. (He won alot bigger).

My sister lives and votes in Mass.
She tipped me off to Elena Kagen 20 years ago.

I personally would like Lynch to get Markey out, and then have a surprise candidate
(i.e. Vicky Kennedy) to rightfully take back a senate seat for the Kennedy's.

Can you imagine how great it would be to have Kennedy/Warren in office.(too bad it couldn't have been Teddy and Warren, he is so missed.)
It would be the best of all worlds.

A month before Nov. and the sweeping landslide of President Obama nationwide, it
was very dicey. Both candidates made mistakes, Scott Brown made worse mistakes, but odds are he wouldn't do it again. And the special elections have normally less voters, especially with an unexciting candidate.

But anyhow, Markey is a horrible candidate. Certainley he has zero charisma, and well,
LOL, he is not Elizabeth Warren. He is not a dynamo.

BTW, speaking of horrible candidates, it boils me inside what Paul Tsongas tried to do. He lied about his health to the nation.
Point Blank he lied.

It is very possible had he not run, Jerry Brown could have been President in 1992 as he almost did(without the smear).But then Tsongas never was a liberal. (and in fact, Tsongas wanted Colin Powell to lead a third party run. Tsongas was to the right of just about everybody that year.
Can you imagine?

[Mass]

9. The fact you dont like Markey helps me. Markey must be a very good candidate if you hate him that

much.

[graham4anything]

13. Why do you equate things in love/hate? I love having the senate in democratic hands.

I have nothing against Markey except he is an awful candidate. The OP says it.
History shows it.

Some people can be great congresspeople in their little district, however, that does not equate to being a state wide candidate. It just means the people in ones district like him.

The state of Mass has twice elected a republican governor.
And in recent history two republican senators.
So it is not a given the state will elect democratic candidates.

Vicky Kennedy would make it alot easier.

[awoke_in_2003]

5. With a leader like Harry the Wimp...

does it really matter anymore?

[graham4anything]

7. Harry Reid is a winner. His beating of Angle was a work of art.

and is the reason President Obama is giving his speech on immigration from there, isn't it?

[awoke_in_2003]

10. And what of filibuster reform...

which he said he was for yet voted against? He talks a good game, but in reality he just wants to sit back and say "I can't do anything because the republicans are tying my hands". Of couse, he did nothing to get rid of the rope. He may be able to win election, but he is a pathetic Leader.

[graham4anything]

11. It was a brilliant move but you need to look 10 steps ahead to see it.

Especially if the democratics lost the senate in 2014

2016 will be easy for democratic candidates based on who is running and it's a presidential.
2014 will be tough as it is.

Harry Reid will like normally he does, look like a genius if that happened.

[awoke_in_2003]

12. Oh yeah, the 13 dimensional chess...

how could I forget? So, for two more years the democrats will get zero done. If they win again in two years, we will have two more years of them saying "the republicans won't let us". If the republicans take the majority, same thing. Thanks to an impotent leader we have an impotent caucus.

[bigwillq]

8. Yes

Mass is a big DEM state. If DEMS get out the vote, a DEM should win.