Democratic Candidate Martha Coakley expressed surprise today that she had been expected to campaign hard for a Senate seat.
"I won the primary, so I figured why bother?" explained Coakley. "My opponent was wasting time opening field offices across the state, shaking hands and running TV ads. What's the sense in that?"
"It's just like in business. If you have a better product, you don't need to advertise. I thought it made more sense to concentrate on moving from Massachusetts to Washington, D.C. and on recruiting staff for my office."
Pundits agreed that Coakley's strategy made sense. "By not campaigning for most of the month before the election, Coakley was saving her energy for things that really mattered," said $400-a-hour consultant Bob Shrum. "Why should she bother pointing out that her opponent was a member of the party who'd led our nation to economic ruin? The press was ignoring that issue, so it wasn't really worth her talking about it much."
Others took a different view. "I wondered why the Coakley was doing less than one-third as many events as her opponents. She didn't even have a field office in my county!" said one longtime Democratic Party volunteer. "But then I read she was taking advice from the same people who ran Hillary Clinton's campaign for President."
"We all love Hillary, but someone should have told Coakley that Hillary lost."