Using a statewide election for a non-ideological race like Treasurer is a bona-fide stretch to claim strength in a US Senate race. Mourdock isn't "unelectable" only because this is 2012 Indiana. But his hard-right wing credentials will make this a POTENTIALLY close race, not unlike Kentucky 2010.
If winning a non ideological statewide election is evidence of winning a high profile US Senate Race then MA would not have to deal with Scott Brown. The WhiteHouse and the US Senate Republicans will be fighting over Elizabeth Warrens confirmation to head to the consumer protection agency she introduced.
Coakley-D despite running a lousy campaign in 2010 would have won and still be serving in the US Senate. Coakley-D would win re-election to a first full term in 2012 by a double digit margin. Coakley's loss in 2010 had to due with superficial reasons- The criteria in 2010 MA was which candidate you wanted to have a beer. Coakley(D-MA) would have left of center voting record had she got elected to the US Senate. Mourdock(R-IN) would have a far right voting record if he gets elected to the US Senate. On the other side, Brown(R-MA) is more conservative than the average MA voter. Donnelly(D-IN) is the true moderate in the race that would not go on Fox News Channel like Bayh or Lieberman.
