Hey Massachusetts! Coakley or Brown?

[Old Pio]

Re: Hey Massachusetts! Coakley or Brown?

well.... i'm still thinking she'll win. don't be surprised if she wins by 2 or 3 points.

Perhaps. That's because we all know what can happen in a one party gulag.
I find myself hesitant to proclaim victory or even confidence in victory, but Jeebus, the evidence is there. For instance, overnight polling seems to show that the president's visit actually hurt her (the venue was 1/3 empty, and the only way they got people there was with promises of transportation, refreshments and food--not exactly the enthusiasm we saw in November of 08).

 

[pirate]

Re: Hey Massachusetts! Coakley or Brown?

From a distance...Schilling is allowed to support a candidate...he isn't the only dope supporting a candidate in the race. If all the dopes were silenced...well, I'll leave that one alone.

She made him a much bigger piece of this by her dense comment...the Beantown equivalent to Bush's "Price of Milk" gaffe?

 

[Red Cloud]

Re: Hey Massachusetts! Coakley or Brown?

Perhaps. That's because we all know what can happen in a one party gulag.

My thoughts exactly, even as poll after poll has shown momentum for Brown. My reaction was... well, they had elections in pre-invasion Iraq, too.

 

[geezer]

Re: Hey Massachusetts! Coakley or Brown?

Lots of previously repressed feelings on this thread.

My thoughts:

1) As has been mentioned, an "enthusiasm" vs "turnout" election. From early reports turnout is pretty good. The problem with this election is that there's no reliable indicators to interpret the results. Who does high or low turnout favor? What areas should be expect to vote heavily, etc. One of the oddest races I've seen, even ones where the Republican candidate (Romney for example) won.

2) Coakley's problem is the same that Mass Dems for governor face, which is that when you come up in state politics the action is always in the primaries for those lower offices, so its a run to the left. If faces with an argument from the other side of the aisle, they often have trouble because its new to them (and their campaign managers).

3) Two unappealing candidates to be sure. Coakley has run a rose garden campaign, which is disasterous. Reminds me of Dukakis in '88, don't do anything and figure the voters will come to you. Never took the time to define herself, allowing her opponents to define her. Scott Brown's candidacy apparently revolves around having a daughter who lost in a preliminary round of American Idol and a vague promise to oppose everything but propose nothing. In that regard this is like the Cellucci-Harshbarger race.

4) Whatver the result, and hopefully its a close scare instead of a crushing defeat, there needs to be several lessons taken out of this for my fellow Dems. First, act like you want the office, not expecting it to be handed to you. Next, for Obama/Congress start getting things done quickly. Health care dragged on for too long. Finally, start defining issues and explaining yourself. If you don't, your opponents will. Right now they're in a sorta prevent defense, which as we all know prevents you from winning.

Oh, one more thing. Its well known that Curt Schilling is a dope. We're all thankful for the 2004 World Series but really, the guy's an idiot. For all the talk about what will decide this race, this angle has to be the most absurd.

Most of this isn't bad spin, actually, except this: moving too quickly on health care with closed-door negotiations, etc. and trying to ram a bill through without opening it up for more input and debate is exactly what led to this "scare". A better lesson to learn: listen to the people!

 

[Red Cloud]

Re: Hey Massachusetts! Coakley or Brown?

Most of this isn't bad spin, actually, except this: moving too quickly on health care with closed-door negotiations, etc. and trying to ram a bill through without opening it up for more input and debate is exactly what led to this "scare". A better lesson to learn: listen to the people!

The people? The people don't know what's best for them. Only Oblahblah and his cohorts do.

 

[GreatLakerMohawk]

Re: Hey Massachusetts! Coakley or Brown?

The people? The people don't know what's best for them. Only Oblahblah and his cohorts do.

Bob Loblaw?

 

[Old Pio]

Re: Hey Massachusetts! Coakley or Brown?

My thoughts exactly, even as poll after poll has shown momentum for Brown. My reaction was... well, they had elections in pre-invasion Iraq, too.

Yeah, and IIRC, Hussein used to win with 111% of the total.

 

[Jon]

Re: Hey Massachusetts! Coakley or Brown?

Bob Loblaw?

Bob Loblaw's law blog is outstanding.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: Hey Massachusetts! Coakley or Brown?

MSNBC's Nora O'Donnell just quoted a Dem source, talking about their GOTV efforts as saying: "I don't think the machine can get you 10 points."

 

[Red Cloud]

Re: Hey Massachusetts! Coakley or Brown?

MSNBC's Nora O'Donnell just quoted a Dem source, talking about their GOTV efforts as saying: "I don't think the machine can get you 10 points."

It should be telling that the news this morning isn't really that Brown is expected to win, it's that he's "got a shot." Any other candidate polling the way Brown has polled in the last week would be reported on as being the likely winner, but not in Massachusett(e)s.

 

[LynahFan]

Re: Hey Massachusetts! Coakley or Brown?

Perhaps. That's because we all know what can happen in a one party gulag.
I find myself hesitant to proclaim victory or even confidence in victory, but Jeebus, the evidence is there. For instance, overnight polling seems to show that the president's visit actually hurt her (the venue was 1/3 empty, and the only way they got people there was with promises of transportation, refreshments and food--not exactly the enthusiasm we saw in November of 08).

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/lrNrLly1vvM&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/lrNrLly1vvM&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

 

[Old Pio]

Re: Hey Massachusetts! Coakley or Brown?

It should be telling that the news this morning isn't really that Brown is expected to win, it's that he's "got a shot." Any other candidate polling the way Brown has polled in the last week would be reported on as being the likely winner, but not in Massachusett(e)s.

I think there's been a slow comprehension of what's going on. Sort of like when Thomas Andrews reported to Captain Smith that the Titanic had a couple of hours to live, and the realization set in that they were way short of space in the lifeboats. Oops.

 

[unofan]

Re: Hey Massachusetts! Coakley or Brown?

Most of this isn't bad spin, actually, except this: moving too quickly on health care with closed-door negotiations, etc. and trying to ram a bill through without opening it up for more input and debate is exactly what led to this "scare". A better lesson to learn: listen to the people!

See, I think the problem is listening too much to the people, the WHARGRBL crowd who is scared of anything and everything because they're the 50% of the country with IQ's below 100.

When the GOP's line on healthcare is possibly the largest contradiction in politics - "Public health care bad! Medicare good!" - you can't convince me that the public who actually buys into it knows what they're talking about. (since when is the GOP the proponent of medicare?) They're simply running scared, and unfortunately, it's working.

The health care bill sucks, but the "town halls" (which were really just means of people getting to yell at politicians and look like uncivil idiots in the process) did nothing to fix it, if anything they made it worse as politicians lost what little spine they had and caved in. Further public input isn't going to fix it, either. It'll just kill it for good. And then we'll be left with the same cluster**** of a system that we've got now.

As far as this election in Mass.? Frankly, I think it might have more to do with the state dems doing everything they can to keep that seat a D, even "cheating" (well, changing the rules as they go) to do so. At least some of it has got to be a backlash to Teddy's "plan" allowing the governor to appoint an interim senator after he had personally gotten the rule changed when Romney was governor to prevent just that.

A similar type of thing cost Ben Nelson his first time around here in Nebraska; he had promised during his re-election campaign for governor that he wouldn't leave early, then turned around and ran for the senate anyway. Lost in an upset to Hagel.

Pause for a moment and consider what we're anticiapting. That Barack Obama's outrageous, bloated, costly health care "reform" bill, that the Democrats have made more deals than Monte Hall to get to this point, may be about to go down in flames. Why? Because the senate seat once occupied by the Hero of Chappaquiddick (a man who made health care "reform" the centerpiece of his senate career) is going to change hands, to a REPUBLICAN.

The "ironyometer" hasn't been made that can measure this one.

The irony is really that if Teddy had resigned early enough so that the special election could've been held earlier, his seat wouldn't have been in doubt.

 

[geezer]

Re: Hey Massachusetts! Coakley or Brown?

See, I think the problem is listening too much to the people, the WHARGRBL crowd who is scared of anything and everything because they're the 50% of the country with IQ's below 100.

I urge you to reconsider this attitude with the question in mind of, "what could possibly have happened to Barry's popularity?"
Nancy, Barry and Harry haven't learned this yet, but the truth is that someone's intelligence isn't indicated by how often they agree with you on controversial issues (like the advisability of decimating the best health care system in the world).

 

[unofan]

Re: Hey Massachusetts! Coakley or Brown?

I urge you to reconsider this attitude with the question in mind of, "what could possibly have happened to Barry's popularity?"
Nancy, Barry and Harry haven't learned this yet, but the truth is that someone's intelligence isn't indicated by how often they agree with you on controversial issues (like the advisability of decimating the best health care system in the world).

It's only the "Best health care system in the world" if you have access to it. I'm lucky in that I have that access. Millions of Americans don't (and no, the use of the ER as one's sole medical provider does not count as access, especially when it bankrupts you in the process).

Also, just because the system may be the best doesn't mean it's perfect and cannot be improved upon.

But I digress, this is about the election. If you want to discuss the health care fiasco, there's dozens of other threads on that.

But I will tell you this. I'm an old school fiscal conservative, so claiming that I think people are stupid because they disagree with me would be hilarious, since it's political position without a party at the moment (and if you think the current GOP is the party for fiscal conservatives, I'll laugh in your face as you do it). I think people are stupid because, generally, people are stupid. It may be shocking, but roughly half of all Americans have below average intelligence. And average intelligence isn't exactly great.

 

[geezer]

Re: Hey Massachusetts! Coakley or Brown?

It's only the "Best health care system in the world" if you have access to it. I'm lucky in that I have that access. Millions of Americans don't (and no, the use of the ER as one's sole medical provider does not count as access, especially when it bankrupts you in the process).

That's a myth. I've been there. There are millions of people who don't buy insurance because they can't afford it or don't want it. When the worst happens (for me, it was a fall from a roof) we have workers comp, medicaid and other programs already in place to fill the gaps. So, not having coverage doesn't equal no access to coverage.

Also, just because the system may be the best doesn't mean it's perfect and cannot be improved upon.

I agree. But in this case they're going after the wrong targets, and foolishly trying to add costly new layers of regulation where we should be reducing costs.

claiming that I think people are stupid because they disagree with me would be hilarious

if that wasn't your claim, I apologize.

 

[Maineiak]

Re: Hey Massachusetts! Coakley or Brown?

According to the WSJ health stocks are up on the possibility of Brown winning.

 

[MinnFan]

Re: Hey Massachusetts! Coakley or Brown?

According to the WSJ health stocks are up on the possibility of Brown winning.

Thats interesting considering they had a big jump when the Senate passed its bill too.

My take is that passage would be good for them in the short-term, but failure is better in the long-run.

 

[Red Cloud]

Re: Hey Massachusetts! Coakley or Brown?

By hook or by crook.

Behind in the polls to Republican Senate candidate Scott Brown, supporters of pro-abortion candidate Martha Coakley have evidentially reached into their bag of dirty tricks. A Washington, D.C. based company is making calls to Massachusetts residents pretending to represent a prominent pro-life group.

The calls, from 202-461-3441, a Washington number registered to a company called SOOH, claim to be from Massachusetts Citizens for Life.

The caller claims the pro-life group is opposing Scott Brown because of his stance against the health care bill, but as MCFL president Anne Fox told LifeNews.com late Monday, the opposite is true.

“Pro-lifers are receiving phone calls from people claiming to be Massachusetts Citizens for Life. The callers say that MCFL is not supporting Scott Brown because of his position on health care,” she said. “The truth is that Massachusetts Citizens for Life is supporting Brown because of his position on health care.”

The same number is also making calls to other state residents with various messages all attacking Brown.

“Pro-lifers are not the only victims of this scam. Our MCFL sleuths have found that this same number is calling people across the state claiming to be different groups with different messages — all anti-Brown,” Fox added.

 

[SteveF]

Re: Hey Massachusetts! Coakley or Brown?

That's a myth. I've been there. There are millions of people who don't buy insurance because they can't afford it or don't want it. When the worst happens (for me, it was a fall from a roof) we have workers comp, medicaid and other programs already in place to fill the gaps. So, not having coverage doesn't equal no access to coverage.

did you just decry universal healthcare using a universal healthcare system (medicaid) in your argument?