Sir Stewart Posted January 12, 2010 Share Posted January 12, 2010 Martha Coakley, Massachusetts' Attorney General, was essentially being handed the seat after the primaries. In the past week, thanks to a groundswell of conservative action (his campaign claims to have raised $1.3 mill in the past 24 hours), Republican Scott Brown (currently a state senator) has closed the gap and we finally have a real race on our hands.There is, of course, controversy (real or fabricated, who knows) over when the new senator will be sworn in - before or after the health care vote?Last night's debate was fiery.Anyone paying attention to this? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Oil Can Boyd Posted January 13, 2010 Share Posted January 13, 2010 Sir Stewart, just remember: it’s not the ‘Kennedy Seat,’ it’s the people’s seat. It is certainly getting closer (and nastier) than I expected.(Full disclosure: I voted for Alan Khazei in the primary.) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mountain bed Posted January 13, 2010 Share Posted January 13, 2010 I really can't see it happening, but if that seat goes to a Republican WATCH OUT. The off year elections could be a free-for-all, with ANY incumbent in dangerous territory. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted January 13, 2010 Share Posted January 13, 2010 I like how guys like Limbaugh, Hannity and the rest celebrate and cheerlead stuff for weeks and then claim that whatever happens is a magical "true grass roots movement". I heard Rush say that today about this guy. They also do that with the tea party bullshit. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted January 13, 2010 Author Share Posted January 13, 2010 Sir Stewart, just remember: it’s not the ‘Kennedy Seat,’ it’s the people’s seat.I know you're being cheeky (I think), but when Brown corrected the moderator to say it's the people's seat, not Kennedy's, I had to agree with him. But then I said that to my wife, who countered with "But it's a special election, taking place because Kennedy died, so it actually is Kennedy's seat they're running for."Just when I thought I'd agreed with Brown on something. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted January 13, 2010 Author Share Posted January 13, 2010 I really can't see it happening Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tweedling Posted January 13, 2010 Share Posted January 13, 2010 Was Joseph in Honey I Shrunk The Kids?That's who I'd vote for. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
u2roolz Posted January 13, 2010 Share Posted January 13, 2010 Was Joseph in Honey I Shrunk The Kids?That's who I'd vote for. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Oil Can Boyd Posted January 13, 2010 Share Posted January 13, 2010 This is sort of funny too: "The Coakley ad ... was already drawing comment and ridicule today from Republicans because it included a misspelling of the name of the state. The ad says it was 'Paid for by the Massachusettes Democratic Party and authorized by Martha Coakley for Senate.'" Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dude Posted January 13, 2010 Share Posted January 13, 2010 It's hilarious and maybe a bit sad that a guy with no relation to the Kennedy clan and no experience campaigning, running for or serving in a public office can still garner 3% of the vote, clearly due to the fact that his name happens to be Joseph L. Kennedy. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted January 13, 2010 Author Share Posted January 13, 2010 Well there's that, but it should also be noted that Coakley and Brown are each repugnant in their own ways. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tweedling Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
isadorah Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 It's hilarious and maybe a bit sad that a guy with no relation to the Kennedy clan and no experience campaigning, running for or serving in a public office can still garner 3% of the vote, clearly due to the fact that his name happens to be Joseph L. Kennedy. that Kennedy name doesn't get people as far as one would think. my guess, his 3% is from people being unhappy with the other two. having that name has only garnered special attention for me twice in my lifetime so far (i am still holding out for some big something to come of having that name): immediate prime seating in a very busy restaurant in Boston and an additional conversation with a TSA guy during an airport screening, in which I almost managed to get myself screened further instead of being whisked through the airport line. i get quite annoyed when someone asks how you spell that...umm like the president...or senator...or supreme court justice...or.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted January 15, 2010 Author Share Posted January 15, 2010 New poll shows Brown slightly ahead of Coakley Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mountain bed Posted January 15, 2010 Share Posted January 15, 2010 Damn! You know when someone who is as plugged in as Charlie Cook says it's too close to call, then it's too close to call. I saw where the Prez was cutting some ads for Coakley. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Oil Can Boyd Posted January 15, 2010 Share Posted January 15, 2010 I saw where the Prez was cutting some ads for Coakley.And now according to boston.com he is coming up to Boston on Sunday to campaign for her. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted January 15, 2010 Share Posted January 15, 2010 Damn, what an inconvenient time for the Bay State to run out of Kennedy Kennedys. Do y'all want Caroline back? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
tugmoose Posted January 17, 2010 Share Posted January 17, 2010 Inneresting take I saw on daily dish: Coakley wins, HCR passes, things continue to generally suck, Democrat's depressed mood deepens, tea party boils, GOP wins blow out in 2010. Coakley loses, HCR goes down to defeat, Democrats rise in fury, tea party fails to offer credible alternative, a finally furious Obama is handed the best foil since Dewey didn't beat Truman, Democrats pick up three Senate seats in 2010, HCR passes with robust public option and Medicare buy-in, polar bears saved. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ih8music Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 ^^^ pipe dreams, on both sides. If the Republican wins, I suspect the House will pass the Senate's version of the health bill, bypassing the need for a Senate vote. Still a shitty outcome, but I doubt they'll allow a loss in MA kill the whole thing. But I could be wrong. These are Democrats, after all. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted January 19, 2010 Share Posted January 19, 2010 From Andrew Sullivan (and it's not pretty ) A Looming Landslide For Brown Democrats can stop hoping at this point. I can see no alternative scenario but a huge - staggeringly huge - victory for the FNC/RNC machine tomorrow. They crafted a strategy of total oppositionism to anything Obama proposed a year ago. Remember they gave him zero votes on even the stimulus in his first weeks. They saw health insurance reform as Obama's Waterloo, and, thanks in part to the dithering Democrats, they beat him on that hill. They have successfully channeled all the rage at the massive debt and recession the president inherited on Obama after just one year. If they can do that already, against the massive evidence against them, they have the power to wield populism to destroy any attempt by government to address any actual problems. This is a nihilist moment, built from a nihilist strategy in order to regain power ... to do nothing but wage war against enemies at home and abroad. What comes next will be a real test for Obama. I suspect serious health insurance reform is over for yet another generation. Even if Coakley wins - and my guess is she'll lose by a double digit margin - the bill is dead. The most Obama can hope for is a minimalist alternative that simply mandates that insurance companies accept people with pre-existing conditions and are barred from ejecting patients when they feel like it. That's all he can get now - and even that will be a stretch. The uninsured will even probably vote Republican next time in protest at Obama's failure! That's how blind the rage is. Ditto any attempt to grapple with climate change. In fact, any legislative moves with this Democratic party and this Republican party are close to hopeless. The Democrats are a clapped out, gut-free lobbyist machine. The Republicans are insane. The system is therefore paralyzed beyond repair. Yes, I'm gloomy. Not because I was so wedded to this bill, although I think it's a decent enough start. But because if America cannot grapple with its deep and real problems after electing a new president with two majorities, then America's problems are too great for Americans to tackle. And so one suspects that this is a profound moment in the now accelerating decline of this country. And one of the major parties is ecstatic about it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Doug C Posted January 19, 2010 Share Posted January 19, 2010 I don't know whether to thank you for posting or not. I respect Andrew Sullivan and enjoy reading his work but the above is too depressing. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Oil Can Boyd Posted January 19, 2010 Share Posted January 19, 2010 This post from FiveThirtyEight isn't much more positive. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted January 19, 2010 Share Posted January 19, 2010 It would have been tough for any Dem, but Coakley looks like a shitbomb of a candidate. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tweedling Posted January 19, 2010 Share Posted January 19, 2010 The most Obama can hope for is a minimalist alternative that simply mandates that insurance companies accept people with pre-existing conditions and are barred from ejecting patients when they feel like it. That's all he can get now That sounds like a step in the right direction for real reform. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted January 19, 2010 Share Posted January 19, 2010 I don't know whether to thank you for posting or not. I respect Andrew Sullivan and enjoy reading his work but the above is too depressing. Meh – the fuckheads of this country will get exactly what they deserve. The angry tea-bagging fuckheads are the same fuckheads who gave that Bush fuckhead the keys to the mansion, twice, and now those fuckheads are angry because Obama hasn’t miraculously fixed the mess these fuckheads helped create, they’re not self-aware enough to even begin to understand their role in this mess - so fuck’em. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.