Ted Kennedy to be succeeded by a toolbag

[Sir Stewart]

It would have been tough for any Dem, but Coakley looks like a shitbomb of a candidate.

Ayup. Somehow she beat this guy:

 

 

Reportedly voters were concerned that Capuano was too "fiery." Sigh.

[watch me fall]

One of my high school friends just posted this on Facebook:

 

Let's GO Scott Brown!!! America needs you!

 

I want to ask why exactly is it that we need him.

[Duck-Billed Catechist]

To stop any and every bill from passing the Senate, obviously.

[Good Old Neon]

One of my high school friends just posted this on Facebook:

 

 

 

I want to ask why exactly is it that we need him.

 

To protect us from socialism, fascism, communism, gays, atheists, science and whatever else you got.

[bleedorange]

To protect us from socialism, fascism, communism, gays, atheists, science and whatever else you got.

 

Yeah, because anyone that would vote for Scott Brown is automatically a kook.

[ikol]

Yeah, because anyone that would vote for Scott Brown is automatically a kook.

 

No, they're a fuckhead. Duh!

[Good Old Neon]

Yeah, because anyone that would vote for Scott Brown is automatically a kook.

 

Given what the Republican Party has become, ideologically pure, yet batshit insane, you could say that.

 

Edit: His platform, when he actually expresses a platform outside of lowering taxes, appears to amount to little more than, “Take back America”, which, as has been noted, from whom exactly? For the answer to that, see my previous post – it’s not what I’m saying, it’s what they are, and that’s the platform on which he’s chosen to run – and if that’s why you’re voting for him, well, as ikol pointed out, you’re an ill informed fuckhead (I’m not referring to you of course).

[Guest Jules]

"accelerating the decline of this country" ?

 

What a bunch of fear mongering garbage.

[Sir Stewart]

^^From wheres?^^

[Guest Jules]

From Andrew Sullivan (and it's not pretty )

 

A Looming Landslide For Brown

 

blah blah blah

 

 

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.

[Sir Stewart]

Ah. Could've easily been a quote from a Brown supporter re: Obamacare. It's all just fucking noise from both sides.

[Guest Jules]

Ah. Could've easily been a quote from a Brown supporter re: Obamacare. It's all just fucking noise from both sides.

True. I just hate that shit regardless of what "side" it comes from.

[ikol]

Given what the Republican Party has become, ideologically pure, yet batshit insane, you could say that.

 

Edit: His platform, when he actually has a platform outside of lowering taxes, appears to amount to little more than, “Take back America”, which, as has been noted, from whom exactly? For the answer to that, see my previous post – it’s not what I’m saying, it’s what they are, and that’s the platform on which he’s chosen to run – and if that’s why you’re voting for him, well, as ikol pointed out, you’re an ill informed fuckhead (I’m not referring to you of course).

 

I never said ill-informed, and you apparently missed the sarcasm in my reply. I don't know much about Brown, so I have little to add, but "take back America" is no less vague of a platform than "hope, change, yes we can!". He's a politician. They always run on vague, emotionally-rooted slogans.

[u2roolz]

If I still lived in MA, I would definitely vote for Undecided.

I know nothing about this person except that they're cool enough to have one name like Madonna.

I don't even know what they look like (they don't even have a picture out there) or if they have a cool bus.

I don't know where they stand on the hot issues.

Vote for Undecided and mold & shape them into the candidate you want.

 

~ Paid For By Undecided..I Am Undecided & I Approve This Message.

[Good Old Neon]

I never said ill-informed, and you apparently missed the sarcasm in my reply. I don't know much about Brown, so I have little to add, but "take back America" is no less vague of a platform than "hope, change, yes we can!". He's a politician. They always run on vague, emotionally-rooted slogans.

 

I added the ill-informed part, and as your reply was a reply to my reply, I was really quoting myself. I agree, the slogans surrounding Obama’s campaign were, by and large, every bit as hollow – the distinction being, and I think it’s an important one, he didn’t run a campaign based almost entirely on fear, and not only fear, but false fears. The fear that the US is being run by socialists and communists – which, by any metric, is entirely false.

[ikol]

I added the ill-informed part, and as your reply was a reply to my reply, I was really quoting myself. I agree, the slogans surrounding Obama’s campaign were, by and large, every bit as hollow – the distinction being, and I think it’s an important one, he didn’t run a campaign based almost entirely on fear, and not only fear, but false fears. The fear that the US is being run by socialists and communists – which, by any metric, is entirely false.

 

Given that we're talking about Massachusetts and not one of them red states, it's not like the constituency has some deep-seeded fear of socialism. Maybe there's a legitimate concern that is causing people to favor the Republican.

[MattZ]

So let me get this straight. This election in MA is operating as a proxy for the national debate on healthcare. And the people voting against it (ie, by voting for Brown), live in a state that already provides them with healthcare? Have I got that right?

[Guest Jules]

I added the ill-informed part, and as your reply was a reply to my reply, I was really quoting myself. I agree, the slogans surrounding Obama’s campaign were, by and large, every bit as hollow – the distinction being, and I think it’s an important one, he didn’t run a campaign based almost entirely on fear, and not only fear, but false fears. The fear that the US is being run by socialists and communists – which, by any metric, is entirely false.

That would indeed be an important distinction if it were even remotely true.

[bjorn_skurj]

So let me get this straight. This election in MA is operating as a proxy for the national debate on healthcare. And the people voting against it (ie, by voting for Brown), live in a state that already provides them with healthcare? Have I got that right?

USA! USA! USA!

[Sir Stewart]

So let me get this straight. This election in MA is operating as a proxy for the national debate on healthcare. And the people voting against it (ie, by voting for Brown), live in a state that already provides them with healthcare? Have I got that right?

 

Thanks for noticing. Brown supporters have swingvoteitis. We don't get that much here.

[bobbob1313]

I hate that this is being painted as a referendum on Obama, when coakley is just a really shitty candidate.

 

Both candidates suck. They are both empty stereotypes, but he gets a boost because his stereotype is more popular now.

[Sir Stewart]

It's not that simple - Brown supporters would've been pretty vocal if it was anyone else in the Dem's corner. It just wouldn't have caught on as much if she wasn't such a shitty candidate running a terrible campaign.

[Good Old Neon]

Given that we're talking about Massachusetts and not one of them red states, it's not like the constituency has some deep-seeded fear of socialism. Maybe there's a legitimate concern that is causing people to favor the Republican.

 

As a Massachusetts native (now living in New Hampshire), I wish that were true. Despite its deeply blue state aura, we can be every bit as red in our thinking (and voting) as, say, Georgia. Following Kennedy’s death, and prior to Coakley, this started out looking like tit on a tray for the Democrats, election-wise, but the GOP has done an excellent job of injecting a strong dose of fear and misinformation into the “debate”, so that rather than vote based on facts, most folks are casting a ballot in favor of fear, or Brown’s admittedly fashionable coif.

[Sir Stewart]

Or, they not only dislike Coakley, but also disagree with her stance on the issues.

[Good Old Neon]

That would indeed be an important distinction if it were even remotely true.

 

Perhaps you don’t pay attention, and given your terse, one or two sentence responses to most political topics, I’m going to guess that, by and large, you don’t, it is true, the GOP has been running on and selling little more than fear for the past few elections. Obama’s campaign may have been hollow, but he didn’t crisscross the nation accusing McCain of being a Muslim, in league with Middle Eastern and lefty terrorists – among a hundred other false accusations – several of which are STILL being bandied about by Republicans.

 

Can you provide examples in which the Democrats made similar, whacked out, entirely fear-bred claims against McCain?