Massachusetts Senate election

Fr Tod Umptious

Tomorrow there is a special election in Massachusetts Senate election to fill the Senate seat vacated by the death of Ted Kennedy

Now this seat should be a lock for the Dems, and it looked that way until about a week ago but Martha Coakley (D) is getting a real run for her money from Scott Brown (R)

If Brown did win it would be a major blow for Obama and his healthcare plans as it would mean that the Republicans would have 41 seats and their fillabuster righst back.

kev9100

Ah ****. How in the name of God can a Republican win Teddy Kennedys seat? The dems have screwed up big time here.

Manic Moran

Interestingly, it's the Democrats that started the negative campaigning this time around. Up until a week ago, it was polite enough from both sides.

Of course, arguably if you seen as being unable to spell the name of your State correctly, there might be some negative PR effects...

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/01/12/coakley-ad-misspells-massachusetts/

A new ad from Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley - the Democratic candidate to replace the late Sen. Ted Kennedy - misspells her home state of Massachusetts

I don't think that Brown'll win, though.

How in the name of God can a Republican win Teddy Kennedys seat? The dems have screwed up big time here.

He's more of an independent. May also be an issue that the D is the current Attorney General, the person responsible for law and order. If crime in the area has gone up, or if there's a perception that she's not doing a proper job or recommending unpopular laws or punishments, it could be a problem.

NTM

Fr Tod Umptious

kev9100 wrote: »

Ah ****. How in the name of God can a Republican win Teddy Kennedys seat? The dems have screwed up big time here.

Well as Scott Brown put it himself , 'It's not Ted Kennedy's seat, it's the people of Massachusetts seat'

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrV4m0PnSUs

And that sort of arrogance and laziness has seen Coakley's lead drop drop from double digits to a dead heat

Manic Moran

A very good little article in the Washington Examiner.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/Two-factors-will-decide-Massachusetts-Senate-race-81956292.html

After all the speeches, politicking, and attack ads, there are just two issues that will determine the winner of the Massachusetts Senate seat in Tuesday's special election. The first is health care and the second is one-party government. And in Massachusetts, neither issue works exactly as outsiders might think –– and right now both are working in favor of Republican Scott Brown.

On health care, Massachusetts is in a unique position. It already has near-universal coverage, enacted in 2006 by Republican governor Mitt Romney and the Democratic legislature, so a national measure designed to extend coverage to millions of currently-uncovered Americans means little to Bay State residents. But the Democrats' national health care plan would force Massachusetts residents to pay higher taxes to expand coverage elsewhere in the country –– with relatively few new benefits at home.

"In this state, we basically have universal health care," says Joey Buceta, a Boston independent who attended a Scott Brown rally in the North End Friday. "Why should we pay more money for it? We already have it."

<snip>

On the second issue, one-party government, Massachusetts is also in an unusual position. Often called the bluest of blue states, it is certainly dominated by Democrats. But over the years Massachusetts voters have shown an inclination to elect a Republican to the occasional state office.

That balance has usually meant a GOP governor; four of the last five Massachusetts governors have been Republicans. At the same time, the rest of the state government, as well as the state's delegations in the House and Senate, have been dominated by Democrats. But even with that lopsided situation, the presence of a GOP governor gave voters a certain sense of balance.

Now, even that is gone. Not only are all other significant state offices occupied by Democrats, the governorship is in the hands of the very Democratic, very liberal, and very unpopular Deval Patrick. There is not even a token of Republican leadership to be found. And for the independent voters who will play a critical role in Tuesday's election, Massachusetts' one-party rule mirrors the one-party rule in today's Washington, where national Democrats are deciding important issues among themselves without even the pretense of including Republicans.

<snip>

Finally, there is a growing sense that the Democratic party's domination has led to widespread corruption. Three –– yes, three –– consecutives speakers of the Massachusetts state legislature, all Democrats, have been indicted. Other Democratic lawmakers are in trouble, as well. There has perhaps never been a better time for a Republican to argue that one-party rule has led to too much conformity and corruption.

Given the uniqueness of Massachusetts politics, voters' feelings about the top two issues in this election –– health care and one-party rule –– seem unlikely to be affected much by outside appeals, whether they be from President Obama, former President Clinton, or former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, who campaigned for Brown on Friday. What do those outsiders have to add to the public's understanding of how the issues play out in Massachusetts? State voters have their own distinctive perspective, and that is what will guide their decision on Tuesday.

NTM

Overheal

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Well as Scott Brown put it himself , 'It's not Ted Kennedy's seat, it's the people of Massachusetts seat'

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrV4m0PnSUs

And that sort of arrogance and laziness has seen Coakley's lead drop drop from double digits to a dead heat

I have to agree, he's put a Hole in this Kennedy Royal Family thing thats been going on for way too long. I'd say more people knew Ted for his brother's assassination than his good works in the Senate, sad as that fact is.

Lockstep

It'll be an interesting race alright.

Brown is doing extremely well despite Joseph Kennedy running on a libertarian platform, would be an absolute body blow to the Obama administration if the Republicans gained a seat in Massachusetts of all places

The healthcare is an issue alright, Republicans will oppose it on principle and many swing voters will see little benefit to it at all.

Fr Tod Umptious

kickoutthejams wrote: »

It'll be an interesting race alright.

Brown is doing extremely well despite Joseph Kennedy running on a libertarian platform, would be an absolute body blow to the Obama administration if the Republicans gained a seat in Massachusetts of all places

The healthcare is an issue alright, Republicans will oppose it on principle and many swing voters will see little benefit to it at all.

And Massachusetts is a place were an awful lot of voters are working and paying good money for good health care plans

They do not want to see their quality of service watered down just so that some toothless wonder in a trailer park in Arkansas can get a health care plan too.

Lockstep

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

And Massachusetts is a place were an awful lot of voters are working and paying good money for good health care plans

They do not want to see their quality of service watered down just so that some toothless wonder in a trailer park in Arkansas can get a health care plan too.

Exactly, that's what I was trying to say about possible swing voters. They already have a statewide plan with community ratings etc.

kev9100

kickoutthejams wrote: »

this would be an absolute body blow to the Obama administration if the Republicans gained a seat in Massachusetts of all places

If Brown wins this seat it will be much more than a body blow. This election could knock the Obama Administrations head off.

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

They do not want to see their quality of service watered down just so that some toothless wonder in a trailer park in Arkansas can get a health care plan too.

No more crass stereotypes please.

Lockstep

kev9100 wrote: »

If Brown wins this seat it will be much more than a body blow. This election could knock the Obama Administrations head off.

I wouldn't go that far. It would remove the Democrat's filibuster proof majority (presumably leading to a more moderate healthcare plan, decided with moderate Republicans), but it'd hardly decapitate the Obama administration.

kev9100

But this bill is already moderate. No Public Option, no Medicare expansion and because of the Mandate even more people will be forced to go to the Private Insurance companies for coverage. The Dems have compromised on almost everything and not one Republican Senator voted for Health Care Reform. So if Brown is elected, Health Care reform dies.

Lockstep

It's certainly been watered down but no, it will not die, even if Brown gets in. The fact that it mandates insurance along with community ratings will have a huge increase, given the biggest problem in the US is the screening for healthcare bureacracy/denial of coverage.

They havn't compromised on everything, the lack of a public option was a problem but is hardly a sign of compromise on everything.

Yesterday's Wall Street Journal listed out the Republican they;d be dealing with, forget her name but she'd sign in the bill if it had more protection for SME and working families.

SLUSK

kev9100 wrote: »

Ah ****. How in the name of God can a Republican win Teddy Kennedys seat? The dems have screwed up big time here.

I thought the seat belonged to the loyal subjects of Massachusetts

Overheal

SLUSK wrote: »

I thought the seat belonged to the loyal subjects of Massachusetts

:rolleyes:

joehanley55

go brown go, last thing we need to do is give the administration more power. it goes against reason to give something (the state) more power over another aspect of life when its in the process of using the power it already has irresponsibly.

its a pity the only way to get rid of the bill is to elect brown, whos got some pretty ridiculus views(like guatanamo).

Agent Smith

I'm following this here in Orlando, There is no exit polls being done (unusal!)

According to local news here, this is too close to call. I can see the GOP taking the seat. People seem to be getting sick with the economy, and altho Obama inherited the problem, he's the public face of it. No Hope No Change, Just Vagueness...

Overheal

Brown is going to win in 20 mins.

Kudlow Report had live feed's of both Election Centers: By 7 o'clock, Coakley's camp was Dead bar for a few technicians. Meanwhile Brown's looked like a New Years Bash. CNN Correspondent's meanwhile vouched having spoken with Democrat Strategists who confirmed the outlook is very bleak for Coakley.

Looks like Healthcare could Die. The Market has responded to this with Growth: the future is more certain without it, and that's encouraging investors.

speedboatchase

Coakley calls Brown to concede

http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2010/01/live_coverage_o.html

Manic Moran

I must say, I am surprised.

I'm also somewhat pleased. I have a bit of a dislike for supermajorities on principle.

NTM

Lockstep

Meh, I saw it coming tbh.

The male vote really seemed to be gearing towards Brown and something like a quarter of Democrats said they'd be voting for the man.

ynotdu

Sh*T if Obama had got his health care reforms through He would have achieved something even FDR could not.
The Irony is Teddy K was a lifelong supporter of health care for ALL:(
The kennedys losing that seat leaves Ireland almost friendless on Capitol hill as well as the Irony that the US is playing a big part in Haiti but still leaving its own poorest vunerable.:(

amacachi

Wow. Did not see that coming.

Reading around on it though It does seem that the Democrats only have themselves in this one.

ynotdu

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XWYefe9EzI

Overheal

ynotdu wrote: »

Sh*T if Obama had got his health care reforms through He would have achieved something even FDR could not.
The Irony is Teddy K was a lifelong supporter of health care for ALL:(
The kennedys losing that seat leaves Ireland almost friendless on Capitol hill as well as the Irony that the US is playing a big part in Haiti but still leaving its own poorest vunerable.:(

Its the People of Massachusetts' Seat, not The Kennedy Seat.

ynotdu

Overheal wrote: »

Its the People of Massachusetts' Seat, not The Kennedy Seat.

Oh really Overheal and there was Me thinking diffrient.
Guess i,ll never be in a polling booth with You so i will never know how You vote,bet i could hazzard a good guess though?

The elephant in the room is MANY people WANT this president to fail.

Manic Moran

The elephant in the room is MANY people WANT this president to fail.

Although this is true, it is probably hard to attribute that sentiment to the plurality of Massachussets voters. MA's still a very, very 'Blue' State. So either Obama is really screwing up if he's getting a safely Democrat-leaning State to vote against him or the Democratic Party screwed up by nominating a poor candidate and taking 'their' seat for granted.

I'll go for the latter.

NTM

SLUSK

The loss of this seat in Massachusetts was a great thing. Perhaps this can delay this monstrosity known as "Universal healthcare". It is madness and will only put America deeper into debt.

Manic Moran

Cool. I just copped that he holds the commission of a Lt Col in the Army. I like him already.

He even enlisted as an infantryman. Mustang.

NTM

Fr Tod Umptious

ynotdu wrote: »

The kennedys losing that seat leaves Ireland almost friendless on Capitol hill

It would have made a blind bit of difference who won from an Ireland perspective.

And it still may not be the end of Obama's plans, I believe that they can delay the rubber stamping of the result and thus not allow Brown to take his seat, I'll find links later

southsiderosie

Manic Moran wrote: »

Although this is true, it is probably hard to attribute that sentiment to the plurality of Massachussets voters. MA's still a very, very 'Blue' State. So either Obama is really screwing up if he's getting a safely Democrat-leaning State to vote against him or the Democratic Party screwed up by nominating a poor candidate and taking 'their' seat for granted.

I'll go for the latter.

NTM

+1000

The Dems in Massachusetts still seem to think that anointing patient party "good soldiers" for major state-wide positions should be enough for voters. They made the same mistake with Shannon O'Brien in 2002 against Mitt Romney - she was an uninteresting party insider who seemed to have no ideas of her own. Martha Coakley was even worse; the woman barely campaigned, and even had the nerve to complain about shaking hands in the cold. :eek:!!! Tip O'Neill is rolling over in his grave.