Massachusetts Senate Race

[wolfeskins]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

I agree with your first statement, people are disappointed with Obama. But that would be another thread. lol

I respect your opinion, no biggie.

yea,it's just my opinion. i could be completely wrong

[GMScud]

IMO, as a Republican, I'm finding this race in Mass totally hilarious. I don't know if it's because Coakley felt like she was entitled to a Kennedy seat simply because she shares his party, but this campaign has been AWFUL! Alienating Red Sox and Bruins fans, saying Catholics shouldn't work in emergency rooms, Patrick Kennedy doesn't even know Coakley's name, Obama comes in and makes fun of Brown's truck (HELLO? A GM truck with over 200,000 miles- oops!). It's no wonder Rahm and Co won't let him speak off the cuff anymore... I mean, what a shit show. Oh, and don't forget that awkward moment this morning when Coakley tried to relate Dr. King's "dream" to her campaign. I was embarrassed for her. She's got campaign staff that can't even spell the name of the state for God's sake.

Coakley is a fail. Massachusetts hasn't had a Republican senator in 38 years. They will tomorrow. And when the polls close, my must see TV will be MSNBC. It's gonna be hilarious.

[Trample the Elderly]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

Wolfeskins, you're wrong on both accounts. Respectfully. First, the exit polling in both the Virginia and N.J races were not a referundum on the president or his agenda. It was and still is primarily about the respective candidates themselves and the local issues in those states. In the case of Creigh Deeds, as I've stated before, and in the case of Martha Coakley both campaigns left a lot to be desired.

On the second point, Obama stumped for Coakley yesterday at Northeastern University. They used footage from that event; Obama didn't tape a commercial for her. It's her commercial and her voice endorsing said ad at the end. I think for people to try to connect the dots from these two or three races and come to some conclusion about the president's agenda is premature and not realizing most importantly that politics are local. This is the ebb and flow of politics and elections in an off year for incumbent candidates.

Are Democrats in trouble? With each day that passes, that's becoming more and more appearant. But to say this spells trouble in 2012 for President Obama is wishful thinking, in my opinion. It takes a horse to beat a horse, and so far the Republicans have produced a lot of show ponies.

My vote was.

[wolfeskins]

Originally Posted by Trample the Elderly

My vote was.

so was mine but apparently we were not polled while exiting the voting area. thank the lord,cuz i never want to be polled.

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

Wolfeskins, you're wrong on both accounts. Respectfully. First, the exit polling in both the Virginia and N.J races were not a referundum on the president or his agenda. It was and still is primarily about the respective candidates themselves and the local issues in those states. In the case of Creigh Deeds, as I've stated before, and in the case of Martha Coakley both campaigns left a lot to be desired.

On the second point, Obama stumped for Coakley yesterday at Northeastern University. They used footage from that event; Obama didn't tape a commercial for her. It's her commercial and her voice endorsing said ad at the end. I think for people to try to connect the dots from these two or three races and come to some conclusion about the president's agenda is premature and not realizing most importantly that politics are local. This is the ebb and flow of politics and elections in an off year for incumbent candidates.

Are Democrats in trouble? With each day that passes, that's becoming more and more appearant. But to say this spells trouble in 2012 for President Obama is wishful thinking, in my opinion. It takes a horse to beat a horse, and so far the Republicans have produced a lot of show ponies.

I agree that the Republicans don't have a "horse" so to speak, but really, is Obama anything more than a "show pony" himself? He's proven to be more style than substance thus far. He ran a campaign just left of center and has governed from the far left. He's been in steady decline in the polls since his inauguration. Someone will emerge from the GOP, and by the time 2012 rolls around, Obama's re-election won't be nearly the slam dunk many Dems think. IMO anyway.

[GMScud]

On a side note, is anyone else stunned that firstdown started this thread and Massachusetts is spelled correctly in the thread title? Must have been some copy-paste.

[saden1]

Don't count your chickens before they hatch folks. Little known fact....every year 200 million male chicks hare killed right after they hatch in the United States. Why you ask? Because they can't lay eggs.



This post is in the memory of Doug Hoffman and all the Republican losers of all the special elections.

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by saden1

Don't count your chickens before they hatch folks. Little known fact....every year 200 million male chicks hare killed right after they hatch. Why you ask? Because they can't lay eggs.

This post is in the memory of Doug Hoffman and all the republican losers of all the special elections.

Seems like Pelosi knows it's done. Hell, other Dems in congress are openly criticizing Coakley. Barney Frank called out some of her mistakes today. Obviously it ain't over till it's over, but if I had to guess, Brown wins by 3-5 points. Her campaign was a laughing stock, and with so much at stake, she should be ashamed of herself, especially considering the Lion-size shoes she's trying to fill.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by GMScud

I agree that the Republicans don't have a "horse" so to speak, but really, is Obama anything more than a "show pony" himself? He's proven to be more style than substance thus far. He ran a campaign just left of center and has governed from the far left. He's been in steady decline in the polls since his inauguration. Someone will emerge from the GOP, and by the time 2012 rolls around, Obama's re-election won't be nearly the slam dunk many Dems think. IMO anyway.

I don't know what Obama you're referring to, but the one in the White House right now is hardly governing from the far left. Even many on the right would agree much of his foreign policy is line with the previous administration. He's doubled, heck trippled, downed in Afghanistan, stepped up attacks in Pakistan and Yemen (before the Christmas Day attempt). He voted to keep FISA, still a very controversial Bush program, largely in tact to the dismay of many on the far left. It sounds nice to say "Obama is a far left radical", but his policy decisions so far just don't bear that out.

I also find it difficult to believe that men of high regard like Secretery of Defense Robert Gates, NSA Jim Jones, and John Brennan would serve in an adminstration that was governing the country from the far left on national security issues.

Domestically, what, healthcare is far left? If that's far left, I think that's an issue he won't have a problem with in 2012. I agree, re-election won't be a slam dunk, they never are.

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

I don't know what Obama you're referring to, but the one in the White House right now is hardly governing from the far left. Even many on the right would agree much of his foreign policy is line with the previous administration. He's doubled, heck trippled, downed in Afghanistan, stepped up attacks in Pakistan and Yemen (before the Christmas Day attempt). He voted to keep FISA, still a very controversial Bush program, largely in tact to the dismay of many on the far left. It sounds nice to say "Obama is a far left radical", but his policy decisions so far just don't bear that out.

I also find it difficult to believe that men of high regard like Secretery of Defense Robert Gates, NSA Jim Jones, and John Brennan would serve in an adminstration that was governing the country from the far left on national security issues.

Domestically, what, healthcare is far left? If that's far left, I think that's an issue he won't have a problem with in 2012. I agree, re-election won't be a slam dunk, they never are.

Well, those are good points. I guess I should have been more specific. Domestically he's governing from the far left a lot more so than with foreign policy.

[TheSmurfs22]

I would like to see Brown win but I have a sinking feeling Coakley will eek it out in the 11the hour. IF Brown wins expect the Dems on the Hill to push Healthcare through before Brown gets there.

[budw38]

Esam Omeish - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Gov. Kaine in Va. appointed this preacher of radical Islam / immigration ... he later resigned . Politics can be freakin crazy , fun and almost scary .

[The Goat]

So what's the deal exactly? Why couldn't the Dem party in Mass find a strong candidate? There's ummm, quite a few people up there from what I understand, most of them being Dems.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by The Goat

So what's the deal exactly? Why couldn't the Dem party in Mass find a strong candidate? There's ummm, quite a few people up there from what I understand, most of them being Dems.

Plain old arrogance dude. They thought it was shoe in because Kennedy held the seat for so long and Mass is reliably blue. Also the special election process just stinks if you ask me. But Coakley just isn't a campaigner; she didn't want it bad enough. The comment about Schilling being a Yankee fan was just nutso.

The Dems had better pull their heads out of their asses though. Seriously. One thing I'm starting to see, and hopefully they're starting to see, is that Obama's appeal hasn't been transferable. You know, people aren't exactly voting against him, but his popularity isn't moving the needle either. Voters aren't enthusiastic because Obama came to town. His presidency is unique in that it's all about him and not really affecting national elections one way or another. As we move into the mid-terms I really hope these guys can see that.

Besides, I might have to quit coming to Warpath if we keep dropping like flies

[The Goat]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

The Dems had better pull their heads out of their asses though. Seriously. One thing I'm starting to see, and hopefully they're starting to see, is that Obama's appeal hasn't been transferable. You know, people aren't exactly voting against him, but his popularity isn't moving the needle either. Voters aren't enthusiastic because Obama came to town. His presidency is unique in that it's all about him and not really affecting national elections one way or another. As we move into the mid-terms I really hope these guys can see that.

Besides, I might have to quit coming to Warpath if we keep dropping like flies

I think it's hard to draw parallels between Barack and the national scene but what you say makes sense. Personally I've been way more impressed w/ him than I expected to be, both in terms of comparison and just what's been accomplished. All I can remember from the first year under Bush is 1) him slashing federal aid to students (i was a student then) 2) him colluding w/ the f*cks at Enron (they all had Thanksgiving dinner together and the admin specifically gave the execs extra time to sell their stock in the company rather) 3) Cheney colluding w/ energy suppliers in Texas who screwed over the rest of the country (remember the great audio clips of Cheney's buddy saying "f*ck em, f*ck em all) 4) Bush ignoring CIA reports specifically warning of terrorist hijackings in the U.S.

Fast-forward and I can't say there's much I'd like to see different over the last year. I wish there was a real national health plan option because I've spent enough time in other 1st world nations to know what they have works infinitely better than the POS plan I have through BCBS. But that probably won't happen until private insurance literally ruins the country and we have to start from scratch...hell Truman tried over 60 yrs ago for national coverage it's not like this is anything revolutionary. One thing I like best about the current state of affairs is the current defense sec. Gates was just one or two of Bush's solid appointments in gov and thankfully the guy has stayed on. He is steadily cutting down on what is the most wasteful facet of government, and because he's a Rep holdover working for this pres it's not getting too much attention