| MA Senate race; -anyone else watching this? | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Jan 19 2010, 02:56 PM (44 Views) | |
| Dominic Guglieme | Jan 19 2010, 02:56 PM Post #1 |
|
the human MICROscope!!
|
Given the impact the race could have on the issue of the moment, (Health Care), I was wondering if anyone else was paying attention. Most of the polls I have seen have Coakley and Brown running even, often within the margin of error. I have seen a few putting Brown ahead. Either way, this race is putting MA on the map, and making us worth noticing in national elections again. I am expecting interesting things in 2012. Dom -wooohoooo, pork barrel money.....not that we have many electoral votes. |
|
Keep it local. The healthiest leper in the colony is still very very sick. www.theanimalrescuesite.com | |
 |
 
|
| andersonh1 | Jan 19 2010, 10:37 PM Post #2 |
 
|
And Brown has won, 52% to 47% with about 80% of the vote counted. Coakley has called him to concede. Dom, you're from Boston, right? So this is home territory for you. From where I stand, and from what I've read and heard lately, Republicans don't get elected very often in Massachussetts. So this is a big deal, particularly since Brown apparently ran against the health care bill. Meaning the heavily Democrat state of Mass. has put the brakes on Obama and the Democrats in Congress. This is something you don't see every day. |
|
------ My Doctor Who reviews | |
|
|
|
| Trench Knife 19 | Jan 21 2010, 03:53 PM Post #3 |
Spammenator 3.0
|
The Dem in this election took it for granted that election was in the bag instead of working the voters. I think it's too bad for those of us who support the idea of health care reform, but I do not think that a comprehensive plan has been offered which is workable, fair and most of all sustainable over time. One thing is certain, the Democratic party as a whole is on the defensive now. One of the things I truly hate about politics is that no matter who has a majority in congress, the way things are set up and with all of the special interest money floating around, neither party is able to truly effect change the way that the voting public would like them to. Therefor we have the same kind of voter backlash from one party to the other every election cycle or two. I vote for results but I end up disenchanted every time.
Edited by Trench Knife 19, Jan 21 2010, 03:54 PM.
|
| I am Vince Gortho, Keymaster. Are you the Gatekeeper? | |
|
|
|
| Dominic Guglieme | Jan 21 2010, 04:15 PM Post #4 |
|
the human MICROscope!!
|
Trench, The thing is that the Health Care Bill in DC now was terrible. Did you really want that bill to pass? I tend to lean left. But, as Trench put it, the Democrats in MA were arrogant. Anderson, MA is a blue state. But, Patrick is the first Democrat Governor in nearly 20 years. Since 90 or so, we have had Republicans. Patrick only got in because we not only had two bad Republicans in a row, but because National Republicans were doing so badly. Dom -amazed that the MA Democrats did exactly the same kind of stupid things that National Republicans did over the last 8 years. |
|
Keep it local. The healthiest leper in the colony is still very very sick. www.theanimalrescuesite.com | |
|
|
|
| andersonh1 | Jan 21 2010, 07:40 PM Post #5 |
|
Power corrupts. It happened to the Republicans, and it's happened especially quickly for the Democrats. Probably because they have such big majorities in Congress and a leftist president. They can pay lip service to bipartisanship and do whatever they darn well please. Or so they think. I'm all in favor of health care reform... so long as it lowers prices and ups availability and doesn't spend us into oblivion. The House and Senate bills that currently exist are nightmares that would cost far too much money and freedom in return for very little. There has to be a better way. But this election has definitely cheered me quite a bit. The general public have been telling the party in power "no" since at least last summer, and the Democrats just refused to listen. Sooner or later we'll make them listen, and losing the seat held by Kennedy has got to wake some of them up. Edited by andersonh1, Jan 21 2010, 07:40 PM.
|
|
------ My Doctor Who reviews | |
|
|
|
| Dominic Guglieme | Jan 22 2010, 11:17 AM Post #6 |
|
the human MICROscope!!
|
I think that Obama's greatest failure, (relative to what Jim correctly calls an incredible speech from last year), is the fact that DC is as partisan as it was before Obama came to town. I would not attribute the arrogance and stupidity of MA Democrats to the national party. Remember, Democrats have all but owned MA for decades. Aside from our governors, (unelectable in any other state), we really were a one party state until this week. Here is a another posting I made on the topic: Note: Yes, I know there are typing errors. I am not paid to write or edit. Complain to somebody who cares.) In case anybody is wondering, there is real reason Coakley lost this week. She was a terrible candidate. Even members of her own party found her distasteful. Obviously, me saying that is hardly a sign of brilliance or insight. To paraphrase Sun Tzu, it does not take great hearing to notice thunder. I know life long Democrats who hate Coakley. I knew people who told me they were less voting for Brown and more voting against Coakley. I actually now one convervative who wanted to vote for her because he would rather see her serve a short term in Washington, (and be unable to run when it was over), than have her stay here. I sincerely doubt I am saying much that voters in MA have not heard, (or even thought), before. She was, put simply, a cruddy candidate. After the primary, many Democrats asked, (as James Rolf would put it), "what were they thinking"....about their own party. Lets chalk that up to "really bad decision making". (Plenty of others have written on this subject as well.) I am going to call Brown's victory this week a win for everybody. Why? Because, for one moment, one shining moment, politics mattered in MA. And, unless Brown and the Republican blow it completely, it will matter for a long time yet. The Democrats, (along with most reasonable people from either party), thought that they had a lock on MA. When Coakley won the primary, most reasonable people assumed she would take Ted's legacy seat. (And, damned if too many of you could honestly tell me you did not think it was a legacy seat.) The Democrats cannot take this state's voters for granted any longer. Any, interested voters no longer have the excuse of "the guy with a 'D' in front of his name is gonna win anyways" to justify not voting. The Democrats know they will have to fight for MA as much as they will other states. The Republicans know that MA is worth fighting for, because they might win. Regardless of one's party or idealogy, this is bigger than a watered-down health bill. This is bigger than a cult of personality around a president, (love him or hate him). This is bigger than gun control. This is bigger than abortion. This is bigger than the fact that the BBC was covering a special election in MA. (Yes, the BBC. You read that right. The friggin' Empire Service was covering the race.) What now? The Republicans won a race. The Democrats, (one might hope), learned from the experience of losing in "their own" state. But, that does not mean MA needs to be split between two parties, or even 3. There is no reason that MA voters have to settle for the big 2, or even the Big 2 and a few little ones. I know too many people who tell me that they "hold their nose and vote for......". And, then they urge me, (and presumably others), to do this. Others say that they are "voting against......". This is just foolish. If you voted for Brown because you disliked Coakley, you still voted *for* Brown. If you held your nose for Coakley because you hated Brown, you still said "Coakely is okely dokely". (If you voted for that Kennedy guy, you probably actually did like him, as most people did not even know who the hell he was.) Votes are counted by how many votes a candidate pulled in, not how many their opponent did not pull in. Imagine a candidate losing by plurality if they were in fact penalized for votes against them, counted from votes for other options. (Yes, that is absurdly stupid. But, some people seem to think that is how it works.) One, (apparently radical), idea is to simply hand in a blank ballot. When I mention this in conversation, people usually mewl and whine about how I am "wasting" my vote by not giving it to a candidate that I do not like. Apparently, making sure one's vote is heard requires a vote for a candidate (probably from one of the big 2). They are forgetting something. Low turn-out = high value. The fewer voters actually bother to show up, the fewer votes are needed to win or lose a race. Now, ignore all registered voters who do not bother to actually vote. Imagine, (not unreasonably), that turnout is all that matters. (It is not unreasonable to assume that politicians worry more about active voters than about lethargic voters.) Now, imagine that...say, 25%, of turnout handed in a blank ballot. 2 or 3% could be ignored as mistakes or hooliganism. But, 25%? What about 20, or even 15%? Even a "mere" 10% (of turn-out) would likely merit some attention from pollsters and politicians. 10% is enough to decisively swing a two-way race. In a 3 or 4 or more way race...... What kind of a message would that send? Imagine the scenario if even 10% of active voters effectively said that they did not want to vote for any candidates offered by any parties. They would be saying say this in a forum, (the polls), that the candidates and pollsters would be guaranteed to heed. It might be interesting to see how long it would take both/all parties to start offering candidates that do not require voters to hold their noses for. I am not saying that everybody should hand in a blank ballot. If there is a candidate that a voter actually agrees with, then it is idiotic to not vote for them. But, rather than endorsing distasteful candidates whose chief virtue is "I hate them less", why not send a mesage to all the parties that they need to do better? To paraphrase "The Hunt for Red October", they campaign indifferently to our resigned voices, now let them tremble at the sound of our silence. The voters of MA sent a message to state Democrats, and possibly the nation. No party, no candidate, no legacy has a claim to MA. Now, let us, (and the rest of the United States), send a message to all the parties. They need to offer better candidates. |
|
Keep it local. The healthiest leper in the colony is still very very sick. www.theanimalrescuesite.com | |
|
|
|
| andersonh1 | Jan 22 2010, 10:27 PM Post #7 |
|
Dom, it's good to read the point of view of someone who actually lives in the state. Thanks for posting it. |
|
------ My Doctor Who reviews | |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · XTRA! XTRA! · Next Topic » |
11:30 PM Jul 31
