Why Is A Crazy Republican Even Close In A Mass. Senate Election?

[MannyGoldstein]

With only 10 days to go until the Massachusetts special election to replace Ted Kennedy's seat in the Senate, Democrat Martha Coakley and teabagger Republican Scott Brown are neck and neck in the polls. How can this be?

It's simple. As explained by Dr. Dean:

"We all voted for change we can believe in. If we don't get it, we'll get some more change in 2010."

Democrats hold the Presidency and commanding majorities in both houses of Congress. They chose to blow off change - did not even make a half-hearted attempt.

So there will be more change.

Coakley will win Mass, but if a nut-job Republican can get any serious numbers in our Commonwealth, then I think we all know what's coming next year.

Note that while Mass. has voted Republicans into office in the past, they were far-left Republicans like Weld, or pretenders like Romney (who ran for senator to the left of Ted Kennedy, and only turned into a rabid pinhead after winning the governorship). This time around, we have a nut running as a nut, and he's making serious inroads.

[midnight armadillo]

1. Because of a crappy campaign, that's why

Martha Coakley is simply running a lackluster campaign and is hoping to simply coast into the Senate. Why isn't she running like she means it? dunno.

[FLAprogressive]

2. The Democrats continue to shoot themselves in the foot with empty promises.....

[Kansas Wyatt]

10. They aren't shooting themselves in the foot anymore...

They've got the chainsaw on full throttle and they are almost through the bone in their thigh.

[FLAprogressive]

11. the strategy is and will always be "run to the right!"

[MannyGoldstein]

13. It's The "Who The %$&@ Else Ya Gonna Vote For, Suckers?!" Strategy

And the question will be answered.

[Kansas Wyatt]

16. Off course they will 'run to the right' because they are cutting off their left leg.

All the unions should band together and start a Labor Party.

With union halls all over the country and an excellent GOTV record, they should really consider it.

The New DemoRAT Party doesn't give a shit about the American People anymore.

At least we would finally see Democrats fear the American People and stumbling over themselves to actually work for and represent them.

[FLAprogressive]

18. Maybe the SEIU would....I don't see Beltway Unions like AFSCME doing it though.

[napi21]

3. But he's really handsome!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7431101&mesg_id=7431101

[treestar]

4. Why are we worrying about poll numbers now?

It's too damn early for any poll to be accurate.

[MannyGoldstein]

6. Ten Days Until The Special Election

This ain't no foolin' around.

[virgogal]

5. Because Martha is lifeless and dull. She'll still win,though.

[HughMoran]

7. Most change in a generation according to Rachel. This is the lamest excuse ever for Martha's boringn

ess.

Look, Martha just isn't an exciting candidate. Trying to blame every single Democratic problem on Obama - who has done more than any President in my lifetime, is the most idiotic argument I've ever heard.

[MannyGoldstein]

8. Yes, He's Done More Than Any President In My Lifetime, Too

For the bankers. For the rest of us... well, sucks for us.

[HughMoran]

9. The bankers - love the 'pat' expressions that have no fucking meaning at all

Lazy ass argument - you got something to say that IS a real argument or are you going to just spew the usual

DLCer! Corporatist! Wall St Shark! Big Pharma! Bankers! Sellout! Cheerleader! Pom Poms! BULLSHIT!!

lamest post ever.

[MannyGoldstein]

12. Sorry. I Believed My Lying Eyes For A Moment

Instead of the White House press release.

My bad.

[FLAprogressive]

19. No president has accomplished more (symbolic/meaningless crap) in their first term.

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[JDPriestly]

21. One word: Corruption. Two words: No change.

Bush drowned us in corruption. Obama promised change.

First thing Obama did when he got in to office was to pay off the bankers -- literally turned over the treasury to them.

Second thing he did -- made deals with Big Pharma and Big Health Insurance.

He has said yes to corruption and no to change. We wanted a no to corruption and a yes to change.

So, that's what's wrong.

[HughMoran]

23. You mean after Bush handed him a country headed into a Depression

Yes, he saved the financial system - got a problem with that?

[JDPriestly]

24. Yes. He saved the financial system for the rich, but not for

the middle class or for the poor. That's what I have against Obama's economic policy.

And, by the way, the foreclosures are now moving into wealthier areas. There is no end to the creep of the foreclosures. Every time a house goes under the other houses in the area lose value.

Obama has done virtually nothing to save homeowners and everything to save "the financial system." The problem is that the mortgages are a huge part of the financial system. By doing nothing to shore up homeowners, Obama sabotaged his own plan to save the financial system.

I know, with a lot of fanfare, Obama announced a program to save homeowners. It hasn't worked and hasn't been properly put into place.

Some of the very banks that received huge bail-outs from the taxpayers have refused to refinance taxpayers' homes. Meanwhile, the bankers' bonuses will be bigger than ever this year.

[HughMoran]

25. We'll see

I'm not going to chastise someone who had to juggle a collapsing financial system, collapsing housing market, collapsing auto market, calls to prosecute Bushco & healthcare reform for the first time in my 50 years. He may not have reformed the defects in the system that got us here yet, but I can see why he may have been a little bit busy keeping the country from going into a free-fall (& the civil war and killing that would have followed.) It's easy to throw stones from the cheap seats.

[JDPriestly]

28. Do you have any friends who have lost their jobs, their businesses, their homes?

I do. And my friends were Obama supporters. Note the word "were." Obama has done nothing to cushion the free-fall for Americans other than extend social security and prevent a few government lay-offs. Much too little. Much, much too little.

Meanwhile, the Wall Street bankers who caused the mess remain wealthy, safe and secure in their mansions in the Hamptons.

That is Obama's record, that is Geithner's record, that is Bernanke's record on this. These men have had plenty of time to at least require banks to take measures that will help ordinary Americans.

[Zhade]

29. You hate facts, you mean.

NT!

[girl gone mad]

32. Repetition is not refutation.

You got something to say that IS a real argument or are you going to just spew the usual

"Lazy Ass Argument! Lamest Post Ever! Bullshit!"

See? I can do it, too.

[pipi_k]

14. Well, Mass has its share of crazies too, you know

I haven't seen the poll numbers.

Maybe they were taken before Victoria Reggie Kennedy endorsed Coakley?

And I hear Bill Clinton is coming to Mass to stump for Coakley.


I wish I could go and see him in person, but I can't.


anyway, I think Martha Coakley will win by a comfortable margin, at the very least.

:)

[yourout]

15. Here is the million dollar question....if by some chance she loses will Obama and the DLCers....

Finally get the message that people are paying attention and they need to fight for real change and stop the Corporatist crap they have been shoveling.

[graywarrior]

17. We all sat around hoping a Kennedy would step in

Then we got stuck with Martha. I'm voting for her, but I don't feel real good about it.

[City of Mills]

20. Martha ran a lazy campaign

As others have mentioned, i'm only now starting to see her ads on TV...the 'Tea Party' candidate, Joe Kennedy, is for pulling the troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan, and for same sex marriage and is pro-marijuana...go figure...should be an interesting election.

[doc03]

26. It's just a indication of what is coming this

November, people are pissed.

[lpbk2713]

27. Is Diebold involved?

That could explain it if they were.

[Romulox]

30. Leadership vacuum. nt

[seaglass]

31. Martha is the status quo candidate. Are you satisfied with the Senate Dems?

Then vote for Martha. Are you satisfied with the overwhelmingly D MA Legislature? Then vote for Martha. Are you satisfied with Deval Patrick? Then vote for Martha.

I would guess that there is a sizeable number of MA voters who would answer NO to all the above. And I didn't even mention Obama.

In the end, the MA voters will vote for the candidate with the D after her name. How uninspiring.