If Coakley loses, the "progressives" will not be why

[mkultra]

Coakley is behind amongst independents in MASS. The democratic base supports her but the usually liberal leaning middle is turning toward Brown.

Anyone who claims it is HCR is trying to pull a psychic prediction because we all know that if indies are unhappy about HCR, they wouldn't move toward someone who supports ZERO reform.

Nice try using this as an example "progressives" but its not working. The reason she is losing is displayed in the most recent poll

<snip>
Brown has made a strong case for why he should be elected while only 41% say the same of Coakley. That speaks to voter perceptions that Brown has run the superior campaign and again you have to wonder how different things might be if Coakley had acted with a sense of urgency ever since the primary.
<snip>

essentially, she is running a crappy campaign. Obama is down there now, so hopefully he can make her case and bring it back around.

[dkf]

1. Depends if they think that no reform is better than crappy reform.

I agree with that sentiment.

I wouldn't vote repub over it but an independent by definition may. And apparently MA is full of indys not dems. I had no idea.

[mkultra]

5. No indie is that strident

That's an ideological purest stand that is reserved for only the most ardent. Indies don't fit that bill.

[dkf]

6. Anyone can get upset at being forced to buy health insurance

And the fact that MA already does it doesn't mean they aren't upset about it. I'd be interested to know where opinion is on this in MA.

[mkultra]

11. 53% in Mass support HCR reform in the senate.

The google has amazing powers. try it sometime.

[dkf]

16. Suffolk poll that has Brown at 50 has opposition to hcr at 51%

Brown, a state senator, is beating state attorney general Coakley 50 percent to 46 percent, according to a new Suffolk University/7News poll. Brown's lead is within the poll's 4.4-point margin of error, but it still represents "a massive change in the political landscape" of the solidly blue state, Suffolk's Political Research Center director David Paleologos told the Boston Herald.

The Suffolk poll suggests, however, health care may not be the issue with which to mobilize voters -- 51 percent of voters surveyed said they oppose the "national near-universal health-care package."

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2010/01/15/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry6100901.shtml

I saw reference to the 53% number you cited but could not see when the poll was taken or what Browns numbers were at the time. Also I didn't see a link. But I thought the Suffolk poll might be relevant since it is recent.

[mkultra]

19. Rasmussen has Mass voter support of currenrt HCR at 53%

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/01/17/massachusetts-special-election-a-mandate-on-health-care-reform/


either way, the clear point is that HCR is not the strike plate here but rather her crappy campaign strategy.

[dkf]

26. I couldn't find the rassmussen report.

But they do have Coakley up over Brown so it may be that the hcr number tracks the race after all.

[mkultra]

28. ill be suprised if she pulls it out

It will be all Obama if she does.

[dkf]

31. I agree.

I think hcr would be dominant but he has the chance to turn it around.

[mkultra]

33. hcr has nothing to do with it, its all her attitude

[treestar]

18. Especially if you are given the money for it and it gives you something you really need

I am sick of this RW talking point on DU. Only libertarians and RWers dislike this type of program.

[mkultra]

21. They are HealthCare Industry thugs

Just like the health care forums. Paid to come and agitate.

[Sebastian Doyle]

47. "Only libertarians and RWers dislike this type of program." BULLSHIT.

Only libertarians and RWers dislike mandatory payments to corporations?

Only libertarians and RWers dislike the complete privatization of an industry that is public in nearly every other civilized nation on the planet?

WTF are you talking about, and which parallel universe are you living in, where a blatantly libertarian, right wing "solution" would only be hated by libertarians and right wingers? :wtf:

[seaglass]

2. There are no independents in MA - we are unenrolled. With only

36% of MA voters registered as Democrats there are a hell of a lot of progressives in the ranks of the unenrolled.

[mkultra]

8. those are independants

Thus the unenrolled. 11% republican with 50% indie. Brown is leading because 91 percent of registered Republicans and 65 percent of independents favor Brown. Anyone claiming to be progressive while voting for Brown is not progressive.

Brown has a 57 percent favorable to 19 percent unfavorable while Coakley is 49 percent favorable to 41 percent unfavorable.


The cause is clear.

[seaglass]

32. You use independents as if it means the same as middle, that is why I am trying

to point out the difference between independent and unenrolled.

From your statement: "The democratic base supports her but the usually liberal leaning middle is turning toward Brown. "

Unenrolled does not equal liberal leaning "middle", it means unaffiliated with a political party.

[mkultra]

34. Actually, they are the same

Sure there are a few on each side that do not attach, but a vast majority who stay unenrolled are indies.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

3. Recall that Massachusetts has almost exactly what the Senate HCR bill is proposing

If the Independents are unhappy with a mandate to buy overpriced insurance that doesn't cover anything, then they might well make a protest vote for Brown. They may indeed feel, based on their personal experience with mandated private insurance, that no reform is better than the Senate bill.

[mkultra]

9. Polling shows a majority of Mass supports HCR reform

conservatives are more passionate about standing against it(not unlike our "progressives")

[Lydia Leftcoast]

39. Which polls asking which questions of the respondents?

If you've ever studied propaganda, you know that it's possible to skew poll results with the choices you offer.

[treestar]

20. overpriced insurance that does not cover anything

that statement is unjustified and unproven.

We may want single payer, but being unhappy with this bill should be limited to Republicans and Libertarians.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

40. What else do you call insurance with $5000 out-of-pocket costs?

CIVILIZED COUNTRIES, even the ones that use private insurance, have negligible or no out-of-pocket costs.

[girl gone mad]

43. I don't know a single person who is buying..

what you're trying to sell. Liberal, conservative, independent, progressive, blah, blah, blah - they all hate the Senate bill.

Even the few I know who want to see it passed think it's just putrid as hell.

[MannyGoldstein]

4. But Democrats May Generally Just Stay Away From The Polls

I don't think that any Democrat would vote for Brown. A lot of us, however, are likely to follow Rahmbama's orders to "fuck off".

Do you have a link for the poll?

[democrattotheend]

7. Please, do not sit this out

I understand your anger about what Rahm said - I am angry too. But sitting out the election on Tuesday will not be effective at sending the right message to the White House. As the OP said, the message they and the media will take is that they lost the independents, not that progressives sat it out and therefore should be more appreciated.

Sitting this out will do nothing to advance a progressive agenda and everything to cripple it. It will not make the health care bill better. It will either result in the House having to just pass the Senate bill without any changes, or having to make it even worse to get Olympia Snowe to support it, or abandoning the effort altogether, which will leave 45 million Americans with no health coverage and virtually guarantee major Republican gains in the midterms, which will further impede our ability to pass any progressive legislation. Giving Republicans another seat in the Senate will only force more compromises, more sell outs in order to get anything passed. Even if you succeeded in sending a message to the White House, what good would it be after their power to be more progressive has been seriously diminished?

I could understand this somewhat if the Democratic candidate here were a total DINO blue dog who really was not much better than a Republican, but that is not the case here. Coakley may not be a great campaigner, and there's no way she'll fill her predecessor's shoes (but then again, could anyone?). But there is no evidence that she will not be a reliable progressive vote in the Senate if elected. There is no evidence that she would not have supported the public option, or that she would have been one of the Senators impeding progress on health care. She has a strong record on the environment, gay rights, choice, etc. She will probably be a good Democratic senator, and certainly lightyears better than Scott Brown being the 41st vote for obstruction.

So please, I beg you, set aside your anger at the White House and go out and vote for Coakley on Tuesday. Do not doom any hope of anything progressive passing for the next year in order to send a message. They will not get that message, and even if they do, it will be too late to change anything. Losing this seat guarantees that the agenda will get pushed even further to the right, because there will be one more critical vote for obstruction, not just on health care, but on everything we care about.

[MannyGoldstein]

36. I Appreciate Your Passion

If the HCR bill is so great, then:

- why doesn't most of it take effect for 3 years, after the next Presidential election?
- why is the entire health insurance and pharma lobbying machine pulling out all the stops to get Coakley elected? These are not stupid people, and they only work to promote their self-interest.

Doesn't smell right to me.

60 votes in the Senate has proved to be almost useless in the last year - it would be great to have if it were being used to help the working class, but it's not.

That being said, my absentee ballot went in yesterday for Coakley. I hate myself.

[mkultra]

10. not for turn coats

find your own link and i invite you to fuck off as well. If your goal is to drive us democrats to the right, your doing a heck of a job.

[quiller4]

38. That doesn't seem likely considering a record number of voters

have requested absentee ballots. Election officers are gearing up for and expecting a big turnout. I suspect that the polls that used a tight likely voter screen will be pretty far off in their predictions.

[elocs]

12. Had a mayoral election in my city last spring where the candidate that should have won

ran a crappy campaign. She was in her 50s and had a lot of time and experience on the city council and clearly qualified to be mayor. Her opponent was a 25 year old with virtually no political experience, but with a well known name because his dad owns a local refuse company.

She acted like the election was hers because she was so clearly better qualified and mature. She didn't campaign much and had few yard signs in the city.

He campaigned his ass off and like Obama he had his yard signs everywhere. Well, you can guess who won.

(Although the election was nonpartisan, she is a Democrat and he is a Republican.)

[Scarsdale Vibe]

13. Already disavowing the negative hyperbole of the fake "progressives"?

If Coakley loses by a small margin you and your ilk will definitely be responsible. Trying to persuade people that Obama=Bush or that the health care bill is worse than the status quo will have consequences. You won't have to live with them, but the poor and the sick will.

Just accept your partial responsibility for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people who would have otherwise lived if health care reform passed and move on to destroying the next progressive goal. Maybe you and the Republicans can destroy climate change legislation next while holding out for utopia.

[mkultra]

14. keep your powder dry there buddy

your firing on your own. Those fake progressives are trying to claim credit for a Coakley loss like a terrorist claims credit for a bombing. They think they can scare us and force us to do things their way and im saying they can fuck off.

HCR is fine enough and it certainly will not be the reason Coakley loses.

[AllieB]

17. +1

And I am one of those far-left progressives, I live in MA, and am holding my nose to vote for Coakley. These purists make me ill.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

41. "Fake progressives"? You mean the DLC?

Actually, for many of us, the Insurance Corporate Welfare Act WOULD be worse than the status quo.

Under the status quo, I can drop my insurance if the companies start price gouging.

[Hello_Kitty]

46. Right, it'll be all the fault of progressives, who have no ability to kill any bill.

Meanwhile, Joe Lieberman does have that ability and threatened to do just that if he didn't get to strip out the public option and keep the insurers' anti-trust exemption. Forced birthers Ben Nelson and Bart Stupak threatened the bill because they wanted to be sure they could sniff women's panties. Right now Stupak is STILL making noises about how he'll derail the bill if it doesn't contain anti-choice language that's strong enough for his liking.

You Rahm stooges have rolled over for everything those cretins have done to the bill. "Yessir, Emporer Lieberman, may I please have another?" Then you want to pretend that the dirty fucking hippies on the internet, who have no vote in Congress and no influence that even slightly compares to corporate lobbyists, are the biggest threat to the bill. GMAFB.


Fail, and I wish I could unrec your post.

[treestar]

15. Why are they voting for him to reward him for running a better campaign?

Don't they realize his positions on the issues? How he will vote that nothing be passed that will help them?

Are the voters really this stupid? I hope not.

[mkultra]

22. Indies are frequently low information voters

so i would use the word ignorant rather than stupid.

[treestar]

29. True

I'm still amazed at how some of them are voting for Brown but still pro-Obama! You've got to be low info to do that! Maybe Obama's trip there today will turn some of their minds.

[PolNewf]

23. Really?

George Bush was re-elected! We've had 30 years of middle class Americans voting against their own self interest.

I think your hope is misplaced.

[Blasphemer]

24. I am bewildered by how this race has turned out

I do know there is a general anti-Democrat sentiment amongst Indies (there should be some polling coming out this week or next reflecting that), but I wouldn't have expected it to affect Kennedy's seat. A recent Gallup poll indicates Indies are against the HCR 54% to 39%, but they don't break that down to reveal which aspects of the bill they are against. I hope there is some good thorough exit polling for this race. I don't see how a liberal leaning Mass Independent could vote for Brown.

[mkultra]

27. I think she just mishandled her campaign.

[Fire1]

25. Yeah, I think she took the seat for granted but that doesn't

excuse the "liberal leaning middle." Sorry.

[mkultra]

30. excuse?

why would they need to be excused for anything?

[Fire1]

35. "excuse" for putting a republican in that seat. If that is the

intent then I see no reason to even have a democratic party. There are enough blue dogs to derail legislation that benefits the citizens without democrats sabotaging the liberal agenda. The agenda may not be progressive enough for some but it's a helluva lot better than your gonna get with a dyed in the wool noncompromising corporatist. Say what you will about Obama, but at least there is room for compromise. We do not have a PROGRESSIVE president! I, for one, DID NOT VOTE for a progressive president. If the progressives wanted one you should have found one to put on the ticket, albeit, it's highly unlikely they would have won, but nevertheless, find a viable candidate and put his/her ass on the ticket. Otherwise, get out of the party.

[ShortnFiery]

37. Not at all like "Gore v. Bush" = a *crappy* campaign is the underlying reason in addition

to standing for CORPORATIONS before the interest of one's CONSTITUENTS. See CRAPPY Campaign again ;).

[Rosa Luxemburg]

42. why do liberal leaners support a right wing &&&&?

[WhiteTara]

44. You're right...it will be Diebold

who is responsible for that win. They can't win without cheating.

[glitch]

45. Yet another opportunity to catch them at it, should anyone be interested.nt

:grr:

[GeorgeGist]

48. I agree. It would be better

if Coakley lost ...to a Progressive.