I wish they were that smart! If they win it will be a win. Won't matter if it is by 1 vote.
Headlines
Brown vs. Coakley- Health care @ stake
- Thread starter MarylandMark
- Start date
I wish they were that smart! If they win it will be a win. Won't matter if it is by 1 vote.
Tommy Gun
Charter Member
LMAO Now that is spin!!!! :rofl: :rofl:
jayboat
Banned
Black is white. Up is down.
The record is right there IN FRONT OF YOUR FACE and like so many... you just choose to ignore facts.
jayboat
Banned
Like I said, bro... lookin' on the bright side. :kiss:
Tommy Gun
Charter Member
Facts are the article claimed regarding the Republicans "alternative proposals. Currently, they have none."
I in turn provide a link to proving it wrong. Here it is again in case you want to educate yourself. http://www.blunt.house.gov/Read.aspx?ID=1059
So who chooses to ignore the FACTS? Right there in front of your face.
jayboat
Banned
The fact is that Blount's proposal is a JOKE. Get real.
jayboat
Banned
In real news, posted about 15 mins ago at TPM:
We're getting some limited information, not just anecdotal now, but statistical, suggesting strong turnout in the bluest parts of Mass.
A reader brings us up to speed after the jump ...
By noon, more than 55,000 voters cast their ballots in Boston - up from an estimate of 24,000 during the December primary. That puts Boston on pace to produce more than 150,000 votes. In raw votes, if this keeps up, that'll be slightly more than the 2002 or 2006 state elections, but well below presidential years. (The surge in enrollments in '08 means that a slight increase in the number of voters would still be a significantly lower percentage.)
It's also above the election eve forecasts. The Secretary of State predicated roughly double the December turnout - so far, Boston is actually up 130%. And with lines discouraging voters at some precincts and a snowy morning, coupled with much more intensive GOTV efforts, there are some indications that turnout may actually tilt toward the afternoon.
It's too soon for optimism. Turnout had to exceed projections for Coakley to have any chance. Well, it has - so she's still in the running. But we're going to need more numbers before we can guess whether she'll pull it out.
*
Maybe the Mass voters woke up. It is possible that media is blowing this out of proportion. Nothing like a good story.
We're getting some limited information, not just anecdotal now, but statistical, suggesting strong turnout in the bluest parts of Mass.
A reader brings us up to speed after the jump ...
By noon, more than 55,000 voters cast their ballots in Boston - up from an estimate of 24,000 during the December primary. That puts Boston on pace to produce more than 150,000 votes. In raw votes, if this keeps up, that'll be slightly more than the 2002 or 2006 state elections, but well below presidential years. (The surge in enrollments in '08 means that a slight increase in the number of voters would still be a significantly lower percentage.)
It's also above the election eve forecasts. The Secretary of State predicated roughly double the December turnout - so far, Boston is actually up 130%. And with lines discouraging voters at some precincts and a snowy morning, coupled with much more intensive GOTV efforts, there are some indications that turnout may actually tilt toward the afternoon.
It's too soon for optimism. Turnout had to exceed projections for Coakley to have any chance. Well, it has - so she's still in the running. But we're going to need more numbers before we can guess whether she'll pull it out.
*
Maybe the Mass voters woke up. It is possible that media is blowing this out of proportion. Nothing like a good story.
Tommy Gun
Charter Member
Well now that appears to be opinion; pretty much the same one I have of the currrent bill; but more importantly proves that the Republicans do have proposal which once again proves the liberal rhetoric wrong. I suggest debating the merits of both proposals instead of lying about and ignoring the alternative. Particulalry when our beloved President insisted he would do so (work across the aisle that is).
These Democrats just keep digging a deeper and deeper hole and are making quite the fools of themselves.
Tommy Gun
Charter Member
The fact that Brown is in the running certainley supports the claim that the Mass voters may have had an awakening.
First off, I can't imagine how she got into this election at all. I should have followed it, but did not.
Second, the ultimate irony in today's election is health care reform.
First Irony: Brown, who voted for Romneycare, has stated emphatically he would not vote for the Senate plan. Second irony: The Senate plan currently on the table is very similar to the one that passed in Massachusetts. Third Irony: Massachusetts voters are not fond of their newfound health care laws, and this is one of the reasons Brown is doing pretty well.
Seriously, this is an outsiders election as well. The Dems are not politically smart, and haven't been since Clinton left the White House.
Tommy Gun
Charter Member
I was not aware of the problems with the Mass health care plan until recently; I posted an article about some of the problems in another thread yesterday...perhaps it will end up being the model to stop the current bill. All very interesting how this is playing out.
There are a lot of people that voted for that bill for one reason or another when it when through. However, there is nothing wrong with learning from your mistakes and not being so pig headed to say that was a mistake and I would not do it again.
jayboat
Banned
TPM. And it was information from polling stations- did it sound like poll results? The polls have been all over the place for the last two weeks, which is normal for a special election, impossible to track. But the trends probably tell the story. I'm betting it's within 5%, but don't ask me which way. :ack2:
Man, this is so much fun... why don't all of you guys meet me over at Olbermann's house for beer and wings- we can watch the returns! :cheers2:
Tommy Gun
Charter Member
He has a HOUSE?
jayboat
Banned
The angry white guy factor.
Sullivan has posted another reader email about the race:
Lifelong Massachusetts voter here. I've enjoyed your thoughtful coverage of the senate race over the past few days, but now that I've gotten a gander at our local polling place this morning, I think we may have all over-thought this.
I was curious to see who in our small, fairly wealthy town was fired up enough to actually get out there and hold signs for Brown -- turns out, a hockey dad and the assistant Pop Warner football coach, both white guys in their 40s, both small business owners. These guys may possibly have voted for Obama, but that's about as far over on the macho scale as they'd ever be willing to go. Guaranteed they voted for Celtics owner Steve Pagliuca in the primary, or possibly brawlin' Mike Capuano, but when Coakley won, they were out of there.
She's a lawyer and a female DA, so doubly emasculating in their eyes. She didn't help herself after the primary by only relying on the old Hillary base, which is other ball-buster female lawyers. That's a strong enough group to win a four-way primary but no way big enough for the general election.
In that context, all Scott Brown had to do was show up and 1) be white 2) be male and 3) come off as anything other than an elite. Hence the truck and hunting shirts, a brilliant touch on his campaign's part, and one that will probably win him the election.
This race is all about the suburbs -- neither candidate has anything to offer the working poor -- and, very sad to say, even in educated, liberal Massachusetts, many suburban wives still vote as their husbands vote, or, if they don't like his candidate, they just don't vote at all. It'll be interesting to see how the vote breaks down in terms of gender and suburban-urban, but given all this, I think Coakley is toast. Angry white guys for the win.
Sullivan has posted another reader email about the race:
Lifelong Massachusetts voter here. I've enjoyed your thoughtful coverage of the senate race over the past few days, but now that I've gotten a gander at our local polling place this morning, I think we may have all over-thought this.
I was curious to see who in our small, fairly wealthy town was fired up enough to actually get out there and hold signs for Brown -- turns out, a hockey dad and the assistant Pop Warner football coach, both white guys in their 40s, both small business owners. These guys may possibly have voted for Obama, but that's about as far over on the macho scale as they'd ever be willing to go. Guaranteed they voted for Celtics owner Steve Pagliuca in the primary, or possibly brawlin' Mike Capuano, but when Coakley won, they were out of there.
She's a lawyer and a female DA, so doubly emasculating in their eyes. She didn't help herself after the primary by only relying on the old Hillary base, which is other ball-buster female lawyers. That's a strong enough group to win a four-way primary but no way big enough for the general election.
In that context, all Scott Brown had to do was show up and 1) be white 2) be male and 3) come off as anything other than an elite. Hence the truck and hunting shirts, a brilliant touch on his campaign's part, and one that will probably win him the election.
This race is all about the suburbs -- neither candidate has anything to offer the working poor -- and, very sad to say, even in educated, liberal Massachusetts, many suburban wives still vote as their husbands vote, or, if they don't like his candidate, they just don't vote at all. It'll be interesting to see how the vote breaks down in terms of gender and suburban-urban, but given all this, I think Coakley is toast. Angry white guys for the win.
Similar threads
