Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

In what was considered impossible, Republican Scott Brown defeats Democrat Martha Coakley and becomes the next senator of Massachusetts.


moneymakers
 Share

Recommended Posts

Apparently the Democrats can't do it either. I vote for a 3rd party - TOSBERG for president!

I wouldn't vote for you if my ass was on fire and you had the last bucket of water on Earth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 129
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

I have to say that Croakley disappeariing for a month from the campaign trail right before the election was a contributing factor. She was just plain the wrong candidate.

 

To me this looks more like a vote against Congress, rather than Obama. I have been increasingly frustrated with Pelosi and Reid behaving in very much the same way as the opposing party, choosing to delay, stall and ruin good legislation with sweeteners, and thier own agendas.

 

I am thinking this indeed looks like the beginning of a swing back, and rightly so. Those two need to go away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please post a link...TIA.

 

Post #7 in this thread. I might have used hyperbole in the way I presented it, but this:

 

So now what will we have? Proposed policy likely never to make it into law because party lines will snuff out anything the other wants to get done. Even if its sound, it won't get passed because the bitter Rebubs want to stick it to Obama if for no other reason than they are frustrated that change didn't happen overnight. America is frustrated....I'm frustrated....but I know change doesn't happen overnight.

 

Apparently, Mass voters grew impatient, and more likely, just scared of change.

 

Hooray! We are a country at a standstill. Someone buy me a beer.

 

Would clearly seem to indicate you being frustrated about gridlock, no? How embarrassing for you... :wacko:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

very important that the republicans realize this was not an endorsement of the republicans but a rejection of incumbents

 

Again, I think this was largely state-specific. As I noted, MA already has state-run healthcare....and their constituent was vehimently opposed to the federal program as it would only increase their costs, and not provide any additional benefit. This was an easy platform to take advantage of, and the Republican campaign was executed brilliantly in this regard.

 

Had this been a state without state-sponsored healthcare, it would have been interesting to see what transpired.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So now what will we have? Proposed policy likely never to make it into law because party lines will snuff out anything the other wants to get done. Even if its sound, it won't get passed because the bitter Rebubs want to stick it to Obama if for no other reason than they are frustrated that change didn't happen overnight. America is frustrated....I'm frustrated....but I know change doesn't happen overnight.

 

Apparently, Mass voters grew impatient, and more likely, just scared of change.

 

Hooray! We are a country at a standstill. Someone buy me a beer.

 

 

so you want change, just for the sake of change? good or bad, doesnt matter? smart strategy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so you want change, just for the sake of change? good or bad, doesnt matter? smart strategy.

There is so much misinformation about what all Obama is proposing that I don't know if we can really see if the change can be good or bad because his opponents keep on making crap up and shouting death panels and whatnot. This election went the republicans way because they were so good at being obstructionists in congress. If something good was proposed they would not vote for it because they need to tare this admin down. Otherwise its just the right manufacturing one problem after problem.

 

Somebody mentioned that this is a mandate about the lefts leadership and while I think it is a result of the whole system being beyond broken - I would not mind givng the boot to 90% of the democratic leadership. They embarrass me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is so much misinformation about what all Obama is proposing that I don't know if we can really see if the change can be good or bad because his opponents keep on making crap up and shouting death panels and whatnot. This election went the republicans way because they were so good at being obstructionists in congress. If something good was proposed they would not vote for it because they need to tare this admin down. Otherwise its just the right manufacturing one problem after problem.

 

Somebody mentioned that this is a mandate about the lefts leadership and while I think it is a result of the whole system being beyond broken - I would not mind givng the boot to 90% of the democratic leadership. They embarrass me.

 

 

i agree about the misinformation. dont you think some may be coming from the left as well?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Congrats on the win. A partial defeat for Obama but a resounding one for the Democrats in Congress who have done with their majority exactly what the Republicans did with theirs - nothing except pander to their own paymasters and sub-electorate.

 

Still, like the earlier poster said....now what? It's a massive wake-op for Pelosi and Reid, an uninspiring pair to say the least. Still - if nothing gets done between now and November because the Republicans in the Senate block everything, the Dems could turn that to advantage. But where does that leave the rest of us? Up chit creek while our leaders take potshots at each other.

 

It was definitely are referendum on Reid, Pelosi, and health care reform (at least in it's present form). I have to admit I have more hope today than I've had at any time sense November of 2008.

 

very important that the republicans realize this was not an endorsement of the republicans but a rejection of incumbents

 

This is a very good point. My wife and I were going back and forth between FOX and MSNBC and our youngest daughter was in the room asking why we cared about something that happened in Massachusetts. My wife responded that we were happy because it allows the Republicans to block health care legislation in the Senate. My wife then went on to say to my daughter that we are happy because we like Republicans. I was real quick to say that wasn't necessarily true. I then went on to explain that we identify with more of what the Republican's say their platform is, that we are conservative, particularly fiscally and that Republicans haven't done a good job of that lately.

 

Look at the Republican Gubernatorial Primary in Texas. The debate was originally set up as Kay Bailey Hutchison vs Rick Perry, and frankly both have a lot of warts. The TEA party has been supporting a more independent candidate named Deborah Medina. Medina was included in the debates and pretty clearly won the debates for any one watching. Medina probably will not win the primary because her race started too late, but she is really picking up steam. She has jumped form 3% of the vote to 12% almost overnight. If she had started as early as the previous two and had anywhere near the money, she very well could have become the Republican nominee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

very important that the republicans realize this was not an endorsement of the republicans but a rejection of incumbents

Exactly. This is why Obama was elected as well. He was not Bush. I am afraid we have started a very bad cycle that will not be broken anytime soon. People need to understand who they are voting for and why.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i agree about the misinformation. dont you think some may be coming from the left as well?

I do. I think there is a little difference in motivation though. The left seems to be trying to get something done and the right seems to want them to fail no matter what the consiquences. I am not defending the left by any means though. They're no different than the right in investing 90%+ of their efforts on spin and counter spin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly. This is why Obama was elected as well. He was not Bush. I am afraid we have started a very bad cycle that will not be broken anytime soon. People need to understand who they are voting for and why.

I never thought I would agree with anything you posted but the above is true. The last decade has seen more votes against than votes for. The Republicans are in a position to block, wreck and stagnate any kind of legislation now and in November will probably be better situated for more of that.

 

However, the chances of a Republican super-majority in the next election cycle and the near to mid term is zero - the boot will be on the other foot.

 

I'd add that one of the main reasons for this win other than health care is the national debt. People have been made very aware personally of the dangers of massive debt in the last 18 months and they are terrified of the year on year deficits we are running. We have to fix this and it will take balls to do it because both sides are going to hate the medicine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

very important that the republicans realize this was not an endorsement of the republicans but a rejection of incumbents

 

Yup - much like the Obama's election was more of a rejection of Bush and his cronies. People are anxious for real change and rejecting the status quo.

 

I also think it was an indictment on HC reform as it has been pursued. Folks in MA have comprehensive HC, and a lot of them don't like it. Costs are spiraling out of control and premiums are eating an every increasing portion of their paychecks. I hear it directly from MA folks all the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly. This is why Obama was elected as well. He was not Bush. I am afraid we have started a very bad cycle that will not be broken anytime soon. People need to understand who they are voting for and why.

 

See, this is all Bush's fault.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, I think this was largely state-specific. As I noted, MA already has state-run healthcare....and their constituent was vehimently opposed to the federal program as it would only increase their costs, and not provide any additional benefit. This was an easy platform to take advantage of, and the Republican campaign was executed brilliantly in this regard.

 

Had this been a state without state-sponsored healthcare, it would have been interesting to see what transpired.

 

 

This is true of most Americans as well swammi, not just those in MA. Even if you take the 46 Million number Obama first claimed were uninsured ( though we know that included about 11 Million illegal aliens that represents only 15.33% of the population of the US. According to Newsweek (Gallop Poll) 87% of people with private insurance were happy with it, and 82% of those with medicare or medicaid were happy with it. 75% of those with private plans and 71% of those with government plans rate their plans as good or excellent. So even if you include illegals and only use the lower 71% number as those that approve and you assume all those without insurance want insurance and are unhappy, you still have 60% of the population happy with the care they receive than their health care plans. Now if you take into consideration that 11 of the 46 Million Obama was claiming are illegal you end up with only 11% uninsured. If you take into consideration that of those with coverage, 59% are private and 41% are public, you realize that 65% of the voting public rate their coverage as good or excellent.

 

So, across the US 65% realize if health care reform is passed it will more than likely cause their plans to be more expensive and quite possibly cause the coverage they currently like to be reduced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never thought I would agree with anything you posted but the above is true. The last decade has seen more votes against than votes for. The Republicans are in a position to block, wreck and stagnate any kind of legislation now and in November will probably be better situated for more of that.

 

However, the chances of a Republican super-majority in the next election cycle and the near to mid term is zero - the boot will be on the other foot.

 

I'd add that one of the main reasons for this win other than health care is the national debt. People have been made very aware personally of the dangers of massive debt in the last 18 months and they are terrified of the year on year deficits we are running. We have to fix this and it will take balls to do it because both sides are going to hate the medicine.

 

Which is the same role the Dems played in the first 6 years of the Bush administration, only they had a lot more room for error.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd add that one of the main reasons for this win other than health care is the national debt. People have been made very aware personally of the dangers of massive debt in the last 18 months and they are terrified of the year on year deficits we are running. We have to fix this and it will take balls to do it because both sides are going to hate the medicine.

 

Very true.

 

People are worried about the economy and jobs not health care. until the job market is fixed that is all the American public will worry about.

 

Also true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If a guy like him - fiscal conservative - no bedroom issues - no negative ads - can win in MA - there is hope for all of us.

 

It's funny how votes are based on party and morals. Oh look at this rich looking fiscal conserv, I bet he would never cheat on his wife.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It took 8 years to create many

of the difficult problems we face.

 

:wacko:

 

Many of the problems we face have taken 200 years to create. Some have taken 50, some 20. Sure, some have taken 8, in the same way that many of the problems we are facing have taken about a year to create.

 

Perhaps we need some elected officials that are focused on undoing much of what the Fed Gov has done as opposed to ones who are trying to do more. More is not necessarily better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly. This is why Obama was elected as well. He was not Bush. I am afraid we have started a very bad cycle that will not be broken anytime soon. People need to understand who they are voting for and why.

Why would you want to change what has worked so splendidly for the last 200+ years? Our politicians are elected on image and BS. Please don't let the general populace know what is really going on, what the issues are and what is or isn't being done about them. How else would our politicians keep their phoney-baloney jobs? Can I get a Harrumph!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, I think this was largely state-specific. As I noted, MA already has state-run healthcare....and their constituent was vehimently opposed to the federal program as it would only increase their costs, and not provide any additional benefit. This was an easy platform to take advantage of, and the Republican campaign was executed brilliantly in this regard.

 

Had this been a state without state-sponsored healthcare, it would have been interesting to see what transpired.

 

This is not correct.

 

Most health care in MA is run privately. It is state law that MA citizens have health care, but the state has no say in mine as I have private insurance. Most people here do. The state only provides insurance to people 300% below the poverty line, and perhaps to some other isolated groups.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:wacko:

 

Many of the problems we face have taken 200 years to create. Some have taken 50, some 20. Sure, some have taken 8, in the same way that many of the problems we are facing have taken about a year to create.

 

Perhaps we need some elected officials that are focused on undoing much of what the Fed Gov has done as opposed to ones who are trying to do more. More is not necessarily better.

This is true and is at the core of my problems with the health care debate. They should start by calling it what it really is, a health insurance debate. All the current plans do is prop up the existing failing system by forcing some type of health insurance on everyone. I don't know what the appropriate solution is, but I will say I'm all for nuking the current system and building one from the ground up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information