Scott Brown(R) or Martha Coakley (D)?
The democrats must be scared. They sent the president in. Did it help or hurt? Who do you think will win, and Why?
Brown! We can't keep moving forward the way things are right now; we need the right republicans to take office! I am not sure what is going on in the White House but someone needs to stop them.
"The Community Organizer went to Massachusetts yesterday to try to gin up a good Democrat turnout. I loved it when Obama chided Scott Brown as being just another Republican who sides with special interests. OK ... let's see. Obama just negotiated a deal with labor unions whereby their members would be exempt from certain taxes that their coworkers will have to pay for ObamaCare. A wonderful present for unions ... and then Obama says it is Scott Brown who panders to special interests. Could he possibly be any more hypocritical?" Neal Boortz
Ten reasons why the Massachusetts Senate race is very, very important
1. Massachusetts is one of the most Democratic states in the nation. It's the only state that voted for George McGovern over Richard Nixon in 1972 and it hasn't elected a Republican senator since 1972. Its entire congressional delegation is Democratic. A GOP win would shock the liberal Democratic establishment that dismissed the 2009 gubernatorial setbacks in Virginia and New Jersey as mere flukes.
2. Health-care reform is at stake. A victory for Scott Brown would deprive the Democrats of the 60 votes they need to push their brand of health-care reform through the Senate without any Republican support. That would be a huge defeat for President Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. No way to spin that one.
3. Democrat-only legislative power would come to an end. If Senate Democrats were to lose in Massachusetts, they'd lose their tenuous 60-seat majority needed to push forward legislation without bipartisan support. That means that moderate Republican Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine would instantly become two of the most powerful people on Capitol Hill. One way or another, the Obama agenda would have to be retooled or scaled back.
4. This is the "Kennedy" seat. For six decades, this particular Massachusetts Senate seat has been represented by Jack Kennedy, Ted Kennedy or a family designee (on a temporary basis). The symbolism of Republicans seizing the "Kennedy seat" is huge.
5. This is where the Boston Tea Party took place. New England "patriots" rebelled against high taxes by dumping tea into Boston Harbor some 235 years ago. Now, the new generation of "Tea Party patriots" is hoping to dump candidates (Democrat and Republican) who raise taxes and increase federal spending. Again, a big symbolic thing.
6. This is a test of the power of political independents. Fewer than one in eight Massachusetts voters admits to being a Republican. So GOP nominee Brown couldn't come close to victory without carrying independent voters by a wide margin and chipping away at the Democratic base. That's terrible news for Democrats looking ahead. If independents continue to flee the Democratic Party -- as they did in New Jersey and Virginia last year -- the midterm elections could be an absolute disaster for the ruling party.
7. It's a good indicator of voters' desire for divided government. Even in Massachusetts, many voters want to send a message to Democrats in DC: One-party government is not a good idea. A Brown win -- or even a photo finish -- would tell us that even some Democrats want a limit on the power of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.
8. It could give a jump start to GOP recruiting efforts in other states. One of the keys to the Republican takeover of Congress is 1994 was a superb recruiting effort that enlisted big-name challengers to Democratic incumbents. If Brown wins in Massachusetts, the Texans atop the GOP congressional campaign efforts -- John Cornyn in the Senate and Pete Sessions in the House -- probably would have recruits lining up outside their offices to take on Democratic incumbents.
9. It's proof that Republicans don't have to be moderates to win on Democratic turf. Conventional wisdom holds that Republicans need to recruit moderate candidates to win elections in the North and Midwest. But Scott Brown is an unapologetic conservative. If he can win (or come close) in Massachusetts, it sends a message that conservative Republicans can play ball in "blue" America.
10. It would be a personal and political repudiation of President Obama. The president upped the political ante yesterday by flying to Boston for a rally with Democrat Martha Coakley. He told voters just how important her election was to him. By inserting himself into the race, Obama raised the stakes: If Massachusetts voters reject his personal appeal, it's a sign that the president's (remaining) personal popularity is not necessarily transferable to endangered Democrats.
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/nov … z0czmxtsMs
Okay Wag the Dog lets calm down. Massachusetts is the one of the most liberal - not necessarily one of the most Democratic states.
We have a long history of Republican governors, many of whom were very liberal - Mitt Romney (who worked hard to implement universal health care and succeeded), Jane Swift, Paul Cellucci, Bill Weld (another very liberal governor), and Frank Hatch (who implemented the first sweeping statewide Wetlands Protection Act - one of the most important statewide environmental laws in the US at the time).
In 1966, we also elected Ed Brooke a liberal Republican African American Senator. We might have elected more liberal Republicans, but that "Kennedy charisma" happened.
So Republicans are nothing new in Massachusetts and they generally have been very good for our state. The don't usually trend with the Bush/Cheney/Palin wing of the Repubican party. I am a very liberal person (not a registered Democrat though) and right now if I could have Mitt Romney back, I'd take him in a second over to Duval Patrick.
Coakley has run a terrible, horrible very bad campaign, with tons of bad choices. And that has a lot to do with the poll results right now.
Either way I'm not seriously worried, we survived eight years of Bush/Cheney, we'll survive anything.
P.S. I do hate the current health care bill so that's maybe why I'm not that upset. If it got thrown out and we had to start over maybe that's a good thing.
I think it would help tremendously if Brown were elected as the Democrats have been a little too arrogant and devisive in their ways lately.
Nelle, thanks for your concern, but I am very calm. Yes, Bush/Cheney made plenty of mistakes, but we need to start correcting the massive errors this new administration is making, as they try to force a enslavement health care bill down the throats of the American people.
We can do nothing about the past, only try to do the right thing for the future. Stopping the health care bill would be a great start, and if Brown get's the seat, that could be the beginning to the end of a very bad bill.
Oh and to answer the question - I don't know who's going to win. But I think that a close race will wake up liberal Massachusetts and that is a very good thing. We've become very complacement.
If Brown wins and votes against healthcare in this state and tries to reverse liberal policies - it will be interesting, very interesting.
If Brown wins, the dems have already stated that they won't swear him in until AFTER the healthcare bill vote.
So much for the "will of the people"
I've heard that also. The secretary of state (Democrat) has to certify the election results before the winning candidate can take office. If Brown wins, papers will be "lost", delays will happen, it could be a month before he is eligible to vote in the Senate.
by Onusonus3 years ago
This is an actual plaque hanging at Northeastern Illinois University in Chicago. The excuses given from the Liberals who made this are a wide stretch of the imagination.
by Charles James4 years ago
I am not an American, but what goes on in the USA is important to the world.Lincoln was a Republican and freed the slaves. One would expect black Americans to generally vote Republican. But they don't.How did this come...
by LucidDreams3 years ago
I am not saying ALL Republicans are, I am just wondering why anyone would actually stay with a party that is clearly not on the same page as most of America? Most (not all) but most who are die hard right Republicans...
by junko2 months ago
An articulate Liberal Progressive conservative Democratic President's words on that subject cause me to wonder. I ain't talking about Obama ,Clinton, nor Carter. Over fifty years ago President Kennedy warned about...
by American View4 years ago
I find it interesting when Democrats say the only reason people will vote for Romney is because he is a Republican. They chastise the people on the right who are loyal to their party. They cannot see that people will...
by Credence24 years ago
I am taken back to the site 'unskewed polls' where the conservatives were saying that the mainstream polling system was unfairly skewed in favor of Mr. Obama. So, I bet I could not find them now anywhere among all the...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.