The Conservative Cave

Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: franksolich on January 15, 2010, 08:13:55 AM

Title: primitives discuss Senate race in Massachusetts
Post by: franksolich on January 15, 2010, 08:13:55 AM
http://www.democraticunderground.org/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7470527

Oh my.

Quote
BurtWorm  (1000+ posts)        Fri Jan-15-10 08:32 AM
Original message
 
Massachusetts, you're not really going to inflict a PaliniteTea Partier on the rest of us, are you?   

In Teddy's seat? Because of opposition to health care reform?!

PS: Is there anything the rest of us can do to help?

The primitives getting all worried about something they don't need to be.

Given the corrupt machine that runs the commonwealth, I don't see the Republican winning; even if he pulls in a margin of 70-30% in the honest votes, the Democrat machines will flip them for their candidate.

If I were a primitive, I wouldn't worry.

Quote
shopgreen (134 posts)      Fri Jan-15-10 08:34 AM
Response to Original message
 
2. Pray? (for those who are into that).

Quote
boston bean  (1000+ posts)        Fri Jan-15-10 08:37 AM
Response to Original message
 
3. Yes, start holding the leadership of the Democratic Party responsible for the principles in the platform.

Quote
drm604  (1000+ posts)        Fri Jan-15-10 08:42 AM
Response to Reply #3
 
4. We need to hold onto that 60th seat first.

Quote
Craftsman (1000+ posts)      Fri Jan-15-10 08:44 AM
THE SEARS, ROEBUCK PRIMITIVE
Response to Original message

6. If he is even close to wining the blue dogs and those in contested seats will bolt to the right.

Quote
negativenihil (524 posts)      Fri Jan-15-10 08:46 AM
Response to Original message

7. ugh

the unfortunate fact is that western mass isn't as liberal as eastern mass. It's almost like a whole other state out there.

i have a rotten feeling that this one is going to be real close...

Quote
Tesha  (1000+ posts)      Fri Jan-15-10 09:03 AM
Response to Reply #7
 
10. The heck with worrying about *WESTERN* Mass!

Worry about the Boston 'burbs!

Yesterday, I was driing around Boston's northern suburbs and while I saw lots of Brown lawn signs and quite a few Brown bumper stickers, I've never ever seen even one sign or sticker for Coakley!

It's as though she felt like she didn't need to run any campaign at all! Didn't someone tell her that the Republicans, nationwide, had absolutely nothing else to so this January besides creating trouble for her in Massachusetts???

Democrats have to be some of the most naïve politicians on the planet!!!

Quote
MiniMe  (1000+ posts)        Fri Jan-15-10 08:50 AM
Response to Original message
 
8. They have an "independent" candidate running, and his name is Joe Kennedy

That may confuse some voters because of the name.

Quote
LaydeeBug  (1000+ posts)       Fri Jan-15-10 08:54 AM
Response to Original message
 
9. whatever happened to Ted Jr? 

this is making me sick too, but the puking icon makes me sicker, so this is my last response in this thread.

If I were a primitive, I wouldn't worry; the bosses will pull it out.
Title: Re: primitives discuss Senate race in Massachusetts
Post by: USA4ME on January 15, 2010, 08:19:23 AM
You are correct, frank.  With Vast Teddy and Lurch, they consistently won by 70%+ of the vote.  If this Dem candidate doesn't do the same thing, that spells trouble for the Dems nationwide in 2010 unless they can pull out a miracle.  Will the primitives ever grasp that message from this Senate election?  No.

.
Title: Re: primitives discuss Senate race in Massachusetts
Post by: The Village Idiot on January 15, 2010, 08:42:48 AM
It looks like Joe "not a" Kennedy is going to drop out. He'll likely endorsed Martha
Title: Re: primitives discuss Senate race in Massachusetts
Post by: Karin on January 15, 2010, 09:56:27 AM
Quote
even if he pulls in a margin of 70-30% in the honest votes, the Democrat machines will flip them for their candidate.

Now just wait a minute.  How can you be so casual?  You almost sound as if you're yawning, Frank.  Where do we live, Iran?  Venezuela?  Well, dammit, not yet.  There are a lot of people saying that if weirdness follows this election, the entire country will explode.  I'll be one of them. 
Title: Re: primitives discuss Senate race in Massachusetts
Post by: formerlurker on January 15, 2010, 09:59:09 AM
It looks like Joe "not a" Kennedy is going to drop out. He'll likely endorsed Martha

?

 where are you getting  that info?
Title: Re: primitives discuss Senate race in Massachusetts
Post by: The Village Idiot on January 15, 2010, 10:12:20 AM
Now just wait a minute.  How can you be so casual?  You almost sound as if you're yawning, Frank.  Where do we live, Iran?  Venezuela?  Well, dammit, not yet.  There are a lot of people saying that if weirdness follows this election, the entire country will explode.  I'll be one of them. 

Just like Minnesota?
Title: Re: primitives discuss Senate race in Massachusetts
Post by: delilahmused on January 15, 2010, 11:34:03 AM
Just like Minnesota?

I couldn't believe that one...and the people seemed so disconnected.

Cindie
Title: Re: primitives discuss Senate race in Massachusetts
Post by: Peter3_1 on January 15, 2010, 11:53:04 AM
COAKELY is the poster child for useful idiot politicians. We have al-Qaeda here in America, but none in Afganistan? Idiot quickliy loseing usefulness.....
Title: Re: primitives discuss Senate race in Massachusetts
Post by: Karin on January 15, 2010, 12:20:36 PM
When Minnesota was going on, FGL, enough people hadn't woken to the country going over the cliff.  Times have changed. 
Title: Re: primitives discuss Senate race in Massachusetts
Post by: zeitgeist on January 15, 2010, 05:52:06 PM
There are so many threads over there bemoaning this election I have lost track of them all.  One called Poll Shocker: Brown Surges is attracting lots of attention:




Quote


No Elephants (1000+ posts)      Fri Jan-15-10 12:08 AM
Response to Reply #1
8. I hope you're right. I've only ever had Democrats representing me in Massachusetts, on both 
 Edited on Fri Jan-15-10 12:09 AM by No Elephants
the state and federal levels (except for Governors). Our state legislature is about 95% Democrat. Currently, even our Governor is Democrat (Deval Patrick, whose campaign David Axelrod also ran.) His poll numbers have not been good, either, though.

I am very disappointed. And this is hard for me because my Rep, Mike Capuano, should have beat Martha in the primary, IMO. However, as AG, she had statewide name recognition, while he did not. (Uninformed voters!!) And, as I said, being a woman gave her an advantage in the race, which she freely admitted.

Like so many, I am tired of voting for the lesser of two evils.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7470734


Apparently the negative pachyderm is to young to remember this guy:




Quote

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fc/Edward_Brooke.jpg)

Edward William Brooke, III (born October 26, 1919), is an American politician and was the first African American to be elected by popular vote to the United States Senate when he was elected as a Republican from Massachusetts in 1966, defeating his Democratic opponent, Endicott Peabody, 58%–42%. He was also the first African American elected to the Senate since the 19th century, and would remain the only person of African heritage sent to the Senate in the 20th century until Democrat Carol Moseley Braun in 1993. He remains, as of 2009, the last Republican senator from Massachusetts, and the last elected African American member of the U.S. Senate to come from the Republican Party.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Brooke


Dummy angst is at an all time high as probably are more than a few dummies!!
Title: Re: primitives discuss Senate race in Massachusetts
Post by: USA4ME on January 15, 2010, 06:34:39 PM
Quote from:
No Elephants

I hope you're right. I've only ever had Democrats representing me in Massachusetts...

In a graduate economics class in college in the mid-80's, the prof divided us into groups and we were to take the state budgets of, I think, 5 states of our choosing and show what would need to happen in order to balance them.  Of all 50, he told us not to even bother choosing Massachusetts, that they were so out of whack it would be impossible.  :rotf:

.
Title: Re: primitives discuss Senate race in Massachusetts
Post by: franksolich on January 16, 2010, 08:09:43 AM
Apparently the negative pachyderm is to young to remember this guy:

Yeah, after Edward Brooke was elected, there were only 97 white guys in the U.S. Senate.

The other three were of course Brooke (R), Margaret Chase Smith of Maine (R), and Hiram Fong of Hawaii (R).

Also what's little known is that Charles Curtis of Kansas (R) during the 1920s was the first U.S. Senator of Native American derivation, and the first vice-president of Native American derivation--I forget if he was vice-president under Coolidge or Hoover, though, and am too lazy to look it up.
Title: Re: primitives discuss Senate race in Massachusetts
Post by: The Village Idiot on January 16, 2010, 10:37:36 AM
Yeah, after Edward Brooke was elected, there were only 97 white guys in the U.S. Senate.

The other three were of course Brooke (R), Margaret Chase Smith of Maine (R), and Hiram Fong of Hawaii (R).

Also what's little known is that Charles Curtis of Kansas (R) during the 1920s was the first U.S. Senator of Native American derivation, and the first vice-president of Native American derivation--I forget if he was vice-president under Coolidge or Hoover, though, and am too lazy to look it up.

Hey Frank, I left a message for you on a thread in the book forum
Title: Re: primitives discuss Senate race in Massachusetts
Post by: GOBUCKS on January 16, 2010, 11:45:54 AM
The other three were of course Brooke (R), Margaret Chase Smith of Maine (R), and Hiram Fong of Hawaii (R).
Every time I see a name like Fong, it reminds me of that W. C. Fields movie where the salesman is shouting questions about Carl LaFong, "Capital L small a capital F small o small n small g, LaFong", while an irritated Fields is trying to sleep.
Title: Re: primitives discuss Senate race in Massachusetts
Post by: franksolich on January 16, 2010, 04:12:37 PM
Every time I see a name like Fong, it reminds me of that W. C. Fields movie where the salesman is shouting questions about Carl LaFong, "Capital L small a capital F small o small n small g, LaFong", while an irritated Fields is trying to sleep.

Now sir, Hiram Fong (R-Hawaii, 1959-1977) was a great Republican; the only tragedy being he was pretty old when first elected, and so wasn't around but three terms before he retired.
Title: Re: primitives discuss Senate race in Massachusetts
Post by: Allentownjake on January 17, 2010, 07:43:58 AM
Yeah, after Edward Brooke was elected, there were only 97 white guys in the U.S. Senate.

The other three were of course Brooke (R), Margaret Chase Smith of Maine (R), and Hiram Fong of Hawaii (R).

Also what's little known is that Charles Curtis of Kansas (R) during the 1920s was the first U.S. Senator of Native American derivation, and the first vice-president of Native American derivation--I forget if he was vice-president under Coolidge or Hoover, though, and am too lazy to look it up.

Curtis was VP under Hoover.  Hoover was a good man.  He has one or two black spots on the historical record but he lead the relief efforts in Europe after WWI and almost lost his career in politics for going into Russia and helping the Russian people after the Soviets took charge.  His response was simple, there are starving people there, I don't care about the ideology of their government.

Title: Re: primitives discuss Senate race in Massachusetts
Post by: DumbAss Tanker on January 17, 2010, 08:55:33 AM
Apparently Coakley made a little boo-boo on the radio and came across as saying Schilling was a Yankees fan.  That could actually be the nail in the coffin for her, nobody takes the BoSox/Yankees thing as seriously as the demographic she is depending on for crucial support.
Title: Re: primitives discuss Senate race in Massachusetts
Post by: BlueStateSaint on January 17, 2010, 09:05:21 AM
Apparently Coakley made a little boo-boo on the radio and came across as saying Schilling was a Yankees fan.  That could actually be the nail in the coffin for her, nobody takes the BoSox/Yankees thing as seriously as the demographic she is depending on for crucial support.

I saw the transcript.  She corrected it, but she made the mistake.  Likely, along with her shot at Brown for his actually standing outside Fenway shaking hands with voters, to cost her a percentage point or two.  In this election, that's all it takes.
Title: Re: primitives discuss Senate race in Massachusetts
Post by: AllosaursRus on January 17, 2010, 09:11:57 PM
Coakley is the typical POS entitled DimWit the country is so sick of! She started out thinkin', "it's in the bag"! Every single DEmagogue is going to learn that you just can't dismiss the American voter the way they have been doing! It's time for the tar and feathers!!!
Title: Re: primitives discuss Senate race in Massachusetts
Post by: Oceander on January 17, 2010, 09:19:16 PM
Apparently Coakley made a little boo-boo on the radio and came across as saying Schilling was a Yankees fan.  That could actually be the nail in the coffin for her, nobody takes the BoSox/Yankees thing as seriously as the demographic she is depending on for crucial support.

You may be spot on with that point!
Title: Re: primitives discuss Senate race in Massachusetts
Post by: Peter3_1 on January 18, 2010, 04:12:28 PM
Yes, Kurt and "The Yas" were BIG yankee fans.......and....anyway,,,....they don't play any more.......and....well....she's ENTITLED to be Senator! The American Royalty , the Irish Mafia SAID SO......!!!!  So THERE!


May the gods let her lose.
Title: Re: primitives discuss Senate race in Massachusetts
Post by: LadyLiberty on January 18, 2010, 05:16:05 PM
They're worried because ACORN has been busted.