Wednesday, January 20, 2010

What Massachusetts means...

We lost in MA because President Obama and Democrats in Congress have not been tough enough in pursuing their goals. Yes, Martha Coakley was a terrible candidate and deserved to lose (just about anywhere but MA), but the lesson must be learned that this is not a call for all Democrats to move to the center. It is a repudiation of politics without integrity. It is a statement against politicians who govern to get re-elected. The Democrats have been so paranoid of losing their majorities that they have forgotten what got them there. I am not advocating for Democrats to be extremely ideologically rigid. I am pleading that they do not back down in debates of what is morally just. When we are confronted with "death panels," and the "government takeover of medicine," we need to treat the American people like responsible adults and tell them the truth, rather than caving from paranoia over being socialists, tree-huggers, or anti-war hippies. We need to pick our battles, not over catch phrases like public option, but on what the best results will be for our country. 2010 needs to be the year when Democrats be honest with the American people and put what is best for them in the long term, ahead of what cable news and lobbyists are shouting about in the short term.

Take over the Leadership!

The Obama Administration has been arrogant, corrupt and ignorant.They do not care about bi-partisanship, it is just a cover for their corporate sell-outs.

Obama's goals are not yours. We need to do away with the "Dems need to be tougher" meme right this instant. Ever think that the Dem leadership didnt actually want/care about a public option or EFCA or DADT? Their stated policy is FOR MORE WAR AND BAILOUTS OF GIANT CORPORATIONS. And they are being very bold in their execution of these aims. WAKE UP. The entire DEM leadership is corrupt and needs to be destroyed. That's it.

The only people people who seem to respond and recognize this is, unfortunately the teabaggers. Republicans are busy doing nothing, and liberals are too busy making excuses. Teabagger ideas are, for the most part, extremely dangerous, but they are the only one willing to say, "the system is fucked-up. I'm mad as hell and im not going to take it anymore."

Tuesday, January 19, 2010

Massachusetts, Election Night

Well, for those of you who are looking to follow the election results in the most detailed of manners, I would suggest going here to NBC Boston's Website...

As it stands, Scott Brown is leading Martha Coakley 53-46 with a lead of roughly 55,000 votes and 40% of the precincts reported. The good news is that most of the towns where Brown is leading have reported all of their precinct numbers, while many Coakley strongholds like Boston, Cambridge, etc. have many more, and thousands of votes to come in. The question really comes down to whether or not enough people in liberal strongholds came out to overcome this lead Brown has built up. I'll update when I can...

Massachusetts...Part II

Sorry for yet another rambling post, but, well, we have come around to being only a few hours away from the polls opening in Massachusetts and it does not look as promising as it did the night before. As it stands a slew of polls came out Monday that would indicate a victory for Scott Brown over Martha Coakley up in Massachusetts. Furthermore, even Nate Silver over at FiveThirtyEight has moved this over into the Lean Brown category for tomorrow. Given his ability to accurately predict…quite frankly everything in the 2008 Senate races, I’m rather inclined to believe that Brown stands a good shot at winning. Naturally this will create press that no one here will want to see. Glenn Beck will likely cry tears of joy for this country, and make this moment a rallying cry for conservatives and his oddball 9/12 project. Sean Hannity will develop the biggest man crush on Scott Brown that’s humanly imaginable. And lord knows that somehow Rush Limbaugh will find a way to make some odd comment with racial undertones about this being an Obama failure.

We all know that this is coming, the key behind it is the decision of where the party must go immediately afterwards with regards to Health Care. The truth of the matter is that there are only a few options. None of them are ideal, but here they are:

Monday, January 18, 2010

Massachusetts...Part I

This Tuesday, Massachusetts voters will go to the polls to choose someone to finish out the Senate term of the late, beloved, Ted Kennedy. With these first few posts, I figure I’ll attempt to cover the good, the bad, and the ugly this race involves (I apologize in advance for the length...there is a LOT to brief on the race). The upcoming special election in Massachusetts between Democratic Attorney General Martha Coakley and Republican State Senator Scott Brown has recently gained a fabulous explosion of attention with the sudden surge Brown has seen in the polls.

For her part, Coakley came to this point by rising up through the ranks of Massachusetts state politics and rather soundly defeated her Democratic challengers in the primary a few months back. Meanwhile Brown gained his party’s nomination while being a largely unknown politician in a state where 35 of the 40 Senate seats are held by Democrats.

Initially, Coakley held a tremendous lead in the polls of, at times, over 30 points. At this point, her campaign made what could turn out to be a fatal error in NOT aggressively campaigning throughout the state to cement her lead/victory. And why should she have? It was Ted Kennedy’s seat, and Massachusetts has a grand total of zero statewide offices, or federal congressional districts that are occupied by someone who isn’t a Democrat. Furthermore, the RNC viewed this race as impossible to win and didn’t send money in Brown’s direction. Hell, even after 2010 began, Larry Sabato, the UVa professor known as “the most-quoted in the land” and a renowned political pundit described this as a “kamikaze mission” for the Republicans to get a 41st seat in the Senate.

Yet here we are less than 48 hours away from the polls closing in Massachusetts and multiple polling agencies have come out with Scott Brown holding slim lead, including one Suffolk University poll that has him up 4 points as of Saturday (yet still within the 4.4% margin of error).

How in the hell did this race become so close?