Boston, Massachusetts (CNN) — Republican Scott Brown won a major upset victory in Tuesday’s special election for the U.S. Senate seat formerly held by liberal Democrat Ted Kennedy.
With 89 percent of the results counted, Brown had 52 percent of the vote to 47 percent for Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley, the Democratic candidate, according to the the National Election Pool, a consortium of media organizations including CNN. Independent candidate Joseph Kennedy, a libertarian who is not related to the Kennedy political family of Massachusetts, had 1 percent.
I’m wondering when American voters are gonna wake up and realize the solution to our problems in this country do not lie in the hands of Republican or Democratic politicians. We aren’t happy with the Republicans so we elect a Democrat, we aren’t happy with the Democrats so we elect a Republican. Enough already, both parties are cut from the same cloth, they take special interest money from lobbyists and defend the special interests, they don’t care about you. It’s time that American voters started registering Indy and started electing Indy candidates. Fuck the two party system, it’s broken. Start electing people based on their values not on their political affiliation.
The wingnuts think their revolution has begun.
Never mind that the senate majority for the dems is still pretty huge and the republicans aren’t any different in their fiscal policy.
They are all the same.
“They are all the same.”
Curd, republican candidate for Congress, recently donated to then-Senator Daschle and Representative Herseth-Sandlin and did not donate to Thune.
http://www.rapidcityjournal.com/news/article_803681b8-055b-11df-9cb4-001cc4c03286.html
“He’s a conservative Republican who says Democratic policies in Congress are threatening the future of America.
Yet Blake Curd made political contributions to two of South Dakota’s best known Democrats: former Sen. Tom Daschle and Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin.
Curd, a first-term state representative running in the Republican U.S. House primary, gave $2,000 to former Democratic Sen. Tom Daschle in October 2004. That was when Daschle, then a national Republican target because of his role as Democratic leader in the Senate, was nearing the end of a bitter re-election battle that he would eventually lose to Republican challenger John Thune.
Curd didn’t donate to Thune in that campaign.
The following year, Curd made a $1,000 donation to Herseth Sandlin, whom he now hopes to face in the general election, if he wins the Republican primary in June.”
L3wis:
“Start electing people based on their values not on their political affiliation.”
This was simply pushback from Obama’s agenda. Actually, quite breathtaking to behold. There was a night and day difference when you broke down each candidates stance on National issues.
The rub is, Obama would’ve in no way even made it past the primaries had he let his actual values be known. He campaigned as a moderate. Same way Bush would’ve lost had he made known his spend-happy ways, when he in fact campaigned as a fiscal conservative.
SyThis was simply pushback from Obama’s agenda.
Yea I keep hearing that from the pundits on talk radio, and I’m sure there are some voters out there who use their time in the booth as a way to send a message to Washington, but I honestly don’t feel that is representataive of the average voter.
Speaking from personal experience, I would never vote for or against a candidate merely because of their political party and affiation with the party in power. I vote based upon the person and if I feel they will represent my interests and values.
I know some people vote for the party rather than the person, but those types of people are going to vote for that party regardless… and they won’t vote against thier team just because of some events happening elsewhere.
Why is it so hard for people to believe that maybe … just maybe… people voted FOR Brown and/or AGAINST Coakley rather than against Obama?
Mind you I didn’t follow the race closely, but I had heard weeks ago that Coakley wasn’t really much of a candidate and wasn’t putting any serious effort in like Brown was. I’d say he fought for the job and won it because of his efforts, and it would be insulting to think he only won because he wasn’t the same party as Obama.
Costner:
“Why is it so hard for people to believe that maybe … just maybe… people voted FOR Brown and/or AGAINST Coakley rather than against Obama?”
His signature issue and line is: “I will vote against the Health Care bill”
Which, not coincidentally, is also Obama’s & the late Sen. Kennedy’s signature issue.
Even Coakley’s campaign is saying the reason she lost is because of Obama and the rapidly eroding support of his Agenda:
“The adviser, who made the case to my colleague Jonathan Martin on the condition of anonymity in response, he said, to “the current leaking coming out of the White House and the DNC that is chalking all of this up to a “bad candidateâ€.
The adviser, who cited internal polling numbers to make the case, e-mails that, “There’s more to the story than that. If Martha is guilty of taking the race for granted, so is the White House and the DNC.”
The adviser pointed to internal polling to argue that Coakley held a wide — 20 point — lead on Dec. 19, and that the damage she took between that survey and a Jan. 5 Rasmussen poll putting the race at 9 points came from the national scene: The Senate vote on health care, with the controversy over Ben Nelson’s deal for Nebraska, and the Christmas Day bombing.”
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0110/Coakley_adviser_memo_DC_Dems_faled_Coakley.html?showall
How about a little progressive thought pop quiz:
President Obama is blaming Scott Brown’s victory on:
A. Martha Coaksley
B. Rush Limbaugh
C. The Economy
D. George Bush
Wait for it….
That’s right: George W. Bush!!
“Here’s my assessment of not just the vote in Massachusetts, but the mood around the country: the same thing that swept Scott Brown into office swept me into office,” the president said in an exclusive interview with ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos.
“People are angry and they are frustrated. Not just because of what’s happened in the last year or two years, but what’s happened over the last eight years.”
http://abcnews.go.com/WN/Politics/president-obama-scott-brown-massachusetts-victory/story?id=9611222&page=2
The blame for the dems’ loss here falls on Coakley and her phoned-in campaign. She took it for granted that a democrat would win Teddy’s seat and didn’t really do much until it was too late.
I’m kind of glad Brown won, though, as gridlock is better than single-party control any day.
Sy: His signature issue and line is: “I will vote against the Health Care billâ€
Name a Republican who disagrees with him. I don’t really think that is much of a stretch to assume any member of the GOP running for office would say the same thing, and every member of the Democratic party would be the exact opposite.
Sy: President Obama is blaming Scott Brown’s victory on: That’s right: George W. Bush!!
I didn’t see where Obama invoked Bush’s name at all. You might infer that is what he meant when he made his comment about eight years, but eight years is actually the time we have been in Iraq, not a reference to Bush. Had it been a reference to Bush, he would have had to say nine years, because to just say the last eight years eliminates one year of Bush and does include one year under Obama.
In case you care, Obama has made comments about “eight years” several times recently and always in connection with the war effort, so it is safe to say the same holds true now. I don’t think the man is dumb enough to forget he has been in office for over a year.
Besides – I agree with Obama… people are frustrated and angry and that was the case before he came into power and will likely remain the case after he leaves. Until we end both of our wars AND improve the economy, I don’t think anyone will be willing to say Americans are a happy bunch.
The exit polls are telling a different story to the “against “Obama’s” agenda one. Seems that a lot of folks were indeed voting against the healthcare bill – but not because it is “too liberal”, or “socialist”, but because it it too much seen as “business as usual” and pandering to special interests. Turns out it’s not Liberal Enough!!! – at least that;’s what the exit polling seems to be saying.
“Turns out it’s not Liberal Enough!!!”
I have said that all along. There is no reform in that bill.
Ok so here is the conspiracy theorist viewpoint in me right now:
Obama has publicly said he wants to postpone any vote on the healthcare bill until Brown is seated. On the surface – that seems like a great effort to work towards a bipartisan solution rather than shoving it through before Brown has a chance to influence the vote.
However, I wonder if the Democrats now realize this bill has become a joke and that it won’t actually accomplish anything… so they can hold their vote and when it is show down they can go out and say they tried their hardest but the Republicans wouldn’t allow them to reform the healthcare system.
They (the Dems) come out of this looking like the heros who tried to help the public all the while the real reason the bill didn’t pass is because they didn’t think it was quite liberal enough and didn’t include the full public option they really wanted in the first place.
Am I nuts?
L3wis:
“I have said that all along. There is no reform in that bill.’
Right…reform that you and extreme Left (pardon the redundancy) are seeking would be a full blown Public option, which in the end means no options. The voters didn’t want that in 1993 and they don’t want it today. I sure hope they keep on with the strategy of pushing for that, since it seems to be a sure fire way to another Republican takeover.
Costner:
“Am I nuts?”
That’s been the point all along. To appear as though the issue is about helping the little guys by giving them free health care. In reality and just like 1993, it is really about power and control over 1/6th of the Economy.
If you take out illegals and those who are either rich enough or young/healthy enough who’ve chosen not to have health insurance, you’re talking about maybe 15 million people who would qualify as needing help. If this was such a priority of this Admin, they could’ve insured those people for a decade for $500 billion and lumped it into the Stimulus Bill that they rolled right over the Reps as they were basking in the glow of Obama’s innauguration. Of course, all the Leftists would’ve scream about that being nothing but a payoff to “big Insurance”, but didn’t we just determine that the Insurance industry was worth bailing out? Bail them out one day, bash the piss out of them the next for “extreme profits”.
Ask the Dude, are those profits extreme? Is “big Insurance” the bad guy? We could all be so lucky if our Government was run as efficiently and profitably as a big Insurance company.
Ask the Dude, are those profits extreme? Is “big Insurance†the bad guy?
Health insurance companies run on a much thinner margin than most insurors. This is true.
The problem lies with the collusion between insurors and care providers. Insurors foot the bill for nearly everything these days and the care costs a fortune. Instead of leaning on providers to reduce costs, they’ve passed the costs onto their policyholders through premiums that have risen through the roof right along with the cost of care.
Think about how much the full hospital bill was when your parents had you. I’ll bet good money it was a fraction of the total bill from when you and your wife had your kids. In fact, I’ll bet if you projected it out from your birth to your kids’ births, the rate of inflation would double or triple that of an average grocery bill over the same time.
Many of these insurors are large enough that they could set a ceiling on what it could cost for a lot of procedures. Instead, they go the easy route and jack up premiums.
Their profit margins may be slim, but the rate at which premiums are increasing is unsustainable. They’re pricing more and more individuals and businesses out of the market every year. The only thing that will stop them is competition from outside the industry.