Apparently the Republican candidate will win the special Massachusetts Senate race:

Riding a wave of opposition to Democratic health-care reform, GOP upstart Scott Brown is leading in the U.S. Senate race, raising the odds of a historic upset that would reverberate all the way to the White House, a new poll shows.

Although Brown’s 4-point lead over Democrat Martha Coakley is within the Suffolk University/7News survey’s margin of error, the underdog’s position at the top of the results stunned even pollster David Paleologos.

The elections are this Tuesday, Jan. 19th.




  1. Phydeau says:

    … and read up on filibusters. The R’s don’t actually have to filibuster, they just have to threaten.

  2. Olo Baggins of Bywater says:

    Pedro, you’re getting dumber and dumber by the week. But at least we now have a stereotypical wingnut to beat up on again. Thanks!

  3. tcc3 says:

    The king of buzzword filled posts with no substance calls someone out for abusing buzzwords. Priceless.

  4. Dallas says:

    #28 I wouldn’t vote for him, but definitely will do’em.

  5. Olo Baggins of Bywater says:

    Pedro….you’re the one taking marching orders from the republican leader….just like every real republican, you all say the same things and think the same way. No divergence of opinion allowed, or they cast you out. Can you say RINO? I knoew you could.

    Now tell me, who’s a follower?

  6. Timuchin says:

    They should have put Ted’s body on ice and give someone proxy power until the health bill passed. Then they could declare Ted dead.

    They can still just vote out the filibuster rules with a simple majority and pass it with a simple majority. For Marxists, the end justifies any means available.

  7. Olo Baggins of Bywater says:

    Pedro, you’re projecting.

  8. clancys_daddy says:

    I disagree with this bill and would prefer to see it fail. I happen to be a registered independent, poor, and an atheist.

  9. RSweeney says:

    Single party government is not working.
    Massachusetts voters, it’s up to you.

  10. deowll says:

    After the last election it was my thought that the Democrats could easily hold power for decade or more. People were completely bleeped of and the opposition was a nearly dead force. The way I saw it all the Democrats had to do was avoid doing something massively stupid and completely bleeping the public off.

    That seems to have been overly optimistic. That a Republican should even be in the running in Mass. much less looking like he might win is staggering. It suggests that the party and its leaders have deeply offended an awful lot of voters.

  11. LibertyLover says:

    #35, The R’s are severely abusing the filibuster. It was meant for extreme cases,

    I would say that a federal takeover of a private industry justifies that definition.

    #36, Then why don’t the D’s change the rules?

  12. MikeN says:

    I wonder how much of this is because of the cases Coakley prosecuted. She campaigned to deny Gerald Amirault a pardon after the state pardon board voted 5-0 in favor, and in a first, declared him innocent.

  13. MikeN says:

    There is something wrong with Massachusetts after Kennedy’s death voting in a Republican. The blame goes to the Democrats. Even if they win the race, that is at least two million dollars that they won’t have for elections later in the year. For all the talk of Republican extremism, it is the Democrats’ extreme position on abortion that has cost them here. When replacing Ted Kennedy, why didn’t anyone ask Ed Markey, Marty Meehan, or Barney Frank? Michael Capuano would have done well. Martha Coakley made it out of that primary because of abortion activists. Pro-life Stephen Lynch would not be in this trouble.


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 5329 access attempts in the last 7 days.