This video was just forwarded to me regarding Scott Brown...
Set as favorite
Bookmark
Email This
Hits: 429
Trackback(0)
TrackBack URI for this entryComments (14)
Subscribe to this comment's feed
written by Behold a Pale Horse , January 12, 2010
There's a possible spoiler in the race.
Joseph L Kennedy (no relation to the family) is running as an independent candidate.
Brown is running as the Tea Party candidate. See http://joekennedyforsenate.com/
He was polling around 5 percent.
He could be the reverse Dede Scozzafava and cause Brown to lose.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Behold a Pale Horse , January 12, 2010
Kennedy is running as a libertarian, Tea Party candidate and could siphon votes away from Brown.
My typo.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Daniel Peterson , January 12, 2010
Let me get this straight. A liberal northeastern state, which votes overwhelmingly Democrat, will the name Joseph (not Citgo) Kennedy on the ballot and think, 'he's conservative?"
I doubt it.
Kennedy will likely draw uninformed liberals who think HE'S A KENNEDY!.
If anything, he'll split the left vote.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Robert Hornak , January 12, 2010
Hard to say for sure how this plays out. Does this kennedy guy have any money? If he's not out there with mail and ads then he is unlikely to steal many votes from Brown. Surely some people may vote on the Kennedy name - liberals of years past who don't know the difference bet liberal and libertarian. My guess is he doesn't factor in much on either side.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Raquel Okyay , January 12, 2010
This race is shaping up to be another Doug Hoffman scenario (without Dede in the race) -- with money hopefully coming in from out of state.
Good news for Brown, who will need it, but like any special election, getting out the vote is key.
His winning may be the only way to defeat the health-care bill, and if that doesn't happen, at least make the Dems look as arrogant as ever, for forcing a vote before Brown can cast.
With just 5% polling for Kennedy, I don't think it will make a whole lot of difference, and you're right Danny, the Kennedy name will be confusing for some, so maybe the vote gets split.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Behold a Pale Horse , January 12, 2010
Voters aren't that naive.
Here in New York, candidates with the same name or same-sounding name ran in the same election (Jose Serrano Jr and Nydia Velasquez), and the "real" ones won without any trouble.
The media coverage in Massachusetts has made it clear that Kennedy is not related to the family. In fact, his Web site states that he is not related to them, and that "Kennedy" is actually a common name in Massachusetts.
Sure, he may get a few votes based on the name, but it won't affect the outcome of the race.
What may affect it is his campaign as a Tea Party member and siphoning votes from Brown.
In a week, we'll know.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Frank Ammendolea , January 12, 2010
For that comment alone - "It's the people's seat" - Scott Brown is one of my new political heroes, win or lose.
I love how David Gergen - a valueless political operative so in love with all things inside the Beltway - just throws around the term "Teddy Kennedy's seat" as if it's a given. When did the Consitution mandate that one of Massachusetts's Senate seats always be held by a Kennedy or by a liberal Democrat? At one time, MA was considered a Republican state. Hopefully Scott Brown can make it a little bit more purple after next week.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
written by Daniel Peterson , January 12, 2010
Frank, there is an article up on FoxNews.com that referred to it as the "kennedy seat" so it's not just the liberals.
JT in BOTW-T @ WSJ has this to say:
"While it's true that Democrats have a big edge in voter enrollment, that tells only part of the story. As of October 2008, when the Massachusetts secretary of state's Web site was last updated, just under 37% of Bay State voters were registered Democrats, versus less than 12% for Republicans. But nearly 51% were "unenrolled"--i.e., independent--and if the November 2009 elections showed anything, it is that independent voters have moved sharply away from the Democratic Party of Barack Obama."
What's funny is how the liberals are curious to know Sarah Palin's thoughts!!!!
"Where is Sarah Palin?" they ask. She's MIA in this campaign!
"Early Monday afternoon, Sevugan sent out an email to reporters featuring a link to a story on the lefty website TPM. The headline: "Is Sarah Palin Avoiding Mass Senate Race?" The story quoted a Democratic strategist saying that "it's interesting" that Palin is "nowhere to be found in this race." TPM conceded that GOP sources say there has been "no talk" about Palin visiting Massachusetts. But that didn't stop Sevugan, who is quoted declaring that Palin's supporters "are anxious for her to weigh in." At the top of his email to journalists, Sevugan wrote, "Come on, Sarah, why are you being so shy?"
A couple of hours later, Sevugan was emailing again, with a message entitled, "Has the Pit Bull lost her bark?" What followed was a statement from Sevugan on "the surprising silence from Sarah Palin on Republican Scott Brown's bid for the U.S. Senate." Sevugan demanded to know: "Where on earth is Sarah Palin herself? Clearly her supporters are anxious for her to weigh in."
Not long after that, Sevugan sent out another email to reporters, this one with a link to a post by TPM alumnus Greg Sargent, who now writes a lefty blog for the Washington Post. Sargent's post featured Sevugan's question with the headline, "Dems on Palin: 'Has the Pit Bull Lost Her Bark?'"
Finally, when a Brown spokesman, while not specifically mentioning Palin, said that "Scott is not looking for a lot of outside help" and that the race would not be determined by outsiders, Sevugan sent out yet another email to reporters, this one headlined "Weaselly." "
These libs are hard up on Palin's opinion on things. Strange. It never crossed my mind to even ask what her opinion is. I'm more concerned with my opinion.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Frank Ammendolea , January 13, 2010
They are calling out for Palin because they know she would be political poison for Brown in MA.
I am a big Palin fan and as of now, she would be my first choice in 2012, but I also know that she doesn't play everywhere - especially MA. The liberal media is likely trying to draw Palin's fire so they can tie Brown to her and alienate discerning Dems and moderate independents, or force him to distance himself from her, thus depressing his base right before the election.
Contrary to liberal belief, Palin is no dope and is not likely to take the bait. She will stay away from this race.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Daniel Peterson , January 13, 2010
I know the deal. The Left is a joke.
I hear the ads by Coakley are simply unintelligent.
It's 2010 and liberals stilll use the following equation for votes.
Scott Brown + Republican = George "the devil' Bush
Scott Brown should do an add like this:
Scott Brown + Republican = Abraham Lincoln
The Party of Abraham Lincoln whom many consider to be our greatest president.
Scott Brown + Republican = Teddy Roosevelt
The Bull Moose helped build America's international stature and helped create and preserve Green spaces throughout the country.
Scott Brown + Republican = Martin Luther King
Dr King, a registered Republican, spearheaded the passing of civil rights legislation that was first proposed by Republicans in the early 20th Century.
Scott Brown + Republican = Ronald Reagan
The Gipper brought a new sense of pride to Americans following years of too much government control on our lives. The spirit of individual liberty was being stifled and today we are heading down the same path if we do not make a change.
Scott Brown will be the type of leader for this State that we can all be proud of. On January 19, vote for Scott Brown.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
written by Jay Golub , January 13, 2010
"Contrary to liberal belief, Palin is no dope and is not likely to take the bait. She will stay away from this race."
More accurately, the Brown Campaign "is no dope." they are the ones, I'm sure, keeping Palin away from this race. She would be there is two seconds if allowed.
Yet, even-though I think she's poison for the GOP at large, any national Republican figure would hurt Mr. Brown's chances to win - as Mass., like most northeastern States, are solid Blue territory.
I think this is a good try by the Dem's to egg her into appearing or commenting on Brown's behalf so they can use it in the campaign, but fortunately, cooler heads have prevailed all around...
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -1
written by Raquel Okyay , January 13, 2010
That's what the media will have you believe, but I don't agree that Palin is poison.
Are you people nuts? People looovveee her across the county, despite the anti-Palin hysteria. In fact, people feel the need to stick up for her, because of the obvious bias. She's a regular person and doesn't fit the Washington belt way model. That's precisely why people love her so much.
Check out her book sales, in red and blue states. She's not as polarizing as some will have us believe.
Personally, I like her, whether I would vote for her for President is something else. I liked Mitt Romney last time, and I like him now.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
written by Quickjustice , January 13, 2010
I like Palin. She is extremely popular with Republican women. She's charismatic, and will remain a GOP celebrity for the foreseeable future.
That doesn't mean I think she's ready to be President. On that issue, time will tell.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by swmirsky , January 13, 2010
Sarah Palin isn't growing in stature or seasoning. Her increased exposure, following her enlistment by Fox News, is likely to be her political death knell. She just seems too unsure of herself and too faux perky to connect well, beyond her base of loyalists. She gave a great speech at the GOP convention and apparently can really project in similar forums but she doesn't convince behind a desk or in a chair with the camera homing in and picking up her often frozen smile (shades of Pelosi) and her just-folks, somewhat nasal tone of voice. She still seems to be delivering pre-packaged sound bites in lieu of extended and thoughtful musings on the subjects she is being asked to expound upon.
The GOP has to look elsewhere because she won't stand a chance in a head to head with Obama in 2012 -- not unless she radically improves from here and there's little reason to expect that since she has made no real progress so far. By the way, I think her resigning the Alaska governorship was the worst thing she could have done. She had a real executive position, however small the Alaska state budget, and instead of managing the state she was elected to run, she walked away as if the job was too big for her. Does anyone think that wouldn't be a factor in American voters' calculus when the time comes to elect a president in 2012?
On the matter of Scott Brown, who this thread was initiated to address, I am impressed. His response to David Gergen hit just the right tone and, while it's true that it's not illegitimate to speak of "Kennedy's seat", in the context of the public debate in which Brown was participating, THAT description sounded incredibly biased. Brown handed it quite well, offering a quip that must be a classic. If he can pull this off, the message to the Washington Democrats has to be loud and clear -- though there's little chance they'll listen anyway, having come so far and being so firmly committed to the idea of federalizing health care.
SWM
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
Write comment
You must be logged in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
