Massachusetts

Sponsored by Americans for a Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow

Moderator: Moderator

Post Reply
User avatar
Electrolyte
Sole Guardian of Truth and Sanity
Posts: 8860
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 10:09 pm

Massachusetts

Post by Electrolyte » Thu Nov 08, 2012 12:32 am

Didn't Romney spend half of the debates crowing about his record in Massachusetts?

So why did he get his ass kicked there; 61% to 38%

Isn't that like your wife voting for your opponent?

User avatar
Dagny
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 446
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 6:18 pm

Re: Massachusetts

Post by Dagny » Thu Nov 08, 2012 12:34 am

It's not a big deal Electrolyte. They'd vote for Satan is he was the Democrat on the ticket. Many just do the straight party.
Free Leonard!

User avatar
Electrolyte
Sole Guardian of Truth and Sanity
Posts: 8860
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 10:09 pm

Re: Massachusetts

Post by Electrolyte » Thu Nov 08, 2012 1:26 am

But Romney was the Bipartisan Saint.

User avatar
Dagny
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 446
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 6:18 pm

Re: Massachusetts

Post by Dagny » Thu Nov 08, 2012 1:44 am

Look. They even adored Scott Brown personally and thought he was a great senator who voted on the issues but they could not vote him in. Instead they choose Warren who lied that she was Native American to get a job at Havard (and that made me really mad). Massachusettians are trained from birth using electric shock treatment to only vote for the Democrats for Prez. Fish Swim. Birds Fly. and Mass votes for Democrats for Prez. It's a rule of nature.
Free Leonard!

User avatar
Electrolyte
Sole Guardian of Truth and Sanity
Posts: 8860
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 10:09 pm

Re: Massachusetts

Post by Electrolyte » Thu Nov 08, 2012 2:46 am

No president has lost his home state so badly since the 1850s. Romney also lost the state he was born in and two states where he owns homes (ok he probably owns homes in all of them).

He's the Grizzly Man. He's rejected by his own people so he tries to pretend to be part of something else, but they don't want him either.

User avatar
i_have_shiny_shoes
playing outside
Posts: 6162
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 11:36 am

Re: Massachusetts

Post by i_have_shiny_shoes » Thu Nov 08, 2012 7:13 am

Dagny wrote:Look. They even adored Scott Brown personally and thought he was a great senator who voted on the issues but they could not vote him in. Instead they choose Warren who lied that she was Native American to get a job at Havard (and that made me really mad). Massachusettians are trained from birth using electric shock treatment to only vote for the Democrats for Prez. Fish Swim. Birds Fly. and Mass votes for Democrats for Prez. It's a rule of nature.


Dagny, my understanding (perhaps incorrectly) of the Warren issue is that she didn't explicitly lie, but that they can't find sufficient evidence either way in her line of ancestors to confirm or refute the claim regarding her great-great-great grandmother, whose name is listed on an electronic transcript of a marriage application as Cherokee, but for which they can't find the actual record.
we're discussing it, so it's not secret.

PTravel
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 340
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 5:13 pm

Re: Massachusetts

Post by PTravel » Thu Nov 08, 2012 7:58 am

Even Mondale won Minnesota

tph24601
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 6640
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 9:32 pm

Re: Massachusetts

Post by tph24601 » Thu Nov 08, 2012 11:17 am

it's not that Romney lost Mass., it's by how much

Scott Brown only lost by 3-4%, so you can say that's less about him than about the heavy Democrats' advantage in the state

a >20% loss is a big rebuke to a supposedly popular former governor

User avatar
Dagny
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 446
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 6:18 pm

Re: Massachusetts

Post by Dagny » Thu Nov 08, 2012 1:51 pm

i_have_shiny_shoes wrote:Dagny, my understanding (perhaps incorrectly) of the Warren issue is that she didn't explicitly lie, but that they can't find sufficient evidence either way in her line of ancestors to confirm or refute the claim regarding her great-great-great grandmother, whose name is listed on an electronic transcript of a marriage application as Cherokee, but for which they can't find the actual record.


Even if her great-great-great grandmother was 100% Cheerokee that would make her a whopping 6% Native American. We are all probably 2, 3, 4 5, 6% Native America especially those whose families have been here since the Mayflower (very common in Mass since people never move). However, not all of us are taking advantage of that special retribution that we have put in place for very good reason to assist Native Americans. It is SHAMEFUL that she took a minority place when there are people who actually have grown up with the challenges that are unfortunately common with NA and largely the governments fault (which is why we have this benefit). Her great grandfather on the side that supposedly was NA was described in a news article as a white man. The article from the time stated that her white great grandfather killed an Indian who was drunk and that he was a really good shot.

She was working the system and IF she was going to claim the benefit she should have had solid proof though 6% is ridiculous. It was not intended as a perk for white chicks who may have has an ancester 200 or 300 years ago.

And the other stuff. Mass is the most Democratic of all state. They sometimes like moderate Repubs like Romney to straighten out the state fiscally (which he did) but they almost always, always vote Democrat for Prez. There must be another dead horse to beat.
Free Leonard!

User avatar
AnnieOakley
stewed
Posts: 5560
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 9:54 pm

Re: Massachusetts

Post by AnnieOakley » Thu Nov 08, 2012 1:55 pm

You'll find one.
You meet the same folks on the way up as you do on the way down.

User avatar
birdlite
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 10603
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 1:00 am

Re: Massachusetts

Post by birdlite » Thu Nov 08, 2012 2:37 pm

Dagny wrote:Look. They even adored Scott Brown personally and thought he was a great senator who voted on the issues but they could not vote him in...It's a rule of nature.


Except that they did vote him in last time. He was not helped by his old masters, the Tea Party.

User avatar
Dagny
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 446
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 6:18 pm

Re: Massachusetts

Post by Dagny » Thu Nov 08, 2012 2:42 pm

birdlite wrote:
Dagny wrote:Look. They even adored Scott Brown personally and thought he was a great senator who voted on the issues but they could not vote him in...It's a rule of nature.


Except that they did vote him in last time. He was not helped by his old masters, the Tea Party.



Martha Coakley screwed up and Scott Brown had a magic moment with "the people's seat." For this election the machine on its game. Brown's election was a bit of a fluke. Who has the Tea Party as his master? Browns was very moderate pro choice Repub. Forget it. I only listen to local Mass politics every day. Where are you typing from Arizona? You're all not done with your celebration and there must be about 500 more ways to say that Romney did not win being the evil overlord of all conservatives, renowned women hater, business destroyer and bain of the elderly who was ready to withhold grandma's prescriptions.

Warren won because she actually campaigned unlike Coakley who took the whole thing for granted (and was dreadful). Elizabaeth Warren actually knew how to spell the name of the state she was running for. Voters like those little touches. And the element of surprise was gone. Noone thought a Rep could win Ted Kennedy's seat. It was unthinkable.

Unless you were stupid, you would have known that Obama would win Mass.
Free Leonard!

tph24601
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 6640
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 9:32 pm

Re: Massachusetts

Post by tph24601 » Thu Nov 08, 2012 3:27 pm

giving they both faced the same strong Democrats state-wide organisation and sentiment, what's the other logical reasons to explain why Brown lost by <5% and Romney lost by >20%?

If by his own account (and others) Romney was a competent governor who worked across the aisle. Are they Mass voters pissed off because the 2012 Romney is completely different than the 2005 Romney they used to know?

User avatar
joeyramone
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 18460
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 9:43 pm

Re: Massachusetts

Post by joeyramone » Thu Nov 08, 2012 3:30 pm

Dagny forgets that Borwn was a champion of the teabaggers, until of course he "betrayed" them. they had zero enthusiasm for his this time around.
"Your fairy tale would sound better if two elves came out and did the Safety Dance at the end." Logg to Zaffer

User avatar
birdlite
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 10603
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 1:00 am

Re: Massachusetts

Post by birdlite » Thu Nov 08, 2012 3:41 pm

Dagny wrote:
birdlite wrote:
Dagny wrote:Look. They even adored Scott Brown personally and thought he was a great senator who voted on the issues but they could not vote him in...It's a rule of nature.


Except that they did vote him in last time. He was not helped by his old masters, the Tea Party.


Martha Coakley screwed up and Scott Brown had a magic moment with "the people's seat." For this election the machine on its game. Brown's election was a bit of a fluke. Who has the Tea Party as his master? Browns was very moderate pro choice Repub.

I am guessing that you were living in your Bomb Shelter after Brown was elected. The Tea Party was all over their hero Brown after the election. Go back and read. That Brown turned moderate made his old Masters unhappy, and they claimed that Brown would be a target in the next election. Once they saw the Warren polls, they came late to the party and half-assed endorsed Brown.

You're all not done with your celebration and there must be about 500 more ways to say that Romney did not win being the evil overlord of all conservatives, renowned women hater, business destroyer and bain of the elderly who was ready to withhold grandma's prescriptions.

What the fuck prescriptions are you on? Never mind. Go back to your gold hoard in your bomb shelter. Don't you know? They are coming after you.

As I have stated, the evil in the Romney/Ryan campaign was the GOP, not Romney. Had Governor Romney run, he might have won. But the tighty-righty-whitey GOP (the party of Bill O'Reilly) did their best to change the man, and the man was willing to whore himself out to the far right (until the last month or so). Go back and read why the Salt Lake City Tribune endorsed Obama. The man who ran was not Governor Romney, nor the man who used bailout money to help the Salt Lake City Olympics.

Oh, and that evil Bain Overlord stuff? Business destroyer? Thank Gingrich and Santorum for the screenplay and dollars to promote that image.
And woman hater? Thank Akin, Mourdock, and Walsh for bringing that tune to the GOP.

By the way, I did not vote for Obama. I did, however, vote against the national GOP.

tph24601
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 6640
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 9:32 pm

Re: Massachusetts

Post by tph24601 » Thu Nov 08, 2012 3:46 pm

Had Governor Romney run, he might have won.

maybe the general election, but in the GOP primaries he would be gone even before Pawlenty and Huntsman

User avatar
Dagny
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 446
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 6:18 pm

Re: Massachusetts

Post by Dagny » Thu Nov 08, 2012 3:54 pm

Scott Brown was not a Tea Party guy. His voting record speaks for itself. He had wide ranging support. That is part of the new crap scare tactics. Don't bother lamenting that moderate prochoice Republicans don't run because when they do look what happens. Zero chance of a bipartisian future when a guy like Brown is villified.
Free Leonard!

User avatar
Dagny
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 446
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 6:18 pm

Re: Massachusetts

Post by Dagny » Thu Nov 08, 2012 3:59 pm

joeyramone wrote:Dagny forgets that Borwn was a champion of the teabaggers, until of course he "betrayed" them. they had zero enthusiasm for his this time around.

He was always who he was. He just did not pull a Romney and pretend to be something different. The teabaggers would have latched on to anyone who was not a Democrat.
Free Leonard!

User avatar
birdlite
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 10603
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 1:00 am

Re: Massachusetts

Post by birdlite » Thu Nov 08, 2012 4:00 pm

Dagny wrote:Scott Brown was not a Tea Party guy. His voting record speaks for itself. He had wide ranging support.


You really do have a poor memory.
http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opi ... al-victory

tph24601
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 6640
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 9:32 pm

Re: Massachusetts

Post by tph24601 » Thu Nov 08, 2012 4:02 pm

Dagny wrote: Zero chance of a bipartisian future when a guy like Brown is villified.

and you supported the democrat senate candidate in Indiana after the teabaggers there tossed out Dick Lugar in the GOP primary for being too moderate and put up a candidate who publicly said he will never compromise with the Democrats, right?

User avatar
Dagny
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 446
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 6:18 pm

Re: Massachusetts

Post by Dagny » Thu Nov 08, 2012 4:04 pm

birdlite wrote:[What the fuck prescriptions are you on? Never mind. Go back to your gold hoard in your bomb shelter. Don't you know? They are coming after you.

As I have stated, the evil in the Romney/Ryan campaign was the GOP, not Romney. Had Governor Romney run, he might have won. But the tighty-righty-whitey GOP (the party of Bill O'Reilly) did their best to change the man, and the man was willing to whore himself out to the far right (until the last month or so). Go back and read why the Salt Lake City Tribune endorsed Obama. The man who ran was not Governor Romney, nor the man who used bailout money to help the Salt Lake City Olympics.

Oh, and that evil Bain Overlord stuff? Business destroyer? Thank Gingrich and Santorum for the screenplay and dollars to promote that image.
And woman hater? Thank Akin, Mourdock, and Walsh for bringing that tune to the GOP.

By the way, I did not vote for Obama. I did, however, vote against the national GOP.


Whatever. I was not talking about , you, birdlite, but the board who will need to admire the success from every angle without perspective. And I don't recall insulting you personally but you are right I am wasting my time. I'm sure lossing Massachusetts is EXTREMELY significant. Who would have ever predicted it.
Free Leonard!

User avatar
Dagny
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 446
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 6:18 pm

Re: Massachusetts

Post by Dagny » Thu Nov 08, 2012 4:06 pm

tph24601 wrote:
Dagny wrote: Zero chance of a bipartisian future when a guy like Brown is villified.

and you supported the democrat senate candidate in Indiana after the teabaggers there tossed out Dick Lugar in the GOP primary for being too moderate and put up a candidate who publicly said he will never compromise with the Democrats, right?



Oh give it up. I'm not a Republican and I don't vote for just one party all the time.
Free Leonard!

User avatar
Dagny
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 446
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 6:18 pm

Re: Massachusetts

Post by Dagny » Thu Nov 08, 2012 4:24 pm

birdlite wrote:
Dagny wrote:Scott Brown was not a Tea Party guy. His voting record speaks for itself. He had wide ranging support.


You really do have a poor memory.
http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opi ... al-victory


You MUST be joking. If the Communist Party declared Obama's victory a great sucess for communism that would be significant too? Some guy in Washington State jumps on his coattails and Brown's a Teabag guy? Well, I listen to real people who actually live in Massachusetts and whatever complaint they might have had against him I've never heard anyone ever claim that he was a Tea Party stooge or affliated in any way with that Party and I tune into some very liberal shows. The liberals LIKE him even the ones that refer to themselves as socialists. I off to the gym for the winter for ski training.
Free Leonard!

User avatar
AnnieOakley
stewed
Posts: 5560
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 9:54 pm

Re: Massachusetts

Post by AnnieOakley » Thu Nov 08, 2012 4:25 pm

Dagny wrote:Oh give it up. I'm not a Republican and I don't vote for just one party all the time.


Image
You meet the same folks on the way up as you do on the way down.

User avatar
birdlite
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 10603
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 1:00 am

Re: Massachusetts

Post by birdlite » Thu Nov 08, 2012 4:29 pm

Dagny wrote:
birdlite wrote:
Dagny wrote:Scott Brown was not a Tea Party guy. His voting record speaks for itself. He had wide ranging support.


You really do have a poor memory.
http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opi ... al-victory


You MUST be joking. If the Communist Party declared Obama's victory a great sucess for communism that would be significant too? Some guy in Washington State jumps on his coattails and Brown's a Teabag guy? Well, I listen to real people who actually live in Massachusetts and whatever complaint they might have had against him I've never heard anyone ever claim that he was a Tea Party stooge or affliated in any way with that Party and I tune into some very liberal shows. The liberals LIKE him even the ones that refer to themselves as socialists. I off to the gym for the winter for ski training.


good lord. you can't separate the election from what he did in office.

Make sure you wear a helmet when skiing

User avatar
AnnieOakley
stewed
Posts: 5560
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 9:54 pm

Re: Massachusetts

Post by AnnieOakley » Thu Nov 08, 2012 4:30 pm

Then again, is this a brain we want to protect?
You meet the same folks on the way up as you do on the way down.

tph24601
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 6640
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 9:32 pm

Re: Massachusetts

Post by tph24601 » Thu Nov 08, 2012 4:36 pm

Dagny wrote:
tph24601 wrote:
Dagny wrote: Zero chance of a bipartisian future when a guy like Brown is villified.

and you supported the democrat senate candidate in Indiana after the teabaggers there tossed out Dick Lugar in the GOP primary for being too moderate and put up a candidate who publicly said he will never compromise with the Democrats, right?


Oh give it up. I'm not a Republican and I don't vote for just one party all the time.

i never said you are a republican

i merely asked you (seeing how much you are into bipartisanship) whether you support Connolly over Mourdoch, giving the fact that Mourdoch unseated the moderate Lugar and specifically said he will never compromise with the democrats

no need to get your panties all in a bunch

User avatar
AnnieOakley
stewed
Posts: 5560
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 9:54 pm

Re: Massachusetts

Post by AnnieOakley » Thu Nov 08, 2012 4:48 pm

They came that way from Walmart.
You meet the same folks on the way up as you do on the way down.

User avatar
Dagny
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 446
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 6:18 pm

Re: Massachusetts

Post by Dagny » Thu Nov 08, 2012 4:48 pm

tph24601 wrote:
i merely asked you (seeing how much you are into bipartisanship) whether you support Connolly over Mourdoch, giving the fact that Mourdoch unseated the moderate Lugar and specifically said he will never compromise with the democrats

no need to get your panties all in a bunch


I don't support people who will not compromise. I'm a girl so it's my perogative to bunch my panties.

We are headed towards a more and more divided country. Moderate Republicans continue to be voted out where there is liberal support to punish the GOP (and apparently because a Teabagger might like them). The Democrats replacing them are lock step. Same problem on the other side. There should be know surprise with the deadlock. Off to gym.
Free Leonard!

tph24601
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 6640
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 9:32 pm

Re: Massachusetts

Post by tph24601 » Thu Nov 08, 2012 4:53 pm

Dagny wrote:We are headed towards a more and more divided country. Moderate Republicans continue to be voted out where there is liberal support to punish the GOP (and apparently because a Teabagger might like them).

oh I see, it's the liberals' fault that moderate republicans are losing

User avatar
AnnieOakley
stewed
Posts: 5560
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 9:54 pm

Re: Massachusetts

Post by AnnieOakley » Thu Nov 08, 2012 4:58 pm

Yas, it's true. I was there, personally twisting Todd Akin's arm to make him say those silly things.
Don't jive us about going to the gym, Dags. You're going to get some more crack.
You meet the same folks on the way up as you do on the way down.

User avatar
birdlite
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 10603
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 1:00 am

Re: Massachusetts

Post by birdlite » Thu Nov 08, 2012 5:04 pm

Dagny wrote:We are headed towards a more and more divided country. Moderate Republicans continue to be voted out where there is liberal support to punish the GOP (and apparently because a Teabagger might like them). The Democrats replacing them are lock step. Same problem on the other side. There should be know surprise with the deadlock.


Oh come on, the GOP does not support its own moderates, and that goes back a long way. A moderate Dem will be supported by fringe Dems. A moderate Republican is not supported by his/her party. It happens all the time and, as I have said time after time after time, is why Obama is president. If the GOP had supported its moderate senator, Obama would have won that Illinois election because moderates on both sides of the fence liked the sitting GOP senator.

It happened with Brown.

It just happened in my district. A moderate GOP (who would have won) was not supported by her party, and the GOP, with strong Tea Party money, backed a more severe candidate. Guess who won? The Democrat.

User avatar
AnnieOakley
stewed
Posts: 5560
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 9:54 pm

Re: Massachusetts

Post by AnnieOakley » Thu Nov 08, 2012 5:08 pm

But, hey--don't go changin'.
:lol:
You meet the same folks on the way up as you do on the way down.

User avatar
Electrolyte
Sole Guardian of Truth and Sanity
Posts: 8860
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 10:09 pm

Re: Massachusetts

Post by Electrolyte » Thu Nov 08, 2012 7:21 pm

tph24601 wrote:a >20% loss is a big rebuke to a supposedly popular former governor

Zackly!

birdlite wrote:Oh, and that evil Bain Overlord stuff? Business destroyer? Thank Gingrich and Santorum for the screenplay and dollars to promote that image.
And woman hater? Thank Akin, Mourdock, and Walsh for bringing that tune to the GOP.

Yes. And it's not just that they came up with the idea. Advertising is an asset that has large fixed costs and then depreciates very slowly. Once someone else has invested in these ideas there is a lasting foundation to build upon. It makes more sense to complete the sales pitch that someone else has started than to start with a new one from scratch.

User avatar
Dagny
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 446
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 6:18 pm

Re: Massachusetts

Post by Dagny » Thu Nov 08, 2012 9:12 pm

Birdlite,

The senate race in Mass cost $46 million dollars. The race only cost 2.3 million in 2010. (The Tea Party did give 300,000 in 2010.) There was plenty of money. Brown did everything humanly possible to distance himself from the Tea Party. He had a lot of support. You may even see him as governor some day.
Free Leonard!

User avatar
joeyramone
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 18460
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 9:43 pm

Re: Massachusetts

Post by joeyramone » Thu Nov 08, 2012 9:22 pm

Dagny wrote:
joeyramone wrote:Dagny forgets that Borwn was a champion of the teabaggers, until of course he "betrayed" them. they had zero enthusiasm for his this time around.

He was always who he was. He just did not pull a Romney and pretend to be something different. The teabaggers would have latched on to anyone who was not a Democrat.



Nothing I said is wrong. the teabaggers loved him, then they didn't.
"Your fairy tale would sound better if two elves came out and did the Safety Dance at the end." Logg to Zaffer

User avatar
birdlite
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 10603
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 1:00 am

Re: Massachusetts

Post by birdlite » Thu Nov 08, 2012 9:51 pm

Dagny wrote:Birdlite,

The senate race in Mass cost $46 million dollars. The race only cost 2.3 million in 2010. (The Tea Party did give 300,000 in 2010.) There was plenty of money. Brown did everything humanly possible to distance himself from the Tea Party. He had a lot of support. You may even see him as governor some day.


yeah, yeah

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massac ... story.html
When Brown staged his surprise win in the 2010 special election for the seat left vacant by the death of longtime U.S. Sen. Edward Kennedy, some of his earliest and most ardent backers were tea party activists.

Two years later not all tea party supporters are still enamored of Brown, but say they’re backing him as he seeks his first full six-year term.

It’s hard to remember just how big an upset Brown’s election was — not just for Brown, but for the tea party movement itself.

As it became clear that Democratic candidate Martha Coakley wasn’t cruising to an easy win, tea party activists jumped at what initially seemed like the longest of political longshots — electing a little-known Republican to Kennedy’s longtime Senate seat in liberal Massachusetts.

The Tea Party Express, one of the tea party movement’s main political action committees, began pouring money into Brown’s campaign, attracting the attention of other activists — some of whom trekked to Massachusetts from other states to lend support.

The Tea Party Express would end up spending nearly $348,000 in independent expenditures to help Brown, according to the Federal Election Commission. The money went for ads, Internet newsletters and emails.

‘‘It was an important race for the tea party movement, because it turned the movement from a protest movement to a political movement,’’ said Sal Russo, a veteran GOP political strategist and founder of the California-based Tea Party Express.

‘‘By winning in Massachusetts, it proved that you could win anywhere,’’ he added.

Brown’s win helped strengthen the movement, which went on to help elect dozens of lawmakers to Congress in the midterm elections, handing control of the U.S. House to Republicans.


don't get me wrong. I think Brown was a great centrist and good guy and would probably make a good governor. I just think you are trying to erase a past that is still going to be there no matter what you'd like to believe .

As for the $348,000 just being a small part of the whole 2010 expense -- that was only Tea Party money, not Tea Party member money which added considerably to Brown's coffers.

User avatar
Dagny
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 446
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 6:18 pm

Re: Massachusetts

Post by Dagny » Fri Nov 09, 2012 1:49 am

Alright, Birdlite. I think it would be fair to say that the Tea Party supported him rather than he was a Tea Party Supporter.
"Moths, and all sorts of ugly creatures hover about a lighted candle. Can the candle help it?" He told them from the beginning that he was going to be independent and centrist. Perhaps, they wanted to believe that he was something else. He distanced himself immediately refusing to go to the tax rally and Palin event. You called them his overlord initially and he was never controlled by them. You must know how toxic it is to box him with the Teabaggers. They were in their early stage of forming when he came to office but he knew enough to go his own way. You are greatly overestimating the teabagger influence in Mass if you are chalking up his defeat to his "teabagger overlords." New England is purging itself of it's Rockfeller Repubs ie. Lincoln Almond, the only one to stand up to Bush regarding the war was ousted. If moderate and liberal areas vote one party then only conservatives from conservative areas willl remain and it will be no wonder at all that bipartisianship is impossible. Elizabeth Warren will not be a bipartisian but a guy like Brown really tried.
Free Leonard!

Lost Soul
Stew Ingredient
Posts: 54868
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2005 2:02 am

Re: Massachusetts

Post by Lost Soul » Fri Nov 09, 2012 2:12 am

Dagny wrote:
tph24601 wrote:
Dagny wrote: Zero chance of a bipartisian future when a guy like Brown is villified.

and you supported the democrat senate candidate in Indiana after the teabaggers there tossed out Dick Lugar in the GOP primary for being too moderate and put up a candidate who publicly said he will never compromise with the Democrats, right?



Oh give it up. I'm not a Republican and I don't vote for just one party all the time.

I've been here 10 years and the leftoids still have no concept that there is a third party that's fiscally conservative and socially liberal.
IMPRISON BUSH!

INDICT HILLARY!

"Lost Soul is largely correct"- VinnyD

Post Reply