The crowing and hooting on the Right will be UNBEARABLE!

[scarletwoman]

Their smug schadenfreude will be INSUFFERABLE!

We CAN'T let a frikkin' Repug take Ted Kennedy's Senate seat -- we just CAN'T!!!!

Look, I'm part of the "Angry Left"(tm). I'm one of those constantly "whining" progressives who HATES the DLC, HATES the HRC bill, HATES the Blue Dogs and the New Dems, and curses their corporatist bought out souls to the depth of my being.

I'm one those horrid "purists" who wants to totally remake the Democratic party, or maybe even break off and form a new party, if the Dems don't start working for the People instead of Wall Street and Big Business. Etc., etc., and all that.

BUT, this Massachusetts special Senate election is a line I will not cross. I don't care HOW awful Coakley may (or may NOT!) be. She's the Dem and that's the bottom line. The most horrible, terrible, nasty, unthinkable awfulness here would be giving the Right a victory in this particular contest.

Not here, not now. There are plenty of battles ahead in which to consider the correct strategy for pressuring the Dems -- but THIS ELECTION ISN'T IT!

Don't give our enemies this huge cause for raucous rejoicing. It's just too awful to contemplate. Any point that could possibly be made will be totally lost in the deafening noise of the scalp-dancing celebrations on the Right. NO WAY will it be worth it!

I don't live in Massachusetts, there's not much I can do about how they vote. But as one of the oft-derided lefties here, I want to draw this line in the sand and declare that it's utter folly to wish for Oakley's defeat on Tuesday.

Peace out,
sw

[eridani]

1. I'm with you on that

So primary her in two years already!

[scarletwoman]

4. Excellent point! Thank you! nt

[Blaukraut]

2. Thank you, thank you, thank you!

I'm in Mass. and it makes me ill to think that Porno Brown could take Teddy's seat. (and it IS still technically Teddy's seat because he was elected in '06 for a 6 year term. He just passed away before he could fulfill it).
I'm also with you on the HCR. It's a piss poor, watered down crap bill, although I'm on the fence as to whether it will be better than the status quo or ultimately worse, but that's another discussion.
A Brown win would be much farther-reaching than just the demise of HCR, and none of the consequences are in any way beneficial to Dems, IMO.

[scarletwoman]

7. You're very welcome. I've been reading some of arguments about letting Oakley lose, and some

of them seemed even somewhat reasonable. But then I started thinking about what the real result would be -- an absolutely giddy Right, rejoicing loud and long, and I totally sobered up.

Bad, bad, very bad idea to let this election go to Brown.

[Jackpine Radical]

3. Indeed. I'm with you.

Our most effective battlegrounds are the primaries.

The symbolic value of this one is too great. For one thing, a loss here would be spun as due to a rightward shift in the electorate rather due to than anger on the left.

My view of the proper strategy in the face of the New Dem DLC Neoliberal bullshit is to always vote for the most leftward-positioned candidate. But always vote. Vote green in protest if you have to, but never stay home and never vote for a conservative. Let it always be seen that there are voters on the left who cannot be taken for granted.

[scarletwoman]

11. "The symbolic value of this one is too great." Exactly! And ONLY the Right would benefit.

Not us, not us at all.

I'm completely with you on the "always vote" strategy also.

I'm glad you're with me, because I'm with you, too. :D

:hi:

[Solly Mack]

5. It would be both an actual victory and a symbolic victory if Brown won

and I don't want Brown to win....and people shouldn't discount the damage a symbolic victory can cause in this case.

K&R

[scarletwoman]

13. That's the thing -- I think the SYMBOLIC victory would be HUGELY damaging!

I started out reading the arguments about Coakley just as a mildly interested observer. But then I got to thinking about the symbolic import -- and as Jackpine so excellently spells out above, NONE of the symbolism would devolve to the benefit of the disgruntled left.

Thanks for the k&r!

sw

[Solly Mack]

19. It would be...there's always psychology at play in an election

sometimes negligible despite rhetoric saying otherwise (but always present), but in this case...oman, the psychological effect of a Brown victory...and more to the point...of what will be seen as a repudiation of all things "Kennedy" (liberal,civil rights, etc.)

This isn't the time to make a point.

[FSogol]

6. Au contraire! Even though you don't live in MA, you can still help. Here's how:

Can you help us call voters in Massachusetts to make sure they all get vote on Tuesday?

Please visit Http://my.barackobama.com/CoakleyN2N

[scarletwoman]

28. I know. I've seen the other posts about this.

It's way too late at night to make calls out East tonight. I won't promise anything, phone banking gives me the cold sweats, I'm much better at face-to-face.

[CTyankee]

66. I did lots for Ned Lamont. You needn't get cold sweats because what you will mostly

get are answering machines. That is what is so frustrating. Lots of people simply look to see who is calling and let it go to a message and avoiding the call. It's wonderful when you get someone on the other end, even if it is to argue with them!

Of course, if you had cell phone numbers, you'd probably get a lot more people taking your call...

[Usrename]

8. k&r

I didn't know there was anything bad about Coakley (other than her party affiliation :)).

[scarletwoman]

26. Well, I've seen a number of posts about Coakley's perceived and/or real negatives.

And I can understand why some people might feel too disgusted or demoralized to want to vote for her. But I came to the conclusion that it's ALL beside the point.

Now is not the time to hang back and let a Repug take this seat -- it's simply too SYMBOLICALLY important.

sw

[Usrename]

91. This is some kind of sinchronisity or something...

I just finished reading http://www.saskndp.com/history/mouseland.php3">the story of mouseland immediately before reading your reply.

Go figure.

Not that I disagree at all with what you have said. I think the symbolic wins and losses are the most important. Even though Lieberman's loss in the primary did nothing to change his status as a Senator, the loss was meaningful. So I agree with you on this particular notion.

[JeffR]

9. There's ample proof hereabouts as to just how totally you rock.

So this post was a little redundant. Nonetheless, it helps to demonstrate for anyone who needs the demonstration that you totally rock. I rest my case.

[scarletwoman]

17. *blush*

JeffR, I do declare! I'm just absolutely tickled to find you in my thread! :loveya:

I just want to do the right thing where I can. I'm so pleased you found my OP! :hug: :hug: :hug: :hug:

sw

[JeffR]

62. I was pleased to find it.

It's an oasis of reason in an increasingly unreasonable forum. It deserves all the recs, and many more besides.

[PM Martin]

10. kick/r

[laststeamtrain]

12. K & R - n/t.

[Truth2Tell]

14. Great post SW! K&R

:hi:

[scarletwoman]

29. Thanks!

:hi:

[HBravo]

15. Third parties are not the answer.

History has proven this. The need is to get through to the people we have elected and vote against them in the primaries it they do not get the message.

[scarletwoman]

31. It depends on the question.

;)

Of course, primaries are the best strategic opportunities, but I'm not about to categorically reject all other options.

[HBravo]

36. Understudied but

most of the public do not look at the big picture. They are to busy with 'American Idol' or "pic your TV program" to care. They think their person is doing a good job based on TV AD's. :)

[defendandprotect]

101. We need IRV voting . . . and Dems aren't going to give it to us . . .!!

If Independents are the majority in MA . . . what are

Joe Kennedy's chances?

Catholics support single payer, government run health care by wide majority --

they also support contraception being included ---

and ABORTION .... by 51% in that case.

[salguine]

84. I think it's been amply demonstrated that the *two* major parties sure as hell aren't the answer.

[defendandprotect]

102. Sadly true . . . but don't wander off alone . . .

we need to bring liberals/progressives together for discussions and a Plan B --

Some have suggested the DFA forum here to begin with --

Would you come if that can be done?

[boston bean]

16. I can't stand the direction of the Dems over the last year

I will go and vote for Coakley on Tuesday.

I just can't let that sick mofo brown be my Senator for 3 years or more.

Or worse, run for VP or President in 2. Yes that is what people (media) in MA are saying if he wins. He will automatically be seen as a front runner for 2012.

[defendandprotect]

104. Right . . . and I think you make the situation very clear . ..

it's what we're always stuck with -- voting for the "lesser of evils" --

We need to bring liberals/progressives together as a voting bloc and for

discussion re a Plan B --

Some have suggested the DFA forum here to begin with --

Would you come?

[EmeraldCityGrl]

18. If it's any consolation...

it may totally shake up the DLC. They haven't had a taste of FAIL in a while. Maybe they'll rethink abandoning the base. If they
don't, they're beyond help. They've become smug and arrogant and as horrible as it may be to have that poster boy win, we can say,
rethink your policies or be prepared to lose even bigger in Nov.

[scarletwoman]

20. See, I'm not buying that argument. I don't disagree with the idea in principle, but in practice,

in THIS election, the downside so FAR outweighs any possible good, I simply refuse to grant it in this case.

See Jackpine Radical's post above for a very well-put counter argument.

In my OP I am categorically rejecting the idea that this election will have any use in "shaking up the DLC".

[salguine]

92. No kidding. If past experience is any indicator, any time the Democratic Party gets handed

a "wake-up call" defeat, for some inexplicable reason they always see it as a sign to push harder to the right. Then, invariably, voters pick the actual Republican instead of the newly-minted pale imitation of one. It happens again and again, and the lesson just never seems to sink in. Then the newly elected Actual Republicans fuck everything up so badly that people re-elect a few Democrats, and the cycle begins anew. No wonder people stay home on election day.

[defendandprotect]

106. Yes . . . that has to be acknowledged . . .

the object of the DLC is to move the party to the right until it is powerless to

bring any meaningful progress to the "people's" government ---

As long as the only competititon that the Dem party has is the neo-fascist GOP then

they will continue to move the party to the right --



PS: We need to bring liberals/progressives together as a voting bloc nationally --

As a start some have suggested the DFA forum here to begin with --

Would you come?

[laughingliberal]

30. I hope Coakley wins

And I think just getting this close to losing this seat in a liberal state may wake them up. I have noticed a decided lack of liberal bashing coming out out of the angry dwarf the past week or so. I don't think that's a coincidence.

[Arkana]

35. She's not DLC and you're a fool to think that it would be a good thing

for Scott Brown to represent Massachusetts in ANY respect.

[EmeraldCityGrl]

48. Didn't say it would be a good thing

if she lost, I hope to god she wins. I'm wondering about the ramifications OF a loss.

I don't appreciate being called a fool. Says more about you than me.
if you can't have a discussion without resorting to insults you fail
to support your point of view.

[Arkana]

67. If you don't like being called a fool then don't say things like "HEY GUYS

THERE MIGHT BE A SILVER LINING"

There is NO silver lining. Scott Brown is a fascist in sheep's clothing and I guarantee you he will prove that ten times over if elected to the Senate.

[zogtheobvious]

73. Uuuuhhh relax

ECG's not advocating Brown. She's making the point that a loss here would drive the point home to the DLC that acting like losing the base isn't a bad idea... is a bad idea. Nobody wants to lose in Massachusetts; we're simply hoping that if we do, the DLC takes its bloody nose and learns its lesson.

[Leopolds Ghost]

65. The DLC's whole objective is to kill the left in this country-They'll use any outcome to pursue that

So the question is really do you want a Republican male model senator taking over from Ted Kennedy and will people percieve him as the standard bearer of liberal anger or conservative anger over HCR etc? I think we all know how that will be played out and the DLC will only have to follow popular perceptions of such an outcome in using it to further kill the "old" Democratic party. They are very much of the "controlled burn from above and encourage regrowth" mentality.

IOW, disaffected left and left independents aren't the only people contemplating "killing the Democratic party to save it." The DLC have a lock on that strategy and will use any "tactical gains" toward that end to reinforce their bargaining position. Each Dem loss with Dean not in charge of the DNC will be used to bolster the DLC.

That being said, I see no good outcome in MA, only a host of bad and less bad ones.

** Coakley wins an overwhelmingly, surprise win like Hillary in NH. DLC paints it as vindication for Rahm & co. HCR passes, Dems lose in Nov, and liberals who won in districts contested by Dean go down first.

** Coakley wins narrowly. DLC crows about the success of their strategy, purges the DNC of naysayers who said anything nice about Dean, drives Dean out of the party for poormouthing Coakley's and Obama's popularity, AND Republicans crow about putting Obama on his heels, Obama is chastened and becomes Bill Clinton ca. 1994. Republicans win in November and Obama becomes Bill Clinton ca. 1996, only worse because the country would be entirely in the hands of the DLC. DLC strikes grand bargain with Republicans to run the country on right wing principles, a la 1876.

All I do know is that option 3 (the male model wins outright) is even worse, being about the same as option 2 only with extra Republican crowing and popular story would become how America is a conservative country that is prone to brief lapses where they allow Dems to win.

[defendandprotect]

105. If you really understand the corporate-DLC, the object is to destroy the Dem Party . . .

no one could be as stupid as they were in running the party IF you wanted to win!!

Howard Dean wants to win --

Rahm Emmanuel/DLC want to move the party to the right until it is uselss as a tool for

activism or progress.



PS: We need to bring liberals/progressives together as a voting bloc -

As a start some have suggested the DFA forum here to begin with --

Would you come?

[EmeraldCityGrl]

123. I would support a DFA Forum.

But, I have a huge conflict. While I have been very troubled by many of Obama's policies in this first year, I still consider myself
one of his supporters. The people he chooses to surround himself with support the argument you make. There are those that
would say, that in itself should be evidence that Obama is working against our best interests, but I don't believe that. There are
many of us that have invested so much into this administration and feel such a sense of betrayal and conflict.

Had Obama pushed for the public option as he intimated to during his campaign, Coakley, her lackluster campaign aside, would
be easily winning this election.

Lastly, I haven't read anyone on here commenting about Obama's reference to "progressive" policies today at the tail end of his speech
when he was asking for supporters to go out and hit the streets. I thought it was a deliberate and significant remark.

[defendandprotect]

129. The idea is to get liberals/progressives together as a voting bloc ...

the overall problem we are having vs corporations is that they have leverage

and we don't -- despite the fact that the public gave Obama near a billion $$$.

I think we need to find out how large this voting bloc may be?

Remember that Obama has chosen those in his administration; they didn't just appear

out of nowhere.

Further, I am of the opinion that TPB select our leaders for us --

And likely that was the case with Obama -- it was quite a zooming rise -- while

many others we would have preferred to have run for president obviously were unable

to get thru the gatekeepers.

I think it's also wrong to take this personally . . . . seeing Obama as anything more

than a politician is, IMO, going to confuse you.

And re this --

There are many of us that have invested so much into this administration and feel such a sense of betrayal and conflict.

There are many here at DU and out there who have done the same -- over the last 20-30

years -- and more. I did for quite some long time -- but my BS meter seems to be set higher

than what the norm here is. And, let me assure you my son worked for and financially

supported Howard Dean's campaign. My son stopped voting after that!

I'm hoping that with the ease of "absentee/early voting" in NJ, he will come back to voting,

but I'm not sure. He's repeating that old adage: "Isanity is doing the same thing over

and again and expecting a different result."

For 40 years we've known about the buying of government and our elected officials -- and

for 40 years we've continued to vote for "the lesser of evils" expecting different results.

Not happening --

Now, I won't either dismiss the reality of Repug steals -- that's one of the things I fear

in Boston. The polls may be fixed to cover a GOP steal? But what we do know is that the

computers we are voting on are still with us and that the Democratic Party has done nothing

to get rid of them.

IMO, it's obvious that had the Dems moved to put MEDICARE FOR ALL in place, pretty much

NO Democrat and NO Repug would have been able to vote against it. And, it would have set up

the Democratic Party for the next 40 years!! And made Obama's presidency historical!

Public Option was the COMPROMISE ... and now even that is gone.

Re this . . . I don't know that anyone has been reporting on his speech here as yet --

Lastly, I haven't read anyone on here commenting about Obama's reference to "progressive" policies today at the tail end of his speech
when he was asking for supporters to go out and hit the streets. I thought it was a deliberate and significant remark.

However, hard to say what that use of "progressive" really meant --

Especially as we look back on everything he said during the campaign and what all of that

has turned out to actually mean?

In fact, Pelosi commented on that a few days ago, saying that ....

"Obama was for a lot of things during the campaign . . . "

Needless to say, suggesting aint' no longer so!

Let's hope we get past MA OK and Coakley wins --

:)

[Bluenorthwest]

21. If I lived in MA, it would be a breeze for me to vote Democratic

I'm sorry, but any Democrat who is not skilled at voting against the Republican when they are not wild about the Democrat has not been voting long. Martha, things I like, things I don't, but this Scott Brown character should not be in the United States Senate, and the choice is of course, one or the other at this point, and what a lovely bonus that it is a two year finish, not a full term. If she stinks up the chamber, the Primary is our best friend. Vote for Martha if you want, against the Republican if that works, or both if you wish! This guy is a bigoted, ignorant Palin in pants. There is no Democrat I would not vote for if he was the alternative.
We are Democrats. Most of us voted for Leiberman to be VP, for crying out loud. Sure, Al was the guy, but still, it was Joe. And we voted for him. I know little about Martha, but I'll take a wild leap here and say I bet she's better than Joe.
On the other hand, I'd be very clear to anyone who would listen that voting for her did not mean I liked the Senate 'reform' bill, or have anything to do with anything but that Seat. And the fact that her opponent is a flesh eating zombie simulacrum from the planet Bigotron. That is to say, he's a Republican of the most virulent strain. In order to pass on voting against that train wreck, Martha would have to be a Blue Dog bigot who personally hurt my puppy. Then I still might vote for her. He's that bad.
Plus, I hear she's not a homophobic puppy kicker at all.

[BrklynLiberal]

24. Very well said!!!

:applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause:

[boston bean]

25. I agree with most of what you say, but it's not really about Martha..

this is a referendum on healthcare. the ads are constant. scott brown has promised to be the 41st vote to stop it.

people are voting against healthcare reform. these are indies. they are flocking to brown and they voted obama in the general.

some of these indies are doing it from the left to just kill the bill, others are right wing nut baggers.

Indies outnumber both dems and repubs in MA.

[Bluenorthwest]

33. If you don't mind me saying, my entire post was 'it's not about

Martha'. It is about Scott Brown. That is what I offered up. As far as these alleged 'indies' go, if they can vote for Brown, they are Republicans, plain and simple. Scott Brown is a bigot. I tell you this, GLBT voters will be out in droves against Brown.
What do you think would be happening there now if this reform had a full blown public option and other more progressive elements? Better for us or worse? Why exactly are they against the bill? If these indies voted for Obama, but oppose any kind of reform, what the hell did they vote for Obama for? Are they just random, rather than independent? Don't know the State at all. I do know Republicans like Brown and I love to vote them down. I really do.

[boston bean]

41. those indies voted for obama, believe it or not. obama won by

65%

I agree brown is a bigot, but you got to live here to understand. this entire clusterfuck is running high on anti obama and anti healthcare sentiment.

some indies are fair weather friends who vote mostly democratic in local races, yet we have had plenty of republican governors.

I guess you have to know first hand the politics of the state. And yes, if the healthcare bill had more progressive elements instead of being able to be sold as a sell out to insurance companies it would have more support. But scott brown can get up there and speak the words about how it is a sell out, but he means it in a completely different way than a liberal believes it to be a sell out. but the argument is never thought out and the nuances are lost.

[defendandprotect]

98. Everyone wants REAL health care reform . . . EVERYONE . . . this bill is crap ...

so I doubt that MA is for it -- including the fact that they've already got

something like it so they know!

Independents would also know this bill is crap --

What's Joe Kennedy saying about the bill?

Joe had some scandal that moved him out of the Senate -- ?

Catholics are FOR single payer, government health care -- and for birth-control/

contraception by wide majorities --

and for abortion being included by 51% --

[AlinPA]

103. The Supreme Court justice situation is important. Brown could help stop any that Obama

would put forward.

[scarletwoman]

38. Let me add my own "well said". Thank you for your excellent post.

The fact that she can be primaried in two years is a VERY salient point -- among the many salient points in your post.

:thumbsup:
sw

[G_j]

22. & Ted Kennedy's seat, no less

all around, it would be a tragedy.

I lived in Massachusetts a couple of times in my life, spent most of my childhood years there.

[scarletwoman]

37. "...all around, it would be a tragedy." Indeed.

I may be a raving lefty, but I also believe in strategic thinking and choosing my battles carefully.

I've never been in Massachusetts, barely know anything about the state, but my heart and my head know that losing this seat to a Repug would be a HUGELY BAD THING.

:loveya:
sw

[BrklynLiberal]

23. Absolutely.

I agree with Ed Schultz...Even if we have to cheat to keep that sea...we must keep that seat.

The repukes cheated their way into the White House, for gawd's sake!!!

[demmiblue]

27. The mere thought of it makes my stomach turn- K&R

[depakid]

32. Too bad the "leadership didn't think (or didn't care) about that

while they were out seemingly making a concerted effort to alienate key constituency after key constituency in a very public way.

Now that the chickens are foreseably coming to roost, it will be interesting to see whether they learn from their mistakes- or whether they simply don't give a shit about winning or losing seats (and/or their majority).

[scarletwoman]

34. I know all that. What I'm saying is that this is a very BAD time & place to encourage

chickens to come home to roost. It's premature rejecturation. As Eriadne posted above, Coakley can be primaried in 2012.

It's self-destructive to let immediate emotion guide what needs be a long-term strategy. No "message" is going to get through the Dem leadership in this one outlier election. You want to send a useful message, you have to make it BIG -- like in the 2010 primaries where LOTS of seats are in play.

sw

[depakid]

39. Unfortunately- this isn't a phenomenon of message boards and bloggers

Same sort of dynamic has occurred repeatedly in the past and it goes well beyond Coakley or her heretofore lackluster campaign.

I appreciate the sentiments- and you are right- what it boils down to is basic human nature.

Major constituencies- which as a whole comprise the Democratic wing of the party have been rather publicly smacked down, taken for granted and in some instances outright insulted. That- along with the appeasement of the Republican wing and the allegiance to K Street lobbyists representing some of the most "popular" groups in America creates the perception that Democrats (and hence Coakley) aren't interested in fighting for them (much less for responsible public policy).

Why then, in turn should they take their time to work for or GOTV in return?

Obviously, you and I know why- but a whole lot of other people don't make such considerations.

[scarletwoman]

45. I just wanted to do my bit on DU to rally the troops, if I could.

As I said in my OP, for me it really just comes down to how extraordinarily awful it would be to have the Right celebrating taking Ted Kennedy's seat.

All the other stuff is secondary to me on this one.

sw

[TheEuclideanOne]

87. Don't rally the troops, rally the leadership

Yes, it would be extraordinarily awful and that will make it even more frustrating as a Democrat watching the core constituencies being told to F Off. We did our part by getting the leaders elected and it is frustrating watching this train wreck happen. It is like watching a train that contains so many things that are important to you crash and burn. At a certain point, it doesn't matter how much you scream at the train to stop, after a certain point, the momentum just dictates the result, whether you like it or not.

I appreciate your effort to rally the troops and I am not trying to poo poo the idea, but if this election is lost, part of the frustration will be in hearing the Rethugs gloating and part of it will be in knowing that if the President and leadership did follow through on what the voters elected him to do, we would probably have a different outcome.

[Fumesucker]

40. So your position then is that Democratic voters should be more mature than Dem leadership?

What is happening is not rocket science, the leadership knew very well what they are doing.

I'm getting really tired of all the fault being placed with the rank and file liberal/progressive voter and none on the damn leadership where it rightfully belongs.

[scarletwoman]

43. My position is that timing is important and symbolism is important.

And I would hope that we on the Left ARE more mature than the Dem leadership -- otherwise, how can we hope to wrest control of the party from the bozos and assholes who currently call the shots?

However, basically all I'm saying here is that Tuesday's Massachusetts election would be a very bad one to let the Repugs win. It's just too symbolically fraught to do any good by letting the Dem candidate go down, no matter what we think about her or HRC.

We have some big fish to fry -- fucking up one special election guppy isn't really going to gain us anything, imho.

sw

[Fumesucker]

44. The same or a similar argument will be made for every single election..

It's *never* the right time for what needs to be done, which is put the fear of the voters into the Dem leadership.

And it never will be.

:(

[scarletwoman]

46. That's why we need to focus on really organizing primary challenges.

Just piecemeal rejecting candidates in this or that election isn't going to change anything, it's just going preserve the status quo with power ping-ponging back and forth between two corporate-owned parties.

I want to "put the fear of the voters into the Dem leadership", too. I just want to do it in way that counts. Giving the Repugs a great big symbolic scalp (Ted Kennedy's seat) to wave around just doesn't strike me as very useful move.

sw

[Fumesucker]

51. Trouble is as soon as they get to DC they become compromised..

It is the rare politician who doesn't sell out for the status and money that flows like honey around Washington.

I honestly don't see any way out of this dilemma..

[scarletwoman]

55. The way out of "this dilemma" is publicly-funded elections, of course.

It's a long road from here to there, but all journeys begin with one step, right?

Paul Wellstone was once my Senator, his memory keeps my hope up.

sw

[Fumesucker]

59. You're lucky..

I have a couple of rabid right wingers as Senators and it's unlikely to change..

I don't see us getting publicly funded elections, certainly not in my state, but then I use cynicism as a form of emotional armor.

[defendandprotect]

115. I think some momentum for Public funding began in states . . . but not sure

what progress was made --

the main thing we need is "barring corporations from any participation whatsoever

in our elections" --

That was TEDDY Roosevelt -- !! Long, long ago --

[icee]

69. I agree with your post here. But for me it's even more personal.

I don't live in Massachusetts although my wife's relatives all do. Some are getting old. They are all Democrats. They live in a place called Needham. My father-in-lawy now deceased, was the Director of the Budget for Massachusetts. Some of these folks are voting for Croakley; some are not. The ones that are not are adamant that they do not want Obamacare passed--for some Obamacare puts them at the end of the road. IOW, they HAVE to vote against Croakley. I understand this. I am very glad I do not live in Massachusetts. What I will be watching is what Obama does should Croakley win. What will he do? Will he get the message? Personally, I will NOT be slapped around anymore by a President who I gave money I did have to, campaigned for, and voted for. I do not want Croakley to lose. But I am not as seemingly as panic stricken by it as the OP.

[defendandprotect]

107. Let's find out how big the liberal/progressive voting bloc ....

may be --

and discuss a Plan B --

Don't wander off alone --



PS: We need to bring liberals/progressives together as a voting bloc nationally --

As a start some have suggested the DFA forum here to begin with --

Would you come?

[David Zephyr]

42. Coakley will win. People also vote because they can't stand the other guy.

Voting AGAINST Brown is a motivator, too.

Let's hope it's enough to keep the monster from going to the Senate.

That said, let's hope that President Obama, at some point, gets it. He won't win any Republicans or conservatives to liking him. So, the lesson is deliver the promises you made to your base and they will deliver for you at election time.

We want people voting FOR our candidates, not just against theirs.

Finally, I'm as worried and sick about this as you. My bigger worry is November. If we are in trouble here where we should take it in a landslide, what will happen then?

[scarletwoman]

47. There will have to be some MAJOR changes come November.

Well-organized primary challenges against vulnerable Blue Dogs and DLCers.

The thing is, Dems losing seats in November will be nowhere NEAR as symbolically potent for the Right as losing this special election for Ted Kennedy's seat.

Midterm election losses for a president's party is an expected and well-documented trend in U.S. political history. The Right will crow about that, too, of course. But it won't be as symbolically important as losing this one special election.

I have no idea how much Massachusetts voters will be motivated to vote AGAINST Brown. I just wanted to say that I think it's a bad idea to take out our disgust with the Dems in this particular election.

sw

[defendandprotect]

108. Excellent points . . .

[Grand Taurean]

50. How sure are you of this?

And what makes you believe she will win?

[David Zephyr]

52. I believe in the goodness and intelligence of the people of Massachusetts

This will be the first year since 1983 that I have not made it there. If it didn't snow, I'd live there instead of California.

It's the people of Massachusetts that makes me believe this.

It's not that she will win, so much, as he will lose.

By the way, welcome to the DU.

[Grand Taurean]

53. Thank you.

I hope you are right. I do not know what Coakley was thinking. Why did she think she could waltz toward victory?

[defendandprotect]

109. Agree with you . . . . but also believe in the ability of Repugs to STEAL ...

elections and we're still voting on those computers!!

The polls make no sense to me --

I'm disappointed that Coakley is a "moderate" and not a liberal --

but EVERYONE wants real health care reform -- granted this bill is crap and if

Bush/Repugs had given it to us we'd be laughing and crying!

But if this corporate/fascist crap is going to be pushed on us, better to have

Dems to remedy it than Repugs --

Also, Catholics want single payer, government run health care by wide majority!

And, they want contraception included ---

and 51% want ABORTION to be covered.



Meanwhile . . .

PS: We need to bring liberals/progressives together as a voting bloc nationally --

As a start at DU some have suggested the DFA forum here to begin with --

Would you come?

[TheEuclideanOne]

89. Didn't Obama lose here in the primaries?

I don't think it would have been a landslide even with a great healthcare bill and all promises followed. We have practically the opposite on both.

Yes, the TeaBaggers are voting against somebody, Obama. They are pissed off, riled up by lie after lie that they gullibly accept, and ready to change things. They are like scumbag versions of the Democrats in the last election. We have a very disillusioned group here and a situation where the speeches that Obama makes and the motivation to rally the troops is going to fall on deaf ears. I think that it sucks now and will suck way more in November if Obama does not wake up and start acting like Senator Obama.

[defendandprotect]

110. Who won the primaries in MA in '08 ... ??? Someone to the right of Obama???

None of this makes sense --

EVERYONE supports real health care reform -- single payer/MEDICARE FOR ALL --

they've been given crap but I'm sure would prefer to have a Dem in Congress to remedy

the bill than a Repug???!!!

Even Catholics support single payer, government run health care --

AND they want contraception included in the program ---

and ABORTION .... the latter by 51%


Polls make NO sense --

could be preparation for a Repug steal?

[Grand Taurean]

49. I agree with you.

There is great symbolism in the loss of the seat formerly held by Ted Kennedy of all people.
Anyone who supports moderate/liberal policy/ideals should never think of allowing Scott Brown to win.

[donheld]

54. There's much more to worry about than that.

[scarletwoman]

56. I have to compartmentalize. If I worried about everything all at the same time, I'd go crazy.

Although, I suppose it's far too late to worry about THAT. :P

[donheld]

57. agreed

[hfojvt]

58. well said

except that this - "or maybe even break off and form a new party," is bound to lead to lots of Republican cheering at some point.

Unless the Republican purists beat us to it.

[scarletwoman]

60. I'm just being honest. I'm about fed up to HERE with the Democrats.

After a lifetime of voting exclusively for Democrats (I'm 60 years old) I'm not about to give up on my lifelong party lightly, but if they don't shape up pretty damn soon, they can kiss my vote good-bye.

sw

[RBInMaine]

70. And then where will you vote? Republican? Nader? Good luck. C'mon, let's be a grown up.

[scarletwoman]

126. No, I'd never vote Republican. And since I'm already quite grown up, I will always

vote strategically.

That is, if there's an opportunity to vote for a further left alternative in a race that's otherwise a lock for the Democratic candidate, I will cast my vote for the further left candidate as a message to the Democratic party.

I'm not interested in enabling Republicans to win, I AM interested in making the Dems worry.

sw

[defendandprotect]

96. Understand and mainly agree . . .

but in discussing the situation in MA -- and in fact wherever we look --

I think it is difficult to tell what's really going on from simply Repug steals????

And those computers are still in place --

Polls also lie --

I don't know that I can believe that MA is willing to let the Kennedy seat go Repug??!!

What do you think?

Granted the Dem Party is also either deceiving itself or deceiving the public who voted

for them. Hard to believe they don't know what's going on.

War -- Pelosi confirmed day after '06 - on video - "Dems were elected to end the war!"

Three years of re-funding and surges!!!

Health Care Reform -- I don't think they dared put up single payer or MEDICARE FOR ALL

because NO Dem and NO Repug could have voted against it without completely exposing themselves!!

IMO, this is all corporatist agenda infiltrating Dem Party with $$$$$$$$ and with help of DLC.

Meanwhile -- whatever . . . don't go off alone -- let's try to get a liberal/progressive forum

going here at DU?

Some have suggested the DFA forum for a start?

Will you come in for discussions if that happens?

We need a Plan B--!!

[defendandprotect]

95. If anything like that happens it has to be strong . . . WOMEN, LABOR/UNIONS, PEOPLE OF COLOR....

Latinos -- Latinas -- African Americans -- Mexicans -- whatever --

Religious liberals who support LIBERATION THEOLOGY now long gone from Catholic Church!

And CATHOLICS who by a large majority support health care, including contraception-

birth control and ABORTION. Abortion is 51% majority.

And let me remind all "whites" we are also people of color --

just check your skin against a sheet of white paper!!

[leftygolfer]

61. If we somehow lose..

which we won't on Tuesday. But if we did, I would not talk to my sister and her family for at least the rest of this year. (or until the Nov. elections). They are already out of control. But I'll be honest, I'm not worried. It's a good news story (Close Race in Mass!) but the reality is...I know we'll pull it out.

[defendandprotect]

112. Despite all, they don't usually want to see PRIVATIZATION of Social Security . . .??!!

And if this corporate/fascist legislation goes forth in Congress they will be back

to privatize Social Security and Medicare -- !!!


Anyone who understands what is going on certainly doesn't want to see a Repug win in MA --

and don't see that's what MA wants.


EVERYONE wants real health care reform and understands that even with this crap bill it is

better to have a Dem working on remedying it than a Repug.

Even Catholics want single payer, government run health care by a big majority -- 70%++

And, they want contraception and ABORTION included in the plan --

Abortion by 51% --



PS: Meanwhile . . .

PS: We need to bring liberals/progressives together as a voting bloc nationally --

As a start at DU some have suggested the DFA forum here to begin with --

Would you come?

[TorchTheWitch]

63. Only if you listen to it

I make it a point not to pay a single bit of attention to lunatics.

[gleaner]

64. I'm with you too....

:kick: and Rec. One thing though. If the worst happens derision won't be something we don't have experience with. It sucks, but it is one thing I am well acquainted with. Grunge.:crazy:

[flamingdem]

68. What you are saying is obvious, check whiney at the door and vote Coakley or we are hosed nt

[Rockholm]

71. When Coakley wins, the right wing noise machine will be SILENT. ..

just as they were when what's his face lost in upstate New York (I can't even remember his name). THe talkies were all going ga-ga over the Democrat vs. the Teabagger. The Teasbagger LOST and nary a word from them .
Same scenario will happen Tuesday night.
Scott Brown is a Mitt Romney tool. Anti-choice and anti-gay. Fuck him.

[scytherius]

72. Meh . . . no big deal

THey will just continue to overplay their "PEOPLE LOVE CONSERVATISM" hand and become even MORE radical. Eventually (and late than it appeared when we elected Obama) conservatism (its really Right Wing radicalism) will die. Throughout history it always dies. The demographics in America absolutely ensure its death. The biggest threat isn't the radical Right, it is the enabling Dem party. THAT is what needs replacing. And perhaps the gOP taking of this seat will shake up the National Clueless Democratic Leadership or at least bring in some real leaders.

So they crow, meh, big damn deal. It's just words, it's just emotion, its no more than a biological reaction to stimulus.

[Mithreal]

74. Well said

[Gman2]

75. I wonder how many right wing freaks would vote for Palin, if she did penthouse?

[NJmaverick]

76. K&R

[bvar22]

77. Solidarity!

The Right Wing is already crowing because this race is so close.
The Democratic Party Leadership better WAKE THE FUCK UP!!!

"When given a choice between a Republican, and a Democrat that acts like a Republican, the voters will choose the Republican every time!"---Harry Truman


The Democratic Party is a BIG TENT, but there is NO ROOM for those
who advance the agenda of THE RICH (Corporate Owners) at the EXPENSE of LABOR and the POOR.

[JCMach1]

78. Just lube up and vote for Coakley...

Either way we're screwed, its just that one is a little easier to take.

[marcmanv007]

79. How does anyone think the Republicans will do any better?

They will return to the old ways of personal corruption and take us down the road for more wars we don't need to be in and putting more of the deficit on a credit card. Give me the tax and spend liberals please! At least we pay as we go along!

[Goldstein1984]

80. Agree with the entire OP...

But here is my take on it

I understand the lesser-of-two-evils voting model, although my view of what our two-party system has become makes me think it's the logical equivalent of choosing a babysitter for my grandchildren based on which of the two has fewer convictions for child molestation. (I said LOGICAL equivalent, not MORAL equivalent).

First, as I've written in a few other posts, if MA Democrats wanted to hold onto Ted Kennedy's seat, they should have found a successor more like Ted Kennedy. What they're dealing with now is, I believe, in large part a consequence of their failure to do so. They were well aware of the split between Kennedy and Clinton, yet the Kennedy successor they chose is more like Clinton. Not a problem that can be solved at this point, but something to think about in the future.

Second, I'm torn about the implications of a loss of the supermajority on "health care reform," since I don't believe what is being produced is health care reform. Thus, I like the specific result of a 41st vote against "HCR," but I dislike the longer term result of a 41st vote against any future good legislation the Congressional Democrats might produce by accident.

Finally, I reject the statements I'm seeing in others OPs, saying non-MA residents should butt out. Just as "all politics are local," all local politics are national. Witness the perpetual interference of Outsiders in Alaska politics, and the importance of national outcries against local and state school boards attempting to destroy science education by adding Creationism. If candidates outside my state want my financial contributions (and the email solicitations I receive tell me they do), then they have to listen to the criticism that might come with the dollars.

All of that said, while I find the lesser-of-two-evils (aka, vote-for-me-because-I-suck-less) model to be repugnant, I see no pragmatic alternative in the Democratic Party's current state of decay. So, I agree that a non-progressive Democrat that is no Ted Kennedy is probably a better choice than a Republican that is even less like Kennedy.

And I disagree that this is no silver lining in a Coakley loss (just being pragmatic): What I see happening is recognition that all of the invalidating, marginalizing and dismissing of the importance of Progressive voters is being recognized as the mistake that it was. I see Rahm Emanuel muzzled; I see Barack Obama using his weekly address to call for unity, and his weekend to travel to MA to appeal to the disaffected; I heard Ed Schultz dedicate a significant part of his show on Friday to kissing Progressive butt and apologizing on the part of the Democratic Right in hopes of regaining Progressive support. If a Coakley loss leads to some introspection and realignment of the Democratic Party to include Progressives even when their votes aren't needed at election time, the rest of 2010 and 2012 could look much better.

So I hope Coakley wins. But if she loses, there are opportunities and lessons to be learned from that loss, and another chance to regain the seat in two years.

My sympathies to MA Democrats and Progressives during this difficult time.

And I really, really, really miss Ted Kennedy.

[scarletwoman]

130. Thank you. I really appreciate your well-considered post.

What I see happening is recognition that all of the invalidating, marginalizing and dismissing of the importance of Progressive voters is being recognized as the mistake that it was.

I hope that's true.

In the long run, it's going to take much more than that if this coming November isn't going to be a huge Democratic flameout. It's going to take concrete action that visibly improves ordinary people's lives.

Because it isn't going to take just progressive voters to save Dem majorities in the House and Senate, it's going to take progressive POLICIES.

Thank you again,
sw

[Land Shark]

81. If this happens, the truth will help: Liberals and Progessives stayed home, it's not just RW thing

[Capn Sunshine]

83. So, the "liberals and lefties" are the best friend conservonuts ever had

Because they couldn't articulate a victory at the polls without them.

[Capn Sunshine]

82. I hope you acknowledege you have been an enabler for darker forces

Because , angry leftie, your displeasure has been siezed and hijacked as a vehicle for helping with the real agenda:
FUCKING OBAMA OVER AT EVERY TURN, AND ASSURING HIS FAILURE.

They want Carter, not FDR, or there will be no hope for the republicans for a generation.

You, and millions like you, who felt like choosing NOW and the past twelve months to wail and moan about the "sellout" as you call it,
You're about to reap what you've sown.

Enjoy the renewal of corporate power, what you saw was NOT it.

You know what sucks most of all? I don't give a shit about saying "I told you so"

[liberation]

94. Tell who what so?

... that you guys will always blame your own hubris on someone else, anyone, given enough desperation?




Spare me the holier than thou bullshit to justify your "black mail as a legitimized electoral value proposition." Good grief.


I guess it was us liberals who pointed a gun to your beloved corporate sellouts and forced them no to do their damned jobs, right? I am tired of useless idiots projecting their hubris on everyone else. Do you want to know why this election, which should not have been that close, became so? Look at your mug in the mirror. But none of you DLC cheerleaders would dare do that, right? It is easier to blame your hubris on those pesky liberals, who you guys were so happy to throw under the bus not that long ago. You guys hate liberals so much, that even when you need their votes... you just can't even get yourselves to even pretend to be polite to us. You have to insult us and made us responsible for your fuck ups, and then wonder why we don't show up in droves to vote for yet another milquetoast "lesser of two evils" useless candidate. The entitlement to our votes is borderline galling.

Ain't that a bitch? to be a liberal in this country... not only we get screwed, but we are expected to pick up the tab for the blame for the screw with a bright smile.

Same shit, same "fear, uncertainty and doubt" approach, almost indistinguishable from the GOP's MO.

Fuck, they are even trying to convince people to vote for the Dem now and she will be "fixed" later... promise.

Are you kidding me? It is the same playbook, over and over and over and over again. They do everything except their damned jobs.


A Dem wants the liberal vote? Well... get he or she earn it for starters. I am tired, tired of being told to toe in line. So what if a GOPer wins that seat? What you guys are terrified is that people notice that nothing, not a damned thing will change from the current situation. Because nothing, not a damned thing changed thus far with Dems in power. What you guys are terrified is that you can fool people for so long. But soon the gig will be up, and you guys will have to *gasp* actually earn your votes. The horror! The horror!

I think that is what the Dem establishment is really terrified of... LOL

[Capn Sunshine]

99. Your knee jerk response is part of the problem

If you had spent any time reading these boards the past eight years you'd know I'm a liberal, a progressive and a whole litanyt of other things, including an actual real-world political operative. I'm a founding member of DFA and the Progressive Caucus.

Where we differ is I seem to understand the system a little better.
Your outrage is misplaced and ill-timed and we're about to pay the price.

[defendandprotect]

116. Agree re DLC .....

Meanwhile . . .

PS: We need to bring liberals/progressives together as a voting bloc nationally --

As a start at DU some have suggested the DFA forum here to begin with --

Would you come?

[defendandprotect]

113. Sadly the "enablers" are those who have produced this nightmare ...

corporate/fascist health care bill --

DLC and corporatists in administration -- and Congress on corporate dole --

None of us wants to say "I told you so" --

However, there are obviously many who may once again stay home rather than

coming out to vote for Dems --

This is not the race to risk -- we are all rooting for Coakley to win --

Better to have a Dem in the Congress working on remedy for this health care crap bill

than to have a Repug working on it!

And, again -- it's often difficult to know exactly what's going on when the Dems continue

to inflict computer voting on us and opportunities for a Repug steal are still with us.

Or has MA been moving to larger percentages of absentee voting? Early voting?

That would be a positive sign --

[Capn Sunshine]

119. "fascist" Health Care Bill????!!

I think you're posting on the wrong board there amigo. That's a talking point from the dark side.

Is everyone pretty clear about the troublemakers in our midst?

[defendandprotect]

128. Guess you haven't heard . . . corporatism IS fascism . . .

long understood --

See FDR --

See Mussolini --

See Hitler --

Wake up!

[scarletwoman]

122. Thank goodness I'm not as angry as YOU seem to be.

I have to assume that you don't really know me, and that you're not at all familiar with my posts on DU -- understandable, because I post very infrequently these days.

That being said, I challenge you to find even ONE "Obama-bashing" post written by me over the past year. (You won't find any prior to that, either, since I was an Obama supporter in the last months of the primary season, and mostly didn't post at all during the earlier months of the primary.)

If you were familiar with what I DO post, you would know that I mostly write about the failures of capitalism, of the inequities and iniquities of Free Trade, of Imperialism and militarism. I write about Class War, I write about the stranglehold of money in our political system.

I also write about the failures of the Democratic party in representing the interests of the working class over the interests of the Plutocrats. And for years and years I've been advocating for a Progressive movement that bypasses electoral politics and instead focuses on building social change from the ground level. I've advocated that people stop focusing on politicians and start focusing on community work.

After the election, I DID express grave misgivings and/or disappointment about many of Obama's cabinet and adviser picks, and I make no apology for that. Other than that, I've rarely mentioned Obama at all in my posts for most of the past 12 months. I prefer to write about the problems with our corrupt political system as a whole. Obama is just a cog in the machine, I don't find any reason to fixate on him. I've certainly never written any angry screeds calling him a "sellout".

I'd be thrilled to reap what I've attempted to sow: a Progressive social movement that addresses the needs of the working class and the poor, and works on evolving the very consciousness of the body politic in this country through education (truth-telling) and building alternative institutions outside of electoral/partisan politics to empower people.

My overriding belief is that REAL change has to happen from the ground up and the sooner we stop looking to politicians for change, the sooner REAL change will have a chance.

sw

[santamargarita]

85. The cheer leading is done by the Goddamn Fascist Media

:puke:

[abelenkpe]

86. They already are!

FOX news, conservative websites, even Mish are all trumpeting a democratic defeat. We cannot let that happen. Please People of Mass vote for Coakley and let republicans who will never ever do you any good choke on defeat.

[ddeclue]

88. I'd rather see fake Health Insurance reform fail so we could get real single payer later.

and it would make Joe Lieberman irrelevant.

[The Wizard]

90. How much has Liebermann

sent to the Brown campaign?

[defendandprotect]

93. Which is doubly why this whole thing doesn't seem believable. . .

I'd say polls may be a prep/cover for a steal?

The right wing only comes to power thru political violence, assassinations, coups --

and stolen elections.

I'm disappointed that Coakley is a "moderate" -- we need liberals/progressives running,

but don't see how MA could let the Kennedy seat go??!!!

What I've read about Brown's popularity -- a "pro-life" Repug doesn't convince me, either!!



PS: Just want to add to this that people everywhere are the same -- we all want real,

health care reform -- and I've probably seen about 1 minute of FOX news in my entire life

but two days ago as I went by checking channels, a female anchor was stressing that

Americans want "health care reform" -- just not this legislation!!!

And I doubt that MA feels any differently --- my daughter lives there and has had a few

occasions to have to use COBRA! And to worry about being in between jobs where health care

was in question.

[kestrel91316]

97. Supporting anyone other than the DEMOCRAT in this election is a violation

of the rules. I hope anyone on DU who verbally opposes Coakley (and therefore is working for her defeat) gets TS'd.

Doesn't matter if she's no Kucinich.

[Techn0Girl]

125. My country right or wrong?

I don't think so.
Not from the Republicans, not from the right-wingers and not from you.

[Fire1]

100. Now, YOU are a REAL DEMOCRAT!! Kudos!! n/t

[placton]

111. who cares? n/t

[orbitalman]

114. There is nothing wrong with HATE...

even if some believe otherwise. From "not liking" to "hate" is ONLY a matter of degree. I think "hate" is merely the ultimate in "not liking." I am in total agreement with Scarletwoman.

[DutchLiberal]

117. The Democrats, including Coakley, ARE 'the right'.

Have been since at least Bill Clinton.

[southernyankeebelle]

118. The sad thing is once if they do win what are they going to do? If they win they win on screaming

the loudest and doing nothing. All along the republicans said lets not do anything and we will win. Well now if they win lets see what they are going to do. I don't want to hear its all Obama's fault. If they win then god will give them what they want at least in their minds. They will get what they deserve. If their truly is a god our country will keep losing its way and we will end up with a President Palin or someone like her. God help us all.

[nxylas]

120. It already is

Here's video of some Brownshirts. If this doesn't make people want to vote for Coakley, I don't know what will:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PnbrbZrqeT4

[LWolf]

121. It would certainly be a symbolic loss as well as a concrete loss. nt

[Techn0Girl]

124. BECAUSE WE'VE ALL SEEN HOW WELL ELECTING A JOE LIEBERMAN WORKED OUT FOR US....

If the Democrats won't or can't put up a candidate that is really worth my vote then I am not going to vote for them.

Putting out Joe Liebermans got us NOTHING. Nothing.

Would a Republican be worse? Yes, of course they would.
Eventually, if things get bad enough perhaps people will wake up.
Until then I am not compromising any more.

[yourout]

127. +1.....thats were I am at. And....

contrary to all the whining I think most like minded leftys have the same sentiment.

We want her to win but we also want the Dem leadership to wake up.

[emsimon33]

131. But where do we draw the line in the sand?

This is the very argument that those in the Democratic Party who marginalize the base make: If we don't support them then it becomes a nightmare with Republicans in power. The Republican base drew a line in the sand with Bush I and have been courted ever since. Where do we draw the line? And if we don't, then the choice is between Republican and Republican lite!

[scarletwoman]

132. I drew it here. This is a one-time limited offer, it expires after Tuesday.

May be renewed this coming November depending on circumstances.