Voter Reactions - Mass (from Boston Globe -- just posted) -- more

[dave29]

http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2010/01/at_boston_polls.html

Thelma Moore, an 80-year-old retired nurse from West Roxbury, said she voted for Coakley because "you vote the party when you get to this stage in life," said Moore, a registered Democrat.

"I'm surprised that it's so close," she said of the race. "But then again, in this day and age, I'm not surprised by anything that happens. Hopefully things will turn out alright."


At Boston City Hall, a steady of stream voters were casting ballots.

Bill Luke, a 62-year-old chief financial officer who lives downtown, voted for Coakley because he said he cares about health care and would "hate to see us lose the majority," in the US Senate.


http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2010/01/voter_turnout_in_springfield_h.html

SPRINGFIELD – Voter turnout here, as in a number of Western Massachusetts communities, is higher than expected.

As of about 12:30 p.m., more than 2,700 of Springfield’s 89,045 registered voters had cast their ballots in the special election to fill the Senate seat held by the late Edward M. Kennedy, said Gladys Oyola, acting election commissioner,

“It’s probably on par with the election in November,” Oyola said, referring to voter turnout.

Oyola, before Election Day, predicted that a very close race between Democrat Attorney General Martha M. Coakley and Republican state Sen. Scott P. Brown, could draw 20 percent of the vote. The third candidate is Libertarian Joseph L. Kennedy.

Judging from turnout so far, Oyola said turnout could reach as high as 25-30 percent.

[tridim]

1. Looks like the MSM bullshit memes are working..

It is IMPOSSIBLE for us to "lose the majority" in the Senate. Even if Coakley loses we'll still have an EIGHTEEN seat majority.

[Motown_Johnny]

5. he clearly meant Super Majority....

[quiet.american]

2. K&R nt

[mn9driver]

3. ..."hate to see us lose the majority," in the US Senate.

This is what it comes down to. The Senate Democrats are so sackless that they will accomplish NOTHING without 60 votes. EVERYTHING will require 60 votes. You can count on the Repigs for that.

[Ozymanithrax]

7. Reconciliaiton is limited in scope. So most of their work will need 60 votes.

That is the way the Senate works.

[Recursion]

11. That's why the GOP-controlled Senate got nothing done from 2002-2006, right?

Bush and McConnell did it with fewer votes. We can do it with what we have. Yes, we'll push a few people out of the party ultimately but that's the price you pay.

[pnwmom]

13. We didn't threaten a filibuster or make endless amendments to every bill.

They do.

We thought our role was to work together with them when we could. They think their role is to oppose whatever we do, no matter what.

[Ozymanithrax]

16. Democrats did not act as obstructionists for those years.

If Democrats had demanded 60 votes for everything it would have been different. They chose to assist in governing while attempting to moderate the extreme right. Republicans have chosen to become absolutet obstructionists. They have never done it like this before.

But from 2002-2006 republcians were constnatly moaning that they should just get an up or down vote. Democrats just were not willing to take every little thing to the mat.

[elmerdem]

14. Hell

they aren't exactly accomplishing a lot with 60 votes.

[Motown_Johnny]

4. only one person said that he voted for Brown and four for Coakley

I hope that is a good sign

[hughee99]

6. Expect to hear the phrase "voting irregularities" a lot in the next few days

I see it's already starting.

[WeDidIt]

8. I'm personally hoping two acronyms go along with it...

"ACORN" and "SEIU".

And it's all Republicans screaming them.

[hughee99]

10. Unfortunately, the first mention I heard was from a Coakley spokesperson. n/t

[Nothing Without Hope]

9. Getting ready to go cast my vote for Coakley

Not happy to have to vote for the person who has been the Dem machine candidate from the first (we got robocalls from Bill Clinton the night before the primary), but what sane person would choose Brown?

[flamingdem]

12. thank you! nt

[edbermac]

15. Mass went 63-37 for Obama.

A large turnout is being reported so I see this as a plus for Coakley.