So Scott Brownstain campaigned in an old pickup truck, but owns 5 houses and 12 cars?

[DainBramaged]

Were the people of Massachusetts that gullible? Did we as Democrats really do that bad of a job campaigning that an empty suit like this (who pimped his own kids out during his acceptance speech) actually beat A Democrat for a seat held BY a Democrat since 1972?


What the hell is wrong with us?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/13/ma-senate-candidate-brown_n_422399.html

[midnight]

1. Nude model who owns many houses and cars took the spot light.

The people are so hungry for change they don't care what kind they get...

[Vinca]

2. The whole thing is mind boggling.

Worse yet, he's already being looked at as being "on the ticket." The guy's a male version of Palin.

[Historic NY]

3. People fall for that truck thing ala Fred Thompson...& *

[SOS]

27. Good one

That was an amusing and telling story.
Thompson was known in DC for his Armani suits, limousines and fancy restaurants.
When he went back to TN to run for Senate they rented him a old pickup truck and threw some Red Man chew on the dashboard.
The suckers fell for that charade hook, line and sinker.

If Coakley had campaigned in a rented 1973 El Camino things might be different today.

[FBaggins]

4. Must have purchased the truck just for this purpose

I don't see how you get 200,000 miles on a truck in five years while owning 11 other cars... unless you purchased it with a bunch of miles on it already.

Oh well... just because something's a stunt doesn't mean it doesn't work. The President sure stepped into the trap.

[DainBramaged]

7. Hell, I am sure he bought it with high mileage

we get them in trades all the time. Many well maintained. And when you can afford five houses, a couple of grand for a crate motor is no big deal.

[HillbillyBob]

21. And here we are trying to hold on to the one house

car and 12 yr old truck with a dead or dying motor,lost one of the valves when the oil system died, we think since we can't afford to have it opened up to see and we NEED that truck for farm work around here. I know theres a bent lifter, guy at the garages said he thinks its a burned /stuck valve that bent the replacement lifter rod.

[DainBramaged]

24. I completely understand.

:cry:

[spanone]

9. it's show businesss, nothing less, nothing more...reality teevee

[cilla4progress]

28. You hit it on the head!

Balloon boy goes to the Senate. I mean, c'mon, American Idol, "available" daughters and all. Some people will do anything for attention.

[TheCowsCameHome]

14. Yup, Mr. Average. A lawyer, wife who's a network news anchor in Boston,

American Idol BS, military officer, yada, yada, yada.

Just another struggling guy from the projects.

[TheCowsCameHome]

5. Coakley's handlers must've thought her name was Kennedy

and set the campaign on cruise control while they a napped.

Also, too many Dems in state offices have angered a lot of voters in recent months.


And now we've paid a terrible price................

[HipChick]

6. Bill Maher had it right...people are stupid..I'm one of you,

don't mind the 5 houses and 12 cars..they are just props..I'm one of you,really

[DainBramaged]

8. Props? You're not everyman with 5 houses and 12 cars............

and he is not one of us, by no means.

[mnhtnbb]

10. The media were all over Edwards' looks, money, houses (and missed the real story)

Where were the media with Brown and his stuff? But, it's a double standard; Republicans are
allowed--no, expected--to have lots of property so it's ok.

[DainBramaged]

16. Then, "we" need to barrage the media the next time "we" run against a Puke

so that they are forced to cover the story. Even if you need to stand near him or her with a sigh questioning their wealth, it needs to be done to make it into a story.

[Orsino]

11. It's more than a truck.

It is evidence of his rugged heterosexuality, or something.

[KharmaTrain]

12. All Hat No Cattle...

"We" didn't campaign, Martha Coakley did...and just barely. While I still cringe when I see Brown, he outhustled and outworked a very poorly run campaign. I'm not a resident of the Bay State..."we" doesn't apply. It should be a lesson that no seat should be taken for granted, no election can be brushed off and how inept the DNC has been since Dr. Dean left.

It's not what's wrong with "us"...it's what's wrong with those in the party who thought they could cruise and, in some cases, believe they were entitled to this seat.

[DainBramaged]

15. "We" is appropriate, we are Democrats, we will suffer the consequences

of her loss. Therefore we share in losing the opportunity to retain the seat.

[Deep13]

13. He spends his spare time clearing brush at his ranch. nt

[Bill McBlueState]

17. Republicans know how to get elected, you have to concede that.

They can't govern, but they know exactly which strings to pull to get there.

[DainBramaged]

19. And that has been my gripe for years

WE are afraid to offend anyone, WE are afraid that if WE don't take the high road we'll be thought less of . WE mustn't ever ever ever lower ourselves to their level.


Maybe that's why they dominated American politics from 1980 until 2006. And we're in this mess and reeling over the election of an empty suit.

[spanone]

18. american idol politics

[TheCowsCameHome]

22. In Coakley's case -American Idle politics.

[lukasahero]

20. "Did we as Democrats really do that bad of a job campaigning"?

Yes.

[Odin2005]

23. Just like DumbAss and his "ranch"

[FarCenter]

25. Mousy DA beat by man with a truck -- end of story.

[LiberalFighter]

26. Huffington Post should had done a better job researching.

Instead of relying on Brown's filing they should had researched the property records.

It would had found that they purchased 1840 Commonwealth Ave Unit 11 for a price of $122,500 on 10/30/2007. It has 344 sq ft.
And on 10/12/2007 they purchased Unit 14 for a price of $172,000. It has 523 sq ft.

1870 Commonwealth Ave Unit 8 was purchased for $194,000 on 5/21/2007.

70 Hayden Woods was last assessed at $538,300. It was bought in 1995 for $307,000. It has 3,020 sq ft and 31. It appears to have been about 3 years old when they bought it.

[DainBramaged]

29. Does it change anything, or is your reply in defense of brown?

[LiberalFighter]

30. How the hell is it a defense of Brown?

[DainBramaged]

31. Let me try the question this way, what is your point?

Is that easier? :shrug:

[Igel]

36. They should have also been a bit more concerned about inclusiveness.

This is an argument that is very, very easily mocked. I find that when I make an argument, I want to make sure that it's not reducible to absurdity, making me look like shit-for-brains.

You're right, though. Just using the filing statement shows a lot of laziness on their part. $100k or more" leaves a lot of leeway.

If you take the property minus the mortgage, you don't come up with more than $300k in net worth for the real assets. Let's call it $400k, and not allow for asset revaluation since 2008. We all know that housing and land prices have skyrocked since then, esp. on small, overpriced condos in large urban areas.

You can look up stock prices for Exxonmobil, Union Pacific, and GE. And annual dividend/share. I used the year high price for Exxon and GE and year average for UP and came up with net stock value of < $150k. Again, we use high prices because stocks have soared since early 2008.

Truly, having net assets of $600k in 2008 (as sort of a high-end estimate) is horrendous. Reprehensible. Vile. The very thought.

Surely, no Democratic politician would dare to have that kind of balance sheet.

Late 40s, both employed, and that's all the net assets they had? And *that's* using 2008 stock and property appraisals? "Risible" is the word that comes to mind. It makes Coakley's forgetting about $200k in assets trivial (although you'd have to wonder if her asset sheet would be any more coveted than his). Although his actual current assets may be no more than hers.

The others would be be mortified with embarrassment to have only that much, and it doesn't matter if there's a (D) or (R) after their names.

The argument crucially relies on presenting inflated numbers that tell only part of the story. As I said, it's the kind of argument I know can be reduced in such a way that makes me look like shit-for-brains. Two professionals in their late 40s with $600k in net assets? Not the worst thing in the world, esp. when most people will realize they've gone upside down on most of their mortgages. And taken a bath in the stock market. Does that elicit envy or empathy?

To attack that and instead lament the inability to vote for a Kennedy, as many do? To mock $600k while saying Kerry's got a keen sense of what it means to be working class? Not gonna go there.

[inna]

32. Since ***1952***, not 1972.

[inna]

33. dupe

[DainBramaged]

34. Four hours later you decide this is a dupe?

I could replace one letter..............

[inna]

35. what in the world are you babbling about??

All I posted was "1952, not 1972", but it posted twice for some reason. I deleted the second post within a second or two.

WHAT "4 hours later"?? :wtf:

[DainBramaged]

38. (sigh) I don't babble, and nevermind..............

:eyes: not worth the effort.

[inna]

39. Massachussets has not had a Republican Senator since 1952, not 1972.

That was the only point I wanted to make. (And FYI I rec'd your thread before I made my first comment.)

If you were offended by my use of the word "babbling", I apologize, it's just that your comment about "4 hours" didn't make a bit of sense. :shrug:

But you're right, it's not important anyway.

[erpowers]

37. Blame the Media

Part of the blame has to go to the media. Last night I posted a comment and a link discussing how Brown's campaign image did not mesh with reality. In that post last night I asked why the media always waits until politicians, especially Republicans, have been elected to inform the voters that the candidate is lying. It was partly the media's job to inform the people of Massachusetts that Brown was not being truthful. People should have been able to do some of their own research, but it would have been much easier for the media to point out the truth.

I also posted last night that the media had done this type of thing before. The same thing happened when Arnold Schwarzenegger ran for governor of California for the first time. During the campaign Schwarzenegger made a number of claims that were popular, but not true. The day after Schwarzenegger was elected the media opted to tell people that what Schwarzenegger had been saying during the campaign was not true.

The same things also happened during the 2002 congressional elections. During those elections the Republican Party, along with President Bush, constantly claimed the Democrats were holding up Homeland Security legislation. Throughout the campaign I did not see any media outlet refuting that false Republican claim. However, the Sunday after the elections in which a number of Democratic candidates lost Tim Russert, then of "Meet the Press", finally refuted the false claim by stating that it was actually Tom Delay in the House of Representatives, and not the Democrats, who was holding up Homeland Security legislation.

In the end Martha Coakley should have called Brown out on his false claims, but it was the media's job to assure that the candidates were not misleading the voters. Brown's false claims did not end with just those about his wealth. He mislead the voters of Massachusetts on just about every other issue. The media should have written stories about Brown's misleading campaign before he won the election, not the day after. Hopefully, in the future the media will do a better job.

[Jennicut]

40. People are that stupid.