Tea Baggers and right wing outrage had no impact on MA election

[inthebrain]

John McCain received 1,104,284 vote in the presidential and Brown received 1,168,107 votes.

Obama won 1,891,083 votes in the presidential while Coakley got 1,058, 682.


It is quite clear that right wing revulsion and "Tea Bagger" outrage had no impact on this election. No matter how much the media spins it. The is was clearly a rejection of the Status Quo offered up by Obama and the Democrats, as well as Coakley, that had voters staying home. The Dems saw nearly a 50% drop off in votes while Brown barely drew a 10% increase to an already paltry 1.1 million voters for McCain in the presidential.

This election is not a call for the party to move right but for Obama and the Democrats to act on the leftist rhetoric they offered to voters and deliver.

[rd_kent]

1. True, but that will not stop them from claiming that.

They have not let facts get in the way before, so why should they start now?

[inthebrain]

2. I say let em claim what they will

Deep down they know.

They also know that with the dissatisfaction on the left that is offers more difficult challenged to them. In order to answer it you will see a lot of what you saw in CT. Some democrats are gonna get primaried and they are gonna be forced to concede to the moderate right Democrat in order to hold any ground. Not only that but there is an undercurrent of unrest in this state and the tea baggers and birthers are not in control of it.

[elocs]

3. Spin is spin no matter which side it comes from. I think I can recognize spin when I see it.

I see it.

[andym]

4. It's been reported that 22% of Obama voters chose Brown.

Wouldn't they be the moderate/conservative ones?

[inthebrain]

6. Funny that it didn't translate to a massive increase in votes for Brown

He couldn't acheive even a ten percent increase. Whether it was the moderate conservative Dems I don't know. Wouldn't surprise me if they flip flopped their votes between both parties.

If 22% of Obama voters chose Brown he would have a bigger increase in votes over McCain.

[andym]

9. 22% is a 44% differential.

Take 22% from the Dem and give it to the Republican. That's significant

Say Obama got 1000 votes and McCain 500. 2/1 margin
22% of 1000 is 220.

If everyone votes, then a 22% differential gives 780 Obama 720 McCain. Almost tied.

Where it was closer, it's a disaster-->

Say Obama 1000 and McCain 800, then
Obama 780 and McCain 1020 after the change

now, it's a special election, so lets say only 75% of people vote:
Coakley (780*.75)= 585 and Brown (1020*.75)= 765

So Brown's numbers look like McCain's, but Coakley's numbers look bad.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

11. funny that you don't get that presidential elections have much higher participation

If only the McCain voters voted for Brown that wouldn't mean Brown didn't energize pug voters.

It would mean he energized pug voters beyond BELIEF!

The reason half the Obama voters stayed home wasn't to protest. It was because a special election doesn't get nearly the turnout.

The reason the McCain voters didn't stay home is because they were as enthused about a special election in January as they were about a presidential election.

That is epic. It is stunning. It is the scariest case of Republican enthusiasm I have ever heard of.

So the OP is completely opposite from reality.

[inthebrain]

14. An 80,000 voter increase

for the party that lost the presidential election by 26% and barely has any traction in this state at all is what you find scary?

But the nearly 50% loss in voter participation on the parts of Coakley doesn't seem to register with you. It's just voter apathy given that it's an off year election.

WRONG!!!!

This was a nationally televised election and followed everywhere. This wasn't an election that happened in the dark. The folks who stayed home, in a state where you don't even had to run a good campaign as a Dem to win, just sent a very strong message that should be taken as warning shot; The voters are not going to vote for a Democratic Party who ran on a strong leftist message of change that he now jerked to the right.

As Clinton "ended welfare as we know it" so has the left in this election for the Democratic Party. Deliver or they are not voting. You're response is typical of the right.

And I do live in this state.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

16. You are too slow-witted to discuss this topic. Sorry.

You cannot grasp that you are comparing apples and oranges.

Doesn't make you a bad person, but you really shouldn't be talking about numbers.

[BeFree]

5. Interesting spin ya got there

1,168,107 Pubbie
1,058,682 Dem
_________

109,325 vote difference?

The pubbies got a 10% increase in votes in the off year
and the dems a decrease of almost 50%?

Wow, that's some shift. The numbers seem incredible.

[JohnWxy]

13. 10% increase? McCain got 1,104,284, Brown got 1,168,107 - that looks like 5.8% to me.

"John McCain received 1,104,284 vote in the presidential and Brown received 1,168,107 votes."


I would say, Dems are quite disaffected by Obama's shrinking from the Public Option. He didn't get any Republican votes for HCR so why throw the Public Option over-board? He could have had the P.O. but he gave it up for nothing. He can never do enough to please the fascists except maybe jump in front of a bus. Now THAT would get them to CHEER!

The Dems have lost interest in Obama. They wonder if he's worth the effort. Not everybody but obviously a good proportion feel that way. He's not acting like a Democratic president.

[DoBotherMe]

7. 800,000 Voters for Change Stayed Home

Is that what happened? Those 800,000 who voted against "The Culture of Corruption" and for change just didn't show up? That's a pretty strong message. Dana ; )

[jobycom]

8. Looks like a lot of right wingers were motivated, to me.

Off year elections usually have much lower turnout than presidential elections, so you'd expect both candidates to have a "nearly 50%" drop. The fact that only the Democrats had such a large drop while the Republicans got even more than during the presidential election is stunning. Stupendously stunning! Pick some more superlative type adjectives.

It tells me that the conservatives were much more motivated. A lot of disenchanted Dems may have stayed home, but I doubt they voted for Brown. A lot of independents who voted for Obama may have bought the Republican message, which means the teabag message is working. More than that, a lot of conservatives who weren't motivated by McCain were motivated here.

It also tells me that the RNC was working the ground harder than the DNC.

Normally gross turnout numbers can't tell you anything without exit polls, but that's such a massive shift that it's clear more than one factor was working here. The bottom line is simple--people were buying the Republican message more than the Democratic message. The Republican message was basically "OH MY GOD THEY ARE SCARY FASCIST COMMUNIST SOCIALIST FRENCH CANIGUTS WHO WILL STEAL YOUR MONEY AND MAKE YOUR KIDS GAY IF YOU DON"T VOTE REPUBLICAN RIGHT FUCKING NOW!!" while the Democratic message was basically "um, you know it would be sad if ted kennedy's seat went republican and Obama really needs our help because controlling a supermajority of congress isn't really enough so vote for us kthanxbai."

We're broken, they're motivated. They have a message (crappy though it is) and we are begging for votes while offering apologies and excuses and accusing each other of being traitors. Seriously, if you were an independent voter who worked 12 hours that day and had little time over the last couple of years to learn the intricacies of each issue, who would you have voted for?

[inthebrain]

10. Or maybe the left is not interested in the statuds quo offered up by Obama and Coakley

The voter increase by the Reps, who are gonna have a good turnout, is not significant enough to conclude that the Tea Baggers or right wing outrage impacted this election.

Obama won this state by 26% with a strong leftist message. He has abandoned that agenda and Coakley supported that.

[jobycom]

12. I didn't mean to say that wasn't part of it.

Off year elections usually have 50 to 60% of the votes of a presidential election, especially one as popular as the last presidential election. So Coakley's numbers are about what you'd expect. Brown's are even higher than McCain's, which is a massive increase. For a more accurate idea on turnout, look up the 2006 elections, or the last senate race in MA. I'm too lazy, but unless it was during a presidential year, the numbers are going to be much lower than the presidential election.

Some of Coakley's loss was from disenchanted liberals staying home. No doubt--I've seen enough here to know they exist. But a lot of it was because of the Republicans screaming louder than us, and scaring people about taxes more than us, and all of the other negative campaigning. Some people are motivated by positive, some by negative, and Obama is losing both sides right now.

A lot of people voted for Obama because of his perceived leftist message (I was one of the ones here at the time pointing out that it wasn't very leftist, so I say perceived). A lot just wanted change and hope, and didn't understand the message. Most voters don't understand the nuances, anyway. Hell, most people here don't--you can tell by how many think the IWR authorized the invasion.

No matter why they voted for Obama, Obama is not inspiring them now. Whether he tries to please the left or the middle, he has to do something stronger than he's doing, or no one will be happy, except his challenger in 2012. The Republican message is working, but it's working mostly because Obama isn't doing anything to challenge it.

Funny thing--while I was typing that last sentence, one of my coworkers stuck his head in the door and asked "You arguing with people over them losing Kennedy's seat?" I laughed and said "Yeah, actually." He said "Well, people voted for change, and nothing changed." :rofl: To me that's the bottom line--this guy doesn't even know the difference between left and right, but he can see that nothing much is different in any way that affects most people.

[inthebrain]

15. up