Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
August 01, 2014, 05:33:50 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
| |-+  Congressional Elections (Moderator: Joe Republic)
| | |-+  MA Senate Special Election Poll
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 Print
Poll
Question: Who would you vote for in the Massachusetts US Senate Special Election ?
Martha Coakley (D)   -25 (37.3%)
Martha Coakley (R)   -1 (1.5%)
Martha Coakley (L/I/G/O)   -9 (13.4%)
Scott Brown (R)   -28 (41.8%)
Scott Brown (D)   -1 (1.5%)
Scott Brown (L/I/G/O)   -2 (3%)
Joseph Kennedy (L/I/G/O)   -1 (1.5%)
Joseph Kennedy (R)   -0 (0%)
Joseph Kennedy (D)   -0 (0%)
Show Pie Chart
Total Voters: 66

Author Topic: MA Senate Special Election Poll  (Read 5017 times)
Alexander Hamilton
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9331
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

View Profile
« Reply #25 on: January 10, 2010, 07:59:21 pm »
Ignore

Coakley so far, but she needs to get her act together.

Why? as an independent(which I assume you are from you avatar), how can you vote for Coakley? She isn't going to be an independent voice, only a democrat rubber stamp. Brown at least needs to cross party lines to please constituents.

He's a Former Romney Republican.
Logged

people suck
Sewer
SpaceCommunistMutant
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7535
View Profile
« Reply #26 on: January 10, 2010, 08:05:17 pm »
Ignore

Coakley
Logged
RIP Robert H Bork
officepark
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9466
Czech Republic


View Profile
« Reply #27 on: January 10, 2010, 08:11:22 pm »
Ignore

I would probably write in someone.
Logged

Clearly the solution is to privatize presidential elections.

So, in less than four years, get excited for the 2016 MetLife Financial U Pick The Prez Extravaganza. If you tweet a picture of your completed ballot with the hashtag #ivoted, you could win a trip for two to the inauguration or an iTunes gift card.
Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 29251
United States


View Profile
« Reply #28 on: January 10, 2010, 08:12:47 pm »
Ignore

I would probably write in someone.

why?
Logged

He's BACK!!! His Time Has Come Once Again! Now We're All Gonna Die! No One is Safe From His Wrath!



Rowan
RowanBrandon
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6714


Political Matrix
E: 1.94, S: 4.70

View Profile
« Reply #29 on: January 10, 2010, 08:16:30 pm »
Ignore


Scott Brown wants to kill babies.
Logged
Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 29251
United States


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: January 10, 2010, 08:33:21 pm »
Ignore


Well then he should just think of it as vote against Obama and Coakley rather then for Scott Brown. This is the Waterloo that DeMint spoke. Its like the Michigan special election in 1931 that signaled no Republicans were safe anywhere even in there own base districts. We win here and Obama his finished for the rest of the year. By next Congress we will have 45 or 46 Senate seats. He needs to look at the larger goal. And Brown will be gone by 2013 anyway. We win here and any Democrat even in 15% Obama districts could be vulnerable in 2010.
Logged

He's BACK!!! His Time Has Come Once Again! Now We're All Gonna Die! No One is Safe From His Wrath!



Psychic Octopus
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9171
United States


View Profile
« Reply #31 on: January 10, 2010, 08:37:54 pm »
Ignore

SCOTT BROWN
Logged

Marokai Besieged
Marokai Blue
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 16699
United States


View Profile
« Reply #32 on: January 10, 2010, 08:39:55 pm »
Ignore


Well then he should just think of it as vote against Obama and Coakley rather then for Scott Brown. This is the Waterloo that DeMint spoke. Its like the Michigan special election in 1931 that signaled no Republicans were safe anywhere even in there own base districts. We win here and Obama his finished for the rest of the year. By next Congress we will have 45 or 46 Senate seats. He needs to look at the larger goal. And Brown will be gone by 2013 anyway. We win here and any Democrat even in 15% Obama districts could be vulnerable in 2010.

I <3 it when people made cold political calculation instead of policy proposals!
Logged

Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 29251
United States


View Profile
« Reply #33 on: January 10, 2010, 08:45:17 pm »
Ignore


Well then he should just think of it as vote against Obama and Coakley rather then for Scott Brown. This is the Waterloo that DeMint spoke. Its like the Michigan special election in 1931 that signaled no Republicans were safe anywhere even in there own base districts. We win here and Obama his finished for the rest of the year. By next Congress we will have 45 or 46 Senate seats. He needs to look at the larger goal. And Brown will be gone by 2013 anyway. We win here and any Democrat even in 15% Obama districts could be vulnerable in 2010.

I <3 it when people made cold political calculation instead of policy proposals!

Don't play dumb with me Marokai. Politics and Policy Proposals run hand in hand. You can't offer your policy proposals till you are in control, and to get in control you need to destroy your opponents and knock them out of office. Winning this seat helps further that.


Think about it Marokai. Would your policy proposals have stood a Ice cube's chance in hell if we had Mitt Romney as President with 48 Senate seats and 190 members in the House right now? No. And what put Obama in the White House? The Financial Crisis of late 2008, not his proposals. Get my point?
« Last Edit: January 10, 2010, 08:51:09 pm by Senator North Carolina Yankee, PPT »Logged

He's BACK!!! His Time Has Come Once Again! Now We're All Gonna Die! No One is Safe From His Wrath!



Marokai Besieged
Marokai Blue
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 16699
United States


View Profile
« Reply #34 on: January 10, 2010, 08:46:58 pm »
Ignore


Well then he should just think of it as vote against Obama and Coakley rather then for Scott Brown. This is the Waterloo that DeMint spoke. Its like the Michigan special election in 1931 that signaled no Republicans were safe anywhere even in there own base districts. We win here and Obama his finished for the rest of the year. By next Congress we will have 45 or 46 Senate seats. He needs to look at the larger goal. And Brown will be gone by 2013 anyway. We win here and any Democrat even in 15% Obama districts could be vulnerable in 2010.

I <3 it when people made cold political calculation instead of policy proposals!

Don't play dumb with me Marokai. Politics and Policy Proposals run hand in hand. You can't offer your policy proposals till you are in control, and to get in control you need to destroy your opponents and knock them out of office. Winning this seat helps further that.

Oh yeah, remember the Democrats? They proposed nothing until they got in control, right? What we really should do is vote for people on the hope they'll come up with something.

It's the only way.
Logged

Senator Libertas
Libertas
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14781
Palestinian Territory, Occupied


Political Matrix
E: -7.48, S: -9.22

View Profile
« Reply #35 on: January 10, 2010, 08:50:52 pm »
Ignore

If it looks like an actually winnable race come election day, Brown.

Otherwise, Kennedy.
Logged
Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 29251
United States


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: January 10, 2010, 08:54:30 pm »
Ignore


Well then he should just think of it as vote against Obama and Coakley rather then for Scott Brown. This is the Waterloo that DeMint spoke. Its like the Michigan special election in 1931 that signaled no Republicans were safe anywhere even in there own base districts. We win here and Obama his finished for the rest of the year. By next Congress we will have 45 or 46 Senate seats. He needs to look at the larger goal. And Brown will be gone by 2013 anyway. We win here and any Democrat even in 15% Obama districts could be vulnerable in 2010.

I <3 it when people made cold political calculation instead of policy proposals!

Don't play dumb with me Marokai. Politics and Policy Proposals run hand in hand. You can't offer your policy proposals till you are in control, and to get in control you need to destroy your opponents and knock them out of office. Winning this seat helps further that.

Oh yeah, remember the Democrats? They proposed nothing until they got in control, right? What we really should do is vote for people on the hope they'll come up with something.

It's the only way.

Actually technically the Democrats haven't come up with anything in decades. They did come up with a lot of sh**t I will grant you that but thats not saying much.
Logged

He's BACK!!! His Time Has Come Once Again! Now We're All Gonna Die! No One is Safe From His Wrath!



Vepres
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8103
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.26, S: -7.39

View Profile
« Reply #37 on: January 10, 2010, 08:56:45 pm »
Ignore

The one that comes from the party that doesn't control the entire state. (I)

Edit: Scott Brown is a moderate IMO. It appears he would not support repealing Roe v. Wade nor would he vote for a constitutional amendment to define marriage as between a man and a women.

Oh, and his election would effectively make Democrats start over on healthcare Grin
« Last Edit: January 10, 2010, 09:01:42 pm by Ebenezer Scrooge »Logged

LOL, Failure

Alright, if Republicans gain less than 75 seats, I'll prominently display my failure in my signature.
Marokai Besieged
Marokai Blue
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 16699
United States


View Profile
« Reply #38 on: January 10, 2010, 09:01:16 pm »
Ignore

The one that comes from the party that doesn't control the entire state. (I)

Is that how you make all your political decisions; voting, who to criticize, etc? Just whoever has power?
Logged

Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 29251
United States


View Profile
« Reply #39 on: January 10, 2010, 09:02:58 pm »
Ignore

The one that comes from the party that doesn't control the entire state. (I)

Is that how you make all your political decisions; voting, who to criticize, etc? Just whoever has power?

In a state overrun by wacko Liberals the only to be Independent is to vote Republican.
Logged

He's BACK!!! His Time Has Come Once Again! Now We're All Gonna Die! No One is Safe From His Wrath!



Vepres
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8103
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.26, S: -7.39

View Profile
« Reply #40 on: January 10, 2010, 09:09:40 pm »
Ignore

The one that comes from the party that doesn't control the entire state. (I)

Is that how you make all your political decisions; voting, who to criticize, etc? Just whoever has power?

No. Off the top of my head, I support Mark Udall, Orrin Hatch, Ron Wyden. Massachusetts is the only state that hasn't elected or reelected a person from the state's minority party in almost a decade (8 years), making it a unique exception.

I support Brown because he seems to be reasonably moderate on social issues and him being elected would effectively kill the current healthcare bill.

Besides, I have yet to know of a sitting Republican in New England I didn't like (not including state legislature, county offices, etc).
Logged

LOL, Failure

Alright, if Republicans gain less than 75 seats, I'll prominently display my failure in my signature.
Vepres
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8103
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.26, S: -7.39

View Profile
« Reply #41 on: January 10, 2010, 09:10:01 pm »
Ignore

The one that comes from the party that doesn't control the entire state. (I)

Is that how you make all your political decisions; voting, who to criticize, etc? Just whoever has power?

In a state overrun by wacko Liberals the only way to be Independent is to vote Republican.

Oh, and this Tongue
Logged

LOL, Failure

Alright, if Republicans gain less than 75 seats, I'll prominently display my failure in my signature.
Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 29251
United States


View Profile
« Reply #42 on: January 10, 2010, 09:11:56 pm »
Ignore

Marokai, how is this any different then Liberals voting for Blue Dogs like Jason Altmire, Heath Shuler, Jim Marshall or Gene Taylor? Or supporting very conservative candidates in Red states because they are the only ones that can win there? Because having your party in controll increases the liklihood that you will get some of your policies enacted. Look I me I support primarying of all Amnesty supporters but only in Red states and give people like the Maine ladies a free pass. Why? Because that is the best I can hope for in Maine. Whereas I know we can do better then some of these Amnesty supporters in Red or Swing States. I oppose most pork barrelers regardless of state or ideology. Those are the only two real deal breakers for me. Other then I don't give a damn if the candidate is Pro-Gay or Pro-Abortion, or whatever. I supported Lynn Jenkins in the general election in KS-02 for the same reason. She was a tax hiker and pro-choice. However she was tough on border security, pork spending and got us the House seat back.
Logged

He's BACK!!! His Time Has Come Once Again! Now We're All Gonna Die! No One is Safe From His Wrath!



Marokai Besieged
Marokai Blue
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 16699
United States


View Profile
« Reply #43 on: January 10, 2010, 09:23:07 pm »
Ignore

Marokai, how is this any different then Liberals voting for Blue Dogs like Jason Altmire, Heath Shuler, Jim Marshall or Gene Taylor? Or supporting very conservative candidates in Red states because they are the only ones that can win there? Because having your party in controll increases the liklihood that you will get some of your policies enacted. Look I me I support primarying of all Amnesty supporters but only in Red states and give people like the Maine ladies a free pass. Why? Because that is the best I can hope for in Maine. Whereas I know we can do better then some of these Amnesty supporters in Red or Swing States. I oppose most pork barrelers regardless of state or ideology. Those are the only two real deal breakers for me. Other then I don't give a damn if the candidate is Pro-Gay or Pro-Abortion, or whatever. I supported Lynn Jenkins in the general election in KS-02 for the same reason. She was a tax hiker and pro-choice. However she was tough on border security, pork spending and got us the House seat back.

It's not really the fact that you're supporting him that irks me. You can support him if you like, and it makes sense to support someone over another if the "other" is someone who is so contrary to your beliefs, though it bothers me a teeny tiny bit because I don't really think people actually understand anything about Scott Brown other than "he's kinda pro-choice and he's not a Democrat" I'm willing to let that go.

My beef with Vepres is that he seems to base all of his political endorsements or his positions or his choices of targets to criticize soley on who is in power. If Republicans controlled congress and the Presidency right now, I'd happily bet you fifty dollars he'd be cheering on the Democrat. Vepres' sort of backward idea of how a government should be arranged is a recipe for an utterly deadlocked and paralyzed nation that accomplishes nothing but the most watered-down slap-on-the-wrist reforms and changes.

But that's neither here nor there.

My problem is a broader one, one I brought up with you to begin with. People are supporting the Republican to play a part in the grander scheme of things. Which is what? The right-wing opposition right now seems, to me, to be a movement based on complete and utter ignorance and an unwillingness to go along with any deviation from the status-quo. It doesn't care what the situation is, it doesn't care what the facts are, it doesn't care if something is effective or not, the movement does not care about the truth. And it's let to the Republican party having no message. no policy proposals to flaunt, nothing at all to run on.

What they are running on is, "stop the Democrats" and I simply find that to be absurd. The Republicans aren't running on anything at all, they have no ideas of their own, no solutions whatsoever, but people will happily line up in support of someone who, Hoffman from New York as one of my previous examples, doesn't care about policymaking or any of that complicated "work" stuff.

It simply baffles me that a party that has proposed absolutely nothing of it's own can actually run and possibly win on such a message, and that people such as yourself justify this complete lack of substance by saying "well, maybe when he gets in, we'll come up with something!" It's dangerous, and it's irresponsible, and it's just stupid.
Logged

Senator Libertas
Libertas
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14781
Palestinian Territory, Occupied


Political Matrix
E: -7.48, S: -9.22

View Profile
« Reply #44 on: January 10, 2010, 10:13:44 pm »
Ignore

What they are running on is, "stop the Democrats" and I simply find that to be absurd. The Republicans aren't running on anything at all, they have no ideas of their own, no solutions whatsoever, but people will happily line up in support of someone who, Hoffman from New York as one of my previous examples, doesn't care about policymaking or any of that complicated "work" stuff.
Better nothing at all than something horrible, which is what the Democrats are running on.
Logged
Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 29251
United States


View Profile
« Reply #45 on: January 10, 2010, 10:23:54 pm »
Ignore

Marokai, how is this any different then Liberals voting for Blue Dogs like Jason Altmire, Heath Shuler, Jim Marshall or Gene Taylor? Or supporting very conservative candidates in Red states because they are the only ones that can win there? Because having your party in controll increases the liklihood that you will get some of your policies enacted. Look I me I support primarying of all Amnesty supporters but only in Red states and give people like the Maine ladies a free pass. Why? Because that is the best I can hope for in Maine. Whereas I know we can do better then some of these Amnesty supporters in Red or Swing States. I oppose most pork barrelers regardless of state or ideology. Those are the only two real deal breakers for me. Other then I don't give a damn if the candidate is Pro-Gay or Pro-Abortion, or whatever. I supported Lynn Jenkins in the general election in KS-02 for the same reason. She was a tax hiker and pro-choice. However she was tough on border security, pork spending and got us the House seat back.

It's not really the fact that you're supporting him that irks me. You can support him if you like, and it makes sense to support someone over another if the "other" is someone who is so contrary to your beliefs, though it bothers me a teeny tiny bit because I don't really think people actually understand anything about Scott Brown other than "he's kinda pro-choice and he's not a Democrat" I'm willing to let that go.

My beef with Vepres is that he seems to base all of his political endorsements or his positions or his choices of targets to criticize soley on who is in power. If Republicans controlled congress and the Presidency right now, I'd happily bet you fifty dollars he'd be cheering on the Democrat. Vepres' sort of backward idea of how a government should be arranged is a recipe for an utterly deadlocked and paralyzed nation that accomplishes nothing but the most watered-down slap-on-the-wrist reforms and changes.

But that's neither here nor there.

My problem is a broader one, one I brought up with you to begin with. People are supporting the Republican to play a part in the grander scheme of things. Which is what? The right-wing opposition right now seems, to me, to be a movement based on complete and utter ignorance and an unwillingness to go along with any deviation from the status-quo. It doesn't care what the situation is, it doesn't care what the facts are, it doesn't care if something is effective or not, the movement does not care about the truth. And it's let to the Republican party having no message. no policy proposals to flaunt, nothing at all to run on.

What they are running on is, "stop the Democrats" and I simply find that to be absurd. The Republicans aren't running on anything at all, they have no ideas of their own, no solutions whatsoever, but people will happily line up in support of someone who, Hoffman from New York as one of my previous examples, doesn't care about policymaking or any of that complicated "work" stuff.

It simply baffles me that a party that has proposed absolutely nothing of it's own can actually run and possibly win on such a message, and that people such as yourself justify this complete lack of substance by saying "well, maybe when he gets in, we'll come up with something!" It's dangerous, and it's irresponsible, and it's just stupid.

Marokai, what do you want. You want us to kneel down and accept a Public Option that will just create another bankrupt entitlement and won't solve the problems. And don't you dare throw the fact that even a non-public option bill won't get GOP supports. Thats you guys fault for pushing the public option so long, letting Dem leaders ignore us, and stipping good parts of the bill to try and save the public option.  That we should just sit back and accept Climate change legislation that risks sending millions of jobs overseas with mere "hopes" that it will create new industries, based on a "debateable" theory. That we should sit back and watch as Barack Obama restarts that great Wave of Illegal Immigration by passing Amnesty with only show piece border security and faux crackdowns on employers. The idea that we have proposed nothing is created by your leftward bias. It should be phrased, "You haven't offered anything, I like" lol. Well Marokai, thats why you are a Democrat aren't you? Get mad, get glad and get over it.

I prefer the crossroads or inflection point analogy of Romney. We can go left or right. Either way American will be fundamentally changed. But the idea that the GOP fights for no reforms is nonesense. In 2012 our nominee, if he is too win, will have to have a set of reforms in mind on Education, Health care, and Energy. These will not be cave ins to utopian visions of Liberals such as yourself either.
« Last Edit: January 10, 2010, 10:26:17 pm by Senator North Carolina Yankee, PPT »Logged

He's BACK!!! His Time Has Come Once Again! Now We're All Gonna Die! No One is Safe From His Wrath!



Lincoln Republican
Winfield
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10462


View Profile
« Reply #46 on: January 10, 2010, 10:41:31 pm »
Ignore

Scott Brown or most anyone else who is not a Kennedy patsy.

Although I really cannot see a Republican winning this Senate seat, not in Leftist  Massachusetts.
« Last Edit: January 10, 2010, 10:47:27 pm by Thomas E. Dewey »Logged




WORST PRESIDENT
SINCE WORLD WAR II
Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 29251
United States


View Profile
« Reply #47 on: January 10, 2010, 10:45:43 pm »
Ignore

Currently its:

Coakley(D) 52.8%
Brown(R)    45.2%
Kennedy(I)   1.9%


Wouldn't be surprised if thats the final result of the special election.
Logged

He's BACK!!! His Time Has Come Once Again! Now We're All Gonna Die! No One is Safe From His Wrath!



Vepres
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8103
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.26, S: -7.39

View Profile
« Reply #48 on: January 10, 2010, 11:34:28 pm »
Ignore

I was just thinking about how hilarious it would be if Coakley lost because Kennedy the independent stole a few % points from her.
Logged

LOL, Failure

Alright, if Republicans gain less than 75 seats, I'll prominently display my failure in my signature.
Psychic Octopus
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9171
United States


View Profile
« Reply #49 on: January 10, 2010, 11:41:31 pm »
Ignore

I was just thinking about how hilarious it would be if Coakley lost because Kennedy the independent stole a few % points from her.

I can actually see that happening (The Kennedy name stealing votes, not her losing, although I hope Brown wins).
Logged

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines