Martha Coakley and Scott Brown (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 30, 2024, 06:01:03 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  Martha Coakley and Scott Brown (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Martha Coakley and Scott Brown  (Read 3119 times)
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,752


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

« on: November 05, 2014, 04:44:01 AM »

I wonder which state Scott Brown will move to next.

"Scott Brown for Utah 2016"

Jim Matheson beating Scott Brown for US Senate would be hilarious.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,752


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

« Reply #1 on: November 16, 2014, 09:11:45 PM »

Maddow was muttering something about "he is the only person in America to lose to two women in Senate races!" -- I mean, what? lol
... because he was

So what? All it is is shameless gender-card bait which worked out really well for you this election didn't it.

Scott Brown came very close to winning, and surged in the polls when he took a position against amnesty.  Shaheen was the most popular of all "endangered" incumbents that were up this cycle. The facts don't lie on either of these two things.

All the talk about how the GOP Must expand its base, and yet moderate Republicans get more grief from MSNBC than they do from us in the tea party. Odd.



Because they realize that the Moderate Republicans are a threat to the Democratic Party.

The Democrats are truly shuddering at the thought of Jim Jeffords, Lincoln Chafee, and Arlen Specter.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.023 seconds with 13 queries.