|
|
Post by Nikkol on Jan 19, 2010 15:09:12 GMT -5
Any thoughts???
Boston, Massachusetts (CNN) -- Voters across Massachusetts braved winter cold and snow Tuesday to decide who will inherit the U.S. Senate seat controlled by the Kennedy family since 1953.
At stake was President Obama's domestic agenda, including the overhaul of health care.
If GOP state Sen. Scott Brown upsets Democratic Attorney General Martha Coakley, Republicans would strip Democrats of their 60-seat filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. Republicans would have enough votes to block future Senate votes on a broad range of White House priorities.
Election turnout is expected to be "pretty good," said Brian McNiff, a spokesman for the office of Massachusetts Secretary of State Bill Galvin.
Galvin predicted Monday as many 2.2 million of 4.5 million registered voters would vote -- at least double the turnout from December's primary.
"I don't think weather is going to impede too many people" from coming out to vote, McNiff said. "I think the interest in this election will trump any bad weather."
More than 100,000 absentee ballots have been requested, he added.
Coakley initially was expected to win the race easily to replace Sen. Ted Kennedy, known as the "liberal lion" of the Senate who made health care reform the centerpiece of his nearly 47-year Senate career. Kennedy, 77, died of brain cancer in August.
Former Kennedy aide and longtime friend Paul Kirk was appointed to the seat on an interim basis after the senator's death.
Until recently, Brown was underfunded and unknown statewide. No Republican has won a U.S. Senate race in Massachusetts since 1972. Democrats control the governorship, both houses of the state Legislature and the entire congressional delegation.
The latest poll, however, shows Brown leading Coakley by 7 percentage points, 52 percent to 45 percent. The American Research Group survey, taken Friday through Sunday, had a sampling error of 4 percentage points.
No poll released in the past few days has shown Coakley ahead.
Obama and former President Clinton hit the campaign trail over the past three days in an attempt to save Coakley's campaign, which observers said has been hampered by complacency and missteps.
Obama crushed Sen. John McCain in Massachusetts in 2008, beating the GOP presidential nominee by 26 percentage points.
"If you were fired up in the last election, I need you more fired up in this election," Obama urged a crowd Sunday at a Coakley campaign rally.
Vicki Kennedy, the late senator's widow, called on Democrats to turn out to save her husband's legacy.
"We need your help. We need your support. We need you to get out there and vote on Tuesday," Kennedy said. "We need you to bring your neighbors. We need you to bring your friends."
Brown, who has trumpeted his 30 years of service in the National Guard, hewed to traditional GOP themes at the end of the campaign. He promised at a rally Sunday that, if elected, he would back tax cuts and be tougher on terrorists than Coakley.
He also repeated a pledge to oppose Obama's health care overhaul effort.
"Massachusetts wants real reform and not this trillion-dollar Obama health care that is being forced on the American people," he said. "As the 41st [Republican] senator, I will make sure that we do it better."
Forty-four percent of Massachusetts voters cited the economy and jobs as their top concern in a recent 7 News/Suffolk University poll. Thirty-eight percent mentioned health care as their top concern.
Voters more concerned with the economy were split almost evenly between the two candidates; voters more worried about health care narrowly supported Coakley.
Democrats far outnumber Republicans in Massachusetts, but there are more independents than Democrats and Republicans combined.
Democratic sources said Obama advisers have told the party they believe Coakley is going to lose. The sources said they still hoped Obama's weekend visit to the state, coupled with a late push by party activists, could tip the balance in her favor.
Facing the possibility of Coakley's defeat, Democrats were trying to figure out if they could pass health care legislation without that crucial 60th Senate vote.
But top White House aides publicly insisted they are not engaging in any talk of contingency plans because they believe Coakley will come out on top Tuesday.
Galvin, a Democrat, said last week that certifying Tuesday's election results could take more than two weeks -- potentially enough time to allow congressional Democrats to pass a final health care bill before Brown would be seated should he win.
But Democratic sources said this is unlikely.
Two Democratic sources in close contact with the White House said Monday they've urged the Obama administration, in the event of a Brown victory, to push House Democrats to pass the Senate's health care bill as currently written. Doing so would prevent the Senate from having to take up the plan again.
"I think the Senate bill clearly is better than nothing," House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Maryland, said Tuesday.
A third option would be for Democrats to revisit the idea of trying to push health care through the Senate with 51 votes -- a simple majority.
But to do so, Democrats would have to use a process known as reconciliation, which presents technical and procedural issues that would delay the process for a long time. A number of Democrats are eager to put the health care debate behind them and move on to economic issues such as job creation as soon as possible this election year.
Senate Democrats also could try again to get moderate GOP Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine to vote for a compromise health care plan. Multiple Democratic sources, however, have said they believe such a scenario is unlikely.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nikkol on Jan 20, 2010 8:52:58 GMT -5
Well, GOP took the seat. I know that has to be tough since a GOP hasn't had a seat in Mass since 1972......
Boston, Massachusetts (CNN) -- Even before the polls closed on Tuesday night, Democrats were distancing themselves from Democrat Martha Coakley and blaming her lackluster campaign for her stunning loss in the U.S. Senate race in Massachusetts.
A top adviser to President Obama rejected assertions that Tuesday's vote was a referendum on the president or Democratic policies and instead took a shot at Coakley: "Campaigns and candidates matter."
For weeks, Scott Brown had been the underdog candidate, running behind in the race to finish out the late Sen. Ted Kennedy's term.
Trailing by double digits a little more than a week ago, Brown had edged ahead of Coakley, campaigning as the pickup truck-driving candidate, capitalizing on voter frustrations and vowing to send Obama's health care bill "back to its drawing board."
Coakley, the state's attorney general, had been considered a shoo-in in heavily Democratic Massachusetts, which hadn't elected a Republican to the Senate in 38 years.
But as Brown gained momentum and Coakley's numbers fell, Democrats rushed big guns to campaign for her, including Obama and former President Bill Clinton.
In the hours after Coakley's concession speech, though, Coakley's pollster Celinda Lake fired back at criticism that she ran a weak and misguided campaign and failed to recognize Brown's surge until it was too late.
Instead, Lake warned Democrats that, "There's a wave here. The first shore was New Jersey and Virginia," she said, referring to Democratic losses in the governors races there, "the second was Massachusetts and it's coming to the island now, so we'd better do something about it."
Other Democrats appeared to recognize the anti-Washington sentiment the recent votes represent.
Sen. Jim Webb of Virginia said that the election "became a referendum not only on health care reform but also on the openness and integrity of our government process."
While Democrats huddled to try to figure out a way to get their health care bill passed before Brown is seated and ends their 60-seat filibuster-proof "supermajority" in the Senate, Webb says it would be "prudent" for Congress to suspend further votes on health care reform legislation until Brown is seated.
Rep. Anthony Weiner, D-New York, said Tuesday night that the Massachusetts results demonstrated Democrats have to change their strategy on health care.
"Large numbers of independent voters saying they're upset about health care, that's not just their fault, that's our fault too. And we have to think about what we're doing wrong here, and to have a conversation as if nothing happened, whether you're in Massachusetts or not, is being tone deaf."
Brown warned in his victory speech that Democrats will face the same factors in the midterm elections in November that led to his win in Massachusetts on Tuesday.
"We had the machine scared and scrambling, and for them it is just the beginning of an election year filled with surprises." he said. "They will be challenged again and again across this country. When there's trouble in Massachusetts, there's trouble everywhere -- and now they know it."
Heading into the race, few political analysts believed Brown, a state senator, had a serious shot at beating Coakley, the state's attorney general.
Brown was underfunded and unknown statewide. No Republican has won a U.S. Senate race in Massachusetts since 1972. Democrats control the state's congressional delegation. They also hold the state's governorship, along with overwhelming majorities in the state legislature.
But Brown, who is in his third term in the state Senate, charged forward on a pledge to end wasteful government spending and hand politics back to the people.
Before he was in the state Senate, Brown served three terms as a state representative. He's also a member of the Massachusetts National Guard.
"He's branded himself brilliantly. He has run as the people's senator," said Jennifer Donahue, a political analyst and contributor to The Huffington Post.
Asked in a debate last week if he was willing to sit in Kennedy's seat and block health care reform, Brown replied, "With all due respect, it's not the Kennedys' seat, and it's not the Democrats' seat, it's the people's seat."
Donahue said that was the game changer for Brown because Coakley "didn't have an effective answer against that."
More so than a statement on the candidates' strength and weaknesses, it's discontent among voters in Massachusetts that swung the election, said David Gergen, a political analyst and CNN contributor.
"Scott Brown turned this into a referendum on what's going on in Washington, especially with health care. His campaign began to gain traction when he said that, 'I am going to be the 41st senator, the one who can stop a lot of this,' " Gergen said.
Gergen also pointed to a major sports gaffe that might have hurt Coakley's image in Red Sox nation. In a recent radio interview, she suggested that former Red Sox pitcher Curt Schilling is a Yankees fan.
"When she was clueless the other day about who Curt Schilling was ... you can imagine what that did," Gergen said.
John Avlon, author of "Independent Nation: How Centrists Can Change American Politics," says in the end, the results of Tuesday's election rested in the hands of independent voters. Democrats far outnumber Republicans in Massachusetts, but there are more independents than Republicans and Democrats combined.
"Independents asserting their real power even in Massachusetts should be a huge wake-up call to Democrats and Republicans."
But no matter what the outcome, Avlon said this shouldn't be viewed as voters turning on Obama.
"I don't think it's a referendum on Obama necessarily personally, because he is still personally popular with many independents. It's the Democratic Congress that's being reacted against.
"Independents like the checks and balances of divided government. They dislike the ideological arrogance and legislative overreach that comes when one party controls both the White House and Congress. That's what you're seeing," he said.
|
|
|
|
Post by krazeeboi on Jan 20, 2010 21:10:51 GMT -5
Obama has got to get his act together for the next year and a half if he wants another term as president. This election was a referendum on him and his agenda and the people have spoken loud and clear.
|
|
|
|
Post by anointedteacher on Jan 21, 2010 0:32:48 GMT -5
Obama has got to get his act together for the next year and a half if he wants another term as president. This election was a referendum on him and his agenda and the people have spoken loud and clear. Really?.... He have his act togather... and he is doing the right thing. People listening to the wrong folks.. and voting against what may be best for them. Obama is not responsible for bank bailout, it took place during Bush administration, remember and they upset with the Senator's health bill... PPL need to learn about the different branch of Government... so they don't think everything is Obama fault... He have done more in his 1st year than most President did in 4 years and the last one in eight... PPl so easily foeget that Bush stop functioning 2007... and even didn't know the economy was going down the hole, still it was almost too late and did nothing, but bailout the banks, with no string attached or regulations. PPl are blaming Pres. Obama for Wall Street.... America need to come up higher, the senator.s bill is better than nothing at all... It not going to stop The Health care Bill from being pass... President Obama is the first President in my lifetime that actually working for the American PPL and not for big corporations and wall street. |
|
|
|
Post by Nikkol on Jan 21, 2010 8:20:01 GMT -5
Even if Obama isn't responsible for the bailout, he is responsible for giving auto companies (who made cars that they KNEW were inferior to other companies) money as well as insurance companies money (although truth be told, they made bad financial moves). They even gave cash for clunkers...although the idea sounds nice, I believe the records show that ppl still didn't buy as many American cars as they did foreign.
One Dem (and Obama himself) (I can't remember if it was in these articles or not, also said that they should wait until he's seated to start working on this bill again and another Senator said they should go back to the beginning and take pieces of the bill at a time. (I believe that both of these ppl were "Democrats".) Therefore, it would appear that there is a disconnect between what the ppl want and what the Senate is trying to pass......and this HCR bill is probably the one thing on each other's minds.
We've had a definict for YEARS. before Bush, Reagan, etc.
And I don't believe that any bill is better than none at all. I believe(believed) that the bill would also hurt a lot of bigger companies that would push more of their employees to gov't run plans because it would be more convenient and cheaper.
|
|
|
|
Post by giantsdodie on Jan 21, 2010 8:37:08 GMT -5
Everyone complains about the bailouts. They attitude was let em collapse.
Sure let the auto industry collapse. Put MILLIONS of people out of work. And not just those people in the industry but every industry ATTACHED to it.. You make brake pads for cars.. you need to lay people off. You make windshield wiper blades.. you need to lay people off. Tires. Lay people off. Mufflers. Air Filters, Oil filters. Spark Plugs. ALL of those industries are affected if the auto inductry suffers.
Dont bail out AIG. Bad idea. There are far too many companies who do overseas business including the US itself who use AIG to underwrite their insurance. Without it they CANNOT do business.
And if you didnt bail out banks. You would be facing a DEPRESSION not a Recession.
These werent easy choices but they were necessary.
The bottom line as I see it for SAINTS. I aint looking at Obama or anyone else. I am looking to JESUS.
Joseph prospered in a famine. Issac prospered in a famine.
Saints need to be seeking GOD to see how they can prosper in a famine. What do they need to do even in a downturned economu to prosper regardless of the situations and circumstances.
Im getting a plan that deals with the highest authority and greatest power there is.. and the only one that matters.
JESUS...
|
|
|
|
Post by Nikkol on Jan 21, 2010 11:24:47 GMT -5
Side Bar:
GDD: Not really understanding what not agreeing with the bailouts equates to not seeking Jesus or even a lack of prospering.....
Granted, I don't think that it was the best decision. However, we should all be walking in the favor of God no matter what the decision is. To me, I believe that what happened was based on what the will of God is/was. And I may not always agree but I believe that what happens is meant to happen. (which of course is where we differentiate regarding the will of God).......
Now, back to the topic at hand..... I don't think that the vote against the dem was meaning that they all were "pro republican"....but moreso "anti filibuster-proof majority".
|
|
|
|
Post by anointedteacher on Jan 21, 2010 12:06:16 GMT -5
Even if Obama isn't responsible for the bailout, he is responsible for giving auto companies (who made cars that they KNEW were inferior to other companies) money as well as insurance companies money (although truth be told, they made bad financial moves). They even gave cash for clunkers...although the idea sounds nice, I believe the records show that ppl still didn't buy as many American cars as they did foreign. One Dem (and Obama himself) (I can't remember if it was in these articles or not, also said that they should wait until he's seated to start working on this bill again and another Senator said they should go back to the beginning and take pieces of the bill at a time. (I believe that both of these ppl were "Democrats".) Therefore, it would appear that there is a disconnect between what the ppl want and what the Senate is trying to pass......and this HCR bill is probably the one thing on each other's minds. We've had a definict for YEARS. before Bush, Reagan, etc. And I don't believe that any bill is better than none at all. I believe(believed) that the bill would also hurt a lot of bigger companies that would push more of their employees to gov't run plans because it would be more convenient and cheaper. Agree with Giant, many of us don't really understand what really go on, how things actually work and how their decision affected the American ppl... I understood they had to bailout the banks to keep us from falling into a depression, not only here in the US, but in other countries as well... But ppl keep connecting the bailout with Obama, when it took place before he was seated... Health Care Reform is very necessary... A felling health care also caused the recession and responsible for many death ( the real death penaty). PPL who work and have been paying these insurance companies every paycheck, have been denied health care when they get real sick, that what happen to Pres. Obama's mother and many of the American ppl. Even a weak HCR will keep insurance Co from dening pre-existance sickness and keep them from cutting off those who get sick. If they fix it that ppl can get Health Ins. cross stateline, it will cause more competition, which will lower the cost and make it affordable. I am still for Public Option... that would've been based on individual income and expansion of medicaid and medicare. Everyone should be covered... 2007 thru 2008 have been nelected because the previous President didn't see it coming till the end of the summer of 2008. As a Christian my trust is in God not man... I have more not working, being on disability than when I was wrong over time... and I am able to do more... My previous job didn't offer Health insurance... I am on medicaid under Humana.. I have a private physicain, specialists, hospitalization, dential etc... I am going back to school to strengthen my accounting skills and will soon start my bookkeeping business. I am working at home... I am doing bookkeeping for a ministry right now and will soon add on. I am doing well during this recession... I consider those who attach the HCR with no realistic solution are being very selffish... People lives are on the line and it too late for many. |
|
|
|
Post by Nikkol on Jan 21, 2010 13:22:15 GMT -5
Even if Obama isn't responsible for the bailout, he is responsible for giving auto companies (who made cars that they KNEW were inferior to other companies) money as well as insurance companies money (although truth be told, they made bad financial moves). They even gave cash for clunkers...although the idea sounds nice, I believe the records show that ppl still didn't buy as many American cars as they did foreign. One Dem (and Obama himself) (I can't remember if it was in these articles or not, also said that they should wait until he's seated to start working on this bill again and another Senator said they should go back to the beginning and take pieces of the bill at a time. (I believe that both of these ppl were "Democrats".) Therefore, it would appear that there is a disconnect between what the ppl want and what the Senate is trying to pass......and this HCR bill is probably the one thing on each other's minds. We've had a definict for YEARS. before Bush, Reagan, etc. And I don't believe that any bill is better than none at all. I believe(believed) that the bill would also hurt a lot of bigger companies that would push more of their employees to gov't run plans because it would be more convenient and cheaper. Agree with Giant, many of us don't really understand what really go on, how things actually work and how their decision affected the American ppl... I understood they had to bailout the banks to keep us from falling into a depression, not only here in the US, but in other countries as well... But ppl keep connecting the bailout with Obama, when it took place before he was seated... Health Care Reform is very necessary... A felling health care also caused the recession and responsible for many death ( the real death penaty). PPL who work and have been paying these insurance companies every paycheck, have been denied health care when they get real sick, that what happen to Pres. Obama's mother and many of the American ppl. Even a weak HCR will keep insurance Co from dening pre-existance sickness and keep them from cutting off those who get sick. If they fix it that ppl can get Health Ins. cross stateline, it will cause more competition, which will lower the cost and make it affordable. I am still for Public Option... that would've been based on individual income and expansion of medicaid and medicare. Everyone should be covered... 2007 thru 2008 have been nelected because the previous President didn't see it coming till the end of the summer of 2008. As a Christian my trust is in God not man... I have more not working, being on disability than when I was wrong over time... and I am able to do more... My previous job didn't offer Health insurance... I am on medicaid under Humana.. I have a private physicain, specialists, hospitalization, dential etc... I am going back to school to strengthen my accounting skills and will soon start my bookkeeping business. I am working at home... I am doing bookkeeping for a ministry right now and will soon add on. I am doing well during this recession... I consider those who attach the HCR with no realistic solution are being very selffish... People lives are on the line and it too late for many. I think that everyone on this site as well as both Dems and Reps believe that we need to reform health care. However, I am agreement with the Dems who have stated that they need to take the bill and do small changes a little at a time. |
|
|
|
Post by Poetricia (G.A.P.) on Jan 22, 2010 8:56:05 GMT -5
Obama has got to get his act together for the next year and a half if he wants another term as president. This election was a referendum on him and his agenda and the people have spoken loud and clear. i agree!!! p.s. happy anniversary mr. president! time to wake up and smell the coffee |
|
|
|
Post by giantsdodie on Jan 26, 2010 10:10:33 GMT -5
Side Bar: GDD: Not really understanding what not agreeing with the bailouts equates to not seeking Jesus or even a lack of prospering..... Granted, I don't think that it was the best decision. However, we should all be walking in the favor of God no matter what the decision is. To me, I believe that what happened was based on what the will of God is/was. And I may not always agree but I believe that what happens is meant to happen. (which of course is where we differentiate regarding the will of God)....... Now, back to the topic at hand..... I don't think that the vote against the dem was meaning that they all were "pro republican"....but moreso "anti filibuster-proof majority". What I am simply saying is this. I dont place my trust or focus on what the Govt does and does not do. I am aware of what they do but my focus and trust is in God. This is a time the saints of God need to be seeking Him for his direction because even in troubles times God has a plan to prosper and bless His people. And then God can use His Blessed people to bless others. Imagine what it would be like if you had lots of Christian buisness persons sending money and resources into communities and building homes and shelters and schools and hospitals all over the world. Imagine if God could take your small business and turn in into a conglomerate that could employ hundreds to thousands of people ?? Imagine God being able to replicate this all over the world through His people. ANd this is just a thought. The reality of the bailouts were this. Bail them out or let them collapse. People who are largely ignorant about business as a whole say things like.. Well let them collapse they created the mess we are in. Well thats not entirely true. Because the American people had a hand in it as well taking on debt that they KNEW they could repay and buying houses they KNEW they couldnt afford. In a system where so much is connected you cannot have one or two pieces fall and 200 other pieces not be affected. Lets say you let AIG fail. Now your company who uses AIG (the largest big buisness isurance company in the world) for insurance has to get new insurance. That is a cost outlay. Now EVERY SINGLE PROJECT that is insured by AIG comes to an immediate halt. That leads to more layoffs and greater job loss. Sure let that bank fail. And everything attacjed to it fails. That office building downtown being built that would bring in 1,000 new jobs that the bank was financing.. Stopped.. Your new home being built.. Stopped... Not as easy as it seems. |
|
|
|
Post by keita on Jan 26, 2010 14:25:42 GMT -5
What I am simply saying is this. I dont place my trust or focus on what the Govt does and does not do. I am aware of what they do but my focus and trust is in God.
This is a time the saints of God need to be seeking Him for his direction because even in troubles times God has a plan to prosper and bless His people.
And then God can use His Blessed people to bless others. |
|
|
|
Post by Nikkol on Jan 26, 2010 15:05:54 GMT -5
Companies changing insurance company isn't a new thing it's happened on occasions at different companies and not too long ago there was a big article about ppl who had bought houses "from the ground up" who's work had stopped.
The issue is that when anyone tends to make a "quick decision", many times, other repurcussions because of that decision aren't thought all the way through which can cause for other issues down the road.
Then again, this is just the "political center" and I'd hope that we aren't putting our trust in gov't.
Some things are facts:
Fact - we need to reform health care
Fact - We need to get out of debt
Fact - Ppl need jobs
What will vary between all of us is the way that it should be handled....
|
|
|
|
Post by giantsdodie on Jan 27, 2010 9:00:27 GMT -5
Other Facts.
We as Americans ( this one included ) need to live healthier lifestyles which will cause us to live better and longer and in all honesty would help lower our personal health care costs in the long run barring any unforseen issues.
We need to control our own PERSONAL debt by not buying what we cannot afford and living off credit. As individuals and especially as saints we need to be better stewards over what is placed in our hands.
Fact. Job growth is not going to spurred by big business hires. Its going to occur like it always have through the growth of small businesses. The govt can help small businesses get started and grow and PEOPLE have to look to actually start them.
As a saint ( which is the perspective I can speak on the best ) I believe that GOD wants to give many saints businesses which will in turn impact their lives, family, church and community with the Gospel of Jesus Christ ( the primary mission ) and economically.
This is a time that we as saints should be seeking GOD as to what to do and how to do it. I always say even in a downturned economy SOMEONE is prospering. There were more millionaires that can out of the depression than there were that went into it.
While this forum is political, IMO we should always be looking to the spiritual solution which affects the political arena.
|
|
