obama should lose

[hi_im_god]

Originally Posted by Rileyoriley

Don't be too sure about Mass.. Brown has a very good approval rating here. People like him because he does not vote strictly along party lines. He is extremely popular among independents who make up the majority of voters here.

i'm not the least bit sure about brown. and i think the senate flips to the republicans even if he loses.

i was just commenting in response to riot's post about him being vulnerable and putting it in the larger context of democrats defending 8 vulnerable seats vs. republican's only defending 2.

[Rileyoriley]

Originally Posted by hi_im_god

i'm not the least bit sure about brown. and i think the senate flips to the republicans even if he loses.

i was just commenting in response to riot's post about him being vulnerable and putting it in the larger context of democrats defending 8 vulnerable seats vs. republican's only defending 2.

Sorry. I tend to skip Riot's posts and only saw yours.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

Uh ... it's not based upon party affiliation, but on what the candidate stands for, and what their actual record is regarding lobbying money, etc.

Like this part you didn't highlight: There are plenty of Dems that will be primaried, or not supported, due to their views.

I know that for folks like you, that view the political parties like sports teams, where the opponent can never, ever, EVER be supported, no matter what, it's hard to understand voting for candidates NOT based upon political party, but upon their actions and record.

You can't say that they will support no Republicans then in the next sentence say there is a lot of support for Paul who at last look was a Republican. And please stop trying to make a group that only supports one brand of politician (democrats) as non-partisan.

The irony of your post (as usual) is that you say "folks like me" only support one party no matter what when it is YOU who is on record (broken record) as saying that they will NEVER vote for the GOP again.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Danzig

the lefties might be pissed, but they're still going to vote for obama...or not vote. they won't vote for the opposition. just like the right-it's not like they're going to vote for obama, no matter how unpalatable romney might be. it's the indies, the middle who will decide, just like always. obama said himself that if he didn't fix things, he'd be a one termer. of course he'll run on a four years isn't enough to fix things type campaign, which is correct. but he dug himself that hole, now he'll have to get out of it.

People think that the Indy's will be the determining factor but that assumes that the party lines will be balanced which they may not be. In other words the people who don't show up to vote will be as important as those who do. Far left liberals are as vindicitve as they are idealistic (it doesnt matter for the purposes of this post that most of those ideas are wrong). If they think that they have been wronged by Obama(which a whole lot of them do) they may rather not show up to vote which will be a huge loss for O. I have a feeling that the Right will be far more motivated to show up though I suppose that the loser of the last election will usually be. If a far greater percentage of rigties show up than lefties than winning the indy vote is less important and it is hard to imagine that it wont be close to an even split right now considering the direction of the country and the weakness of the GOP contender

[geeker2]

Originally Posted by Rileyoriley

Don't be too sure about Mass.. Brown has a very good approval rating here. People like him because he does not vote strictly along party lines. He is extremely popular among independents who make up the majority of voters here.

Deb-o Deb Rules!!!

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

You can't say that they will support no Republicans then in the next sentence say there is a lot of support for Paul who at last look was a Republican.

Paul is no Republican, he is a Libertarian. Past NH, he'll be running as an independent.

And please stop trying to make a group that only supports one brand of politician (democrats) as non-partisan.

Yes, it's clear you know all Occupy Do tell, what Republican candidates or politicians share Occupy values? It's pretty clear that the vast majority of politicians: 100% of Repubs and many-most Dems - are in the pocket of corporate-owned government. Plenty of Dems won't be remotely supported by Occupy.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by hi_im_god

i'm not the least bit sure about brown. and i think the senate flips to the republicans even if he loses.

i was just commenting in response to riot's post about him being vulnerable and putting it in the larger context of democrats defending 8 vulnerable seats vs. republican's only defending 2.

True the Dems have more seats to defend, but right now some of those states are being destroyed by their GOP govs, which will play into Dem hands. Brown is already massive points behind Warren, in a historically Dem Senate seat. But there's a long time to go yet. Trends are not even "real" now.

[Rileyoriley]

Originally Posted by geeker2

Deb-o Deb Rules!!!

Brown is holding the lead over Warren and the 3 other Dem challengers. Warren is expected to win the Dem nomination.

If interested, go to realclearpolitics.com and look under Mass 2012 senate race.

[clyde]

Originally Posted by geeker2

Deb-o Deb Rules!!!

^^^^ Under effects of St. Joseph Rye for Adults.(86 proof...4% Turpentine...3% ethyl alcohol)

[geeker2]

Originally Posted by Rileyoriley

Brown is holding the lead over Warren and the 3 other Dem challengers. Warren is expected to win the Dem nomination.

If interested, go to realclearpolitics.com and look under Mass 2012 senate race.

I only use huffy and dailykouskouscus

[Riot]

..

Warren 49 Brown 42
BOSTON—Democratic U.S. Senate hopeful Elizabeth Warren has opened up a slight lead over Republican Sen. Scott Brown in a new poll.

The UMass-Lowell-Boston Herald poll of 500 registered voters found 49 percent would vote for Warren, a longtime consumer advocate, if they faced off in the general election. Forty-two percent would back Brown, who won the Senate seat after the death of long-serving Democrat Edward Kennedy.

Warren, a former White House adviser who helped set up the new federal Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, has a slight lead over Brown, 49 percent to 42 percent. Three percent of voters chose another candidate, and 9 percent were undecided. Brown trails Warren despite a 16-point lead among independent voters.

The poll, released Wednesday [ December 7 ] found Brown's job approval and favorability rating has slipped while Warren's numbers have climbed.

Realclear politics, Mass 2012 Senate Race: note the dates of each poll:
Poll Date Brown (R) Warren (D) Spread
RCP Average 8/30 - 12/6 44.3 43.0 Brown +1.3
UMass/Boston Herald 12/1 - 12/6 42 49 Warren +7
Western NE College 9/29 - 10/5 47 42 Brown +5
PPP (D) 9/16 - 9/18 44 46 Warren +2
WBUR/MassINC 8/30 - 9/1 44 35 Brown +9

[Rileyoriley]

I understand now why you think Warren is ahead. You are basing this on a Boston area poll. For the record, Boston area polls had Coakley (in the 2010 special election) ahead of Brown by +17, +30, and +31. A Boston poll will NEVER show a republican in the lead. It is a heavy democrat area as is the Amherst, Northampton area in western Ma. This is why it's important to note where the poll was taken.
Since early 2011, the democrat party has been test polling various Mass. dems against Brown. They all were well behind him in these test polls. Warren is the only one that received decent numbers hence she was drafted to run this fall. Interesting to note, her first tv ads had her proclaiming she was "the mother of OWS". Response was not favorible. She has since dropped those ads and seems to be distancing herself from OWS.
It's still a long year so we shall have to wait and see. As I said before, Brown is well liked and does not vote strictly along party lines. That has impressed voters who are sick of the party politics. He also is in the state frequently and that includes visits to western Ma.. "Liveshot" Kerry only appears in western Ma if heavy media coverage will be there.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Rileyoriley

I understand now why you think Warren is ahead. You are basing this on a Boston area poll.

That's a good point. Did it include only Boston?

Even the averaging shows Brown's early 9 point lead vanishing, his previous +5 and +9 gone, now within margin of error at 44.3 v. 43.0 But it is very early yet, lots can happen. Now is reflecting momentum more than anything.

Interesting to note, her first tv ads had her proclaiming she was "the mother of OWS".

That's completely false. I've seen all her ads. No.

I imagine you are confusing the Rove attack ad that attributed that to her. That was a lie by the right wing, deliberately misstating her words.

Response was not favorible. She has since dropped those ads and seems to be distancing herself from OWS.

Not in the least. You can watch her ads all on line and see for yourself. Her greatest strength is her history of trying to regulate Wall Street, and her work with the Consumer Protection Bureau. Maybe link the specific ads you are talking about here. The ones where you think she said she was "the mother of OWS", at least.

[Rileyoriley]

Yes the poll was taken in the Boston area.


It was not the Rove ad since the ad I saw clearly stated at the end "I'm Elizabeth Warren and I approve this ad".

The one they are airing now is the one where she talks about her family, etc..

The ad I was referring to was played early on and it showed her giving a speech. A male voice then spoke the praises of Warren. I watch the local news in the morning for the weather and that's when I saw the ad. It was end of September, early October. Perhaps it was a test ad?


Just went to her website. I don't see the ad there either.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Rileyoriley

Yes the poll was taken in the Boston area.

Strange you say that. The poll says it surveyed voters statewide
http://multimedia2.heraldinteractive...isc/UMLma1.pdf

It was not the Rove ad since the ad I saw clearly stated at the end "I'm Elizabeth Warren and I approve this ad".

Elizabeth Warren has never, ever said that in any ad, nor in any interview.

You are probably referring to an interview she gave back about that time, where she said she had, "worked on the intellectual foundation for Occupy Wall Street."

The right wing took that and twisted it to falsely say Warren claimed she was the mother of the Occupy movement. She never claimed that. The GOP claimed that. You are repeating that twist.

Now, the hilarious thing is that Rove has completely backtracked on that, as his ad boosted her fundraising. Rove's latest ad paints Elizabeth Warren as a Wall Street insider.

You can't buy humor like the GOP gives for free.

BTW - Elizabeth Warren was a registered and voting lifetime Republican until about the time she was 40. She quit the party when it changed.

GOP casts Elizabeth Warren as 'radical' mother of Occupy Wall Street
October 27, 2011|By James Oliphant

Even as she has drawn closer to securing the Democratic nomination in the U.S. Senate race in Massachusetts, Elizabeth Warren is under fire for comments that were viewed by some as taking credit for the Occupy Wall Street movement.

Warren’s candidacy got a boost this week when rival Alan Khazei dropped out of the race, joining Setti Warren, another former Senate candidate, on the sidelines and seemingly giving a clear shot for the Harvard University law professor to take on incumbent Republican Sen. Scott Brown next fall.

But Warren continues to face some blowback for comments to a Daily Beast reporter in which she said she laid the “intellectual foundation” for the movement.

The Massachusetts GOP released a video Thursday that dubbed Warren the “Matriarch of Mayhem” and in which protesters are shown decrying capitalism.

"Elizabeth Warren. Too Divisive. Too Radical,” it intones.

Warren, of course, became a nationally known figure for her role as overseer of TARP, the Wall Street bailout program and her role in establishing a new federal consumer protection bureau. Since she launched her candidacy last month, she has branded herself a middle-class warrior who has, to many progressives, made a case for increasing taxes on the wealthy more effectively than President Obama or other Democrats in Washington. Remarks she made at a campaign event at which she said that “there is nobody in this country who got rich on his own” quickly became a Web sensation.

She’s tried to paint Brown, who cast himself as a truck-driving everyman in his upstart Senate win last year, as captive to financial interests.

Warren nearly doubled Brown’s take during the year’s third-quarter fundraising period, raking in $3.15 million and telegraphing that she will be a formidable challenger to Brown, who still enjoys widespread popularity as a Republican in a bluer-than-blue state.
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/oct...ccupy-20111027

You can see all the ads, both by Warren and by Rove, and interviews, on YouTube.

[clyde]

Originally Posted by Rileyoriley

I understand now why you think Warren is ahead. You are basing this on a Boston area poll. For the record, Boston area polls had Coakley (in the 2010 special election) ahead of Brown by +17, +30, and +31. A Boston poll will NEVER show a republican in the lead. It is a heavy democrat area as is the Amherst, Northampton area in western Ma. This is why it's important to note where the poll was taken.
Since early 2011, the democrat party has been test polling various Mass. dems against Brown. They all were well behind him in these test polls. Warren is the only one that received decent numbers hence she was drafted to run this fall. Interesting to note, her first tv ads had her proclaiming she was "the mother of OWS". Response was not favorible. She has since dropped those ads and seems to be distancing herself from OWS.
It's still a long year so we shall have to wait and see. As I said before, Brown is well liked and does not vote strictly along party lines. That has impressed voters who are sick of the party politics. He also is in the state frequently and that includes visits to western Ma.. "Liveshot" Kerry only appears in western Ma if heavy media coverage will be there.

Excuse me, but Rita is impeccable with her word and speaks with integrity.

[bigrun]

Originally Posted by clyde

Excuse me, but Rita is impeccable with her word and speaks with integrity.

I'll vouch for that

[Rileyoriley]

Originally Posted by Riot

Strange you say that. The poll says it surveyed voters statewide
http://multimedia2.heraldinteractive...isc/UMLma1.pdf



Elizabeth Warren has never, ever said that in any ad, nor in any interview.

You are probably referring to an interview she gave back about that time, where she said she had, "worked on the intellectual foundation for Occupy Wall Street."

The right wing took that and twisted it to falsely say Warren claimed she was the mother of the Occupy movement. She never claimed that. The GOP claimed that. You are repeating that twist.

Now, the hilarious thing is that Rove has completely backtracked on that, as his ad boosted her fundraising. Rove's latest ad paints Elizabeth Warren as a Wall Street insider.

You can't buy humor like the GOP gives for free.

BTW - Elizabeth Warren was a registered and voting lifetime Republican until about the time she was 40. She quit the party when it changed.



You can see all the ads, both by Warren and by Rove, and interviews, on YouTube.

I saw the poll results. You do realize that inner suburbs, outer suburbs, and southeastern Ma. are all considered the Boston area? Also Umass was involved in this poll UMass west is in Amherst. When Barney Frank gets favorable results from all areas in a poll, you can pretty much tell selected areas were polled.

I'm sorry you can't find the ad on youtube. As I said before, perhaps it was a test ad played only in Mass.. Since I live in Mass. and know what I saw and heard, I'll go by that. I'm not going to argue youtube videos with you. I'll leave that to others with more free time on their hands. It will be an interesting Senate race to watch. Have a good evening.

[Rileyoriley]

Originally Posted by clyde

Excuse me, but Rita is impeccable with her word and speaks with integrity.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Rileyoriley

I saw the poll results. You do realize that inner suburbs, outer suburbs, and southeastern Ma. are all considered the Boston area? Also Umass was involved in this poll UMass west is in Amherst. When Barney Frank gets favorable results from all areas in a poll, you can pretty much tell selected areas were polled.

I'm sorry you can't find the ad on youtube. As I said before, perhaps it was a test ad played only in Mass.. Since I live in Mass. and know what I saw and heard, I'll go by that. I'm not going to argue youtube videos with you. I'll leave that to others with more free time on their hands. It will be an interesting Senate race to watch. Have a good evening.

I imagine much will change in the polling in the next 11 months. Long time to go yet.