Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

If you're a Dem or a progressive and don't like Coakley,

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-17-10 07:01 PM
Original message
If you're a Dem or a progressive and don't like Coakley,
don't forget this is only a temporary position. If you want to help Obama with the rest of his agenda, hold your nose and vote for her.

Then start working for a better candidate to run against her for the Democratic slot in the general election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-17-10 07:05 PM
Response to Original message
1. She would not be my first choice, nor my 5th choice, but she is leagues ahead of any repuke
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maru Kitteh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-17-10 07:05 PM
Response to Original message
2. Good advice. We need those 60 votes not just for HCR but upcoming SCOTUS appointments.
And other things as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DJ13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-17-10 07:06 PM
Response to Original message
3. If she wins she becomes entrenched and almost impossible to vote out
Big money will move behind her in a reelection, and Mass loses an opportunity to have the kind of traditional liberal they've enjoyed for decades with Teddy.

How many times have we been told that trying to oust the Blue Dogs will be virtually impossible due to the financial support they have from their corporate buddies?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-17-10 07:13 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. By your reasoning, if Brown wins HE becomes entrenched.
Hold your nose, please, and vote for the one who stinks less.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DJ13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-17-10 07:20 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. No, Brown would be easier to beat
The Mass voters will tire of being represented by a right winger long before his first term is over.

It would be easier to replace a right winger with a real liberal later on than trying to primary a corporate Dem if she wins now.

The "we need 60 votes" excuse is bullcrap, we dont have but 58 Dems in the Senate now (and Lieberman cant be counted on anymore).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-17-10 07:36 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. Dream on. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DJ13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-17-10 07:44 PM
Response to Reply #11
19. Your original premise was "vote for her now, then get rid of her later"
And Im telling you thats ill advised because she wont be easy to get rid of later.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-17-10 07:55 PM
Response to Reply #19
21. And so would Brown, who would be much worse. The media there loves him;
they'll help him win the next round.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DJ13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-17-10 08:24 PM
Response to Reply #21
28. I think its sad that Ted's seat will belong to a corporate candidate no matter who wins
Edited on Sun Jan-17-10 08:30 PM by DJ13
Its the ultimate insult to his legacy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arkana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-18-10 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #3
41. Martha Coakley is no Blue Dog.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MannyGoldstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-17-10 07:08 PM
Response to Original message
4. The Problem Is *Precisely* The Rest Of Obama's Agenda
As far as I can tell (based on what's happened since he took office), that agenda includes my carcass roasted on an open spit, being picked at by bankers and other sordid members of the Predator Class.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-17-10 07:14 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Then think about Supreme Court appointments and getting them through Congress. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MannyGoldstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-17-10 08:20 PM
Response to Reply #6
26. Don't SCOTUS Nominees Only Need 51 Votes? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FBaggins Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-18-10 09:03 AM
Response to Reply #26
35. Not since we gave them political cover to filibuster them. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-17-10 07:39 PM
Response to Reply #4
16. We can only hope
:rofl:

Touch :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
izquierdista Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-17-10 07:21 PM
Response to Original message
8. If you have to hold your nose
for every "Democrat" that comes along, when do you get a chance to breathe? :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-17-10 07:36 PM
Response to Reply #8
12. When you're not standing in the voting booth. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jennicut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-17-10 07:38 PM
Response to Reply #8
14. Primary her in 2012. Two years of Coakley or two years of Brown.
I know what I would choose.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
timeforpeace Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-17-10 07:23 PM
Response to Original message
9. No Mass voters who are on DU are going to vote for Brown.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-17-10 07:37 PM
Response to Reply #9
13. Some are encouraging others not to vote. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-17-10 07:41 PM
Response to Reply #9
18. One is
...but the post was deleted, obviously, so it can't be proven that any will vote for Brown, but if you've read a lot of threads here lately, you know there are many who are at least discouraging Mass voters from voting for Coakley.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-17-10 07:23 PM
Response to Original message
10. Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, you may cherish the sweetest reflection
Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost." John Quincy Adams
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-17-10 07:38 PM
Response to Reply #10
15. That really worked for the 95,000 Nader voters in Florida who watched the
Supreme Court install Bush in an election with a final margin of less than 500 votes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-17-10 08:19 PM
Response to Reply #15
25. The votes of the left are available to candidates...if they earn them.
But, "not as bad" doesn't cut it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
louis c Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-17-10 08:25 PM
Response to Reply #25
29. learn your math
700,000 votes for the rep.
600,000 votes for the dem
150,000 votes for an indy or stay-at-home lefties.

result. Nixon, Reagan, Bush, Gingrich

Nice going.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-17-10 08:28 PM
Response to Reply #29
30. So, blame the candidates who were unable to convince the left to vote for them.
Or, unwilling.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulsby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-18-10 12:51 AM
Response to Reply #29
31. learn your history
nixon won by a frigging landslide.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
louis c Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-18-10 08:47 AM
Response to Reply #31
34. Not in 1968. Nixon by seven tenths of a point
Edited on Mon Jan-18-10 08:51 AM by louis c
I not only know my history, I lived it.

I'll accept your apology.

link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulsby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-18-10 10:10 AM
Response to Reply #34
38. you are right
i was wrong. for some reason, i was THINKING reagan when i saw nixon (not too long ago, somebody claimed reagan won by a hair and i corrected them).

apology given.

when you're wrong, you are wrong. and man, was i wrong.!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
louis c Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-18-10 02:25 PM
Response to Reply #38
40. you are thinking of the second terms
even though reagan won comfortably in 1980, the rift created by the kennedy candidacy in a bruising primary took its toll. just as the reagan primary undid ford in 1976. it's tough for an incumbent president to withstand a grueling primary before a general. Johnson, Ford and Carter all lost when seriously challenged from their own party.

Nixon and Reagan won landslide second terms (1972 and 1984). Both carrying 49 states.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arkana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-18-10 02:32 PM
Response to Reply #10
42. Worked out well for ol' JQ Adams, didn't it?
Four years of what was perhaps the most miserable Presidency anyone except MAYBE Franklin Pierce suffered as the Jacksonians destroyed him and his legislative agenda, ran a Bush in '04-style campaign against him in 1828, and routed him out of office.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TomCADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-17-10 07:41 PM
Response to Original message
17. What About Supporting Coakley On The Issues? Here Is Where They Stand.
Here is a dicussion of where the candidates stand on the issues, and Brown's mandate on issues like abortion, torture, gay rights, and health care.

http://www.thesunchronicle.com/articles/2010/01/17/opin...



Our choice of Coakley may be surprising to some. Her major opponent is state Sen. Scott Brown, R-Wrentham, a local figure we have endorsed in the past for state Senate, and he is supported by a minority on our editorial board.

There's much to be said for endorsing a local candidate. However, we have an insurmountable problem. To paraphrase words Brown applied to his Democratic opponent, "he's a nice man, but he's wrong on all the issues."

Brown initially took a militant stand against gay marriage, which we have consistently supported. While he has softened his position some, his outlook on equal rights in a private matter remains worrisome.

After voicing support in this space for health care reform, we can't very well back Brown when he is promising to submarine national health care on his own as "the 41st Republican senator." We are left instead to wonder how he sees himself as a fitting successor to Sen. Edward Kennedy, who made health care reform a signature issue, while planning to spoil the best chance for reform the nation has ever had. Senate candidate Martha Coakley waits for the start of a taped debate at the WBZ-TV studios in Boston. Coakley is running to fill the seat vacated by the late Sen. Edward Kennedy, but is crafting a campaign largely free of the Kennedy mystique. (AP Photo/Steven Senne, File) After making our view plain that the United States does better not to lower itself to the level of nations who use torture in pursuit of information, we cannot endorse Brown when he issues statements that water boarding is not torture and should be employed by our nation.

We have no doubts about Brown's patriotism and commend him for his three decades of service in the National Guard and rank as a lieutenant colonel in the Judge Advocate General Corps. This, however, hardly translates into foreign policy expertise. The thin skin he has shown at times, notably at a King Philip Regional High School assembly, would be a handicap in the Senate chambers. He may have a desirably harder line than Coakley on fiscal issues, but his extreme positions on choice, gender, and other social questions are out of step for our pluralistic society.

Coakley is pro-health care reform, with qualifications regarding abortion amendments. Her jobs and economy platform is well-thought-out and detailed, while Brown hangs his hat on a return to free enterprise. She is firmly committed to same-sex marriage rights.


Coakley has established herself as a leader. Her work on the foreclosure crisis in Massachusetts is evidence that she is ready to serve the people's interests while dealing with the big players in Washington.

She deserves your vote on Tuesday.

The third candidate in the special election, Joseph L. Kennedy, is running on the Libertarian ticket. He is even more ardently opposed to health care reform than Brown. Kennedy is not ready for prime time and his Libertarian no-government-interference stance on the economy is a non-starter in Washington. He is given virtually zero chance of winning, but we are happy to see him in the face. Third parties' heads need to stay above water in Massachusetts in order to offer an alternative to Democrat and Republican platforms too often crafted to please their more extreme wings.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-17-10 07:57 PM
Response to Reply #17
22. Thanks for the informative post. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wisteria Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-17-10 07:53 PM
Response to Original message
20. She will help take us forward and help put Americans back to work.
Brown is only concerned about obstructing everything Obama for the Republicans so they can regain their power.

Remember, Republicans do not care about average Americans- they care only about regaining power.
My senator-Arlene Specter has said the Republicans decided when Obama was elected to do nothing but obstruct and vote against his agenda. He said all Republicans were told there would be sever consequences for anyone of them that did not stay lock step in line with the party line and that is why he left- because he is a moderate and they wanted him to be a hardliner.

As Obama said, a vote for Brown is like going backward- he will not help-he will hinder.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alc Donating Member (649 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-17-10 08:11 PM
Response to Original message
23. and tell the dems that you won't ever care who they offer up
they will have your support. If you think she's an acceptable candidate, then vote for her. If not, write in who you think would be good. Nothing will change until people stop voting party and start voting candidate. If people vote party and she's the incumbent, she's there for good (or until a repub wins)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sendero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-17-10 08:15 PM
Response to Original message
24. I have a real dilemma..
... because I want her to win, but I want HRC in its present incarnation to DIE.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
louis c Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-17-10 08:22 PM
Response to Original message
27. The "General Election" in in 3 years
get with it. This is for all the marbles, and Cakley is all we've got. W have to work for her as though she was FDR. We're all in.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-18-10 12:52 AM
Response to Original message
32. Recommend
I've held my nose to vote so much, I hardly know any other way. And I'll keep doing it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-18-10 01:05 AM
Response to Original message
33. "hold your nose" again with the hold your nose. and then wait, again wait...
wait for what, einstein.

wait for what? exactly...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mari333 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-18-10 09:04 AM
Response to Original message
36. and then there is this:
http://www.openleft.com/diary/16973/dems-inadvertently-...

the details, the other side of the story
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tailormyst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-18-10 09:04 AM
Response to Original message
37. Yup- I'm not so much voting for her as much as I am voting against Brown.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
graywarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-18-10 10:14 AM
Response to Original message
39. Therein lays her problem
I never liked her. But I'm working to get her elected. I'm now guessing that most other voters in MA will vote for the shiniest object and that ain't her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Oct 02nd 2014, 08:55 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC