Things seem to've worked out pretty good for the Dude and Walter

just listening to brown's victory speech. We're at war with unconstitutional terrists, & tax cuts will defeat them!!1!

that's what it sounded like he was saying

Jay Nordlinger has it right, he keeps referring to the sheer unlikelihood that this could happen. That's about it though. Sheer unlikelihood that will be forgotten when things normalize and the Dems take the seat back in 2012 with a proper, prepared candidate (and maybe some humble pie burps to keep them honest).

Let me end this night with a tip o' the cap to Werthless for not editing "exploratory."

Massachusetts has a ton of hospitals, a ton of health care jobs: 15% of their workforce is in health care and related occupations.

I can almost see Rahm Emmanuel huddling with Brown's handlers (he sure as hell is not calling his own shots) to explain how he can drop Massachusetts' unemployment by 3 percentage points, with a deal that makes Nelson's Medicaid goodies look like so much corn meal, IF Brown rolls over on health care - and that if he doesn't, he'll make sure every fucking unemployed voter in MA and their wives, mothers, cousins, and uncles knows that it was Brown who helped keep them out of a job.

He wants to be Mr. 41st No Vote - show him what it will mean to him

Just popped in to congratulate JH and Rocco (I think). I saw Brown's speech and he seemed like a decent guy. I also saw Coakley's speech and she seemed like a decent gal. If there is any good news for Dems I guess they get to blame the GOP in November if healthcare doesn't pass.

listening to Gergen opining that one consequence of the Brown win is that Team Barry will "have to" huddle & come out with a "bare bones" alternate health reform plan.

While I disagree with him, I intend to use that opening to reiterate my own "bare bones" reform alternative over in the Single Payer? thread, whilst posting bare tomorrow.

swishnicholson wrote:

Mountainphan wrote:

dajafi wrote:Oh, there's a wave. A righteous coast-to-coast yearning for Tax Cuts 'n' Torture.

But none of you seem to care anything about policy anyway, so long as Red Team wins and you get that resultant dopamine rush.

With all due respect, this post is heavy on the righteous sauce.

I don't recall seeing this kind of anger and bitterness around here after the 2008 elections. Is it possible that most people who voted for/supported Brown simply don't like Obama's/Democratics' policies? Is that an unreasonable consideration?

Silly question. Obama's approval ratings continue to be positive in Massachusetts, yet the Democratic candidate for the senate lost. People who don't like Obama's policies voted for Brown. And people who do like Obama's policies either stayed home or, in some cases, voted for Brown/ against Coakley themselves. There can be both dissatisfaction for whatever reasons AND a bad candidate that swings the election. Liberal minds can accommodate both these ideas at once.

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/01/lets-play-blame-game.html

Ding!

It's nights like this I miss DC. I'd be underdressed at some bar right now with a lot of real yutzs wearing Lacoste and drinking Miller Lite while I was sucking down rail whiskey and hugging and high fiving random people.

drsmooth wrote:Massachusetts has a ton of hospitals, a ton of health care jobs: 15% of their workforce is in health care and related occupations.

I can almost see Rahm Emmanuel huddling with Brown's handlers (he sure as hell is not calling his own shots) to explain how he can drop Massachusetts' unemployment by 3 percentage points, with a deal that makes Nelson's Medicaid goodies look like so much corn meal, IF Brown rolls over on health care - and that if he doesn't, he'll make sure every $#@! unemployed voter in MA and their wives, mothers, cousins, and uncles knows that it was Brown who helped keep them out of a job.

He wants to be Mr. 41st No Vote - show him what it will mean to him

so you expect him to pull an arlen specter and get out of the primary?

rhetorical question... those uneducated, white trash, astroturf teabagers will never let that happen

drsmooth wrote:listening to Gergen opining that one consequence of the Brown win is that Team Barry will "have to" huddle & come out with a "bare bones" alternate health reform plan.

While I disagree with him, I intend to use that opening to reiterate my own "bare bones" reform alternative over in the Single Payer? thread, whilst posting bare tomorrow.

i mean, this already IS the bare bones reform.

azrider wrote:so you expect him to pull an arlen specter and get out of the primary?

that's the trouble with you reactionary mouth-breathers - you can't think radical when the situation demands it. Brown's already elected, remember? So you just need to make it clear for him how he guarantees an end to his illustrious Senate career if he doesn't find some way to decide that maybe he isn't Mr No Vote on a health bill.

While I'm talking crazy talk, if I'm a Barry advisor I'd (excuse the expression) do it up Brown - you haven't seen bipartisan like the republicans would see on my health reform v.2.0. Among other things I'd ask - no, I'd insist - that Brown be formally appointed a "special envoy" to the bipartisan revision talks, and make sure he had every chance to reveal to the nation in his words, with his face, what great ideas Team Know Nothing has for doing things better.

And if he ever - I mean once - got into any vehicle other than that humble $30k pickup over the next 4 years, I'd make sure there was plenty of footage of his entry, his exit, his explanation, etc.

what is most frustrating about this whole partisan landscape is that republicans moronically think that their party is small government and that it is only the democrats who create inefficient, tax dollar sucking programs. i just wish they had a grip on reality.

scott brown for president...it's going to happen

a status from when of my staunch, truly know nothing republican friends.


i responded by saying "bahaha. you know nothing about him." he then said "funny, you knew nothing about obama and voted for him... what a joke." i told him that was a predictable response and i could have probably written it for him.

he then deleted all the comments.

Lede of the libburl New York Times story:

Senate Democrats prepared to meet on Wednesday to consider the fate of the Democratic health care overhaul now that Scott Brown’s decisive Senate victory in Massachusetts has cost them their razor-thin advantage.

New math: 41 equals 59.

dajafi wrote:Lede of the libburl New York Times story:

Senate Democrats prepared to meet on Wednesday to consider the fate of the Democratic health care overhaul now that Scott Brown’s decisive Senate victory in Massachusetts has cost them their razor-thin advantage.

New math: 41 equals 59.

No, old math, when one party wants to obstruct 59 votes equals ain't nothing happening.

does it really matter though? the republicans have been dragging their feet with 40 people. i dont think one more person is really going to change that until the democrats get it together.

CalvinBall wrote:does it really matter though? the republicans have been dragging their feet with 40 people. i dont think one more person is really going to change that until the democrats get it together.

Tell me more

haha jerseyhoya knows more about politics than you calvin! kill yourself!

Brown in 2012? Is he the new Romney? What is it with conservatives and Massachusetts Republicans?