Who is Althouse? * View only LAW posts * Contribute * Shop AMAZON*
I suspect in a rematch against Scott Brown.
Coakley is a whack job , Mass. deserves her.
Coakley is the answer to the question 'how vile does a Democrat have to be in order to lose an election in Massachusetts?' Her persistence on the wrong side of Fells Acre, the multiple counts of prosecuting the innocent and freeing the guilty in the name of politics, the cold fish disdain of common voters, the dalmation-skin coat...Of course the political environment has changed in the last two years. Wouldn't surprise me in the least if she pulls it off.
...which should only increase the Democrats' shudder factor.Brown should telegraph his interest enough to increase the likelihood of a damaging primary challenge for Coakley.
After the election of Elizabeth Warren, virtually anything is possible in Massachusetts. No thinking is required to vote and elect frauds. They have reached th pinnacle.
Hey, Fauxahauntus won there, so the bar for Dems is pretty low. Warren repeatedly lied to get AA preferences as she worked her way up through law schools until she got to the top. And, of course, lied that she had any intention of representing the little people, after making a lot of money representing large institutions. And, yes, they also sent Lurch, as well as "Chappaquiddick" Teddy, to the Senate. Not a sterling record - which is what you get with a one party state.
Democrats like morals-free morality, so she's your guy.
Her time would be better spent designing sunglasses and ski goggles.
Lizzie and Maatha are what the People's Republic has been moving toward since it fell in love with the Kennedys.
rehajm wrote:Of course the political environment has changed in the last two years. Wouldn't surprise me in the least if she pulls it off. I hope she wins. It owuld be nice to have some cruella de ville type villains to throw tomatoes (figuratively at). Besides, Boston is a blue state, so I hope they elect the absolute worst people who will do the worst job and be the biggest jerks about it.
For every credit there is a debit. Massachusetts has the finest universities in the world and arguably the dumbest electorate in the nation. God must be an accountant. How else to explain the State of Massachusetts other than God balancing the ledgers?
Jeebus, Democrats, recycling trash really is an animating theme for you. I guess if you can put Fauxcahontas in the Senate you can find a bureaucratic sinecure for this awful creature.
> Massachusetts has the finest universities in the worldHarvard and MIT are good, but CalTech, Stanford, and Berkeley are at least as good. CA's second string is UCLA and USC....
I think the secession folks are barking up the wrong tree--how about a movement to expel Mass from the union?
If that's what they want . . . . .
Hey, if Fauxcahontas Warren can get elected, why not Martha Coakley? This is the state that keeps returning Kerry to the Senate and that kept Ted Kennedy in office until he died. The bar is low.
And it should be noted that I made that comment without reading any of the others. I'm not surprised that my points had been made upthread. I'll just add to the bold print!
What's interesting is how scared the Mass. Democrats are that a Republican might swoop in and take one of their precious offices.
When I think of Martha Coakley, I think of the persecution of the Amirault family.
In her defense, she is a walking, blithering argument in favor of limiting the power of the state.
She is worse than Ted Kennedy. Chappaquiddick was at least at some level an accident. What Maatha did to the Amiraults was the contemplated sacrifice of innocent people for political gain.
It will take a lot of B-Sox games attended by Martha, before folks will forget her BS.
Kirk Parker said...I think the secession folks are barking up the wrong tree--how about a movement to expel Mass from the union?Throw in CA, NY, and, IL and you have something.
She's perfect for Massachusetts.
Brown's defeat this time around was just a return to the Massachusetts status quo. His win in 2010 was an outlier and only came about because of the arrogance of the state democrats assuming everyone would agree that Teddy's seat was there for the democrats to fill. Coakley bought into that mindset hook line and sinker once she was anointed as Teddy's successor in the primary and didn't campaign well in the general election. She simply did not take it seriously until a few weeks to go and it was already lost by that point. The state democrats took it very seriously this time around.Brown's a good guy. Honest and hard working. He won his first shot because he was indefatigable in getting his message across. What he doesn't have is the instinct and willingness to put courtesy aside and throw lies back in the liar's face - come right out in the debates and call Warren the liar and fraud that she is. Paul Ryan demonstrated the same thing in his debate with Biden. I don't think that's a personal failing by any means, but it is a handicap when the other side is a Lizzy the Liar or a Joey Giggles.Also, keep in mind that the Massachusetts electorate did not sweep Warren in by any historical measure. IIRC, neither Teddy K nor John Kerry ever came within 15% of losing much less under 8%. The outright lies about Brown's record on the local TV networks was astounding. Warren managed to portray herself as a victim in the fake cherokee accusations. The state bar refused to investigate much less censure her for practicing unlicensed in Mass (they wouldn't even ofrfically acknowledge it). The media let her lies about being for the little guy stand by refusing to look at her real record as an attorney. The commercials were insulting to any informed voter. Yet Warren still had to outspend Brown almost 2 to 1 to peal off the 4% she needed to pull ahead. The democrats did take back the seat, but both 2010 and 2012 demonstrated that the old days of assuming an easy win for the Democrats in Massachusetts in any statewide election are gone. The gerrymandered districts will keep the reps democrats, but the senate and governor's races will be hard fought for at least a few cycles. So I doubt Coakley will get the nod this time around. Warren was an unknown and the fraud and lies didn't have enough time to get through the filters. Coakley doesn't have that advantage. Her baggage simply can't be hidden. She might stand in until a special election, but it'll be Deval Patrick who is the anointed one this time around.
Andy Freeman said... > Massachusetts has the finest universities in the worldHarvard and MIT are good, but CalTech, Stanford, and Berkeley are at least as good. CA's second string is UCLA and USC....11/27/12 12:38 PM You forgot to quote the rest of what I said. Still California gives Massachusetts a run for the money in superb universities and brain dead electorates.
Coakley and the Amirault story shows just how evil you can be and get elected in Massachusetts.
Trivia question: the majority of MA registered voters belong to which party?Answer: Not the Democrats, surprisingly. Over half of all MA voters registered as Independents (called Unenrolled in MA). Out of 4.2 million voters, 53% are independent, 36% are Democrats, and 11% are Republicans.I wish I could say that Democrats are losing their grip, but many of those independents obviously used to be Democrats, so they lean much more Democratic, and Republicans are an endangered species. Recent election results show that the state is as blue and stupid as ever.
And Coakley may still be 'scarred' from her 2010 senate loss, but every single wound was self-inflicted.
Post a Comment