/dev/null Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 http://hamptonroads.com/2011/02/us-sen-jim-webb-says-he-wont-seek-reelection Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UConn James Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 Knows he's got a snowball's chance.... I expect the same from Scott Brown in Mass. He won in a special election when Dem turnout tanks (and I think the Kennedys --- Joe III in particular --- saw polling to this fact and stayed out), but he won't win a general. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Knows he's got a snowball's chance.... I expect the same from Scott Brown in Mass. He won in a special election when Dem turnout tanks (and I think the Kennedys --- Joe III in particular --- saw polling to this fact and stayed out), but he won't win a general. Uh...exit polls, demographics, and common sense says: the only way Scott Brown won was if a significant # of committed, life-long Democrats voted for him. So, if Democrats want to blame anybody for losing Ted Kennedy's seat, for any length of time, they have nobody, once again, but themselves to blame. Going forward, the challenge for the Democrats will be to offer a better option/show their policies are effective. Otherwise, incumbency is a powerful thing. Especially when we consider the # of Democrats who already voted against their party the first time around. They all have to admit being wrong about Scott Brown, so a pretty strong case has to be made, and it has to be made specific to Brown. Otherwise, how do you un-ring the bell? Also, look for every potential candidate in Virginia, but Tim Kaine, to be put on defense. The Republicans will move Kaine to the front and center, so they can whip him in the general. The reaction section makes that plain as day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 Now Jon Kyl is refusing to run for re-election so he can be the VP nominee. hahahahahahaha. The old breed has it all figured out. Romney&Kyl in 2012. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UConn James Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 Uh...exit polls, demographics, and common sense says: the only way Scott Brown won was if a significant # of committed, life-long Democrats voted for him. So, if Democrats want to blame anybody for losing Ted Kennedy's seat, for any length of time, they have nobody, once again, but themselves to blame. Going forward, the challenge for the Democrats will be to offer a better option/show their policies are effective. Otherwise, incumbency is a powerful thing. Especially when we consider the # of Democrats who already voted against their party the first time around. They all have to admit being wrong about Scott Brown, so a pretty strong case has to be made, and it has to be made specific to Brown. Otherwise, how do you un-ring the bell? Also, look for every potential candidate in Virginia, but Tim Kaine, to be put on defense. The Republicans will move Kaine to the front and center, so they can whip him in the general. The reaction section makes that plain as day. They also managed to nominate a woman who wasn't terribly popular as AG, where there are always things that can be turned against you, and who couldn't fall back on a family legacy when she didn't have any answers about jobs or health care --- even the bare modicum that Dems will allow their candidates to get away with. Coakley and her Botox-stiff upper lip (seriously, she couldn't smile and had the personality of a galvanized nail) couldn't connect the way any Kennedy could in MA. Like I wrote, they steered clear of it for a reason, but I wouldn't be surprised if one of them --- Caroline, Joe III or Teddy's widow --- runs in 2012. Brown has charm and a talented/hot daughter, but I don't think he stands a chance when the Dems throw it on full force in a 16-month campaign in the second-most-liberal state. I think Brown may decide to angle for a cabinet position (Attorney General?) in a Republican admin. So don't feel too sorry for him when reality sets back in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 (edited) They also managed to nominate a woman who wasn't terribly popular as AG, where there are always things that can be turned against you, and who couldn't fall back on a family legacy when she didn't have any answers about jobs or health care --- even the bare modicum that Dems will allow their candidates to get away with. Coakley and her Botox-stiff upper lip (seriously, she couldn't smile and had the personality of a galvanized nail) couldn't connect the way any Kennedy could in MA. Like I wrote, they steered clear of it for a reason, but I wouldn't be surprised if one of them --- Caroline, Joe III or Teddy's widow --- runs in 2012. Brown has charm and a talented/hot daughter, but I don't think he stands a chance when the Dems throw it on full force in a 16-month campaign in the second-most-liberal state. I think Brown may decide to angle for a cabinet position (Attorney General?) in a Republican admin. So don't feel too sorry for him when reality sets back in. If this was a state largely populated by idiots, transplants, and people that can't be bothered to care, like Florida, or South Carolina(Alvin Green) I would agree with you. But, Massachusetts, like Louisiana, and New York, is a state where people are highly tuned in to politics. You won't find a politics board attached to Phagnation, or Jagoffland message boards...whereas, with the Bills...well, we're here aren't we? Estimates say that 15-30% of committed, life-long Massachusetts Democrats had to make a conscious choice to pull a level(or whatever) with an "R" next to it. I am sorry, but the act of doing that, and the weeks of consideration prior and after, and the conclusions they had to have arrived at? The momentous act of doing that as a way to stop Obamacare in its tracks trumps your "Candidate Hag" theory. Sure, the Kennedy Celebrity thing still goes a long way, but, again, these people take a lot of pride in knowing what they are about in Politics, and I just don't see them abandoning Brown purely on Democratic stardom or hack politics alone. IF they can't make a case specific to Brown, then I don't see how they get him. Edited February 13, 2011 by OCinBuffalo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 Smart move by Webb. The odds of his opponent calling someone "macaca" are about nill, and therefore so are his chances at reelection. I'll be glad to be rid of his sour pissed off looking face. From all accounts I've heard, politics aside, the guy's a real a-hole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UConn James Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 If this was a state largely populated by idiots, transplants, and people that can't be bothered to care, like Florida, or South Carolina(Alvin Green) I would agree with you. But, Massachusetts, like Louisiana, and New York, is a state where people are highly tuned in to politics. You won't find a politics board attached to Phagnation, or Jagoffland message boards...whereas, with the Bills...well, we're here aren't we? Estimates say that 15-30% of committed, life-long Massachusetts Democrats had to make a conscious choice to pull a level(or whatever) with an "R" next to it. I am sorry, but the act of doing that, and the weeks of consideration prior and after, and the conclusions they had to have arrived at? The momentous act of doing that as a way to stop Obamacare in its tracks trumps your "Candidate Hag" theory. Sure, the Kennedy Celebrity thing still goes a long way, but, again, these people take a lot of pride in knowing what they are about in Politics, and I just don't see them abandoning Brown purely on Democratic stardom or hack politics alone. IF they can't make a case specific to Brown, then I don't see how they get him. OC, You seem to think the seat is Brown's to lose --- that all he needs to do is be on the ballot in 2012. And when one looks at incumbency election rates, well, it's hard to argue. I'm not saying he ought to throw in the towel, and there ARE precedents of fiscal-oriented Republicans getting elected statewide in MA --- as long as they take a pledge not to touch abortion with a 10-foot pole (and I'm perfectly OK with pols saying they will represent their constituents' wishes over their own personal beliefs). But, as I wrote, 2012 is going to be a 16-month marathon, not the 2-month sprint that happened in the special election. I fully expect the Dem nominee situation to be FAR less chaotic than it was last Jan. There were several, including Capuano, who just beat each other up unmercifully in the press and debates, believing that they basically just had to win the Dem nomination to get to the Senate (Boston is a local market for me; actually comes in better than Hartford despite being double the distance). Well, they got a shock and may have learned to cut the intra-party mud-flinging. I haven't seen any polling on Brown. Not sure they do it this far out from the election for anything other than internal use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 Smart move by Webb. The odds of his opponent calling someone "macaca" are about nill, and therefore so are his chances at reelection. I'll be glad to be rid of his sour pissed off looking face. From all accounts I've heard, politics aside, the guy's a real a-hole. Actually he's one of the few Senators with a (D) in front of his name that I can tolerate. Very centrist, goes against the grain and is someone I would consider to be a man of principle. I don't believe he decided not to run because he thought it was going to be a tough re-election campaign, I just think he got tired of all the ****. He hadn't been fundraising for the re-election campaign at all over the past 2 years which usually is a sign that someone wasn't planning on running. OC, You seem to think the seat is Brown's to lose --- that all he needs to do is be on the ballot in 2012. And when one looks at incumbency election rates, well, it's hard to argue. I'm not saying he ought to throw in the towel, and there ARE precedents of fiscal-oriented Republicans getting elected statewide in MA --- as long as they take a pledge not to touch abortion with a 10-foot pole (and I'm perfectly OK with pols saying they will represent their constituents' wishes over their own personal beliefs). But, as I wrote, 2012 is going to be a 16-month marathon, not the 2-month sprint that happened in the special election. I fully expect the Dem nominee situation to be FAR less chaotic than it was last Jan. There were several, including Capuano, who just beat each other up unmercifully in the press and debates, believing that they basically just had to win the Dem nomination to get to the Senate (Boston is a local market for me; actually comes in better than Hartford despite being double the distance). Well, they got a shock and may have learned to cut the intra-party mud-flinging. I haven't seen any polling on Brown. Not sure they do it this far out from the election for anything other than internal use. And Brown won't be easy to beat in MA. He's been a very crafty senator since he's come on board, taking very centrist positions which will play well with their constituency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 Actually he's one of the few Senators with a (D) in front of his name that I can tolerate. Very centrist, goes against the grain and is someone I would consider to be a man of principle. I don't believe he decided not to run because he thought it was going to be a tough re-election campaign, I just think he got tired of all the ****. He hadn't been fundraising for the re-election campaign at all over the past 2 years which usually is a sign that someone wasn't planning on running. yup. heard from a credible source in the gym this am that he had very little money in his war chest. also, that rick boucher (long term congressman from the virginia 9th) may be chosen to oppose allen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UConn James Posted February 17, 2011 Share Posted February 17, 2011 WSJ: Sen. Scott Brown Recalls Childhood Abuse on ‘60 Minutes’ On this week’s upcoming episode of “60 Minutes,” Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown tells Lesley Stahl that as a child, he was the victim of “physical, psychological and sexual abuse.” Wow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 17, 2011 Share Posted February 17, 2011 WSJ: Sen. Scott Brown Recalls Childhood Abuse on ‘60 Minutes’ Wow. Interesting turn. Usually politicians are on the other side... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 Interesting turn. Usually politicians are on the other side... It's just a political ploy to toss his Democrat challenger's salad before they get the nod - so to speak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 OC, You seem to think the seat is Brown's to lose --- that all he needs to do is be on the ballot in 2012. And when one looks at incumbency election rates, well, it's hard to argue. I'm not saying he ought to throw in the towel, and there ARE precedents of fiscal-oriented Republicans getting elected statewide in MA --- as long as they take a pledge not to touch abortion with a 10-foot pole (and I'm perfectly OK with pols saying they will represent their constituents' wishes over their own personal beliefs). But, as I wrote, 2012 is going to be a 16-month marathon, not the 2-month sprint that happened in the special election. I fully expect the Dem nominee situation to be FAR less chaotic than it was last Jan. There were several, including Capuano, who just beat each other up unmercifully in the press and debates, believing that they basically just had to win the Dem nomination to get to the Senate (Boston is a local market for me; actually comes in better than Hartford despite being double the distance). Well, they got a shock and may have learned to cut the intra-party mud-flinging. I haven't seen any polling on Brown. Not sure they do it this far out from the election for anything other than internal use. I was waiting to see if any polls came out about Brown, well, useful polls, especially since the child abuse thing... Haven't seen anything yet. In any event, look, given your handle I am certain you have a better handle on the details of it than I do. I am merely looking at it the 20k level, and from here, it's a pretty darn jostling event, even now. Perhaps the most useful indicator out of it is: Mass Democrats are not California Democrats, nor are they Chicago or NYC Democrats. All of the rest would have voted for Candidate Hag out of sheer party loyalty. Same way we ended up will Hillary "I will do a lot for upstate NY" Clinton as Senator. NY is "national politics payoff" land. Mass, apparently, is not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UConn James Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 I was waiting to see if any polls came out about Brown, well, useful polls, especially since the child abuse thing... Haven't seen anything yet. In any event, look, given your handle I am certain you have a better handle on the details of it than I do. I am merely looking at it the 20k level, and from here, it's a pretty darn jostling event, even now. Perhaps the most useful indicator out of it is: Mass Democrats are not California Democrats, nor are they Chicago or NYC Democrats. All of the rest would have voted for Candidate Hag out of sheer party loyalty. Same way we ended up will Hillary "I will do a lot for upstate NY" Clinton as Senator. NY is "national politics payoff" land. Mass, apparently, is not. OK, I stand corrected a bit... Link Per a poll by the Western New England College polling center, 52% of respondents think Scott Brown "deserves to be re-elected" and 28% say he does not. Brown's total job approval rating is 57%, which rivals Kerry's and Patrick's numbers. It's still super early and only one minor Dem candidate has declared. I'm still saying that if any Kennedy declares, it's going to tilt fast. Remember in CT last year before the politicking really started, ex-Congressman Rob Simmons had over 50% against Dodd.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts