Author Topic: What does Scott Brown's win mean for Independents?  (Read 945 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
What does Scott Brown's win mean for Independents?
« on: January 22, 2010, 04:33:34 PM »
Floor is open
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Kramer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5762
  • Repeal ObamaCare
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What does Scott Brown's win mean for Independents?
« Reply #1 on: January 22, 2010, 07:53:49 PM »
it means nothing unless the Republican Party can figure out how to harness this win into attracting more independent voters to vote republican over democrat.

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16141
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: What does Scott Brown's win mean for Independents?
« Reply #2 on: January 22, 2010, 09:02:27 PM »
Brown's win shouldn't mean anything to the GOP or the independents.

What his win represents is that for the first time in a long time the entire spectrum of political thought in the Commonwealth of Mass is represented in the upper house.


Kramer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5762
  • Repeal ObamaCare
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What does Scott Brown's win mean for Independents?
« Reply #3 on: January 22, 2010, 09:27:37 PM »
Brown's win shouldn't mean anything to the GOP or the independents.

What his win represents is that for the first time in a long time the entire spectrum of political thought in the Commonwealth of Mass is represented in the upper house.



in other words Mass conservatives and independents and even some democrats finally have representation in the US Senate because with Kerry & Kennedy these folks had little or none of it in the past 40 or so years. Personally I'm glad Ted is dead, he did more for this country by dying than he ever did living.

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16141
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: What does Scott Brown's win mean for Independents?
« Reply #4 on: January 22, 2010, 09:41:49 PM »
Kennedy lived a full life. He was surrogate father to his slain brothers children, he was true to his ideals, whether you agreed with them or not and he was a human who liked a little wine and liked a little skirt.

And there is always the possibility that his challenge to Carter in 80 paved the way for Reagan.


Kramer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5762
  • Repeal ObamaCare
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What does Scott Brown's win mean for Independents?
« Reply #5 on: January 22, 2010, 09:54:43 PM »
Kennedy lived a full life. He was surrogate father to his slain brothers children, he was true to his ideals, whether you agreed with them or not and he was a human who liked a little wine and liked a little skirt.

And there is always the possibility that his challenge to Carter in 80 paved the way for Reagan.



Noonan said it better than me.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703699204575017503811443526.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_BelowLEFTSecond

It is not the end of something so much as the beginning of something. Ted Kennedy took his era with him. But what has begun is something new and potentially promising.

President Obama carried Massachusetts by 26 points on Nov. 4, 2008. Fifteen months later, on Jan. 19, 2010, the eve of the first anniversary of his inauguration, his party's candidate lost Massachusetts by five points. That's a 31-point shift. Mr. Obama won Virginia by six points in 2008. A year later, on Nov. 2, 2009, his party's candidate for governor lost by 18 points—a 25 point shift. Mr. Obama won New Jersey in 2008 by 16 points. In 2009 his party's incumbent governor lost re-election by four points—a 20-point shift.

In each race, the president's party lost independent voters, who in 2008 voted like Democrats and in 2010 voted like Republicans.

Is it a backlash? It seems cooler than that, a considered and considerable rejection that appears to be signaling a conservative resurgence based on issues and policies, most obviously opposition to increased government spending, fear of higher taxes, and rejection of the idea that expansion of government can or will solve our economic challenges.

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16141
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: What does Scott Brown's win mean for Independents?
« Reply #6 on: January 22, 2010, 10:06:44 PM »
She certainly didn't imply the world was better off with him dead.

As Plane alluded to earlier, if Kennedy were still living ObamaCare surely would have passed and with that the heavy albatross that the crap bill would have hung around the dems neck, would have hurt them far more than the election of Brown, who gave them an excuse to shuck the heavy bird.

Kramer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5762
  • Repeal ObamaCare
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What does Scott Brown's win mean for Independents?
« Reply #7 on: January 22, 2010, 10:12:06 PM »
She certainly didn't imply the world was better off with him dead.

As Plane alluded to earlier, if Kennedy were still living ObamaCare surely would have passed and with that the heavy albatross that the crap bill would have hung around the dems neck, would have hurt them far more than the election of Brown, who gave them an excuse to shuck the heavy bird.



One of Ted's many gifts to America -- Patrick Kennedy


Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What does Scott Brown's win mean for Independents?
« Reply #8 on: January 22, 2010, 10:30:24 PM »
She certainly didn't imply the world was better off with him dead.

As Plane alluded to earlier, if Kennedy were still living ObamaCare surely would have passed and with that the heavy albatross that the crap bill would have hung around the dems neck, would have hurt them far more than the election of Brown, who gave them an excuse to shuck the heavy bird.


WE may never know what might have been.

Some thought that the bill was going to be improved over time into a law that institutionalised easily obtainable health insurance for almost everybody.


Some thought that the sheer sourness of the bill as written and as it would have been implemented would have hit the Congress like a dose of ipecac purgeing Democrats in a cathartic episode next election cycle.


AS it is we may see some attempt at cobbleign up a compromise bill that fixes some small part of the whole problem , the gradual approach that we use so often.