Open thread on MA election *sobs*

So how are folks feeling?

and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

44 Comments

  1. Karole
    Posted January 20, 2010 at 10:02 am | Permalink

    I’m just so…confused. I don’t understand how Brown was able to get away with his platform of “change”, why “I drive a truck” was accepted as a legitimate reason to support him, how in the hell Coakley and the democrats dropped the ball so badly, why the conservatives are angry NOW when they were silent for 8 years of mismanagement and overspending… I just don’t understand. I feel like Scott Brown hijacked everything the Dems said last year, and just played to people’s fears instead of being rational. On the other hand, Coakley and her campaign were practically invisible until that Suffolk poll came out, and then brought Obama to a tiny tiny venue so even IF that could have changed some minds, so few people (I think 1500) were able to get in that it didn’t really matter anyway.
    I’m also almost afraid to ask people if they voted or not because if they didn’t, I’ll just be too upset to speak to them.
    Argh!

  2. TD
    Posted January 20, 2010 at 10:47 am | Permalink

    how in the hell Coakley and the democrats dropped the ball so badly
    A candidate who has a record as a DA of ignoring genuine cases of child abuse, while keeping the victims of trumped up charges in jail. I actually am not surprised in the least that she lost the campaign.
    Reviewing her record I’m having trouble seeing anything to truly motivate a vote for her.

  3. JupiterAmmon
    Posted January 20, 2010 at 10:48 am | Permalink

    I’m moreso upset with the very likely chance that this election, like so many others, was stolen through easily hackable, paper-trail-less “voting” machines sold by companies like Diebold and LHS Associates whose top employees have criminal backgrounds, than the fact that a democrat lost and a corpratized, “throw-the-womenz-and-us-other-broke-people-under-the-bus” bill won’t be passed. I’m also super pissed that the media is tooting about how the bill will now have to “compromised.” HOLYEFFWHAT? Compromised, you say? Hello, the entire bill is already a compromise and a bad one at that.
    Coakley hasn’t been all too forward about women’s rights in her campaign, nor has she spoken out about stolen elections in Mass (i.e. voting rights). I’m glad I didn’t throw my good money at Coakley.

  4. Posted January 20, 2010 at 10:49 am | Permalink

    I’m just glad the Brown election and the Chris Christie inauguration are so well timed. That way I can just kiss my repro and gay rights goodbye once. Oy. For all his many flaws, Ted Kennedy deserved better than this. Just goes to show you that you can’t take any elections for granted. Good campaigns that listen to the voters are key, and wonky business-as-usual folks who get out of touch wind up losing. I’m really concerned about how this will impact my home state of Rhode Island, where we have a Republican challenging another Kennedy seat who has already pledged to hire Scott Brown’s campaign staff. I am bracing to hear people’s worst fears whipped up into a frenzy all year.

  5. Comrade Kevin
    Posted January 20, 2010 at 10:58 am | Permalink

    It should make us as Progressives, Feminists, and Democrats take note that we can never take any election for granted. I don’t mean that we should be afraid from now on, but that it is imperative we make our voices heard in the larger community, which I hope now is beginning to realize that complacency and indebtedness to old ideas and older strategies is a recipe for disaster.
    How many times will it take them to get it?

  6. Ravencomeslaughing
    Posted January 20, 2010 at 11:07 am | Permalink

    I will admit, I don’t know a lot about either candidate, nor have I ever been to Mass. I was considering visiting there for a genealogical trip as an ancestral line of mine helped found Nantucket. Seeing that they chose to elect someone who voted against gay marriage and called a lesbian couple with children “unnatural”, I sure as hell don’t want to go there now.

  7. EvilSlutClique
    Posted January 20, 2010 at 11:13 am | Permalink

    Well, obviously he won because he has ‘abs we can believe in’. (Did anyone else see Cosmo‘s spread ‘campaigning’ for him?) If this was a female candidate who just happened to be a former nude model, you know she would never have been elected. :(

  8. Sierra
    Posted January 20, 2010 at 11:17 am | Permalink

    I am so sickened by my home state today. Massachusetts, what’s wrong with you! Are you trying to outlame California?!?
    I mostly feel shocked and confused and depressed. I know someday very soon we’re going to need an action plan to get out state back, but right now I’m just stunned.
    NPRs take was that he won because he brought it the pro-sports-fan voters who saw him as a ‘real guy’. In other words, he played the misogynist card as hard as he could.
    Now the health care bill is basically toast, and potentially thousands of people will die because some of my state’s otherwise progressive-but-stupid voters couldn’t stomach voting for a woman?
    I hate you, right now, Massachusetts.

  9. Courtney
    Posted January 20, 2010 at 11:21 am | Permalink

    Oh God, not another “No more icky gayz and baby killin’z” Republican! He won by saying “Look at me, I drive a truck and hate health care!!”
    While I do agree the current healthcare bill sucks and should be redone -and now it’ll be defeated-, I still wish Coakley wouldve stepped up and really campaigned -she was banking on Mass. voters voting Dem. like usual. Meanwhile Brown and his campaign were running around screaming about the fiscal apocolipse.
    If this is a sign of elections to come, would anybody like to join me in moving to Denmark? Or Sweden, Im not picky.
    Oh how I wish Ted Kennedy were still here, now there was a great polititian…

  10. Courtney
    Posted January 20, 2010 at 11:21 am | Permalink

    Oh God, not another “No more icky gayz and baby killin’z” Republican! He won by saying “Look at me, I drive a truck and hate health care!!”
    While I do agree the current healthcare bill sucks and should be redone -and now it’ll be defeated-, I still wish Coakley wouldve stepped up and really campaigned -she was banking on Mass. voters voting Dem. like usual. Meanwhile Brown and his campaign were running around screaming about the fiscal apocolipse.
    If this is a sign of elections to come, would anybody like to join me in moving to Denmark? Or Sweden, Im not picky.
    Oh how I wish Ted Kennedy were still here, now there was a great polititian…

  11. TD
    Posted January 20, 2010 at 11:28 am | Permalink

    Its not like the alternative was much better.

  12. schismtracer
    Posted January 20, 2010 at 11:30 am | Permalink

    After the Presidential election, I recall arguing with a friend about whether Obama’s tenure would actually change anything. He insisted that the large Democratic majority would allow Obama to affect his plans even more than Bush. I countered that Democrats have a history (in my lifetime, at least) of spectacularly failing to do anything when opposed at any level.
    So, to answer the question, I’m feeling a bit like Cassandra.

  13. JupiterAmmon
    Posted January 20, 2010 at 11:45 am | Permalink

    It looks like california can actually outdo them.
    http://www.bradblog.com/?p=7647

  14. Honeybee
    Posted January 20, 2010 at 11:48 am | Permalink

    Really? I kinda think the opposite.
    The main reason Sarah Palin is liked at all is because guys think she is hot. I could see lots of guys voting for a former nude model. Maybe women wouldn’t though, and certainly some conservatives might have a field day, but a conservative former nude model could likely win!

  15. MLEmac28
    Posted January 20, 2010 at 11:54 am | Permalink

    I don’t think it will make much of a difference. Dems never had a “super majority” with Lieberman and the like.
    I’m just annoyed that a few years ago the Republicans were whining about Democrats filibustering a few judicial candidates, and now the Republicans are blocking everything they possibly can. Pot, meet Kettle.

  16. mamram
    Posted January 20, 2010 at 12:01 pm | Permalink

    To be honest, watching non-Massachusetts liberals talk about this election has been really frustrating. It’s not all Fox News and teabaggers; people don’t seem to realize how many left-leaning voters felt that, as a friend of mine put it, “a vote for Brown is a vote for a different Democrat in three years.” I don’t like being told that I have betrayed the left by not voting to make Coakley essentially senator for life.
    We had to choose between shitty option one: probably voted out in three years, and shitty option two: FOREVER. It is unfortunate that Democrats, even with a significant majority, can’t seem to get anything done unless they have absolute, unfettered, filibuster-proof power.

  17. paperispatient
    Posted January 20, 2010 at 12:04 pm | Permalink

    I completely disagree, 100%. If it came out that Sarah Palin had posed naked a decade ago, I think she’d be abandoned by all of her “family values” supporters. There’s nothing wrong with posing naked, but if you’re putting out this wholesome and conservative and family-focused image, there’s a disconnect there, not that hypocrisy would be anything new to the GOP or to most politicians, regardless of party affiliation. Also, what support do you have for the main reason Sarah Palin is liked is her “hotness”?

  18. uberhausfrau
    Posted January 20, 2010 at 12:14 pm | Permalink

    “outlame”? really??
    watch the ablist language.

  19. uberhausfrau
    Posted January 20, 2010 at 12:18 pm | Permalink

    yeppers. with this and the inevitable dick perry win in texas, fuck the democrats and it’s back to being an anarchist. mutual aid, here i come. i just hope the local collective has been overrun with hipster.

  20. uberhausfrau
    Posted January 20, 2010 at 12:18 pm | Permalink

    yeppers. with this and the inevitable dick perry win in texas, fuck the democrats and it’s back to being an anarchist. mutual aid, here i come. i just hope the local collective hasnt been overrun with hipster.

  21. Alex Catgirl
    Posted January 20, 2010 at 12:30 pm | Permalink

    Democrats are losers even when they win so I’m not seeing the issue here. They had a “Super Majority”, what did they do with it? Nothing, they squandered it pandering to the people who voted for he other side.
    Progressives in MA sent the dumbocrates a message by not rallying around Coakley – Fuck You To.
    I donated money and campaigned for Obama and other democrats during the last election, I’m not doing it again…Ever.
    Like Bill Clinton, Obama was all about reach’n out to good ol’ boys like Scott Brown the truck driver.
    Well,their good ol’ boy Scott won, I hope they are happy.

  22. 94.Rowland
    Posted January 20, 2010 at 12:36 pm | Permalink

    I agree. I live in Massachusetts and I voted yesterday. It drives me crazy to hear so many people saying (or read writing suggesting) that we let down the entire country. We’re just one state– and we’re still a good state. It’s unfair to make us shoulder all this blame just because so much attention was paid to this particular special election. What about all of the other states with Republican senators? And like you pointed out, Democrats still have a significant majority and ought to make some good things come from that, filibuster-proof or not. Yes, it’s brutal to think that a Republican senator won Massachusetts, but I don’t think this has to be the devastating moment that people are making it out to be.

  23. Jadelyn
    Posted January 20, 2010 at 12:41 pm | Permalink

    Or perhaps they couldn’t stomach voting for a problematic candidate with a weak campaign. Frankly, I don’t think it was misogyny that took this one away. I can’t say that I would have voted for Coakley, either, and that’s sure as hell got nothing to do with her gender.

  24. daveNYC
    Posted January 20, 2010 at 1:15 pm | Permalink

    It doesn’t help that she suggested that Curt Schilling was a Yankees fan. That’s about the same as being pro-Hitler, as far as Massachusetts goes.

  25. woolverine.wordpress.com
    Posted January 20, 2010 at 1:15 pm | Permalink

    No joke. Honeybee, I agree that people liked Sarah Palin’s hotness, but if she’d actually done a nude spread, she would have been completely vilified, a la Carrie Prejean. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t have any love for Miss Prejean, but the pendulum totally swung from “hot but pure voice of the future” to slutshaming. Double standards for men and women extend to this sphere as well.

  26. schismtracer
    Posted January 20, 2010 at 1:28 pm | Permalink

    That’s also an incredibly stupid reason to vote against someone.

  27. GREGORYABUTLER10031
    Posted January 20, 2010 at 1:58 pm | Permalink

    I’m not a Democrat, and I feel that there isn’t a dime’s worth of difference between the two corporate dominated parties, so it’s a matter of profound indifference to me.

  28. daveNYC
    Posted January 20, 2010 at 2:46 pm | Permalink

    Well technically you’d be talking about Red Sox fans, so stupid is as stupid does. With the ritual Boston hate out of the way, the fact that she made such a obvious and stupid mistake really shows the level of effort she was putting into her campaign. It’s similar to Ford’s recent interview where he said he only took the subway if he couldn’t find a cap, and that he’d been to all five boroughs, but only if you counted his helicopter landing on Staten Island.
    It takes a certain amount of effort to win an election, even as a (D) in Massachusitts. Brown put in the effort, she sure as hell didn’t.
    And with the way the wankers are backing off on HCR, it’ll be 2016 before anything gets done.

  29. GalFawkes
    Posted January 20, 2010 at 2:47 pm | Permalink

    Well, Coakley got complacent. She got lazy in her campaigning, she didn’t put herself out there, she refused to be more pro-active, and she made that “Yankees fan” comment – which I concede is a stupid reason not to vote for someone but still – it was like she didn’t care about winning. As if she didn’t even want to win. And she could have, if her attitude hadn’t been like, “Oh, well, my opponent REALLY sucks, so obviously you’re going to vote for me.”
    And ditto for Deeds in Virginia.

  30. tsokol
    Posted January 20, 2010 at 2:55 pm | Permalink

    The “run to the center” by Obama, the insane quest for some mythical “bipartisanship”, have had the expected results. Obama’s unwillingness to fight for the principles that got him elected — all this has led to a “tea party” candidate getting elected.
    These folks have nothing positive to offer — they are filling a vacuum left by a Democratic Party that owes far too much to Wall Street, Insurance interests, and all “financial services” folks.
    Since Reagan effectively killed the unions, the Dems. have gone elsewhere for money.
    Better to follow the example of former Governor Howard Dean, not the example of the faux populist Obama. He is a total disappointment.

  31. davenj
    Posted January 20, 2010 at 2:59 pm | Permalink

    My thoughts? Was this any sort of shock? Coakley was a crummy candidate, and that this was even a race made me really consider the possibility of Brown winning this seat. She ran a poor campaign, and it doesn’t hurt that the public is generally against the current health care bill, and knew that electing Brown would stall it.
    People are dissatisfied with Obama and his super-majority. Part of it is absurdly high expectations due in part to pie in the sky campaign rhetoric and sheer ignorance from the electorate as to what can and can’t be done. The other part is legitimate problems with what a Democratic-led House, Senate, and White House has done so far.
    The Democrats had a real chance to pass health care reform. They did. They had months and months to do it, and majorities in the House and Senate. Instead of pushing through legislation that would have ensured at least a public option they decided to play it safe, compromising almost all the reform out of the “health care reform” bill.
    The bill as it currently stands is a mess. It’s a deeply, deeply flawed piece of legislation that reads more like a bailout for insurance companies than anything approaching true change. And the whole “tax Cadillac plans” thing is problematic, too, amounting to a tax on workers who negotiated good benefits in lieu of salary hikes. And the definition of “Cadillac” could easily change in the future if there’s a budget shortfall.
    The people who get left out in the cold are, as usual, those with pre-existing conditions and those who aren’t poor enough to qualify for aid, or who must remain that poor to get said aid. And that sucks. But the Democrats sold the soul of this bill out long ago, and are fighting over how to best get re-elected, not serve the nation.
    The silver lining? It looks like Massachusetts has found a way to stop Stupak.

  32. Mr M. Crockett
    Posted January 20, 2010 at 3:09 pm | Permalink

    It doesn’t help that she suggested that Curt Schilling was a Yankees fan. That’s about the same as being pro-Hitler, as far as Massachusetts goes.
    Wow. I am absolutely speechless. That cost her votes? What next? A politician who loses votes for not being able to name the latest emo band correctly?
    I would have thought that anyone would vote for the candidate whose policies they agreed with most (or disagreed with least).

  33. davenj
    Posted January 20, 2010 at 3:15 pm | Permalink

    The inability to share a major cultural event with one’s constituency is a sign that one is out of touch with their electorate. This can be interpreted to gauge one’s likelihood of responding to their electorate’s wishes, because if they cannot understand something as important as Boston’s 2004 World Series victory (and can’t be bothered to care) why would they take the time to listen carefully to their electorate?.
    Knowing something as simple as the importance of Curt Schilling to Bostonians is crucial, and whiffing on it as a candidate in Massachusetts is an outright botch job.
    Brown ran a campaign about her being out of touch, and she just threw gasoline on the fire.

  34. daveNYC
    Posted January 20, 2010 at 3:25 pm | Permalink

    1) It probably cost her votes, but in case you haven’t noticed, the electorate is all kinds of shallow.
    2) There’s a basic amount of knowledge that one should have about the local culture, she didn’t have that, nor did it look like she had made an effort to learn it. And this isn’t something goofy like the proper toppings for a Boston hot dog, this is about the Red Sox and Yankees. It’s something you should get by osmosis just by living in the zip code.
    3) Policies? Most people want low taxes, lots of services, zero deficits, and goverment hands off their Medicare. Good luck on that.

  35. Toongrrl
    Posted January 20, 2010 at 3:35 pm | Permalink

    It didn’t seem much, as a Cali girl, but Brown…hell no!!!!

  36. MLEmac28
    Posted January 20, 2010 at 10:08 pm | Permalink

    I don’t think there is no difference, but it’s not enough of one to make me want to vote democrat anymore. I voted for mostly green candidates in 2008. If the presidential election had been close in my state (Arkansas), I probably would have voted for Obama, but it wasn’t and he was (and still is) lacking on too many issues. I’ve also decided that I will never again vote for our senators, Blanche Lincoln or Mark Pryor. They are both democrats, but they are southern democrats, so still conservative. If some scary republican gets elected the next time around, that means that in another six years the democratic party in AR will hopefully nominate an actual liberal. One step back…

  37. aleks
    Posted January 20, 2010 at 10:08 pm | Permalink

    The election bugged me for an hour, then I was ready to move on.
    The Democratic surrender that followed? Hard to see us ever coming back from this.

  38. aleks
    Posted January 20, 2010 at 10:10 pm | Permalink

    The election bugged me for an hour, then I was ready to move on.
    The Democratic surrender that followed? Hard to see us ever coming back from this.

  39. James
    Posted January 21, 2010 at 12:11 am | Permalink

    Knowing the local sports heroes is politics 101 stuff… particularly in a place like Boston where a good chunk of the populace is insanely loyal to the local sports teams. Not knowing about Curt Schilling, particularly when she already had a rep for seeming like she felt entitled to the seat and being out of touch with normal everyday voters, did nothing but reinforce and provide a condensation point for the growing meme… and in the process cemented Scott Brown’s “regular guy” credentials.

  40. aleks
    Posted January 21, 2010 at 12:40 am | Permalink

    Yes, it would be great if every voter analyzed every issue likely to arise in the next 6 years and how each candidate was likely to vote on them. Since many don’t or can’t, identity and cultural connections count for a lot.

  41. Zoe Brain
    Posted January 21, 2010 at 7:43 am | Permalink

    Bear in mind that I’m on the Right. Though “Right” in Australia means “Liberal Voter”, so I guess I’m closer to Independent than GOP.
    Even in Australia we’d heard of Persecutor Coakley. How she kept innocent people in jail to buy popularity and further her political career.
    The Dems could have chosen Albert De Salvo in the primaries, and had more support from Independent voters. They need to figure out how they came to have her as a candidate, and fix it.
    Her opponent was no-one special. A good campaigner, but that’s about it.
    Ok, so now the Dems have lost their “Filibuster Proof” majority. They only have a 59:41 majority in the Senate.
    To put this in perspective… the GOP has not had a majority as great as that since NINETEEN TWENTY EIGHT.
    Not for 82 years.
    Yet somehow, they’ve managed to pass the odd bit of legislation, here and there. Sometimes very odd.
    The Dems… have not. Not even with a 60:40 majority. Both House and Senate leadership has been conspicuous by its absence.

  42. Marisa
    Posted January 21, 2010 at 8:12 am | Permalink

    As a college student it’s important I point out the DISGUSTING lack of college voters, I can probably count the people my age I know that voted on one hand. In a state with 3 to 1 democrat to republican ratio, I think the lack of voter turn out was the difference.

  43. Melanie
    Posted January 22, 2010 at 7:14 am | Permalink

    I wish I could like this comment multiple times

  44. EvilSlutClique
    Posted January 23, 2010 at 8:51 am | Permalink

    I know this is just an exaggeration… but do you really think it’s appropriate and funny to equate liking the wrong baseball team with the Nazis? I’m surprised no one else has commented on that.
    -Lilith

Feministing In Your Inbox

Sign up for our Newsletter to stay in touch with Feministing
and receive regular updates and exclusive content.

241 queries. 1.042 seconds