Pardon me for eleven dimensional chess, but would Obama LLC and Reid, Inc rather have Brown or Warren in the Senate. With Brown they have a foil for their own use. Obama could claim any progressive legislation he backed (only later shown not to back) was blocked by arcane Senate rules supported by Brown. Same for Reid. With Brown voting mainly GOP line, cloture would again constipate the Senate, something Reid seems to like, though of course deny.

As H.L. Mencken said “no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.” The problem with “democracy” in America is an electorate that is largely myopic, easily manipulated and susceptible to the myth of American exceptionalism.

Scott Brown has a huge cash advantage. I hope I (a Massachusetts voter) don’t get stuck with him representing me for long. Elizabeth Warren is my preferred candidate. She has worked to raise awareness of the plight of ordinary working families for decades, and Scott Brown sucks up to the Koch brothers. For me this race is a no-brainer, and for the old men who sit around at the Dunkin Donuts, it is a no-brainer in the opposite direction. Which leaves the people in the middle — those who pay no attention to politics until the last minute, or when something extraordinary happens. Sadly those people are the ones most easily swayed by TV advertising. This race really could be decided by the powerful $$$ interests that back Scott Brown.

so doubtful that Brown could win, despite his money, in such a Blue state. Let’s help Warren as we can! Yes, probably Obama would prefer Brown, they seem to be more aligned, horrifyingly.

I was a big supporter of E Warren at the start of the Obama administration… but then the Obama administration… and all of it’s fake promises, betrayal and fake excuses for serving the 1%.

Warren is an instant replay… of Barack Obama. She is copying the Obama Playbook Of Fakery to a tee.

Fake populist..­. then serve the 1%.

Elizabeth Warren could have run as an Independen­t… considerin­g that over 50% of the voters in Mass are registered Independen­ts. This would have shown her to not be part of the corruption in Washington. Instead Warren chose to align herself with the corrupt 1% owned Democrats.­.. who are awash is campaign money from Wall Street and Bankers and virtually every 1% special interest on earth [the very same people she fakely claims to be protecting us from]… and she knows that. So in the first decision of her fake political career Warren chose to jump into the outstreche­d arms of the 1%.

And dont even get me started on the fake Consumer Financial Protection Bureau… which is housed in the FED and gets all its funding from the FED.

Enough of the fake misrepresentations. Enough of the fake act. We need real people to run for office.

Brown/Warren… both intend to serve the 1%.

A Kennedy on the ticket in Ma is going to bring out a lot of Dem voters and I think helps Warren.

And if republicans can tie Warren to Obama (not hard to do…) Brown will have a leg up on keeping that seat.

what massive registration edge?
there are 4 million registered and 2 million are independents.

Its FEBRUARY..Anything can happen by NOVEMBER. I work at an airport and coworkers don’t have any idea who Harry Reid is nor can they tell you what bills have passed recently or what the bills do. People start paying some attention at the end of summer. But then they only pick up bits and pieces of issues and that is how they make the decision on who to vote……..if they do vote.

E. Warren isn’t going to have any trouble raising lote of $…She’s traveling the state and meeting people, and she speaks in declarative sentences that make sense. Being a woman may not help w/ the old cranks at Dunkin Donuts who don’t know which side of their bread is buttered and by whom, but they’re a minority when it comes to voting. Warren’s going to win and win big.

Amen.

Waiting to be convinced that this election crap makes a difference.

Much as Obama is not my favorite person, I doubt he would prefer Brown. A pres can usually get what he wants from his party. The again there is ole Joe. Still…..

Brown is just popular there. It is not Obama.

I don’t doubt Brown’s popularity.

And I don’t doubt Obama’s lingering (if temporarily reduced…) UNpopularity.

In 2008 Obama’s coattails were bright and shining and lonnng. This time around I think they’ll look like foul rags and can be measured in inches.

“A president can usually get what he wants from his party.”

I’d have to agree.

When Obama decided on a “bipartisan” policy of bending over and spreading cheek for the republicans, he sure got plenty of help from the big democratic majorities he came in with.

Sapphire…

It does make a difference.

Step 1… stop voting for Democrats and Republicans. Voting for Democrats and Republicans is EXACTLY what the 1% and all those who have corrupted our entire government… want you to do. Anyone who wastes their precious vote on these corrupt Democratic and Republican scoundrels is in fact rewarding corruption and participating the continuation of the corruption.

And even worse they are continueing to allow themselves to be used as patsies-dupes for the 1%. There are still way too many brainwashed voters who are actively participating in ruining the country. This is what brainwashing does… it causes people to act against their own best self interests and the best common interests of others. Too many voters are still victims of the largest brainwashing scheme in history.

And your proof of you assertions is that she’s not running under your banner and submitting to your dictates? Are you even from Massachusetts?

Exactly. If Obama, DINO that he is, is really Wall Street’s chosen one, why is Wall Street already, before the primaries are done, plunking down tens of dollars to see him defeated? And that billionaires like the Koch brothers and Vegas casino magnate Sheldon Adelson are promising at least $100 million to the GOP to take out Obama?

But then again, logic is not the strongest suit of some folks.

You are a brick shy of a full load if you believe what you just wrote. To use Canada as an example, our friends to the north have 3 liberal parties and they vary as to how liberal they are, but each is to the left of the Conservative Party. So, what happens at vote time? The liberal parties split the majority left-wing vote, the Conservatives get about 40% and win. And, that gives us the tar-sands project and the XL pipeline and an all-out assault on the social safety net. If you think that is an improvement then you live in a different world than I live in. What is the solution? You vote for the better of the two, and work FROM THE BOTTOM UP. Starting locally, elect Progressives and go from there, and it takes years–decades even. The Conservatives understood that and are now reaping the benefits of their stategy. Why don’t the Progressives understand this? Are we really tactically inept? Or was Rahm correct, and we are just f’n retards (and then the asshat was elected mayor of Chicago)? And that, my friends, was an example of a complete Progressive FAIL. No Progressives were groomed from the days of the school board elections to challenge Rahm and the system–and that was f’n retarded. You can only crack the system from within. It was designed that way over 200 years ago, and if you buck it you will lose, and lose big.

My problem with Warren, or one of them, is that she was a republican until she was 46, and when she was asked if she voted for Reagan during that time, she refused to answer.

Now: For someone who’s currently being elevated to “populist” sainthood mainly on the basis of her (supposedly) being rabid about putting some real restrictions on Wall Street and the corporatists, to have…possibly…voted for the great de-regulator raises some interesting questions, to put it mildly.

IF she voted for Reagan, then saying that she is now in favor of more regulations for the money-shufflers is kind of like saying that Mitt Romney is standing in Tmes Square, giving away $100 dollar bills. Talk about a sea-change!

That would be one hell of an epiphany, and if I was a reporter on the Mass. political situation, I’d sure be doing follow-up questions about how she discovered the error of her ways. I mean, it’s not like we had a worker’s paradise just prior to Reagan’s landslide victories. When he was helping himself get elected by pimping the idea that what was wrong with the country was that the big, bad, federal government was fucking over poor little Exxon and Wall Street, did she buy into it enough that she voted for him?

Inquiring heretics want to know. :o)

reddog… thanks for proving my point.

I REFUSE the brainwashing.

tanbark

All great points.

I am a registered Independent [not affiliated with any political party].

I can think for myself. I have no dictates other than… ALL of our politicians should represent and work for the American people. Currently we have no one doing that except Bernie Sanders and I’m not even sure about him.

I know it’s very difficult for some people to understand that some of their fellow citizens can think for themselves. Maybe you should try it. It’s nothing to be afraid of.

I REFUSE the brainwashing.

The polls question wording /order is being blamed for the result – and that may be true:

Q9. Does Senator Scott Brown deserve to be re-elected or is it time to give someone else a chance?
Q10. What is the first word or phrase that comes to your mind when you hear the name Scott Brown?
Q11. What is the first word or phrase that comes to your mind when you hear the name Elizabeth Warren?
Q12. Does Elizabeth Warren have the experience to be a United States Senator?
Q13. Is Scott Brown a leader in the United States Senate, or a follower?
Q14. If the General Election for United States Senate were held today and the candidates were Republican Scott Brown and Democrat Elizabeth Warren for whom would you vote or towards whom would you lean at this time?

Q10 and Q11 use neutral wording, but the order of these questions may have the side-effec­t of reminding respondent­s, three times, that Scott Brown is an incumbent senator. They may also raise doubts about Elizabeth Warren’s experience while planting the suggestion that Brown has been a leader in the Senate, not a “follower.­”"