Who will win the senatorial election in Massachusetts ?

considering that we will know for sure via exit polling in 24 hours, arguing theory is a waste of time

I find it interesting that Coakley got a successful prosecution of Louis Woodward the English au pair convicted in the shaking death of Mathew Eappan.

The pharmaceutical and insurance companies will win (no matter who wins the election). All the candidates are owned, the only thing that will change are the line items they are "urged" to vote on in the health care bill.

Eh? He's more liberal now than he's ever been. (I've been reading him for about three years.) And, while jealously guarding his iconoclasm, one of the most pro-Obama bloggers out there.

Well hopefully he doesn't fall off the wagon.

I mostly agree with this, except that I think Coakley is a flawed candidate. I'm not sure the timing of Obama intervening would make a big difference -- maybe some, but I think she's the main problem. I think the main variable, and the main thing I wish would be different, is that the Democrats should have fielded a better candidate.

I sympathize with people who don't like her and don't want to vote for her even though they support Obama and healthcare. That's not the only thing on their radar screen.

No one has the guts to make a prediction.... so here goes.

Coakley 52%
Brown 44%
Other (Kennedy) 4%

Coakley is the same basic deal as running Mike Nifong for US Senator from North Carolina. Anybody who would actually vote for her or even think about doing so needs to be lobotomized and put on an island somewhere.

Will that be covered by my health care plan?

((or does it matter that I am mostly voting against Brown))

I still don't feel confident enough about today's election to make a forecast - either way.

I agree that in many ways Brown has been a more attractive candidate than Coakley in the current campaign. However it is worth remembering that Coakley is, and for some time has been, a successful and prominent Democrat office holder in Massachusetts. Many of the supposed gaffes she is accused of making, such as her remark concerning the suitability for employment in emergency medical centers of folks who have moral objections to abortion really stem from basic, strngly held, Democrat political beliefs . In this instance she was merely guilty of a failure to disguise the essential issue with sufficient art. She has the benefit of a powerful, well-funded and orghanized political machine in a state that hasn't sent a Republican Senator to Washington in over 40 years.

It is simply implausible to suppose the current political scene with respect to this election does not involve basic and very likely widespread public issues with both the Obama Administrati0n, particularly given its over zealous pursuit of health care and green energy issues at a time when the adverse side effects of both have become increasingly evident to the public. Moreover the spectacle of political payoffs to Democrat Senators, Labor Unions, and key constituencies in both these efforts and emergency economic measures, plus the unsavory back room maneuverings of the highly unlovable duo of Pelosi and Reid, has given the lie to Obama's promise of "change we can believe in" and transparency in government. Instead he has quickly established a new low standard more reminiscent of the Chicago cesspool from which he emerged than the soaring rhetoric with which he conned the Democrat true believers.

It has occurred to me however that a defeat in Massachusetts may well be a blessinbg in disguise to President Obama. It will give him a plausible way to back out of a grotesque piece of health care legislation that will only further undermine the credibility of Democrats if it is enacted, and do a course correction, reminiscent of that done by President Clinton in 1993 & 1994.

Hopefully not....

http://mensnewsdaily.com/sexandmetro/2010/01/18/martha-coakley-family-destroyer-misandrist-for-senate/

I wonder who the Amiralts are voting for?

It's more about the individuals in the campaign, and who the electorate believes will represent them better, than it is about Obama.

People already voted for Obama; they don't expect to have to vote for him again under a different name.

It is conceivable that your interpretation is accurate. Neither of us can claim to know that will motivate millions of Massachusettss voters in actions most of them (at this hour) haven't yet taken.

However, I believe your interpretation requires a certain .... suspension of common sense.

I hope Brown wins.

I don't think gridlock is necessarily a bad thing.

I think it'll be the guy. Not by much, but the guy.

All the Republicans and conservatives who never bothered to vote when Kennedy was alive will finally come out to vote. The woman, whatshername, made the msitake of thinking she'd be a horse shoe-in.

Even though Mass. has more often than not voted Democrat, they still voted in Mitt Romney. I'll be disappointed if the guy wins, then again, I think Obama and Pelosi and Reid behaved badly with this 60 vote majority. They sort of did a na-na-na jig around the Repubs.

Regular people don't like that, and it's their chance to let them know it. So if the guy wins, it really is because the Dems were short-sighted in their approach to playing well with others. In that regard, I can see it coming. Am I happy about it? Not at all.

I mean what you have here is another case of a dem pol starting off as a DA and forging a political career on the blood of innocents.

I've said this before, I'll say it again: we need to get rid of the entire "adversarial" system of justice along with the job of prosecutor/DA, and adopt the "inquisiitorial" system which the French use in which the sole motive of all parties involved is determining facts. NOBODY should ever have any sort of a career or money incentive to put people in prison.

Granted there may be the odd case of a republican political career being made this way, but it is rare; the Mike Nifongs, Ronnie Earles, Scot Harshbargers, Janet Renos, and Martha Coakley's of the world are mostly democrats.

I have a number of reasons for despising the democrat party, this is just one of them.