The Boston Globe reports that Democrat Martha Coakley has called her Republican opponent, Scott Brown, and congratulated him on his victory.
If the reported returns so far are accurate, it looks like Brown about 52%, Coakley about 47%. If that's true, then it's a pretty sad commentary on Massachusetts. Whodathunk that in the birthplace of the American Revolution, only 1 in 100 voters would support the only candidate who in any way stands for that Revolution's values?
Update on the oddsmaker angle: Tuesday morning, I swagged the outcome as Brown 49%, Coakley 46%, Kennedy 5%. The actual outcome seems to have been Brown 52.2%, Coakley 46.8%, Kennedy 1%.
Recent polls had Kennedy at the 5% I predicted. I should have guessed that "wasted vote syndrome" would bring that way down, but I was unduly optimistic in this case -- the "major party" candidates were just so godawful that I thought Kennedy's vote would stick because it had no other even nominally worthwhile candidate to go to.
I'd be interested to know where that 4% did go to. Rasmussen had Coakley as the second choice of Kennedy supporters by a 2-1 margin. If that is how the fallaway from Kennedy broke, then Brown was doing better, and Coakley worse, than I thought before they picked up their respective last-minute-poltroon votes.
Showing posts with label Massachusetts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Massachusetts. Show all posts
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Liberty for Massachusetts? Unlikely, but worth pursuing anyway
I'm taking a break -- just finished another 100 name/phone number matches for the Massachusetts Libertarian "Get Out The Vote" phone banks -- and I'd like to take a minute to formally endorse Joe Kennedy.
He's not one of "those" Kennedys, as he's gone out of his way to make clear (Democrat Martha Coakley's campaign has also been vocal in driving home that point, for obvious reasons).
This Kennedy is the pro-freedom candidate -- the only pro-freedom candidate -- in today's election to fill the US Senate seat vacated by Ted Kennedy's death.
Just to elaborate a bit on that point: If you're a Massachusetts voter and you vote for anyone but Joe Kennedy today, you're voting against freedom, baseball, apple pie, Mom and America.
Whether or not you're a Massachusettsian, if you're voting or working for or donating to or talking up any candidate except Joe Kennedy today, you're pissing on the graves of the Lexington and Concord Minutemen. You're spiking the cannon that Knox dragged down from Ticonderoga. You're making a mockery of the Boston Tea Party and you're dancing in the blood of Samuel Gray, James Caldwell, Crispus Attucks, Samuel Maverick and Patrick Carr.
Yes, it really is that simple.
Can Kennedy win? Well, yes -- if a plurality of Massachusetts voters decide to support him.
Is that likely to happen? Of course not. Libertarians haven't yet persuaded a plurality of Massachusetts voters that we represent their highest aspirations while the Republicans and Democrats represent nothing worthy of support.
Does it matter whether or not Kennedy wins? Yes, it does. Because he will not win, the Senate will remain 100% anti-freedom instead of becoming even a paltry 1% pro-freedom. Over the course of Ted Kennedy's unexpired term, it's likely that that one pro-freedom vote would have made a difference in any number of bills -- passing them, defeating them, or amending them to make them better.
Since he won't win, does it matter which of the two anti-freedom candidates wins? Not really.
There are differences between Brown and Coakley, and between their parties, but not differences substantial enough to merit supporting either one. Do you really care that much whether the creatures gnawing the flesh off your bones are coyotes or happen to be hyenas?
Voting for or otherwise supporting Joe Kennedy means never having to say you're sorry. It means knowing that you did the best you could do for Massachusetts and for America. That's something worth knowing about yourself even if 95% of the people around you couldn't, wouldn't, or didn't put down the Demopublican crack pipe.
He's not one of "those" Kennedys, as he's gone out of his way to make clear (Democrat Martha Coakley's campaign has also been vocal in driving home that point, for obvious reasons).
This Kennedy is the pro-freedom candidate -- the only pro-freedom candidate -- in today's election to fill the US Senate seat vacated by Ted Kennedy's death.
Just to elaborate a bit on that point: If you're a Massachusetts voter and you vote for anyone but Joe Kennedy today, you're voting against freedom, baseball, apple pie, Mom and America.
Whether or not you're a Massachusettsian, if you're voting or working for or donating to or talking up any candidate except Joe Kennedy today, you're pissing on the graves of the Lexington and Concord Minutemen. You're spiking the cannon that Knox dragged down from Ticonderoga. You're making a mockery of the Boston Tea Party and you're dancing in the blood of Samuel Gray, James Caldwell, Crispus Attucks, Samuel Maverick and Patrick Carr.
Yes, it really is that simple.
Can Kennedy win? Well, yes -- if a plurality of Massachusetts voters decide to support him.
Is that likely to happen? Of course not. Libertarians haven't yet persuaded a plurality of Massachusetts voters that we represent their highest aspirations while the Republicans and Democrats represent nothing worthy of support.
Does it matter whether or not Kennedy wins? Yes, it does. Because he will not win, the Senate will remain 100% anti-freedom instead of becoming even a paltry 1% pro-freedom. Over the course of Ted Kennedy's unexpired term, it's likely that that one pro-freedom vote would have made a difference in any number of bills -- passing them, defeating them, or amending them to make them better.
Since he won't win, does it matter which of the two anti-freedom candidates wins? Not really.
There are differences between Brown and Coakley, and between their parties, but not differences substantial enough to merit supporting either one. Do you really care that much whether the creatures gnawing the flesh off your bones are coyotes or happen to be hyenas?
Voting for or otherwise supporting Joe Kennedy means never having to say you're sorry. It means knowing that you did the best you could do for Massachusetts and for America. That's something worth knowing about yourself even if 95% of the people around you couldn't, wouldn't, or didn't put down the Demopublican crack pipe.
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Debunking a Scott Brown myth
"Scott Brown is the only person who can stop ObamaCare by being the 41st vote against cloture."
That, or some variant of it, is the latest excuse I'm hearing from the usual suspects who come up with a MOST IMPORTANT REASON EVAH! to vote for "the lesser evil" just this one time ... every time.
There are three kinds of lies right now: Lies, damn lies, and reasons to vote for Scott Brown in next week's special election to fill the US Senate vacancy created by Ted Kennedy's death. This whole "he can stop ObamaCare" schtick fits into all three categories. Here's why:
That, or some variant of it, is the latest excuse I'm hearing from the usual suspects who come up with a MOST IMPORTANT REASON EVAH! to vote for "the lesser evil" just this one time ... every time.
There are three kinds of lies right now: Lies, damn lies, and reasons to vote for Scott Brown in next week's special election to fill the US Senate vacancy created by Ted Kennedy's death. This whole "he can stop ObamaCare" schtick fits into all three categories. Here's why:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)