Posted by voyager on Tue, Jan 19, 2010, at 8:11 PM:
With 63% of the vote counted Brown leads Coakley 53-46% in MA Senate race. This changes quite as few things. What are your opinions?
Replies (67)
EAT THAT IKE!
-- Posted by Skeptic1 on Tue, Jan 19, 2010, at 8:22 PM
If this doesn't show Pelosi, Reid, and Obama that it isnt just the Republicans who are angry as hell with spending, taxing, and hidden meetings.... then just wait and see.
-- Posted by Skeptic1 on Tue, Jan 19, 2010, at 8:24 PM
Wiffle, I just popped the champagne! PARTY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-- Posted by Skeptic1 on Tue, Jan 19, 2010, at 8:25 PM
Voy may have passed out already. Pour? Straight from the bottle baby! This is a good night indeed.
-- Posted by Skeptic1 on Tue, Jan 19, 2010, at 8:31 PM
Will the sec. certify? Was the election stolen. Will we find votes in the trunk of a car. Get ready for another Franken deal?
-- Posted by Old John on Tue, Jan 19, 2010, at 8:39 PM
Yoyager is rite cheer! The Delphi Oracle failed me NOT! Everybody knows what I think. I was more interested it what everyone else thought since most of you are better at it than I am.
However, I'm almost feel sorry for poor ole Ike. Now Wiff, be gentle with him.
-- Posted by voyager on Tue, Jan 19, 2010, at 8:48 PM
Fell over in dead shock?
-- Posted by Skeptic1 on Tue, Jan 19, 2010, at 8:53 PM
ooops that may be the champagne talking
-- Posted by Skeptic1 on Tue, Jan 19, 2010, at 8:53 PM
Barney announced his plans to change the rules again today. Pelosi said health care would still pass. Maybe they can declare lack of government health care an enviromental issue and get the epa to run it.
-- Posted by Old John on Tue, Jan 19, 2010, at 8:55 PM
Reid just made a public announcement that Brown will only be seated after the proper documents are registered...hinting that they will delay seating the Republican senator.
Remember when IL Senator Burgess was seated in IL? and was seated even though there was a huge cry about the legality of his appointment? They seated him anyway because he was a democrat.
And now they won't seat the Republican without delay after delay.
man democrats have no ethics whatsoever.
-- Posted by Skeptic1 on Tue, Jan 19, 2010, at 8:59 PM
"...then I think we can make a pretty strong claim that we have got the most runs and its the ninth inning and we have won."...said Obama
newsflash- you just LOST!
-- Posted by Skeptic1 on Tue, Jan 19, 2010, at 9:14 PM
The fact that a Republican won in Mass where they are outnumbered, I believe I heard 3.25 to 1, and by over 5 points is nearly unheard of. But the really good thing I see is it breaks the Democrats stranglehold on the Senate. Brown though is not a very conservative Republican from what I am hearing.
I bet Ted Kennedy is having a drink if they serve them wherever he is.
I wonder where Howdy, Ike, Theorist and some of the others are. It is awfully quiet here tonight.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Tue, Jan 19, 2010, at 9:25 PM
Obama is confused about the game being played. He is in a football game and it is only the first quarter. (He's been in office exactly one year today of his four year term.) At the end of the first quarter things ain't lookin' too good.
And November 2, 2010 cometh, and its shaping up to be a political earthquake.
-- Posted by voyager on Tue, Jan 19, 2010, at 9:32 PM
wheels- I still say they all fell over dead shock.
You see, the democrats are so convinced that the tea baggers are Republicans. They have been saying for 6 months that the nay-sayers and vocals at the town hall meetings were all republicans. They truly believed that democrats were one big unified force to be reckoned with. What they discovered tonight is that they ticked off memmbers of their own party. That democrats belong to the tea movement.
They were served a huge portion of Humble Pie tonight, may they choke on it.
-- Posted by Skeptic1 on Tue, Jan 19, 2010, at 9:38 PM
Do you think Obma will think twice before insulting a Republican's GM TRUCK?
-- Posted by Skeptic1 on Tue, Jan 19, 2010, at 9:42 PM
Obama is not going to sleep well tonight.
By the way... where is his biggest advocate, Caddy? I haven't seen him posing since this morning I think it was.
And I worry a lot, Michelle may once again, not be proud of her country.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Tue, Jan 19, 2010, at 9:52 PM
Brown's speech was awesome....perhaps he will become the next presidential hopeful?
-- Posted by Skeptic1 on Tue, Jan 19, 2010, at 9:57 PM
So the voters of Massachusetts had a temper tantrum and already repulicans are convinced a shift in the balance of political power is in the works. But if so, will that power be used to influence a shift to smaller government? Will that political balance insure a movement resulting in a less progessive trend in government? Can the power of politics be put back into the order in which it comes down from the people and not down from the federal government. Remember, democrat or republican, they have all became progessives first. One just moves us closer to a totalitarian nation faster than the other.
-- Posted by Old John on Tue, Jan 19, 2010, at 10:24 PM
Old John,
I think you definitely have a handle on the problem. I am very skeptical of what this young man will become when he gets to Washington. If the voters continue to hold him accountable... who knows. And if in November they were to elect 100% Republicans, it will not mean we are going to get a change in the way Washington is working lately.
I would have accepted anything but a Democrat in today's election, just to break the 60 vote super majority in the Senate and hopefully this pell mell rush to hell that has been going on.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Tue, Jan 19, 2010, at 10:39 PM
Old John, it time for us to get over that foolish notion. You are witnessing a counter progressive moment forming.
By the way, folks, let us not forget where the American Revolution began. Remember the shot heard around the world? You heard another one today.
-- Posted by voyager on Tue, Jan 19, 2010, at 10:40 PM
Voy, I hope your right. Did you hear it too in 94?
-- Posted by Old John on Tue, Jan 19, 2010, at 10:45 PM
Yes, if only they had not subsequently lost their way. No one should become over self confident.
-- Posted by voyager on Tue, Jan 19, 2010, at 11:00 PM
Yes, if only they had not subsequently lost their way. No one should become over self confident.
-- Posted by voyager on Tue, Jan 19, 2010, at 11:00 PM
Yes, if only they had not subsequently lost their way. No one should become over self confident.
-- Posted by voyager on Tue, Jan 19, 2010, at 11:01 PM
Rumor has it the reason she lost was due to a failure to create a negative narrative about Brown. Gibbs said it will lead to a wholesale re-evaluation of the Obama administration agenda. The DNC is throwing her under the bus and fixing to back up over her a few times in saying it is not their fault. Also it was those clever republicans that caused the defeat by falsely convincing voters that Brown was above politics as usual.
-- Posted by Old John on Tue, Jan 19, 2010, at 11:11 PM
James,
I didn't say that very well, I did know that independants or unregistered voters are the largest group.
I just hope Brown comes to Washington and doesn't get tainted and become just one more progressive Republican.
We can only hope that Republicans don't blow it this time. But from recent history I am not optomistic that they are much smarter than this current crop of Democrats.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Jan 20, 2010, at 1:28 AM
I will acknowledge that this a big event, how it shakes out in the end is anybody's guess. It is troubling to witness voters flocking to the Republican Party in the false belief that somehow the GOP is going to save them from the Dems.
Both parties want to to grow the size of the state, they just want to do it on their own terms.
There is a world of difference between Republican and Democrat voters - not so much difference in the actual parties themselves.
Fasinating development. I think that it speaks volumes to Bush-bomb-a.
-- Posted by Lumpy on Wed, Jan 20, 2010, at 5:20 AM
Lol, Coakley was terrible.
It is honestly probably a good thing, I don't like when parties have absolute power.
...Bush didn't have absolute power yet he seemed to do whatever the hell he wanted anyway, so we will see what happens.
-- Posted by futile_rant on Wed, Jan 20, 2010, at 6:23 AM
Lumpy, where else can they flock and have any real hope of winning. Admirable as they may be, the Libertarians have the best outside chance but not likely to win. Third parties rarely do. Ross Perot comes to mind, a political loon that he was.
A sure fire receipt for defeat is progressive Republicanism. Maybe the same can be said of the far right Republicans as well.
Anyway, looks like we're in for some real stormy weather ahead. So keep your slickersd and galooshes handy, folks.
-- Posted by voyager on Wed, Jan 20, 2010, at 6:38 AM
V'ger,
Scott Brown is the personification of a progressive Republican.
-- Posted by Lumpy on Wed, Jan 20, 2010, at 7:27 AM
the guy was nude in a magazine...Mass allows gay marriage. He got all the gay votes. Easy win button
;)
-- Posted by futile_rant on Wed, Jan 20, 2010, at 8:21 AM
I guess the people of Mass have forgotten what repubs do when the actually get into office...
-- Posted by Ike on Wed, Jan 20, 2010, at 7:55 AM
All lawmakers better learn what to do when they get into office - and there should be a lot of openings.
-- Posted by blogbudsman on Wed, Jan 20, 2010, at 8:44 AM
sore LOOSERS!
-- Posted by Skeptic1 on Wed, Jan 20, 2010, at 9:08 AM
I don't feel a bit sorry for the Dems. When a candidate (Coakley) says she will not stand out in the cold and shake hands with the voters would not get my vote regardless of party. When she went on vacation for 2 weeks, I told my spouse her 20 point lead will soon disappear. She was arrogant and took the voters for granted. She did not deserve to win. This should be a warning to all politicians. The political winds do change.
-- Posted by howdydoody on Wed, Jan 20, 2010, at 9:24 AM
Ike,
Surely after last night you don't still believe all Tea Party folks are Republicans do you?
That is the kind of tunnel vision that leads some Democrats into thinking the thing to do is forge ahead on health care and pass it before Brown can be seated. In other words... American bend over, we are going to stuff it if or not you like it.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Jan 20, 2010, at 9:27 AM
Ike, today all your petty criticisms lack substance or validity.
Its obvious Brown was not elected to go to the Senate to vote for more and in support of Obama policies.
What does posing semi nude in Cosmo 20 years ago or getting the gay vote have to do with anything. He made exceeding clear where he stood on the issues, progressive Republican or not, and HE WON!
Obama is in big trouble, big time. Wait until November this year.
-- Posted by voyager on Wed, Jan 20, 2010, at 9:35 AM
Caddy,
The people of MA disagree with you, obviously!
They took away Obama's lock on the senate and it was because they disagree with his policies as much as anything else.
You my friend need a reality check!
The Honeymoon is over, Obama needs to park his jet and ask if he can borrown Brown's truck for a couple of months. :-)
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Jan 20, 2010, at 9:40 AM
Cadi, You mention change that the people want. What change do you want? What would represent what the non all white voters want? And that good old boys network, is that folks like Ted Kennedy, Byrd, and Frank?
-- Posted by Old John on Wed, Jan 20, 2010, at 10:00 AM
Wiffle, Never love something that can't love you back!
-- Posted by Old John on Wed, Jan 20, 2010, at 10:27 AM
Ike, I think they just started waking up in the last couple of months of Bush.
-- Posted by Old John on Wed, Jan 20, 2010, at 10:53 AM
Wiff -- I'm gonna find your truck and put an Obama sticker on it.
As for the teabaggers, I don't think they meant to associate themselves primarily with the republican party, I think they meant to bring attention to the seemingly endless tax and spend mentality of both democrats and republicans. However, the republicans saw the movement as an opportunity to vilify Obama and threw their weight and that of Fox news behind the movement. The teabaggers never really tried to disassociate themselves from the republicans and thus cemented their reputation as and the republicans bottom b**** in the minds of many Americans.
-- Posted by DADES on Wed, Jan 20, 2010, at 11:11 AM
DADES, a little smaller and more petty than usual. 'teabaggers'? tsk tsk, pretty MSNBC of you. Well, hardly anyone pays attention to them either.
'It is to me a new and consolatory proof that wherever the people are well-informed they can be trusted with their own government; that whenever things get so far wrong as to attract their notice, they may be relied on to set them to rights."
--Thomas Jefferson to Richard Price, January 8, 1789.
Two hundred and twenty-one years later, the sage of Monticello has been proven right again. Aroused and well-informed by a year of watching a liberal majority go very far wrong, Massachusetts voters handed a Senate seat held by Ted Kennedy for 47 years to Republican Scott Brown, a little known state senator from Wrenthem.
The resounding five-point victory in one of America's most liberal states is an upset heard 'round Washington--and one that ought to force Democrats to rethink their entire agenda, national health care in particular. Despite an 11th-hour intervention by President Obama in a state he carried with ease only 14 months ago, state Attorney General Martha Coakley was routed even in such unlikely tea-party outposts as Andover (58%) and amid a large turnout for a midwinter special election.
My thoughts: DADES, don't you want a better America with accountable public servants and responsive elected officials? Join us - don't just sit in the monkey gallery and carp contrarian. Man up!
-- Posted by blogbudsman on Wed, Jan 20, 2010, at 11:33 AM
Ike you can't rain on my parade. And the typo may of had something to do with the champagne, celebrated all night don't you know. Oh, but since you have a stick up you arz I guess you wouldn't know.
And the criticism about a semi nude ad....who cares? The man is HOT! Don't really see any difference about that ad and the President Obama on Times Square selling jackets. Oh, wait- one is hotter.
Ike you are the typical democrat and thank God for that! You and they believe tea baggers are republicans and you ignore them, and you will ignore Brown's win. That is exactly how we are going to win BIG next election....so stay in denial!
-- Posted by Skeptic1 on Wed, Jan 20, 2010, at 1:53 PM
Blog,
Wasn't trying to be small and petty . . .was going for mean and funny. C'mon man, teabaggers and bottom b****??!! That's just funny.
And I do want a better America, but we have had 8 years of republican hegemony, and it was that which lead to the election of the Obama administration and democratic majority in congress. Wiff, Wheels, and the rest of the ICP seem to think that Obama somehow hoodwinked the country with empty promises and showmanship. Personally I take that as a little insulting. They take no responsibility for their losses and place the blame squarely on the shoulders of me and the rest of the American people for being gullible.
You mentioned holding our public servants accountable, we do. Accountability is the reason the republicans are the minority in congress. But that isn't what republicans want to hear. They would rather believe that Obama somehow snookered America than take any responsibility for their failures.
-- Posted by DADES on Wed, Jan 20, 2010, at 2:39 PM
Sorry DADES, didn't realize who was the butt of your joke. Sounds kinda goosey to me.
Not all republicans are conservative and not all conservatives are republicans. Obama did snooker America, at least independent Americans. They'll do better next time. And I try to keep the reign in on presidential politics in relation to Congressional politics. One is more local than the other - as the incredible folks of Massachusetts have demonstrated - anything can happen.
-- Posted by blogbudsman on Wed, Jan 20, 2010, at 2:47 PM
It should take more than just an (R) next to a name, shouldn't it?
-- Posted by Ike on Wed, Jan 20, 2010, at 2:46 PM
Let's see, 41 R's, 59 D's. Nope!
-- Posted by blogbudsman on Wed, Jan 20, 2010, at 2:59 PM
Sorry DADES, didn't realize who was the butt of your joke. Sounds kinda goosey to me.
Obama did snooker America, at least independent Americans. They'll do better next time. And I try to keep the reign in on presidential politics in relation to Congressional politics. One is more local than the other - as the incredible folks of Massachusetts have demonstrated - anything can happen.
-- Posted by blogbudsman on Wed, Jan 20, 2010, at 2:47 PM
Sorry blog, a bottom bi*ch is a pimp's favorite prostitute. My joke was in equating the tea party movement to being the republican parties favorite go to girl.
And I am an independent American. So you must believe that I have been snookered into voting democrat rather than the best gosh darned political party in the history of the whole wide verse -- republican. But let me assure you that my faculties (at least to me) seem to be intact and I don't believe myself to have been hoodwinked -- of course it could be the evil genius Obama controlling my thoughts making me think that.
-- Posted by DADES on Wed, Jan 20, 2010, at 3:20 PM
*****************************
uh, that's spelled "LOSERS"
typical teabag republican
*****************************
And your post has no punctuation, loser.
You live near a university. Take advantage of it, if you can pass muster for the entrance requirements.
I am not hopeful, unless Mr. Obama waives the entrance requirements for state universities. We have already seen "Cash for Clunkers", perhaps the next big thing is "zero college entrance requirements for losers who take others to task for spelling yet fail to punctuate sentences".
-- Posted by capeobserver on Wed, Jan 20, 2010, at 4:34 PM
Do any of you know who said the following?
20 I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the state, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party, generally.
21 This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.
22 The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty.
23 Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind, (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight,) the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.
24 It serves always to distract the Public Councils, and enfeeble the Public Administration. It agitates the Community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.
25 There is an opinion, that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the Government, and serve to keep alive the spirit of Liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in Governments of a Monarchical cast, Patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in Governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And, there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be, by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.
Let me help you. It was George Washington. This was a part of his farewell address after his 2nd and final term as President. He knew then, as all of our forefathers did, that political parties would ruin us as a nation. Party would come before country. I don't think anyone can argue that this hasn't already happened. We as citizens get nothing from Washington except theft and dishonesty. If I am wrong, show me proof! A man that will elect someone to office strictly because of their party affiliation is a FOOL of the highest order.
It is time to return to our Constitutional roots and be the country we were destined to be!
-- Posted by HogWild on Wed, Jan 20, 2010, at 5:19 PM
I think Obama made his agenda pretty clear. Many just ignored him when he indicated what he wanted because they were stuck on his style and not his words. The people most duped by Obama are the ones that came out to vote for him as someone who wanted to help the poor and middle class. In fact if you go back and hear what he said, most time he spelled out how he was planning to pull the middle and upper class down to the bottem so everyone would be equally poor. The unionization of the nation into nationalized enterprises will do that by giving more to the folks that vote for more entitlements and keep the entitlers in power as privledged. I predict that if this direction is not changed, the next generations will by government incentive and mandate, work, live and serve as the national government directs.
-- Posted by Old John on Wed, Jan 20, 2010, at 5:26 PM
HogWild,
No constitution can prevent the state from doing that which is the only thing that it is capable of, and that is to rule through a monopoly of force.
-- Posted by Lumpy on Wed, Jan 20, 2010, at 5:34 PM
How about Scott Brown for Pressident 2012? Now there's a happy thought which could very well happen.
He will have served longer in the Senate that Obama did.
-- Posted by voyager on Wed, Jan 20, 2010, at 8:54 PM
And I do want a better America, but we have had 8 years of republican hegemony, and it was that which lead to the election of the Obama administration and democratic majority in congress. Wiff, Wheels, and the rest of the ICP seem to think that Obama somehow hoodwinked the country with empty promises and showmanship. Personally I take that as a little insulting. They take no responsibility for their losses and place the blame squarely on the shoulders of me and the rest of the American people for being gullible.
-- Posted by DADES on Wed, Jan 20, 2010, at 2:39 PM
Dades,
Please help me here... what is the ICP?
As to Obama "hoodwinking" you. Your words not mine. First of all as I have said before, I feel Obama's election had more to do with people voting against Bush than for Obama. But for you true believers, who have not seen through that empty shirt yet, and who still believe in "Hope and Change" Obama style.... maybe hoodwinked is a good word. How else do you explain it?
You can not get as far left, and stay as far left as Obama and have more than a fringe group support you long term in America. MA has shown us, maybe there is hope. And maybe the politicains on both sides of the isle will wake up and see there is no future in following leaders like Reed and Pelosie blindly... or putting their vote up for sale as has been done recently.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Thu, Jan 21, 2010, at 12:03 AM
hogwild,
I think the problem isn't with parties, the problem comes from career politicans. To our forefathers politics was a service to nation, not a job, and definately not a career.
-- Posted by futile_rant on Thu, Jan 21, 2010, at 2:23 AM
Blog, are you aware of Brown's voting record on health care reform and cap and trade?
-- Posted by Ike on Wed, Jan 20, 2010, at 3:00 PM
I am.
-- Posted by blogbudsman on Thu, Jan 21, 2010, at 9:06 AM
Here's food for thought....
You think the people of MA finally told the Dems that they aren't VICTIMS of anything, that they are CITIZENS of this country and they will CHECK ANYBODY that snubs their nose at them.
That's what Barry gets for dissing a National Guardsman with a pickup truck.
Now, my fellow 'cry wolf' Dems... what can BROWN do for you?
-- Posted by vincebrown on Thu, Jan 21, 2010, at 10:12 AM
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Thursday that she does not have the votes needed to pass the Senate version of the health care bill.
"I don't see the votes for it at this time," Pelosi told reporters in a briefing.
After Democrats lost their 60-vote supermajority in the Senate Tuesday after Republicans won an upset victory in the Massachusetts special election to replace the late Ted Kennedy, House passage of the current Senate health bill appeared to be one of few options available for Democrats hoping to complete their year-long quest to pass health reform.
And:
Rank-and-file Democrats vented their frustration at a closed-door meeting Thursday. Emerging from the session, Rep. Michael Arcuri, D-N.Y., said: "The mega bills are dead. If we didn't see what happened Tuesday night, we have blinkers on."
BANG!
-- Posted by blogbudsman on Thu, Jan 21, 2010, at 11:50 AM
If this is the effect of Tuesday's election, can you possibly imagine what may be the result of next November's mid term election.
-- Posted by voyager on Thu, Jan 21, 2010, at 11:59 AM
Ike,
An estimated 109 days in the Senate by some counts. He, Obama, was out campaigning most of the time.
The point is he literally came out of the background and pulled off quite an election upset. Remember...popular wisdom at the time was Hillary was supposed to win.
Maybe Scott Brown may very well do the same thing. We will have a better idea after we see his Senate record and how he conducts himself. For sure, the Liberal media will not like him.
I'm suggesting the Republicans may just have a potentially huge winner in 2012. At the rate the way things are going for Obama, he's a one termer.
-- Posted by voyager on Thu, Jan 21, 2010, at 2:46 PM
Ike, stop confusing the ICP with facts. ;o)~
-- Posted by Turnip on Thu, Jan 21, 2010, at 6:55 PM
Ike- during Obama's SHORT time as senator, instead of voting "yes" or "no" on legislature he often voted "present"
-- Posted by Skeptic1 on Thu, Jan 21, 2010, at 8:34 PM
Now Fellas, lets all stop jumping on poor old Ike so much. He can't help being of limited intelligence.
-- Posted by voyager on Sat, Jan 23, 2010, at 10:20 AM
Go figure, more verbal diarrhea from Voyager.
-- Posted by riregrist on Sat, Jan 23, 2010, at 10:38 AM
More vomit from Riregrist.
-- Posted by voyager on Sat, Jan 23, 2010, at 1:35 PM
Original! I'm impressed.
-- Posted by riregrist on Sat, Jan 23, 2010, at 2:41 PM
Menu
With 63% of the vote counted Brown leads Coakley 53-46% in MA Senate race. This changes quite as few things. What are your opinions?
Replies (67)