Apparently the Republican candidate will win the special Massachusetts Senate race:
Riding a wave of opposition to Democratic health-care reform, GOP upstart Scott Brown is leading in the U.S. Senate race, raising the odds of a historic upset that would reverberate all the way to the White House, a new poll shows.
Although Brown’s 4-point lead over Democrat Martha Coakley is within the Suffolk University/7News survey’s margin of error, the underdog’s position at the top of the results stunned even pollster David Paleologos.
The elections are this Tuesday, Jan. 19th.
After watching the movie Sicko, I don’t get the opposition to any US health care reform.
Pedro, the failure of this reform effort falls squarely on the Republicans. No amount of right-wing spin can change their vehement opposition to any and every facet of the effort.
His projected win is more a reflection of Coakley’s stupidity- she’s been virtually invisible until very recently, whereas he’s been campaigning.
On health care specifically- he supports Mass health insurance reform, in Mass. The same aspects he likes about the Mass legislation are what he doesn’t like nationally. Can you say hypocrite?
# 6 Greg Allen : Greg, I sympathize with what you’ve said. I’m very ambivalent about the whole idea. But one thing I’m NOT ambivalent about is the current proposed health care bill. It just doesn’t get the job done. Don’t you find it interesting that insurance company stocks are going up? That BigPharma is endorsing it? That, when all is over and done, it will not cover everybody? Semi-universal health care. Basically, it took them 2,000 pages of legislation to say you gotta buy health insurance. If you don’t, we’ll sic the IRS on ya. As a doc, I would rather see the Feds take over the whole damned thing instead of a new and very complicated system that further enriches the insurance and pharmaceutical industries. And more than a few legislators, I presume.
In any case, if Brown DOES win, they’re already suggesting they won’t be able to swear him in quickly enough to stop the bill.
“Doesn’t Massachusetts already have a universal health care program, which program is vastly superior to the federal plan??”
Yes we do, a plan from a Republican.
Could happen. I lived in Mass when the intelligent electorate voted to ban shoulder seat belts.
Might end up with the usual Senate version of democracy where 41 people overrule 59.
Just the kind of democracy Republikans pray for.
Pilgrim, are you a dunce or a liar? Because a Republican governor signed off on the bill – reelection still means the most to politicians – didn’t make it a Republican bill.
Cripes.
#19 So you admit you’d vote for him. Sheeple!
#21 Your opinion was automatically disqualified when you mentioned you saw fat bastard’s opera.
#22 You’re a sore loser. Not even with a majority can you pass a thing. Useless sheeple.
#26 Another sheeple trying hard to hide their lack of capacity by blaming the minority.
#19. He does look good. Martha not so much. Scary actualy. People are sick of her type.
#21
After watching the movie Sicko, I don’t get the opposition to any US health care reform.
That’s because there isn’t any opposition. However, there is a great deal of difference in the nature of the reform.
#22
Bullshit. The Democrats have the majority. They only needed to convince their own people. They could have done this with their own people and left the Republicans out of it completely.
If you want to blame anyone about not getting the reform you want, blame the incompetent leadership of your party starting with the President.
# 8 Robart:
“… The Dems could do the same thing here. They control everything.”
Um, obviously not.
– - – - -
# 11 srgothard:
“Just remember, no one in America is denied health care….”
I’ll have some of what he’s having. Must be better than Kickapoo Joy Juice!
– - – - -
Don’t forget about the $10 million a week Big Health (insurance, pharma, etc.) have been spending since October on the big “NO!”. Hard to fight resources like that.
Bullshit. The Democrats have the majority. They only needed to convince their own people. They could have done this with their own people and left the Republicans out of it completely.
Can you say fil-i-buster? I knew you could.
Lieberman is a Republican in all but name. But still the gutless Democrats give him a chairmanship, trying to suck up to him. They deserve to lose, but America suffers.
A thought just occurred to me… now that the bill is a big fat wet kiss to Big Insurance, they might rein in their pet Republicans and let it pass.
#32
Again, that’s a you problem. The Republicans only threatened a filibuster and the Democrats caved. It all comes down to incompetent leadership on the part of the Democrats. What makes you think they should be able to change the minds of Republicans if they can’t convince their own party to follow them? The Democrats are solely to blame for lack of or the quality of any health care reform until the Nov elections.
#34 The D’s could have all 59 of their senators in agreement and still be able to get nothing done. The R’s are severely abusing the filibuster. It was meant for extreme cases, not for sore losers to prevent the winners from getting anything done. So spare me the “all D’s fault” BS.
And the D’s are gutless for not raising a big stink about this and going after the R’s. As I recall, majorities in states represented by Republicans want health care reform. The D’s should pounce on that, but they haven’t.
Actually, maybe “gutless” is too kind. Maybe they’re just under the control of the big corporations just like the R’s.
… and read up on filibusters. The R’s don’t actually have to filibuster, they just have to threaten.
#33 Irresponsible sheeple will always blame someone else for they shortcomings and misdeeds. Pathetic to no end.
#35 Nice to see you finally admit demagogue’s complete incompetence. Not even with 100% control would you be able to achieve anything. Thanks for showing us how you eat your humble pie.
As someone who lives in a country (UK) that supposedly has Universal Health Care (NHS) I can tell you that it is simply a utopian dream.
There are people here who are denied specific types of health care on the basis that it’s not “cost effective” We often hear of specific drugs for example that go a great job with cancer patients, but isn’t available on the NHS because it’s “Too Expensive”. People who need them, then have to, as we say here “Go Private”. There are also some places where you can get a treatment on the NHS and other places where you can’t, depending on how they spend their buget.
We also often hear tales of children with rare conditions and their parents having to save up thousands to get the required treatment outside of not just the NHS, but the UK its self. And where do they usually go? The USA.
Like most left leaning Socialist type ideas, they are wonderful in theory, but just don’t work as well in practice. An NHS style system is VERY expensive to run
srg86
Pedro, you’re getting dumber and dumber by the week. But at least we now have a stereotypical wingnut to beat up on again. Thanks!
#39 Like a good sheeple, you keep calling anyone who opposes your blabbering a wingnut. Suit yourself, shepple