Will Joe Kennedy "Perot/Nader" Scott Brown?

[manifold]

Even though he's way back in the polls (like most 3rd party candidates), with the race at the top being as tight as it is, it's looking like Joe Kennedy might cost Brown the election. Let's be honest, every vote he gets is a vote taken from Brown.

I thought it was funny last night when Coakley was asked about having Kennedy participate in the debate and she said that every candidate on the ballot should be allowed to be heard yadda yadda. Of course I agree with that. However, if it were a green party candidate instead of a libertarian, you can bet your ass she would have fought to keep him away.

Regardless, I was decidedly underwhelmed by both Brown and Coakley and as of now I'm undecided, but leaning toward Brown.

 

[Titanic Sailor]

Brown. The Impossible Dream for Massachusetts taxpayers.

 

[QUENTIN]

Let's hope.

By "Perot/Nader" him do you mean allow for greater democracy by giving American voters more choice in their representatives than just making the "lesser of two evils among the two rotted parties" decision? Since when did democracy become a bad thing in this nation? We're not designed as a two-party system and it's to our great detriment we've allowed the two parties a stranglehold on our electoral process.

Brown, in the 21st century, supports torture. No one with that mindset deserves to hold public office.

 

[Navy1960]

I had the chance to watch the debate a little, and it struck me that Kennedy would take votes from both sides more so than Brown. I tend to agree though , Brown and Coakley both looked as if they were talking right off the "talking points" memo page and looked more like a finger pointing tattle-tale session from a schoolyard rather than a debate. I came away with the impression that this race will more or less depend a lot on turnout and if if it's low enough then Brown may have a chance, but I tend to agree these candidates looked as if they were stamped from the various party machine factories and then someone flipped the switch to "on" and out they came.

 

[Sinatra]

Brown gave the stronger performance and the only take-away line of the night...

"With all due respect, this is not Ted Kennedy's seat, or the Democrat Party's seat - it's the peoples seat."


If Scott Brown wins, it will play out HUGE throughout the American political landscape...

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Even though he's way back in the polls (like most 3rd party candidates), with the race at the top being as tight as it is, it's looking like Joe Kennedy might cost Brown the election. Let's be honest, every vote he gets is a vote taken from Brown.

I thought it was funny last night when Coakley was asked about having Kennedy participate in the debate and she said that every candidate on the ballot should be allowed to be heard yadda yadda. Of course I agree with that. However, if it were a green party candidate instead of a libertarian, you can bet your ass she would have fought to keep him away.

Regardless, I was decidedly underwhelmed by both Brown and Coakley and as of now I'm undecided, but leaning toward Brown.

An indie cannot bring home the bacon. High tech, medicine, education, bio sciences, all the fields that make Massachusetts what it is are dependent on federal aid.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Let's hope.

By "Perot/Nader" him do you mean allow for greater democracy by giving American voters more choice in their representatives than just making the "lesser of two evils among the two rotted parties" decision? Since when did democracy become a bad thing in this nation? We're not designed as a two-party system and it's to our great detriment we've allowed the two parties a stranglehold on our electoral process.

Brown, in the 21st century, supports torture. No one with that mindset deserves to hold public office.

more choice? Perot wasn't a choice, he was an asshole.

 

[manifold]

Even though he's way back in the polls (like most 3rd party candidates), with the race at the top being as tight as it is, it's looking like Joe Kennedy might cost Brown the election. Let's be honest, every vote he gets is a vote taken from Brown.

I thought it was funny last night when Coakley was asked about having Kennedy participate in the debate and she said that every candidate on the ballot should be allowed to be heard yadda yadda. Of course I agree with that. However, if it were a green party candidate instead of a libertarian, you can bet your ass she would have fought to keep him away.

Regardless, I was decidedly underwhelmed by both Brown and Coakley and as of now I'm undecided, but leaning toward Brown.

An indie cannot bring home the bacon. High tech, medicine, education, bio sciences, all the fields that make Massachusetts what it is are dependent on federal aid.

I'm not planning on voting for Kennedy regardless.

He's too short.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Even though he's way back in the polls (like most 3rd party candidates), with the race at the top being as tight as it is, it's looking like Joe Kennedy might cost Brown the election. Let's be honest, every vote he gets is a vote taken from Brown.

I thought it was funny last night when Coakley was asked about having Kennedy participate in the debate and she said that every candidate on the ballot should be allowed to be heard yadda yadda. Of course I agree with that. However, if it were a green party candidate instead of a libertarian, you can bet your ass she would have fought to keep him away.

Regardless, I was decidedly underwhelmed by both Brown and Coakley and as of now I'm undecided, but leaning toward Brown.

An indie cannot bring home the bacon. High tech, medicine, education, bio sciences, all the fields that make Massachusetts what it is are dependent on federal aid.

I'm not planning on voting for Kennedy regardless.

He's too short.

but, but his name is K-E-N-N-E-D-Y!

 

[Valerie]

I thought that Kennedy guy was in there just to fool all the old timers and steal some Dem votes.

 

[Valerie]

Brown, in the 21st century, supports torture.

Link???

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I thought that Kennedy guy was in there just to fool all the old timers and steal some Dem votes.

Old game.

 

[QUENTIN]

more choice? Perot wasn't a choice, he was an asshole.

And lots of Americans preferred that asshole over the other two assholes running and voted for him.

I think Perot would have made an awful present, but I support generally the efforts of any third party candidates to get onto ballots because the stranglehold over elections the two biggest parties have engineered and sustained is antithetical to democracy. The more options people have to choose from to decide who actually represents them, the better.

Brown, in the 21st century, supports torture.

Link???

Brown, Coakley clash over suspected terrorists’ rights - The Boston Globe

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

more choice? Perot wasn't a choice, he was an asshole.

And lots of Americans preferred that asshole over the other two assholes running and voted for him.

[/QUOTE]

A lot of Americans preferred keep blacks in slavery too.

go figure

I agree in principle.

I do not think allowing every run of the mill nut job to clutter up the ballot.

Perot was a legit 3rd party candidate, and their lies the rub. As long as the 3rd party can meet certain arbitrary guidelines, go for it.

My problem with 3rd parties in general is that they are almost always attempts to grab federal power. They are usually headed by people who walk away after losing. They do not represent anything for the leadership, except personal gain.

Green Party is an exception. They started out on a local level.

 

[manifold]

Hey Dev,

For all of Perot's assholery, he did give the election to your boy Clinton.

I'm surprised you're not pissed at Nader for screwing Gore in 2000.

 

[Valerie]

more choice? Perot wasn't a choice, he was an asshole.

And lots of Americans preferred that asshole over the other two assholes running and voted for him.

I think Perot would have made an awful present, but I support generally the efforts of any third party candidates to get onto ballots because the stranglehold over elections the two biggest parties have engineered and sustained is antithetical to democracy. The more options people have to choose from to decide who actually represents them, the better.

Brown, in the 21st century, supports torture.

Link???

Brown, Coakley clash over suspected terrorists’ rights - The Boston Globe

From your article:

After a press conference in Boston in which he called for a freeze on wages for federal employees, Brown, in response to a question, told reporters that Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, 23, the Nigerian accused of trying to blow up a passenger jet en route to Detroit on Christmas Day, should be treated as an enemy combatant, taken to the US detention camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, interrogated “pursuant to our rules of engagement and laws of war,’’ and not be treated as a civilian criminal suspect. Brown asserted that waterboarding does not constitute torture, but he did not specifically say Abdulmutallab should be subjected to waterboarding.

“I don’t support torture; the United States does not support torture,’’ Brown, a military lawyer in the Massachusetts National Guard, told reporters.

Obama banned the practice by executive order upon taking office last January.

 

[QUENTIN]

“I don’t support torture; the United States does not support torture,’’ Brown, a military lawyer in the Massachusetts National Guard, told reporters.

State Senator Scott Brown, the Republican candidate for US Senate, endorsed yesterday the use of enhanced interrogation techniques - including the practice of simulated drowning known as waterboarding - in questioning terror suspects.

He's euphemizing torture and still supporting it. "Enhanced interrogation taechniques" is newspeak for torture, which is what drowning, punching, walling, sexually degrading, and sometimes killing detainees is. Renaming something doesn't change what it is.

If I rape you, then tell you it was "aggressively enforced physical congress" then declare "I do not rape; I do not support rape" I'm full of a big pile of shit which is what Brown is.

He said he supports waterboarding. He supports torture.

People whose minds and morality are stuck in the Middle Ages should not be given the responsibilities of public office.

 

[Valerie]

“I don’t support torture; the United States does not support torture,’’ Brown, a military lawyer in the Massachusetts National Guard, told reporters.

State Senator Scott Brown, the Republican candidate for US Senate, endorsed yesterday the use of enhanced interrogation techniques - including the practice of simulated drowning known as waterboarding - in questioning terror suspects.

He's euphemizing torture and still supporting it. "Enhanced interrogation taechniques" is newspeak for torture, which is what drowning, punching, walling, sexually degrading, and sometimes killing detainees is. Renaming something doesn't change what it is.

If I rape you, then tell you it was "aggressively enforced physical congress" then declare "I do not rape; I do not support rape" I'm full of a big pile of shit which is what Brown is.

He said he supports waterboarding. He supports torture.

People whose minds and morality are stuck in the Middle Ages should not be given the responsibilities of public office.

Looks like the Boston Globe (and you) chose to misrepresent what he actually said.


Notice the quotes do not say what they say he said???