Skip to main content

As we know, the Democratic primary for Senate in Massachusetts pretty much determines the ultimate winner, and that Democratic primary is today. So what's the state of the race?

Attorney General Martha Coakley has been firmly in the driver's seat throughout the short campaign, but, perhaps inevitably, she has lost some ground as other candidates have picked up name recognition statewide. In mid-September polling, she more than tripled the percentage anyone else was drawing. That had dropped to not even doubling the competition in late November.

More recently,

Tom Kiley, pollster for Michael Capuano, and Celinda Lake, pollster for Martha Coakley, both confirmed for me today what I reported yesterday. Kiley says his poll, taken Sunday and Monday of this week, has Coakley around 35%, and Capuano 7 points behind, in the high 20s. Lake says her poll, taken Sunday through Tuesday, has Coakley at 41%, and Capuano at 20%. (Both have Pagliuca roughly around 10%-12% and falling slightly; Khazei around 7-10% and rising slightly; and some 15%-20% undecided.)

Coakley is looking to close with a robocall from Bill Clinton. Capuano has had some high-profile endorsements, including Nancy Pelosi, but you have to figure that Clinton > Pelosi and a call is more likely to move votes than a press statement weeks back.

Higher turnout will probably benefit Coakley as the only woman and the only person in the race who's been elected statewide -- but what exactly constitutes "high turnout" is an unknown, since there's no real basis for comparison. Regardless, she is the likely winner. But we'll see soon enough.

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 07:00 AM PST.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  A lead as solid as Coakley's (6+ / 0-)

    is pretty difficult to surmount in such a short time. She seems to have prepared well for all this.

  •  Capuano is my representative (16+ / 0-)

    and he's one of the most consistent and forthright liberals in the congress.  Coakley's politics are basically a blank slate.  She wrote on it during the campaign but how that will translate into lawmaking remains to be seen.

    I'll vote for Capuano but it's pretty clear Coakley will win.  

    •  I voted Capuano this morning (7+ / 0-)

      (Somerville girl here) but I'd be satisfied with Coakley as our next Senator.

      I was really pleased with the slate in general.  Coakley, Capuano, and Khazei all have excellent records in public service.

      Paliuca is obviously a corporate whore for Bain, like Romney.  Bain doesn't give a crap about partisan politics, they just want their guys representing corporate interests.

      "Right wing freak machine" General Wes Clark

      by Tracker on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 07:07:39 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I'll be voting for him later. (5+ / 0-)

      I've been quite the flip-flopper on this one.  I think both Coakley and Capuano would do well in the senate, but Capuano has been progressively solid and goodness knows that's needed in the Senate.  I also like Coakley as attorney general and would like her to stay there for a while, frankly.  I think any number of people could take Capuano's spot, but finding a solid AG would be tougher right now.  Of course, I feel like a traitor to Emily's List and women everywhere, but there it is.

      Oh, and Pags can suck it.  Neither my husband nor I were EVER going to vote for him and made that very clear in all eleventy billion polls he paid for and the robocalls from his campaign have been endless.  The day I buy him as a progressive is the day I pack it in and vote Palin for president.

      A liberal is a man or a woman or a child who looks forward to a better day, a more tranquil night, and a bright, infinite future. ~ Leonard Bernstein

      by michstjame on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 07:27:24 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Capuano is a union shill (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Matt Z, flitedocnm, licorice114

        He went in front of a union and told them to go "hug" the likes of DeLeo and Murray because they steamrolled over Deval Patrick's rightful desire to raise the gas tax.  Instead they passed the (deeper trough, please) regressive sales tax.  The legislators don't need a hug.  The unemployed, working poor, people in foreclosure need a hug.  Screw Capuano for that.  A real progressive would stand up for what's right, and raising the sales tax is NOT right.

        •  What's wrong with unions? (0+ / 0-)

          You seem to have a big problem with them.

          "Right wing freak machine" General Wes Clark

          by Tracker on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 08:22:10 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  My problem is with the fact (0+ / 0-)

            that the Democrats in Massachusetts permit more of the same: waste, patronage...the dirty side of Democratic politics.  We have DeLeo, Murray and the rest of them that walk all over the governor, who is elected statewide, yet they aren't held accountable to the electorate at large.  DeLeo/Murray and on down the line, they get into office in primaries where maybe 3000 people vote, 3000!  Then in the general they are elected easily because they have (D) next to their name.  

            They cater only to unions and no one else, and the union often don't look out for what's in the state's best interest.  Case in point: fighting the MBTA to keep wages/benefits so high as to cripple the agency (along with their other debt-loads).  I'm not against high wages, I'm against unfairly high wages/benefits.  23-and-out?  Give me a break.  You see how the Big Dig tunnels are already falling apart?  Our newly paved roads crumble because contractors don't give a rats ass as to the job they do, just so long as it guarantees they get more work.

            Yet the legislature holds this power that even the governor, elected statewide, does not wield.  Because they run uncontested in primaries, these legislators do everything they can to cater to the status quo, which is broken.  So no, I'm not anti-union, but I am anti-what's not in the best interest of the state.  Quality work, fair wages, and the removal of the old-school Democratic machine, what gives Democrats a bad name, is what I am against and Capuano and Coakley represents this which I despise.  Capuano should not have asked the unions to hug the legislators, he should have chastised the legislature for being against raising the gas tax, if he was going to stick his big nose in intra-state business.

  •  15-20% undecided leaves a lot of wiggle room---- (5+ / 0-)

    could prove to be very tight!!

  •  Gah, turnout is abysmal in my precinct (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    so far.  I vote around the same time every election morning.  This morning, I was the the 31st voter to turn in a ballot.  

  •  I haven't made up my mind among the 3 (0+ / 0-)

    of them (Coakley, Capuano, and Pagliuca)

    If Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow are sick puppies, may I catch whatever the illness is. May it invade every pore of my body, and may I never recover!

    by Clytemnestra on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 07:12:37 AM PST

  •  I'm depressed--I want Capuano and I'm afraid (10+ / 0-)

    he won't make it.

    Capuano is my rep and he's a really, really good guy. He has been far more liberal than the liberal I originally voted for way back when he was running for the house.  But he has been right out in front, much to everyone's surprise, on everything progressive throughout the Bush years.  I detest the Martha Coakley style of faux feminist identity politics--I'm a feminist myself. As far as I know Coakley is not a liberal, or a progressive. She's a democratic political lawyer--an AG, in a democratic state.  That means that she could be very conservative on a number of important issues. She also has no elected experience. That wouldn't stop me from voting for her--I'd happilly have voted for Khazei if I thought he had a chance--but in my experience of lawyers straight from lawyering they have no idea how to get things done that require negotiations among equals.

    I'm sad that this historic seat is going to go to someone in such a scrambling, unhistoric, fashion. If Capuano gets in I know he can fill this seat well and honorably. If Coakley gets in I'll cross my fingers and hope that she will turn out to be an amazing progressive fighter.  But I wish we had had a broader, more progressive, more interesting choice than just the four who presented themselves and that they had had the time and the money to really make their case to the voters.


    •  I'm holding out hope for Mike (7+ / 0-)

      And why not? With low turnout and still some undecideds, it's anybody's race.

      And, if Coakley takes it we'll still have Mike in the House, and he will have more exposure/name recognition when/if Kerry retires.

      "Right wing freak machine" General Wes Clark

      by Tracker on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 07:20:43 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Kept going back-and-forth, then went Coakley. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      i like bbq, Cobbler

      Capuano is my representative, and I've seen him do some great work, and you're certainly right to say that he's been out front on some key progressive issues.  The Patriot Act vote, way back when, was truly a Big Deal, and he's proven himself to be a vocal fighter when we need one.  He's also certainly IMO the most similar to Ted Kennedy among the bunch.  

      But I've got a few issues with him as well -- if horses must be traded, for example, he's shown a willingness to trade some crucial horses.  And he lets the financial interests of some of his constituencies trump principle at times (see "hug the legislators" incident, stance against paper trails for electronic voting machines, et cetera).

      So I feel like I know what I'd be getting with Mike, and it's mostly good.  But the horse-trading thing really bugs me.

      Coakley, on the other hand, has painted herself from the beginning of this campaign as a progressive who would NEVER trade away the big horses.  The exchanges between herself and Capuano regarding Stupak well-illustrate what seems like the biggest difference between them.

      Of course, with Coakley, we're gambling a bit.  Hard to know what she's really going to stand for, since she has no legislative record to look back on.  That said, representatives have a tendency to change when they get to the Senate, too -- so it's not like Capuano is a 100% sure thing to stay the same as he has been, either.

      Anyway, I've been flip-flopping on this for weeks now, and I finally made up my mind this morning: Coakley got my vote.  It was such a hard choice, and if I'm honest with myself, it really kind of came down in part to the fact that MA has never had a female Senator, and there are far too few female Senators in general.  If the lopsided composition of the Senate wasn't so extreme I'd be loath to take that into real consideration -- but it's extreme.  And I reminded myself: I'm not JUST voting for a single Senator, I'm voting for how I'd like the composition of the Senate to change.

      So, Coakley it is!

      •  I wish i could agree. I wish we had more women. . (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        representing Massachusetts but I vote for whats in a candidates heart and brains not what's in their bodies.  Also I am not pleased with the lack of fire among Dems in the Senate in general and among women Senators in particular except maybe Barbara Boxer.  Can anybody correct my impression.
        Coakley has no position on Iraq,on Afghanistan, and isn't trustworthy on health care.
        I really don't like her.

        WE must hang together or we will all hang separately. B.Franklin

        by ruthhmiller on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 09:22:46 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  If she wins, I hope you're right about Coakley (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        I really wonder what sort of Senator Coakley will be -- she has not impressed me at all in the campaign.  It feels to me like the best hope for Coakley is that she will be a reliable vote on the left, though pretty anonymous and low-profile.  My fear is that she'll turn right when she gets in and she's shown me nothing in the campaign to dispel that fear.

        Honestly, I can understand the motivation to get more women in there, but I'd much rather have a tough progressive voice who won't be low-profile at all -- that's Mike Capuano all over.

  •  Who do I vote for? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Larry McAwful, sharonsz

    It would be helpful if dailykos had a specific recommendation of the most progressive.  I'm leaning towards Khazei, because he went on the Colbert Report.  I'm going to vote tonight after work--I know how important Senate races are, in some ways even more important than presidential races.

    •  Khazei's terrific (6+ / 0-)

      And if he's your choice, go for it!  He has strong progressive credentials and I think he'd do a great job as Senator.

      Mike Capuano is my personal choice, because he's a tough fighter for progressive causes.  

      "Right wing freak machine" General Wes Clark

      by Tracker on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 07:22:12 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I don't want to waste my vote (0+ / 0-)

        I did for Sam Yoon in the Boston election because he was so much more progressive than the other candidates, even though I knew he would lose.  But if there are decent progressive candidates with a chance of winning, I'd rather "spend" my vote there.

        •  Capuano, because Khazei wastes your vote (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          cos, profh, Cobbler

          Nominally, perhaps, Capuano and Khazei look like they have the same chance to get in. If they really did, I'd say vote for Khazei, if you like him. But Capuano has way more chance of getting in in reality--and if he does he will be a far better Senator than Coakley.  

          Like I said I originallly voted for the more liberal sounding guy--forget who he was!--in the original congressional race. I thought of Capuano as a local, machine politics kind of democrat. But in congress he has really been amazing--I have never called his office to ask what his position was without finding out that he was right where a progressive/lefty would want him to be. His office is famous for their work with and for illegal immigrants and refugees in the state. And despite his townie/populist view of himself he has been excellent on all national and international issues. I mean, really excellent from a progressive standpoint. Ignore this boob, hybrid, who won't vote for Capuano because Capuano supported (?) an increase in the state sales tax.  We had to increase the sales tax because its the one tax we could increase to make up for the loss of other tax revenues capable of supporting the actual needs of our population--including low income members of the population.  Only an absolute moron would hold this against Capuano when it was a purely local/state level decision not a federal issue at all.


    •  Capuano. (7+ / 0-)

      Member of a Congressional Progressive Caucus.  Supports Medicare for all, voted against the Iraq War and Patriot Act.  And endorsed by progressive organizations such as Progressive Democrats of America,, and Blue Mass Group (blog).

    •  The site tends not to go in on (6+ / 0-)

      primaries unless there's an extremely clear choice. In this case, there wasn't, but as is often the case, you could get a lot of passionate reasons one way or another in the comments.

      I personally voted for Capuano. My next choice would've been Khazei, followed by Coakley. Pagliuca I don't even really consider a Democrat.

    •  Coakley is a true Progressive... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      ...and she has guts. Capuano and Khazei both dithered around about running based on what some Kennedy family members would do. Martha Coakley stepped up and put it on the line for working families in Massachusetts. She has been great about fighting for workers on wage and hour enforcement, fighting for homeowners against predatory lenders, standing for equality for same sex couples and clearly and loudly supporting choice.

      There is nothing else we could ask from our next Senator. I was proud to vote for her today.

      •  Not waiting to run isn't enough (0+ / 0-)

        Coakley impressed me when she decided, unlike the others, to run even before Joe Kennedy decided not to.  She also showed a lot of boldness on the question of opposing HCR with the Stupak amendment.

        However, other that that she's shown me nothing that makes me think she has guts or is a true progressive.  Her campaign seems to have been an exercise in sitting on her huge lead in the polls and not blowing it.  My hope is that she either turns out to be a better Senator than I expect or proves to be easy to defeat in a future primary.  I fear that she's not as progressive as she has claimed.

        But thank you for being the first Coakley supporter I've heard of whose argument for voting for her doesn't mention gender at all.

    •  mike Capuano (0+ / 0-)

      Two things  If we can it would be good to stop Coakley. Khazei feels like a touchy feely throw in by someone wanting to make sure to divide the consciously progressive vote for Capuana and make sure Coakley got it.
      Mike's problem for me is that he's too tempermental. But when I look at all the well mannered Senators who are letting our battles and victories go down the drain for bi partisanship(?) I want someone whose going to get mad.
      Mike's liberal record is sterling.  As others here have pointed out.  He should probably keep his hand out of state politics.  He's so good at National ones.

      WE must hang together or we will all hang separately. B.Franklin

      by ruthhmiller on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 09:27:07 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Not Coakley (0+ / 0-)

      Coakley is the kind of "tough" prosecutor who supports the war on drugs and pushed for harsh punishment for the makers of the Mooninites, while at the same time encouraging things I consider prosecutorial misconduct, and not seeming to care if she keeps innocent people in prison if it helps her political career.  As AG she presides over a criminal justice system that does tremendous damage, and she's more part of the problem than part of the solution.

    •  Capuano stories (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Here's one from me:

      Here's a good one from someone else:

  •  I get very nervous . . . (4+ / 0-)

    when I read things like this:

    the Democratic primary for Senate in Massachusetts pretty much determines the ultimate winner,

    Please do not take for granted that a Democrat will be sitting in Teddy's seat. This is the type of thing that motivates Republicans and gets Dems to stay at home on election day because they think they have nothing to worry about.

    In the choice between changing ones mind and proving there's no need to do so, most people get busy on the proof.

    by jsfox on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 07:21:02 AM PST

    •  don't worry (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      cos, profh, Matt Z

      Seriously--zero chance a Republican would win.  Half the time there's no Republican candidate for elected positions.

    •  And the GOP has a real stinker (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Matt Z, p gorden lippy

      Scott Brown is favored to win the GOP primary today.

      Imagine Glenn Beck with a less crazy facade.

      Imagine that as your senator.

      The man is right out of the right-wing radio/tv wurlitzer.  A true believer.

      •  And he's running against someone even worse (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Matt Z
      •  Looked good in Cosmo back in the day, though (0+ / 0-)

        Cosmo pinup boy. Says all it needs to about the brainometer reading here: Bimboy.

        People will at least consider a Republican if they are socially moderate - or mittfakeromney it. Brownie's not. He's pro-life and anti-samesex marriage. He can't run against the legislature in this race either.

        The Mass Republicans are aiming at 2010 governor, not wasting money on Brown.  What passes for A Team Republicans (Bush Chief of Staff Andy Card and Red Sox World Series hero Curt Schilling) passed on this race, which says a lot.

        Shit happens. So when you flush thank a liberal.

        by BobBlueMass on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 12:16:09 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  It's not just that it's Mass, it's that (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      FlyingToaster, Matt Z

      the Democratic field is a lot stronger -- our candidate will just be better than theirs -- and that polling doesn't show weakness on this front.

    •  No need to worry, this is MA. We only vote for (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      FlyingToaster, Matt Z

      Republican governors.  Probably because we miss Weld, and Dukakis.  I mean, what is there to say about the T man anyway :-).  He was really good but people made too much fun of us after that tank ride.

      A conservative is a man with two perfectly good legs who, however, has never learned to walk forward. Franklin D. Roosevelt

      by Memory Corrupted on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 08:25:27 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Wrong, sorry. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      The Massachusetts [R] bench was destroyed by Romney.  Instead of building up the state org, he imported a hundred out-of-staters to run for in-state offices in 2004.  He lost 7 seats in the Lege (both House and Senate) that year.

      Since Mittens left office, the state party has been in a tailspin.  They get no support (and occasional bad-mouthing) from the national party, and have very little ability to pursue a state-wide message.  In 2006 they neglected to put in any nominees for one of the constitutional offices (Secretary of the Commonwealth).  The Green Party had more candidates.

      This year, with this field, any of the 4 Democratic candidates beats either of the Republican Candidates.  

      And remember, the last time Jack E. Robinson ran for Senate, the Libertarian candidate got more votes :)

  •  Coakley on Stupak: Defending Women's Rights (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    coral, Tracker, Matt Z, i like bbq

    Martha Coakley says she wouldn't have voted for a health care bill that includes the Stupak amendment restricting abortion access.

    Seems obvious now that Coakley would say such a thing explicitly and firmly but Capuano dropped the ball here, and then had to reverse less than 48 hrs later.


    Here we are now Entertain us I feel stupid and contagious

    by Scarce on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 07:28:02 AM PST

    •  It's true this happened. but health care (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      FlyingToaster, michstjame, Cobbler

      and I say this as a woman and a feminist is more important than abortion.  I never got the sense from any of Coakley's people that she would really put up a fight for the Public Option.  The Abortion issue we are going to be fighting until the cows come home. I have never understood why, given the political landscape, the various pro-choice groups didn't make a real effort to fund abortions for poor women.  I have tried on a number of occasions to convince an abortion clinic to provide an abortion for an indigent teenager and never gotten any support.  I understand that clinics need to make money but where's the money behind the push.  Where's the heart?
      No I understood why Mike pulled back from making that committment.  It's too complicated.  Can another position be negotiated.  Can we pull the issue out of the bill.  The RC bishops are very clever but can we let them tie us up like this.
      Progressives know nothing is assured and we have to fight another day.  Anyway that's my take.

      WE must hang together or we will all hang separately. B.Franklin

      by ruthhmiller on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 09:38:17 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  don't be over-confident (0+ / 0-)

    As we know, the Democratic primary for Senate in Massachusetts pretty much determines the ultimate winner

    Whoever wins the Democratic nomination, they'll be better than the Republican in the final, but I wouldn't be so confident that the outcome is a done deal.  Massachusetts voters have been known to occasionally choose Republicans in state-wide races.

    Incumbents are not very popular nowadays.  In Massachusetts all the incumbents are Democrats.  No matter who wins the primary today, Democrats should be prepared to work hard for victory in the general election in January.

  •  It Would Be Nice To Have Another Woman In (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    aimai, Tracker, wdrath, p gorden lippy

    the senate, but it is more important to have a reliable progressive senator.  If I was voting I would have to go with a sure bet and vote for Capuano.  Coakley would be my second pick.

  •  Psst! For Netroots looking ahead ... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    ... next major primary is the Illinois Senate primary on 2-2-10 -- Alexi Giannoulias v. David Hoffman for the seat Roland Burris is vacating.

    Show Dems in R-Leaning Districts Who Voted For Health Care, Against Stupak: We've Got Your Back

    by Adam B on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 07:40:50 AM PST

  •  I voted for Khazei (0+ / 0-)

    and I will reluctantly vote for Coakley next month, but if it's that weasel Capuano I'm staying home.  I'd rather have the Republican than him.

    •  that's pretty frightening to me. If someone on a (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      FlyingToaster, Cobbler

      progressive blog says

      I'd rather have the Republican than him.

      my advice is to consider what Kennedy did as a staunchly liberal senator. I happen to admire Capuano's relentless support of progressive policies in his votes against AUMF and Patriot act, and other activities in the progressive caucus of the House.

      The "weasel' name calling is a bit vague, given his public record. Do you have more than just a gut on this? I know he can be irritatingly pugnacious, but I like his politics a hell of a lot better than a Brown or a Robinson.

      Please, get real!

      Fear is the mind-killer - Frank Herbert, Dune

      by p gorden lippy on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 07:57:47 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I posted my reason above... (0+ / 0-)

        "He went to the unions and asked them to "hug" state legislators because they "had" to vote to increase the regressive state sales tax.  Ya know, the one the hurts low income residents more than anyone else.  So, no, Capuano is a shill and he does not deserve my vote."

        •  oh, and when I wrote to him, called his office... (0+ / 0-)

          not a single response.  nothing.  totally unresponsive to one of his constituents that did not send him money or belong to a union.

          He doesn't represent me.

          •  Jeezus, you do realize that the state tax is (6+ / 0-)

            that this has nothing to do with his office? He didn't get to vote on the state tax because its a state legislator issue? If you had to complain about it why didn't you call your state legislator?  You seem to have no idea what the function of a congressman is. Plus, I resent the implication that Capuano's office only does stuff for people who "send him money or belong to a union." That is complete tripe--his office has worked closely with and for refugees for a long time who are not voters at all, and certainly don't give him any money. Perhaps if you called the right people to complain about a particular tax you would have gotten some kind of response?


            •  I called his office about something else...still (0+ / 0-)

              no response.  If it is a state issue he should have kept his big mouth shut and not pleaded with the union to go "hug" the state legislators who voted to raise the sales tax.  

              It was on, but my google search turned up the Herald opinion piece on it (Herald=shudder):

              "At the SEIU breakfast, he told members to "give every House member a little hug...They’re going to need a hug next year when they’re on the ballot.""

              If he wanted to stay out of it he should have, instead he stuck his support on the wrong side of the issue.

              •  His office has *always* responded to me... (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                StanBlather, i like bbq, Cobbler

                Did you only ever call one time?  If so, I imagine it was a fluke.  His staff has always been super-responsive with me, and whenever I've had a question they didn't know the answer to, they've researched it and called me back within a few days.

              •  This is so jaw droppingly dumb (5+ / 0-)

                That I can't even figure out what planet you are from.  Capuano was a mayor, a darned good mayor, and he prides himself on thinking about the poorest of the poor in our cities.  My only real concern about him as a Senator is that he is too preoccupied with local issues and the local economy--to me the Senator's spot is one that is national and international in scope.  But Capuano thinks specifically that if you haven't taken a midnight phone call from a constituent whose heat has been shut off you shouldn't serve at all.  He's all about the constituent services. I'm sorry if for five seconds your personal needs were not attended to. If you only called once they can't have been really urgent. I'd suggest you try getting therapy from a liscenced therapist instead of hoping for it from your congressman's office. Or call again if its urgent.  


        •  You might check out Coakley's union (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          i like bbq

          endorsements.  Not sure why you're so anti-union, but if you hate unions you might not support Coakley, either.

          Pags, perhaps?  

          "Right wing freak machine" General Wes Clark

          by Tracker on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 08:13:22 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  You really seem to have it in for Capuano (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          based on just one incident. He is, with the possible exception of Barney Frank, the most consistently progressive member of the Mass. congressional team -- which is a pretty liberal bunch to begin with. I think he would enter the Senate and shake things up from day one, in the mold of Al Franken. Martha, not so much, although she would be a reliable liberal vote. Not a disaster, but not very exciting or imaginative.

    •  Are you serious, have you heard Bakers ad? (0+ / 0-)

      It's the same 'ol GOPsheeplenese vaccuous nonsense from the right... "less taxes and less waste vote Republian"  BTW, I'll be voting Khazei today and Dem for the forseeable future as well.

      A conservative is a man with two perfectly good legs who, however, has never learned to walk forward. Franklin D. Roosevelt

      by Memory Corrupted on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 08:19:17 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I'm not voting this time around (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Ann T Bush

    I'm more interested in abolishing the senate than in sending anybody else to sit in it.

    You may think it's a silly sentiment, but that's where my heart's at right now.

    Fuck the senate. Fuck 'em all.

  •  I'm voting for Capuano (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BruinKid, Tracker, cph, Larry McAwful

    He's solid, and to the left of Coakley.  And he's from Somerville!

    The biggest problem with Capuano, in my mind, is that his wife is so dang teabaggy*.

    (*see second to last sentence)

    My health care is a sacred matter that should be determined by my doctor, a greedy for-profit corporation, and Wall Street.

    by signals on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 07:55:49 AM PST

  •  I'm not even voting. I failed to change my party (0+ / 0-)

    on my registration.  I am still registered as an R.  I know that is pathetic.

  •  Embarrassment of riches... (0+ / 0-)

    I voted for Coakley.  I've generally tried to support women, all things being even, and in Mass. Dem politics they're usually pretty close. I think her career start with the hysterical Fells Acre case is a bit unfortunate but she's been pretty solid since then.  I think a former prosecutor as US Senator is a good defense against the Massachusetts liberal tag. She is a bit of a blank slate on her positions but I was impressed by her support of the health care reform at the Boston Labor Day Rally.

    I know a lot of progressives going with Khazei and he'd be my second choice.  He actually ran a surprisingly good campaign with good grassroots support, proved he belonged in the field, and I think he's got a future.

    Capuano is a decent Congressman but he's kind of old school.  Much as we love the Kennedys it's time to move on.  Massachusetts politics is progressive but it's a closed club. I think he ran a terrible campaign.

    Pagliuca is a private equity guy.  He likes to say he created jobs but he's probably been responsible for the destruction and outsourcing of more jobs than he's created.  He'll get the Celtics vote.

  •  I am rooting for Coakley-- Partly because (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    she (but not Capuano) said she could support lowering the voting age to 17.  The other two candidates also supported it, but neither of them has a chance.

    Join National Youth Rights Assocation, and join the youth rights revolution

    by teenvote on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 09:01:58 AM PST

  •  I voted for Khazei this morning. (0+ / 0-)

    I like him the most of all four candidates.  Capuano is my second choice.  I suspect Coakley would be okay, but I still don't have a good feel for how she'd legislate.  I suspect she's probably going to win, though.

    A conservative is just a liberal who hasn't needed a second chance yet.

    by Larry McAwful on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 09:04:06 AM PST

  •  Massachusetts (0+ / 0-)

    may be progressive in many ways, but in statewide politics, not so much. And a lot of the women in Massachusetts who've worked their butts off for various candidates over the years are very tired of same old same old, good ol' boy backroom politics. And that's why a lot of them want to see Martha get the slot.

    At least, that's what I hear from people on the ground there.

    If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament.--A Boston cabbie, to Gloria Steinem, in the 1970s

    by Mnemosyne on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 09:20:57 AM PST

  •  Khazei has Wes Clark & Boston Globe endorsements (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    ...and Vicki Kennedy's. Also the Worcester Telegram and the Cape Cod Times.

    Nothin' to sneeze at.  This is a good man.

    But I'm torn between him and Capuano, who I think of as a bulldog, and I like having our state being represented in the House of Lords by a bulldog.

    Will the last one out of democracy please turn out the lights?

    by Apphouse50 on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 09:54:29 AM PST

    •  No, Vicki hasn't endorsed (0+ / 0-)

      You're thinking of Caroline, who did endorse Khazei.

      I was torn between Khazei and Capuano, but have decided to go for Capuano.  This is a down to a race between Capuano and Coakley and that's an easy choice for me.  Khazei is a great guy, but I want to see a fighter in the Senate and that's Mike.

      •  Someone from his campaign called last nite (0+ / 0-) fact, someone very highly placed in local higher education, who told me Vicki had endorsed him.

        I think Max Kennedy may have as well from something I saw on Khazei's website today.

        Oh well, doesn't matter. This comes down to Coakley, who I increasingly don't want, and Capuano, who doesn't thrill me but at least he's a fighter.

        I am bracing for disappointment.

        Will the last one out of democracy please turn out the lights?

        by Apphouse50 on Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 01:32:57 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Vote for Khazei! (0+ / 0-)

      "He (Capuano) went to the unions and asked them to "hug" state legislators because they "had" to vote to increase the regressive state sales tax.  Ya know, the one the hurts low income residents more than anyone else.  So, no, Capuano is a shill and he does not deserve my vote."

  •  Three-Way General Election (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    A good Democrat -- see above, where the argument is almost all 'X is better' not "Y is bad".

    A R******can -- one of those people*

    and running under the "Liberty" political designation is Joseph L. Kennedy of Dedham, who has filed his 13,900 valid signatures and is already on the ballot.

    "Liberty" may well draw off the C4L segment of the R******can Party.  Mr. Kennedy is on the State Committee of the Libertarian Association of Massachusetts.

    *name not spelled out to avoid disturbing the delicate of stomach. (8^))

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site