Is Trend turning back to Scott Brown?
By Shawn on Oct 29, 2012 in Politics
From the Boston Globe today, we hear that a poll that fell quite against him now has him leading.
Two years ago, this poll had Martha Coakley 15 points ahead of Brown.
I don’t know about you, but I’m sick of hearing about abortion and other issues from the 70s. We have an economy where people need work and the government should be looking to ease anything in the way of creating jobs.
From Boston.com:
A new Boston Globe poll shows the race between Senator Scott Brown and Elizabeth Warren in a dead heat, with ample opportunity for both candidates to win the nation’s most expensive Senate race eight days from now.
The survey indicates Brown holds a razor-thin 45 percent to 43 percent lead over Warren among likely voters, well within the poll’s margin of error of plus or minus 4.1 percentage points. Brown’s lead evaporates, with 47 percent for each candidate, when voters who are undecided are asked which candidate they are leaning toward.
The poll is a reversal from a September Globe survey that showed Warren ahead 43 percent to 38 percent, as well as several other recent polls that have found Warren with a slight lead. The shift underscores the belief long held by both sides that the race, active for more than a year, would be competitive until the end.
Loading ...
Rich Cowan | Oct 30, 2012 | Reply
Shawn — if abortion is an issue from the 70s, and it was resolved in favor of abortion rights (at least in terms of Roe v. Wade), then I don’t think you can blame Democrats for making it a big issue.
A record number of abortion restrictions were introduced or enacted in 2011, including very invasive measures (unnecessary ultrasound) in Texas, Virginia, and Pennsylvania. Talk about big government involvement in decisions that should be left between a woman and her doctor.
Here is a chart showing the trend.
It is indeed too bad that so much of the conversation is about abortion, but again, if Scott Brown or the House leadership had devoted its energy to supporting jobs measures like the Teachers and First Responders Back to Work Act, there would be more money for Dracut schools and public safety. In fairness, can you acknowledge that Warren campaign has also brought up this issue as a fiscally responsible way to restore some of the public sector jobs that were lost as a result of economic conditions ad policies of the past few years? Can you explain why Mr. Brown voted against this bill???
Shawn | Oct 31, 2012 | Reply
“A record number of restrictions..”
You know, when it comes to the murder a child, maybe some restrictions should exist. I don’t think abortion will ever be made illegal across the country, but I do think its a states rights issue, and not a federal one. But that’s my opiion.
That “Teachers and First Responders Back to Work Act”? You really expected anyone on the right to vote for that?
Lets just put forth the “money for Democrat voters Act”
The grant put out a couple years ago by the federal government forced communities all over the country to temporarily carry employees forward for another two years.. then the money went away. It put the current operational costs of the school systems on the credit to be paid by your children.
You don’t borrow to pay operational costs. You borrow for capital improvements. That was a stupid, expensive temporary patch.. and the bandaid got ripped off this year.
Complaining about one vote, out of the context of what was in it and what were the amendments, is a simple campaign trick. One can see lots of reasons not to vote for it. A $35 Billion dollar spending spree on government workers was not going to help the economy. Its just pouring more money into a failing system.
Education needs reform, housing needs reform, the tax code needs reform.. and none of these people are going to get it done.
Voting for Warren will do nothing to move any of that “forward,” because she will just be another hard left senator rubber stamping the Pelosi agenda. Its the bipartisan Senators who actually solve problems and get things done.
Rich Cowan | Oct 31, 2012 | Reply
Shawn, I called the Teachers and First Responders Back to Work Act “fiscally responsible” because it did not require any borrowing whatsoever.
Here is the text of the bill as the Senate (including our two Senators) voted on it and you will notice it does not simply appropriate $60 billion in a 2 year period, it also raises revenue to pay for the program. You can’t defend Brown’s vote by saying he was just trying to control the deficit.
I do think you have a point about some of the stimulus funding. Education programs that are run as block grants to the states — like IDEA and Title I — should have been given permanent, large increases of at least 30%. Instead, the Democrats did almost all the increases for these critical programs through the stimulus, a temporary measure as you say. Now, as you have said before, these programs are under the mercy of the sequestration law which could result in such a large cut that funding our school system depends on will be funded below 2007 levels.
Shawn | Nov 1, 2012 | Reply
You must be kidding. That wasn’t a school funding bill, it was a permanent tax on the wealthy.
The school spending part ended by 2012, but the tax remained. Great trick.
Also, if a state decided they did not want to participate, the government could bypass the leadership of the state and shove the money into other government funded programs.. who would themselves then have a huge layoff problem two years later.
Oh.. and magically.. only 60% of the money was allocated based on student population.. 40% was allocated based on general population. Buying votes again??
This was nothing but a vote buying and tax bill that ignored states rights, and Brown was more than right to not vote for it.
Rich Cowan | Nov 1, 2012 | Reply
Shawn — if the school and fire and police spending were to end after 2 years and not be renewed, but the taxes were to remain, the net result would be less debt to leave for future generations…
You say trick… but I say treat!
Bob | Nov 2, 2012 | Reply
Shawn, I hope you are right about Brown being in the lead. As for abortion. The more restricitons the better! I agree it is murder of young babies. An issue that probably won’t change in my lifetime.
About that bill, Scott Brown READS the bill and determines if the bill in its entirety is good for Mass. This one I hear was not. Warren will be Obama’s puppet if he is relected and will vote 99% with the Democrats. I’m sure!
Why are we so politically DEAD here in Mass?
Karen | Nov 3, 2012 | Reply
Maybe you should work with your fellow males to educate them on their reproductive responsibilities. Birth control is not the sole domain of women. If men don’t want children, they should make sure they protect themselves from unwanted pregnancies. Only when men take an equal share in reproductive rights, responsibilities, and roles will the number of abortions go down.
It’s not about restrictions — it’s about education and taking responsibility for one’s actions.