Yes, I would vote for her if I was eligible to vote in Massachusetts.  And yes, I do expect she will win. I could be wrong – wouldn’t be the first time (I wanted Joe Biden in the 2008 primary), but that’s my prediction.

Regular readers can guess why:

I’m a reliable left of center voter except on a few issues (I vote against casinos and am very independent when Israel is involved, rarely going into the move all Israelis to Siberia territory but also reliably against settlement expansion).

And Scott Brown is an untenable option for me just on the basis of his positions on pretty much every single issue that matters to me:

He is anti-choice bordering on being anti-woman (see more here, where the Boston Globe compares the candidates’ positions on choice), he thinks Obama was born out of wedlock, he espouses a position that denies decency to rape victims, anti-immigration groups love him, gun rights advocates want him, he opposes same-sex marriage, disparaged and then apologized for disparaging lesbian adoption, supports the federal DOMA and is considered anti-science.

Many left of center folks have come up with reasons to be extremely miserable with Martha Coakley – Taylor Marsh’s posts exemplify that group’s discontent.  Amy Siskind of The New Agenda, in an entry at The Huffington Post called “The Coakley Hangover,” conveys similar sentiments.

But as Digby says in her post, “Hitting the Wall” (read PunditMom’s post, “Am I Angrier at Martha Coakley or the Democratic Party?” for a variation on the same theme):

I think a lot depends upon this election in Massachusetts, frankly. If Martha Coakley loses, it will be very bad for progressives.  Worse than we can imagine. After the so-called lessons of Virginia and New Jersey, there will be no fighting back the perception that the party is in big trouble, regardless of whether it’s true — and it’s hard to argue at that point that it isn’t.  Sadly,  the lesson that will be taken from losing Ted Kennedy’s seat to a right wing Republican  is not that the Democrats have been too liberal, I guarantee it. What will follow will likely be a sharp turn to the right.

So, job one is to make sure that Senator Playmate is defeated.  If you live in Massachusetts, and I know I have readers there, please do what you can to get out the vote.  The consequences are quite dire if Coakley loses.

Seriously, if you live in Massachusetts, do get yourself out to vote for Martha Coakley and volunteer to help if you can.  A loss will be so devastating that I’m afraid the Democrats will end up calling to invade Yemen  and institute shoot to kill orders for illegal immigrants if they don’t win this race. They will panic, bet on it.

Not surprisingly, Coakley has been treated with sexism from the start, been analyzed on her “babe factor” (for real) and she gets nothing but grief for being a serious campaigner. Sounds reminiscent of how Hillary Clinton was treated by the pundits as well.  Women are too mushy if they cry, or they’re faking, and they are cold if they are serious.  Cannot win for losing.


NB: Not once have I mentioned the abomination that is the 17% of women in the U.S. Senate and the fact that she would be the first woman to represent Massachusetts in the U.S. Senate. However, these are both critical milestones that bring our country’s federal government closer to a truly representative body.

For more, please visit the original post at Writes Like She Talks.

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2010 The Moderate Voice
Sort by:   newest | oldest

Welcome to the one party state. The Democrats nominate som one who makes empty suits look like geniuses and still people are going to automatically vote for the Democratic Party candidate because the candidate has a (D) next to their name.

Repeating talking points does not make the Democratic candidate look any better. Maybe the Democrats in Mass. should pay attention to what their doing now instead of just automatically voting for someone named Kennedy.

Dorian de Wind, Military Affairs Columnist

Agreed, agreed, agreed, Jill, and I hope so much that you’re right. For once (or twice) I am relying on a woman’s intuiton.


Maxwell's Demon

I’m sorry, but you lost all credibility by saying you wanted Joe Biden to win the primary.


I thought it was obligatory for Original Posters here to insist that they were moderates despite pushing hard for the most liberal health care takeover by the most liberal Congress and Administration in history. Yeah, not wanting to throw the Israelis into the sea, how moderate of you. I can feel the moderation crackling through the air. lol


More proof that negative campaigning works I guess. And questioning global warming is now “anti-science”? I have two degrees in science-related fields so I never guessed I was really anti-science.


Another bullseye Jill. Thanks for your posting. I know it isn’t popular to get right to the nitty gritty and dispense with all the tit for tat nonsense political forums are so fond of, but I had another birthday today and one of my resolutions is to be more concise. :-) What it comes down to is this: No candidate is perfect, they all have flaws and warts, some just have more than others. In this case Brown has a LOT more. Once the partisan spin is removed, when the truth is allowed show through, when facts and objectivity are given precedence over willful ignorance and ideological dysfunction, then it’s clear to see that Coakley is the more reasonable, the more rational, and definitely the least toxic choice. Forget what the reactionary blowhards are trying to feed your head with. What matters is what is going to be the best choice for the country in the long term. Not what is good for a party, not what is good for pundits and entertainers, but what is good for the country. It doesnt get any simpler than that.


I think Brown is basically a lightweight, a pretty face, and a tool of the right. I don’t see anything to indicate he has much vision or experience – not the sort of experience and vision one would hope for in what we used to call a “leader”. Hopefully the fickle and apparently disgruntled voters in Mass will figure that out before Tuesday. Needless to say, there could be national, longterm repercussions from a Brown win, and something the anti-Coakley folks don’t seem to realize is that such a scenario wouldn’t be as much a blow to the democrats as it would be a blow to Americans in general.


I think what all of us who care about the integrity of the functioning of our federal legislature MUST join together to examine is what happens when a group is able to congeal together their anger and dislike well enough to make shamans rise up who will take on the shape of that anger and dislike, but be nothing more than a vessel. I really feel that that’s all people like Brown, or the guy who challenged the legislator in upstate NY or here in Ohio we’ve got some similar “vessels” taking shape, just as the tea party-followers in particular seem to gel together. What confounds me the most is how, no matter how much they rail against Obama et al., they are in fact pushing forth the same meme “JOIN!” that Obama did – which I absolutely detested – it creeped me out. Any group that uses that kind of influence does creep me out, lol. I just want people to come to their own conclusions – sure, I usually want it to be the one I’ve reached. :) But I still need them to feel that it’s theirs and not just something they’re accepting because they have nothing else.

It is so refreshing to read genuine, thoughtful, well-reasoned commentary like yours. I agree with your observations and conclusions, and wish more of our citizens were less motivated by demagoguery and were willing to engage in more honest examination – not excluding self-examination. This atmosphere of low standards and low expectations – as well as contention for contentions own sake is ruining honest productive dialogue and by extension is very, very bad for the country. Apologies for speaking the obvious.


By the way, don’t be afraid to take DaMav to the woodshed if you need to. I’ve had good results with that. . . they just don’t last very long. 😉


All I have to do is yell “don’t waterboard me man” and GreenJeans shows up, chases you off, and hires me a lawyer.


Did someone just seriously compare Joe Biden to Sarah Palin? .. I think I threw up a little in my mouth.

Don Quijote

The problem with electing Republicans is that no matter how moderate they sound and have been in the past, once they get to DC they start voting as a block with the most conservative troglodytes that the South elects.


Hmmm. Reverse sexism (PC hypocrisy) certainly is not a fine Ethical Example to follow with the ballot box. Voting robotically Democratic as a desperation measure is understandable. It needn’t even be admitted how desperate one may feel; just call it “playing defense.” It’s understood, Jill.

* * *

“Don’t rely on murdering a life to erase your lack of self-control.”

Harsh, but obviously superior to the mess (logical, moral, behavior) from the other side.


“He is anti-choice” [sic]

CORRECTION: Anti-abortion


“More proof that negative campaigning works I guess. And questioning global warming is now ‘anti-science’?”

The second example is an outright lie revealing also the puritanical fundamentalist religious nature of the current environmental movement (related to “climate change” at least, or especially).

The first (vote for a woman because she is so, and voting for the male opponent is “anti-woman” [sic]) typical PC deliberate-discriminatory hypocrisy.

But it may also reveal concern, desperation, even panic, too. (Hysteria?)

Axel Edgren

Still putting “reform” in mock quotes I see.

I guess this is a site where you can use the word REPUBLI*CONS* and fit right in. Disappointing.


“I smell an interest in mere provocation on your part and that disappointments me”

The interest is not there.

“To throw around such accusations that have no basis in reality”

I don’t do this.

“Clearly you feel put upon”

My tone might have led you to guess that, but it’s not so.

“… Last but not least”

(Who feels put upon, incidentally?)

“you show how little you know about the so-called feminist theme”

I’ve not demonstrated this at all. I’ve responded to its being used or applied handily or conveniently, again, though. (This isn’t the first time; it’s a part of a habit, pattern, or routine.)


“Still putting ‘reform’ in mock quotes[,] I see.”

Mock quotes, indeed, if your vision or other functions are defective.


“Enter the crickets. Maybe we’ll do better on another thread.”

Not here, obviously. (See above.) But if you prefer —

As to something you wrote earlier, I betrayed no trust — I was responding to what you wrote to start this thread, which includes a number of statements related to one of your favored political themes (which, in fact, is often the basis for your starting new threads on this site). It’s that simple.

As to Coakley, she’s a tainted candidate, but if you can’t stand the Republican (I actually don’t mind him, but one photo I saw of him reminded me of Romney or the equivalent of one or two “blueprint” or “out of the mold” GOP equivalent of Dem politicians like Warner (Virginia).

I’m also curious about the effect on the voters of the flirting among Dems in Washington to tax makers of medical devices. (Taxing those involved in “production” of medicine is anti-medicine!) This specific object, device makers, affects a rare modern, high-tech, niche industry in Massachusetts.

This, accompanying the general problem of the Dems wanting government to do far too much, is what we’re seeing now. (I don’t view this as “1994” nor see a guaranteed GOP revival out of this; I’ll believe that when I see that.) Also of note are the swarming over this story by major parties nation-wide and related political interests (as on here, this site); I’ve written elsewhere that it reminds me of the race in Upstate New York. But mainly it also is indicative of discontent nation-wide, and I have to chuckle: This Republican running against Coakley and the Dem agenda to date, for Ted Kennedy’s seat in, of all places, Massachusetts, and surprising everyone, actually is treating us to — unlike last year — real, actual Hope [tm] for real, actual Change [tm].


If Martha wins, you will all be very sorry. I use to work for her, and she is the worst person I have ever met. Good luck to you if she wins.


Scott Brown HATES rape victims? Really that’s the kind of crap you listen too? Where did HE say HE hates rape victims. Let alone the fact that most rape victims are consenting at first then regret their decisions later.

Liberals will stop at nothing.

Why did Martha spend NO time talking about the TOPICS of a debate? She only spent time and money slandering her opponent. I want to know their stand point.

She is just another elitist, socialit, pig, of a person. Nothing more.