Sunday, January 17, 2010

Analysis: Should the Democrats' hair be on fire as they think about losing the senate seat in MA?


Mr. Bretzmann said...

1. Kennedy's seat goes to a Republican.
2. Majority Democratic registration in MA, but still goes R.
3. Lose 60 vote filibuster proof senate
4. Irony: Kennedy was a champion of health care reform and they would lose his seat to someone who would stop it.
5. A larger message of danger for Dems. as they look forward to 2010 midterms.
6. A larger message for moderate Dems. that they should steer clear of healthcare reform or they will be whamboozled in their next election.

Mr. Bretzmann said...

Pronunciation: \ˈshä-dən-ˌfrȯi-də\
Function: noun
Usage: often felt by many toward the QB for the MN Vikings
Etymology: German, from Schaden damage + Freude joy
Definition: enjoyment obtained from the troubles of others

aprichard said...

Well, they shouldn't be upset by who they lost, but losing the seat is detrimental to the health care bill. To lose the 60th seat after such prolonged negotiations and reconciliations would make any party rip the hair from their heads. Regardless of what party affiliation one may have, the loss of Kennedy's seat should deffinately upset the Democrats and make their "hair be on fire". As if to add insult to injury, Brown is anti-health care!!! This may not have been so bad if it had have been a different republican. There was talk of holding Kennedy's replacement senator until the 60th vote is made;but, I don't see that happening. Too inflamatory. The Democrats should be furious with Coakely for her blunders and mourn their 60th vote. Hopefully it will not harm the progress of healthcare too drastically.

MKlinka said...

Of course the democrats should have their hair on fire! They lost their filibuster proof majority, and this may be a sign of what is to come. Dems should be spitting fire now that they've lost a seat at such a crucial point in the process. Surely it will take more than 1 seat to stop health care reform, but still, one can't help thinking that this could turn into a trend. If it does, then congress would once again be bathed in wonderful republican glory.

Diana said...

Yes, i think so. The fact that they lost the filibuster proof. This alone is not a good sign. But, for the Democrats the 2010 midterms will not be looking so good. Even though this seat might not seem like a huge loss at this time, but i do think it will hurt the progression of the healthcare bill, atleast slightly.

Mr. Bretzmann said...

Just to clarify...the election is Tuesday...they wouldn't lose it until then.

ayork said...

Klinka, I think you bathe in "wonderful republican glory." Consequently, nobody wants to be near you as the stench is overwhelming.

As for the question, I think it is a minor roadbump in the situation. Democrats need to focus on getting health care passed, no matter what that means. Perhaps they should be going after some of the more moderate Republican senators for their votes. Losing a seat at any time is a big deal, especially one from a Democratic region. However, I think that this health care bill should take precedence over worrying about seats for next term. Should they be a little worried? Sure, but they have bigger fish to fry and so many other subtleties to worry about first.

Mr. Bretzmann said...


By the way, Tuesday's election is not for next term, it is for right now. It's to finish Sen. Kennedy's current term.

jmarczewski said...

I choose to ignore the commentary within the definition of Schadenfreude, and my rebutal is simply this: 1) scoreboard; 2) who's still playing next week?

Oh yeah, politics...I don't like the beliefs of Democrats. Therefore, if their hair is on fire then the Alleluia chorus is ringing amidst my brain. I do believe they should be worried about losing their Senate seat for all the reasons listed above by the leader of the class (if anyone thinks that refers to Klinka, I laugh at them). The most significant implications that can stem from Democrats losing their Senate seat in Mass. is the inability to clinch cloture in the case of a filibuster (e.g. healthcare reform). You can imagine me partying with noisemakers at this point. As we approach the midterm election later this year, I anticipate many more seats to be turned over to Republicans due to the short-term dissatisfaction of swing-voters.

Much like the Packers coaching staff, Democrats are on the hot seat now if they want to get anything "efficiently" done. Now to find my Helga Hat...

PMiner said...

Jesse, the correct answer is that the colts play next weekend and Manning broke Favre's MVP record...

but back to the blog. Yes, they should be a little worried. I don't know if hair on fire worried, or feeling the heat under the seat worried but they need to be worried. One seat may not seem too major, but it is. Kennedy was a major part of health care reform and losing him hurt the Democrats, but they can make up for that; however, they can't make up for a lost seat. Overall, they should be worried.

Ryan Paprocki said...

If Democrats lose this seat the fate of thousands of Americans' lives rest in the Republicans hands, who will then characteristically and expectedly puke all over said lives. (40,000 Americans die every year due to unaffordable/ lack of health care). If Coakly doesn't win, then I say let the Republicans fillibuster it - in the name of "small government". What makes this debate so intruiging is the fact that the Democrats have both the logic and reason, and the humanitarian aspect. The Republicans have nothing but ignorance and their "small government" talking point (irrational fear of an active, limited government carried on through decades by demagogs, and people believing them).

I wish this debate were a matter of opinion but it isn't. It's a battle against ignorance. Hence, it would be an absolute OUTRAGE if Coakly doesn't win and health care reform doesn't get passed. The left is objectively correct here, of course under the premise that we want what's best for the most people.

As Karl Marx said, Communism is the final stage in society. But I'm afraid that evidence like this says something about America...we might be a little slow in the head and late to the party until we finally achieve that greatness.

Astoiber said...

*@#% it. we'll do it live

if i were a democrat right now i would be pretty worried.

but at the moment im still a student mooching off my parents so i dnt care

but once reality sets in and im alone in the big bad world i will hope to non-denominational creator figure that the democrats take over and turn things around for the better.

then i can mooch off the government and everything will be ok

then karl marx will resurrect from the grave and hand me a big shiny box of hopes and dreams and make all my wishes come true

but enough of that

i think as humans we must all strive to move forward and constantly be more progressive in our policies so we can achieve a better, more enjoyable and inhabitable world for everyone

if the gop stops this bill ima be really pissed. ill have to resort to raiding hospitals for the pills and care i need.

nahh.. actually if the gop stops the bill i'll move to italy and laugh at all u backwards americans while i eat spaghetti and work half as much as you do

Tyler Kehoe said...

Okay to clear up some of my points.
I did not mean to say socialism Paprocki. I was totally flawed in the comment because its a very touchy subject.
First, health care reform is needed. No insurance company should ever deny someone based on previous medical conditions. Its not their fault(most of the time).
Second, I believe in equal Opportunity; not outcome. Before all of your hair starts on fire, let me explain. EVERY single American should have the opportunity to recieve health insurance at a reasonable price (this means to what they can afford with there net income) and recieve what they get out it. If they chose not to put anything in to the system and then scramble to get something out and cant, then there is a problem. There is certain situations that really are cases of hard-working people who cant afford health insurance or are denied by insurance agencys; those are the people who deserve health care.
Third. Maybe we are on a whole new level of what really fixing the health care system is. 31% of adults are obese and 20% people smoke. Now guess how many of those are WITHOUT health insurance? close to 25%. (23. 59)(ABC NEWS) A absurd number. (I could right a research paper on this)

Finally, sorry paprocki about socialism you beat me there. Alex is right in saying there is a grey area and thats exactly where this bill needs to go. It needs to start some reform. Even republicans think change is needed, maybe the change just needs to come more slowly.

morgank said...

Seeing as they did lose the senate seat the Democrats probably are worried about what they will do now especially in regards to a filibuster and passing the healthcare bill. The fact that a Republican won in a very democratic region sends the Democrats a hint that they will have to change up their policies and everything a bit if they want to be re-elected during midterms.

j.polinski said...

of course their hair should be on fire. Hopefully this garbage of an idea for health care reform will finally be put to rest. Instead of complaining about not having health care, get off your lazy butt, stop getting a welfare check, get a job (Mcdonalds always need people to flip burgers) and get some health care.

nsomers said...

Yes I think that the Democrats should be worried that they lost the seat in the Senate. As many people mentioned earlier this will most likely effect the healtcare bill, especially since Brown is said to favor strengthening the private insurance system.

Ryan Paprocki said...


That's all it took. But to summarize;

Fascism = Republicans [(nationalism, anti-multiculturalism, authoritarianism, and that tradition should be obeyed over logic and reason) and you agree with these things?]

Socialism = A society ruled by the working class (and you don't want anything like this?)

There's one reason why our mixed economy (we are capitalist/socialist) survives and it's because socialism has to keep bailing capitalism out.