Fallout from Massachusetts Senate Election (Liberals wanted a Black JFK. Instead, they got a Black Jimmy Carter)
EDWARD M. Kennedy has been gone less than five months, but in political terms he is already ancient history. For 47 years he represented Massachusetts in the US Senate; in his home state, no one wielded greater influence or cast a longer shadow. As recently as a few weeks ago, it was taken for granted that the race for the seat he occupied for so long would be shaped unmistakably by his legacy.
But that’s not at all the way this campaign has worked out. As Tuesday’s special election approaches, Massachusetts voters are not being driven by their esteem for Kennedy’s memory or by affection for his family. Indeed, far from advancing what Kennedy called the cause of his life - universal health care - hundreds of thousands of Bay State voters are fired up in supporting a candidate who promises to derail it.
For the first time in two generations, the outcome of a US Senate campaign in Massachusetts is not a foregone conclusion. Whatever happens on Tuesday, this much is clear: Democrat Martha Coakley will not win in a cakewalk, and Republican Scott Brown will not be a sacrificial lamb. Heading into the final weekend, two of the country’s most respected political handicappers - Stu Rothenberg and Charlie Cook - pronounced the Bay State Senate contest a “toss-up.’’ A new Suffolk University poll showed Brown surging into the lead, with 50 percent of likely voters supporting him vs. 46 percent for Coakley.
How can this be happening? This is the bluest state of them all - a state without a single Republican in Congress or in statewide office, a state Barack Obama won in a landslide. How can the Senate race be too close to call?
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com …
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
No comments yet.
Leave a comment