Baylorguy
"Oh, now he's a philosophizer"
"I don't buy the whole argument that out of staters don't have access to the same information you do about politics. You don't have an amazing revelation reserved only for the state of MA."
You may have access to information about where Scott Brown stands on hot issues like gov't spending, war, and health care based on the internet or on national news channels like FOX or CNN, MSNBC, etc. but did you get to see all the attack ad's put on by both parties non stop? Were you solicited for votes non stop for the last 2 weeks via annotated voice msg's? Did you get the news from BOSTON based news stations who interviewed the candidates about themselves about where they grew up and the towns they live in currently?...aka how the represent the people of MA - BS both are wealthy and don't worry about forclosure, paying the bills, and getting loans to pay for their children's education. (yes Scott Brown's town of Wrentham is a bit run down, but not where he lives) (Yes martha lives in a well to do town so she doesn't have a clue about joe the plumber's problems). Did your information tell you about the 4 democrats and 2 republicans that started the race? I bet they only covered the final 2 dem vs rep. Did you know it was discovered that Brown's party had ballots already filled out for him and gave them to voters? Why is it a huge deal a republican won in MA, because we traditionally vote democrat does not mean we are always democrat (Mitt Romney?) In fact the democrats have themselves to thank for losing the public vote of confidence here (chuck turner, sal dimaisi, diane wilkerson, deval patick.. want to tell me about them?). As I said, Brown won because he had a better run campaign, it has less to do with health care reform and Obama's agenda than you think... Fact is he won independent votes and conservative democrats because he had a better campaign based on limiting gov't spending, creating jobs, increasing troops in afghanistan, AND reworking the health care bill, not killing it altogether... although fox news would have you believing differently! if you think the people of MA really are disenchanted with Obama and therefore voted Brown into the Senate because he blocks things Obama wants do you are very wrong. How about Bush's war of terror, where has that gotten us, oh yeah trillions of dollars in debt maybe, countless lives lost? Where have the golden parachutes gotten us? How about the Patriot Act, really seems that it worked at stopping richard reed, and that guy from Nigeria from getting on airplanes! I am not saying I agree with all the spending that's being done on capital hill now, nor am I saying I support everything Obama does. What I am saying is wise up if you think MA is such a raging liberal state and that Brown's win reflects what all of America thinks about Obama and his agenda. His win is really not that historic in MA more or less a deviation from the norm (lets see if we stay republican in 2 years, my guess no, although I wouldn't be surprised if a republican stayed on) and I will bet our next governor will be a republican who I'll probably vote for...just because he is a republican that won by a small margin in what has been a traditionally democratic state doesn't make it a huge historic event... Brown ran a better campaign, had a better debate, caught fire last week, and won by 5%...coakly didn't do anything to better her campaign until it was too late nor did she have the same fire or appeal to blue collar workers and business executives that Brown did. its really that simple, she tanked and wasn't a good choice for the democrats, where as Brown caught lighting in a bottle and campaigned hard in the suburbs where he needed to (yes he did win teddy's old district too).
Hopefully you will pardon me if I miss some of your post, but it is way too much of a headache to read the whole thing in the largest paragraph of all time
Everything you said is true in that you experienced it first hand, but the general methods of campainging and election do not change... and a few college classes in polictal science will give you plenty of knowledge to understand the implications of everything you just mentioned.
It IS historic. 1972... read it... almost 40 years. What do you define as historic?
As to the Patriot Act and other general claims, how can you even quantify if it worked or not? The concept is not invalidated just because you throw a few instances out where it failed. Nothing is perfect.
As to your statement of fox news. I could very easily flip it the other way and say you probably get most of your info from CNN. Truth is I read both liberal and conservative opinions and then I do fact checks. I NEVER believe ANYTHING at face value until I have given it thought.
Phil