U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Massachusetts
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 02-21-2012, 12:16 PM
 
1,041 posts, read 1,199,101 times
Reputation: 1207

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by steve1282 View Post
Massachuetts is not as liberal as everone thinks. Its really independant just the far left runs the dems there and the mods go along. Warren has no chance of winning. I wouldnt be suprised if Obama lost the state
No chance of winning seems a bit strong. The only thing I would put money on would be the race being with 5 points, probably even less, when all is said and done. It will surely be a close Senate race and I'm willing to bet it comes down to ground game, and who can actually get people to the polls. If Romney is the nominee then things could be very interesting on a Presidential level, but I don't see Santorum or Newt carrying Massachusetts

 
Old 02-21-2012, 02:10 PM
 
2,474 posts, read 1,329,216 times
Reputation: 1203
Mass I wouldn't say is the most liberal state..that would be vermont (just don't look at the gun laws). If we were really to the left we would have raised the income taxes and lowered the sales..we actually did the opposite.

Most of the people in mass are actually independents. Republicans are a small amount and pretty much can't do much on their own. If the democrats tick off the independents then it's off.

Warren made some serious mistakes in her ads that are haunting her.
Her ad is well..it's hypocritical. She fought against big banks (wall st) ok..and says "we got it" about this new Consumer Finance Protection Agency

United States Consumer Financial Protection Bureau - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ok and that references a site saying this

"Here is a profile of the new watchdog unit, called for under Wall Street reforms that were written into law in July.

WIDE POWERS

The bureau will write and enforce rules for banks and other firms, aiming to protect consumers from deceptive and abusive loans and other financial products and services.

It will be able to conduct examinations of banks and seek information from other firms about consumer-related business.

It will monitor and report on markets for consumer financial goods and services, ranging from payday loans to check cashing shops, and how consumers interact with them.

It will collect and track consumer complaints about these markets through a toll-free telephone number and a website.

In doing its work, the bureau will consolidate existing consumer protection programs now scattered across several agencies widely criticized for doing a poor job in the past."

Fair enough..pretty simple to understand.

"INDEPENDENT UNIT

The bureau will be an independent unit located inside and funded by the Federal Reserve, the country’s central bank. The financial reform law allows the agency to be formed on an interim basis within the U.S. Treasury.

The director must be nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate to a five-year term.

The bureau will have offices that are in charge of fair lending, financial education, armed services affairs, and financial protection for older Americans, among others."

Um...what? So it is located inside the Federal Reserve...funded by the federal reserve..um..
Member banks elect the directors of the Federal Reserve. This isn't conspiracy theory stuff this is what they say



"CHECKS AND BALANCES

The Financial Stability Oversight Council, an inter-agency group of regulators also set up under the new reforms, will have some power to block new regulations from the bureau.

A six-member board of experts from consumer protection, financial services and other fields — appointed on recommendation from the regional Federal Reserve Bank presidents — will advise the director."

Huh? OK so you mean to tell me that the FSOC has the power to block the CFPA..ok fine...BUT the FSOC like the CFPA is also under the Federal Reserve..ok so who's on this six member board of experts..

Bill Summary & Status - 111th Congress (2009 - 2010) - H.R.4173 - All Information - THOMAS (Library of Congress)
Financial Stability Oversight Council - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Um...so the chairman of the Federal Reserve is on the panel for the FSOC which checks against the CFPA which is inside the Federal Reserve and funded by them...

Basically we've created quasi government inside of quasi government.

It can be understandable when there are governmental organizations doing the same thing if it is under different branches (GAO and CBO). But this isn't...

The Fed is exempt from FOIA. It is easier to get information out of the CIA than them. Meetings are not open to the public, or congress or even the president. How is this transparency? How is anyone on these boards accountable to anyone when the decisions making process is not open. The concept of recalling anyone is not laid out. Impeachment is not an option and neither is election/reelection.

This goes beyond putting a fox in a henhouse. This is putting a hen house inside of a mouth of a fox.

Also Warren hasn't won the primary yet so it is early. The primary isn't even until September...quite a bit can happen in the next nine months. Personally I wish Alan Khazei would have stayed in since he's done quite a bit more for the area then Warren has done. Marisa DeFranco is a much better speaker and debater than Warren
WGBH News: Marisa DeFranco Says She Can Beat Elizabeth Warren

Warren thinks she's already won the primary and she's not even showing up at some of the events. Pulling a coakley apparently
Elizabeth Warren draws criticism from Democratic contenders for missing public forums | masslive.com If you don't campaign and don't show up you cannot win.The surge in Warren could be the surges we've seen with Bachman, Cain and Gingrich, a passing fad with little to show for it.
 
Old 02-21-2012, 02:45 PM
 
Location: Taxachusetts
13,615 posts, read 8,203,419 times
Reputation: 11248
Thank you, mdovell.
 
Old 02-21-2012, 07:16 PM
 
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
84 posts, read 98,038 times
Reputation: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hudlander View Post
Not meant to be a political thread, just wondering why Scott Brown is leading the polls?
MA is a very liberal state, this was Ted Kennedy's seat, this is the blue of blue regions. Why is it then that a republican tea party candidate is neck and neck at best and at worst 9 points ahead of a solid, competent liberal?

What is the rationale as to me this is akin to liberal winning in red Texas?

As of tonight they're pretty much neck and neck (only just read).

How Brown got into office is a confoundment. I hold out some good faith that Elizabeth Warren will prevail. At the very least her IQ is three digits rather than Brown's two.
 
Old 02-21-2012, 10:27 PM
 
Location: Dallas
588 posts, read 487,269 times
Reputation: 492
Quote:
Originally Posted by beth98 View Post
No chance of winning seems a bit strong. The only thing I would put money on would be the race being with 5 points, probably even less, when all is said and done. It will surely be a close Senate race and I'm willing to bet it comes down to ground game, and who can actually get people to the polls. If Romney is the nominee then things could be very interesting on a Presidential level, but I don't see Santorum or Newt carrying Massachusetts
I should've clarified that I think Romney will be the nominee. I think he can go into places and win states that are normally blue. The only reason mass was liberal was cuz of the kennedy's now their gone I think it will swing away from liberal policies. I left Boston a year ago for Dallas the grass is greener
 
Old 02-22-2012, 11:35 AM
 
10,107 posts, read 14,420,016 times
Reputation: 10240
In 2004, Kerry carried his own state by only 60 percent to Bush's 40 percent. I guess Brown looked more like an old-fashioned Republican moderate (a what?) than the bible-banging whack jobs that pass for many Republicans now. I know more than a few people who think they are "Teddy Roosevelt Republicans" or moderate Republicans or some such endangered species, and Brown would appeal to them
I sincerely hope that anyone who would vote for someone because of looks couldn't actually be bothered to vote at all. Look at what percentage of Americans don't vote at all.
I remember idiots I work with saying, "I'll vote for Palin, she's hot." I say, "Then call her up and hit on her. Don't vote for her."
 
Old 02-22-2012, 11:47 AM
 
1,041 posts, read 1,199,101 times
Reputation: 1207
Quote:
Originally Posted by brightdoglover View Post
I remember idiots I work with saying, "I'll vote for Palin, she's hot." I say, "Then call her up and hit on her. Don't vote for her."
I wish this was true but somehow I doubt it. I'm fairly certain my 90 year old grandma voted for Romney back when he was running for governor because he was good looking. Anyone else remember the commercial where he had his shirt off? I had a friend tell me they weren't voting for someone (I can't recall who) because their eyebrows were a mess and if they couldn't figure out how to wax their eyebrows how could they run the state. Sometimes I wonder if high voter turn out is actually a good thing.
 
Old 02-22-2012, 01:06 PM
 
259 posts, read 357,387 times
Reputation: 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finocchio View Post
As of tonight they're pretty much neck and neck (only just read).

How Brown got into office is a confoundment. I hold out some good faith that Elizabeth Warren will prevail. At the very least her IQ is three digits rather than Brown's two.
do you have some solid details to back that up, or is this just one of those mindless "democrat down the line without any thought" comments?
 
Old 02-22-2012, 03:06 PM
 
2,919 posts, read 2,223,651 times
Reputation: 2001
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finocchio View Post
How Brown got into office is a confoundment..
It was a matter of the better candidate winning. Keep in mind that he won by less that 10 points (only because of all the sheeple with their partisan blinders on who also keep voting in dead weight like Barney Frank and Tierney). Any other state Brown would have won with like 80% of the vote. Coakley was a loser, and still is.
 
Old 02-22-2012, 06:32 PM
 
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
84 posts, read 98,038 times
Reputation: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by brent s View Post
do you have some solid details to back that up, or is this just one of those mindless "democrat down the line without any thought" comments?
Had you been less rude in your reply to my post I'd have given you your "back up". But you weren't. So I won't.

What I find mindless is the anger that permeates the divided and hateful republican party.

Quote:
Originally Posted by massnative71
Coakley was a loser, and still is.
I'll comment on this portion of your reply only massnative. Martha Coakley is the best there is. I have personal association with her and she is an intelligent and caring representative of the people of this Commonwealth. When I say she "saved my life" I almost mean literally. Brown (with his Playgirl narcissistic background and small fist to cover his small privates) is a deer in the headlights. Never a more vacuous individual have I watched. Small wonder Warren's going to wipe him out at the polls.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2011 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Massachusetts

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top