But even incompetence doesn't lose you a 30 point lead in less than two months, there was far more factored into this than just a poorly run campaign.
Coakley Was Too Stupid To Cheat!
- Thread starter Dixie - In Memoriam
- Start date
But even incompetence doesn't lose you a 30 point lead in less than two months, there was far more factored into this than just a poorly run campaign.
Do you really think the press release (not a memo) was written before the election or do you think they used a form press release and didn't change the fucking date because they were sloppy/incompetent shits that don't bother to proofread anything like the fact that they spelled Massachusetts wrong in an ad?
So, it's just a coincidence that the Sec. of State's office looked into it, and that there was a report of a ballot in Cambridge that had been pre-marked & voided?
But even incompetence doesn't lose you a 30 point lead in less than two months, there was far more factored into this than just a poorly run campaign.
It doesn't help matters much.
But even incompetence doesn't lose you a 30 point lead in less than two months, there was far more factored into this than just a poorly run campaign.
Is that because you want to believe there was more factored in, or because you have some hard facts to indicate more was factored in?
I think that the memo was written before any such "reports" came along, it fits with the previous memo talking about issuing releases of "fraud" long before there was any indication of any fraud...
I'm embarrassed that they suck at proofreading, but laugh at the stupidity.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Cambridge —
According to our news partner, WCVB, there were some reports of discrepancies at polling places, with Secretary of State William Galvin investigating reports that two ballots had been pre-marked for Scott Brown, one in Cambridge and one in Boston's Brighton neighborhood. He said the ballots had been located and voided.
The memo and this story, indicate the ballots were discovered the day of the election, at the polling places. It is never indicated this was something happening BEFORE election day, and as a matter of fact, if I am not at a polling precinct, I can hand you a ballot with ANYTHING marked on it... that is NOT a violation of election laws or any other law.
The amazing thing about this is, Coakley apparently knew of the election day shenanigans the day before the election... like maybe she had psychic ability and just KNEW that would happen the day before, so she prepared the memo!
It's because I analyze the available data and come up with a realistic opinion based on actual information.
You are deluded if you think it was solely because Coakley was bad at campaigning. Everybody looked past this election figuring it was a walk. Nobody seemed to consider how pissed off the independents were.
Or to ethical what? Go the spoils? The defeat, the victory? What???!!!
And how pissed they continue to be. The Democrats are like practising addicts. They never see their part and live in a constant state of denial.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Yes, they were too sloppy and incompetent to change the date! Seems that someone would have made sure if they were going to issue a memo charging election day voter fraud, they would have changed the date to that of the election!
Oh, I think there was more to it, but I also think she ran a shite campaign, and that they still would have squeaked out a win if she had even run a basically competent campaign.
Apparently, you don't think they started polling independents until recently...
No, I think she may have "squeaked" one out myself. I am still pleasantly surprised at Brown's victory. A week ago it was just a faint hope. Then I thought that Obama would get her one or two points and that would have been the margin.
Seriously, when a state that elected the President by a HUGE margin then turns that around that quickly it is a bit of a shock...
Apparently they were polling the wrong independents because she had a massive lead among them and lost it in just two months. It wasn't just due to Coakley. Bad candidates (like McCain) don't net you a loss of more than 30 points. They hurt, but not 30 points worth.
But Obama is still in the 53-55% approval rating range here in Mass. Granted, it's down from his 62% of the vote but it isn't all that bad considering.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Nooo.... It's not all that bad....
You just lost a senate seat held by a Kennedy for 40 years.
To a republican running on a Reagan/Bush platform.
In a state where D's outnumber R's by 3 to 1.
In a state Obama carried by 26 points.
I'm sure it's just a minor bump in the road, and the people just don't understand your message!
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Exactly... She ran a very strong campaign. The loss is CLEARLY due to Obama and Billy Clinton coming to town and blowing her lead for her. Totally a referendum on Obama.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Personally, I think they wrote this up due to the reports that absentee ballots had been pre-marked and they wanted to warn voters going to the polls to watch out for something similar. From what I read yesterday, there were two reported cases by absentee voters that claimed their ballots were already marked. From what I read, they did not indicate which candidate was already selected.
Coakley claimed it was Brown's campaign committing fraud (again, this is just what I read yesterday)
What I read (and what I received via email yesterday from the Coakley campaign) was that "several" voters received ballot pre-marked for Brown (there are reports of this happening in Cambridge and Brighton), that they weren't sure why they were pre-marked (no allegation of misconduct on the part of Brown's campaign), that they were looking into it and taking steps to address it and notifying voters to be on the lookout. Here is the text of the email I received at about 5:30 yesterday evening: