Chatting on Mass. Senate, Citizens United and professional wrestling
We spent an hour chatting live online today about what Sen.-elect Scott Brown's (R) victory on Tuesday means for health care and the 2010 elections, the impact of the Supreme Court's ruling yesterday on the Citizens United case and, in one of the biggest non sequiturs you will ever find, the best professional wrestlers of all time.
A few of our favorite questions and answers are below. You can always check out the full chat transcript and set a date with us every Friday morning from 11 am to noon.
Richmond, VA: How do you factor in the Supreme Court decision yesterday into November's races? Do you think some seats that looked safe will now be more vulnerable if a large corporate or union interest decides it's in it's better interest to dump obscene amounts of money into a candidate?
Thx. Dunkin Donuts regular..
Chris Cillizza: Love it.
Nothing better than a cruller and cup of Dunkin. Man I miss the northeast sometimes.
On the SCOTUS ruling, I think the basic effect will be to take power in campaigns away from candidates and party committees and hand it to outside interest groups.
While candidates and party committees have to abide by contribution limits, corporations and unions can now use unlimited sums of money to DIRECTLY advocate for the election or defeat of a candidate.
That is HUGE. (In the past, they could only run so-called "issue" ads, advocating for a particular issue but not directly asking for voters to cast a ballot for or against a candidate.)
What it means is there will be HUGE amounts of money poured into campaign ads during this campaign. HUGE.
Anonymous: I was in the camp of "This is a national election"
For one, because of electoral college, even the race for U.S. President isn't a national election.
But the more and more I read about Martha Coakley's campaign, the more I think she deserve more and more of the blame. This was a woman who polled her chances of winning before Edward M. Kennedy had died and the announced she was running with 2 weeks of his death. That put of the Kennedy family and the Democratic establishment.
Boston talk radio was in the bag for Scott Brown and he pretty much got 24 advertising from them while only one show. Coakley didn't spend a penny on advertising in Latino or Black media markets. She didn't call Boston Mayor Menino or any of the U.S. Representatives until a week before Election Day. And there are rumors that Mayor Menino purposely kept quiet on the race, not because she was going to lose, but he wanted her to lose.
Chris Cillizza: I DO think Coakley ran a poor campaign -- sort of hard to dispute that.
But, I think to say the President and his agenda had NOTHING to do with the race is beyond implausible.
Scott Brown ran overtly as a check and balance to the Obama agenda in Washington; at his victory speech people were chanting "41" to signify his status as the vote that kept Democrats from a filibuster proof majority.
In a race that draws as much national attention and money as this one did, there's no ONE thing that causes a candidate to win or lose.
Arlington: Hulk Hogan is clearly the #1 wrestler. As the French would say, come on now.
Chris Cillizza: Dude could not wrestle a lick. The leg drop as a finishing move? COME ON.
My top 3: 1. Flair 2. Bret Hart 3. Shawn Michaels
January 22, 2010; 6:00 PM ET
Categories: Fix Notes
Save & Share: Previous: Five myths about the Massachusetts Senate election
Next: Plouffe stepping up role as adviser to White House
Posted by: crrobin | January 23, 2010 6:42 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: 37thand0street | January 23, 2010 12:16 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: Moonbat | January 23, 2010 8:46 AM | Report abuse
Posted by: douglaslbarber | January 22, 2010 11:02 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: DDAWD | January 22, 2010 10:08 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | January 22, 2010 8:21 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: broadwayjoe | January 22, 2010 7:52 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: DDAWD | January 22, 2010 6:26 PM | Report abuse
The comments to this entry are closed.