Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Final Senate debate OPEN THREAD

By

No live blog tonight, just an open thread.  Have at it!

UPDATE: Here’s my takeaway (from the comments below):

I’d give the win to Capuano tonight.

Coakley and Khazei both had some very good moments, so they tie for second.  Pagliuca was the clear loser — angry for no good reason, making silly “death panel” statements, and getting his facts very wrong on Coakley’s position on financial regulation.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

    • was Khazei IMHO.  It is irresponsible to refuse to fund troops that the president has put in the field.  Once they’re there, we have to pay for them or we’re hanging them out to dry.  So if he sends them, we all should pay for them, and that means a tax.

  4. Martha makes an apt comparison between Vietnam and Afghanistan in that in neither situation did we have a strong partner from the country of conflict  

    • Pagliuca is not going to win this race on Capuano’s health care record so that part is weird…

      <

      p>Glad to see the Coakley people are back, glad to have you!

  7. (Then its magic circle time.  Everyone comment on Mike.)  

    <

    p>Martha takes the bait. Delivers some lights jabs at Mike.

    <

    p>Khazei says Mike is WYSIWYG what you see is what you get. Then talks about himself.

    <

    p>Pags says WYSIWYG.  Cap for health care in spite of Spupitts.

  9. She is absolutely right on point  about eliminating good candidates because of the ridiculous media scrutiny.  Martha’s so so articulate and comfortable in her own skin.  

  10. huge loss of privacy for individuals, thinks that background relating to competence is fair game, idea that everyone is subject to 24/7 news works against bringing good people to government  

    • Obama has changed the way he deals with other countries after 8 years of what we got with Bush – time will tell if Obama lives up to the virtues of the peace prize  

  13. on the Obama peace prize question.  He was the only one who seemed at all conversant with the major foreign policy issues of the day.

    • historically the cooperation between federal guidelines and state enforcement and adaption is the balance of our legal system…certainly the two are not mutually exclusive, no exception to federal regulation  

    • This is from her financial white paper:

      <

      p>

      As a result of my experience as Attorney General, I know that any regulatory reforms undertaken at the federal level must take into account the role states play in this process, and allow states to enforce laws and regulations free from federal preemption. I will continue to fight against preemption of state enforcement because I strongly believe that state regulators and Attorneys General must have the ability to combat unfair and deceptive acts by national banks.

      <

      p>She’s talking about preemption, which means the states are completely disabled from doing anything.  Coakley wants the states to have the ability to enforce either federal standards, or, presumably, more stringent state standards.  But she has never, as far as I know, urged that the feds abdicate authority to the states.

  16. It’s unique and I think he’d be better off if he didn’t seem so dimissive- that was a good answer.  

  18. then we’ll have to keep the money  because he doesn’t accept PAC or fundraiser money.  

    <

    p>Coakley wins the Khaz question on campaign funds – dumb question, what’s he’s asking for is already provided for.

  19. He has big money donors from his years of gathering funds- Bloomberg, Tisch and the Hollywood crowd.  If he didn’t have them and a vast network he’d not be so bold.   He wouldn’t be where he is without $$$ .  It’s a sad, sad fact.

    • He’s not taking a stand against special interests, he’s taking a stand against the fact that they aren’t backing him. And what was with his response to being called out about the hedge fund managers fundraising for him? Something about Spock? And I thought dodging the question wa Martha’s speciality.

  20. I’m all debate’d out, so thanks for summarizing it.  Glad to know from the Coakley fans that Coakley is doing great, while the Capuano backers inform me that Capuano is doing great, and the Khazei folks tell me that he’s doing great.

    <

    p>On second thought, I regret missing the debate because it seems that they’re all having a great one.

  21. to expand on answers and seem Senatorial. Re: Patriot Act (Think he can do this for more than one hour at a time?)

  23. So what I got from that is: both of them think there are some good things and bad things in the Patriot Act. For Caps, the bad outweighs the good and he won’t vote for it. Coakley won’t vote for it, either, until the bad stuff is fixed. Where’s the beef? That played out a lot like the whole Stupak Pitts thing from a couple weeks ago.

    • becuase it was a horible bill that rolled back 4th Amendment rights and habeus corpus.  Even Martha agreed with him on that.  Hard to see how you can claim Capuano blwe it.  

    • Pags went into this obviously trying to get Capuano into a shit fight. Problem is for him it is like taking a knife to a gun fight, one that Capuano has to avoid.  

  26. Cap sounds particularly pissed off tonight.  I guess I would be too if I had to spend all my time arguing with the guy coming in last when he’s trying to pull ahead of Coakley.

  30. but he creeps me out with his holier than thou attitude in this campaign-
    Martha hit him on the big money from his big donors-  

    • Sometimes I’m afraid I’m the only one who finds Khazei really off-putting.  To me, he consistently comes across as patronizing, and I honestly don’t like listening to him talk.

      • Especially to working people and their concerns. The typical liberal elitist if you ask me.  

  31. who want to contribute to campaigns, who aren’t celebrities, hedge fund managers, or clebrities. hell yeah martha coakley!

  34. Pagliuca responding to the question about campaign contributions.  Regarding giving contribution to the Clinton campaign…

    <

    p>“He captivated me at the Charles Hotel.”

      • Cap is bringing it in a debate format and has done very well. Martha again is cool and calm. When it comes to debating a bill in conference she is going to get tossed aside.

  39. He’s finishing 4th next Tuesday.  

    <

    p>I’m looking forward to the breakdown of dollars spent per vote.  

  41. all quite likeable

    <

    p>martha c – so safe.  why not?  can’t lose v 3-man field.  

    <

    p>alan k – good answers.  knows facts.  not this time around.  

    <

    p>mike c – small gaffe: laughs at pags joke, then 30 seconds later “can i answer without Pags yelling at me?”  huh?  but also guy you’d most want to drink with.  

    <

    p>steve p – who talked him into this?  gabrieli loves/loved policy.  mitt has hair and charisma.  steve?  

    <

    p>* * *

    <

    p>i think nobody changed mind watching this debate.  martha c didn’t pull many undecideds but didn’t need to…they ain’t gonna show up anyway.  

    <

    p>

  42. Martha with her “keep children and elderly people safe.” Sure but I think the same focus should be taken to kepp all American citicens civil rights safe.  That’s where the threat has been and continues to be. That, and threat of unaccountable exeecutive branch.  She’s off key with her children and old people frame. It’s way too narrow.  

  43. Coakley and Khazei both had some very good moments, so they tie for second.  Pagliuca was the clear loser — angry for no good reason, making silly “death panel” statements, and getting his facts very wrong on Coakley’s position on financial regulation.

      • photo finish for second with Coakley and Khazei PLACE and SHOW and Pags finishing a distant 4th.

        • Should ask for a refund. He should also fire whomever was responsible for the silly Sarah Palin comment, that was just stupid.  

          • That seemed WAY to off the cuff to be scripted, he just threw it in.  Now I know Pags isn’t a politician, but if he thought it was a zinger, he would’ve timed it better.  That was just him reaching.

    • I think Capuano’s going to be remembered for fighting with the guy who’s going to finish fourth in this race. Whatever good points he might have made on the issues were overshadowed by his temperament, and also his inability to land a punch on Coakley.

      <

      p>I think Khazei was exposed a bit tonight. His question on financial disclosures made him look hopefully naive.

      <

      p>I think Coakley clearly won last night’s debate — she dominated the other’s on health care. Tonight is less clear, but I think she wins by staying out of the fray again. I can’t believe none of the other candidates went after her.

      • Coakley “wins” by laying low and taking no risks.  That’s not really what I look for in a legislator.

  44. Coakley and Capuano know their stuff Khazei and Pags (outside of finance) not so much.  They really can’t go deep into a coversation, Khazei pretty much sat out of the financial industry conversation (I hope he took notes, he might learn something).

    <

    p>Reminds me of a newer employee who presents well but we need to send them out with a staff member how knows what they are doing as backup.

  45. He does raise a good point to Khazei, is it self serving?  Is BMG PAC evil?  How does that compare to his Bloomberg hosted party with big whigs to get hundreds of thousands of dollars, are they buying influence?  Things are not as cut and dry as Khazei seems to put it.  If the information is public for everyone to see is it bad?  Good question.

    • If he takes money from any PAC, he might as well take money from every PAC. If we want special interests out of elections, it means taking NO special interest money, no matter how fair and good the PAC may be.

      • Everyone has their own special interest.

        <

        p>The whole “no money from lobbyists and PACs” line is far more show than substance, in my opinion. Contributions from the spouses of lobbyists but not lobbyists; bundled gifts from groups of employees of the same company, but not from the firm’s PAC. It may be better than nothing, but not much, and certainly not as much as either Obama or Khazei suggest.

    • Individuals can only contribute the individual federal limit of $2400/election –whether a billionaire or minimum-wage worker.

      <

      p>PACs can give double that amount.

      <

      p>Thus, a candidate like Coakley could get $2400 from Rupert Murdoch directly, and $20,000 more from Rupert Murdoch via 4 PACs to which he and his employees “contribute.”

      <

      p>Because he does not accept PAC money, Khazei would need to persuade 9 billionaires to contribute the maximum just to match what Coakley could get from exercising that irresistable “babe factor” on a single Murdoch and his fat PACs.

      <

      p>That was Phillips doing a lame George Will impersonation….

  46. think Martha Coakley is Foxey and HOTT, isn’t Martha the real Sarah Palin? (except Martha has brains Sarah Palin never had although her supporters argue she does.)

    <

    p>Post debate Broadside review.

  47. The conventional wisdom seems to be that no slip-ups or game-changers means that it is a win for Coakley.  

    <

    p>My question is: in a race like this, is no real good news for Coakley bad news for Coakley?

    <

    p>In terms of big endorsements and commentary, everything is shifting to Capuano and Khazei.  

    <

    p>With the amount of undecideds and the apparent momentum shift over the past two weeks, can a fine performance (but not a clear win) for Coakley really be considered a win tonight?  

  48. Of course I think Capuano was the winner. We’ll know very soon who the winner is.  Can’t believe the primary is 6 days away. Yikes!  This is such an important election.

    • Outside of BMG very few people care. I see Khazei finishing behind Pags actually because nobody is watching the debates or reading the papers. My dad still doesn’t realize who he is and he keeps up with the news pretty well. He also decided to back Coakley day one and that hasn’t changed either to my chagrin. I think coming out early and not waiting for the Kennedy’s might have been the best move she made. In a special its better to be the front runner. Caps biggest problem is that this was never a two person race, the progressives that ought to be backing him are going to be throwing their votes away on Khazei.  

      • the progressives that ought to be backing {Capuano} are going to be throwing their votes away on Khazei.

        • Looking at her conflicting stances on the death penalty, the Patriot Act, and civil liberties in general it seems to be that unlike Senator Kennedy, Coakley will not be a True Compass on progressive issues.  

Archives