Hey, there! Log in / Register

Somebody is doing polls designed to see if Joe Kennedy should take on Ed Markey

ComonWealth reports on some expensive polling going on right now.



Nothing like pondering potential platform minutiae of a deep blue race in a deep blue state to get a jump on fracturing democrats before arguably the most pivotal election in this nation's history.


Markey is probably the most useless politician to ever represent MA. Joe, Jr. seems to do his job and not simply coast on the family name. It would be better if Markey retired to his home in Maryland and let someone else do the job he really isn't.


A lot. But Democratic infighting is distracting especially right now.

Our attention spans are shot, and we're already fatigued over an election not even here yet.

Markey should just retire, imo

Most useless?

Please elaborate.

the most pivotal election in this nation's history

Has there ever been a Presidential election that was not considered super-pivotal?


Not in my lifetime, no.


Or 2008 for that matter? Heck, what about 2016?

I do believe that 2000, 1996, 1992, 1988, 1984, 1980, and 1976 were also considered the most pivotal in history at the time. I was 1 year old for the 1972 elections, but it was also probably considered, in some quarters, the most pivotal in history at the time. 1932?

Of course, then there was the 1860 election. I'd bet anything that if you got a panel of experts together, that was probably the most pivotal, unless they get very serious and start talking about the elections of 1796, 1828, and 1832.

But yeah, people should vote next year. And this year, but I know no one cares about municipal elections.


To me this was still the most pivotal. On a broad scale, it decided whether we were going to be proactive or reactive to climate change.

So many other races to put time and $$ into... now is not the time for this.

they are saving lil joe for 2024. all they have to do now is keep him from flipping over a jeep and paralyzing someone, drunk skiing into a tree, banging the babysitter in a vodka tent or drowning a helpless woman in a shallow body of water.

american royalty. lol


It was bad wasn't it?

The crap they got away with back then was nuts.

Just glad we learned from it and now demand more from the families of our Commander in Ch-....oh...er.....nevermind.


What was worse back then was that the newspapers and authorities actively helped the politicians cover up blatant crimes. The internet and cell phones have made it exceptionally difficult unless someone goes to Harvey Weinstein lengths to bury it or has the DoJ covering for them as a confidential informant like Jeffrey Epstein.


Seems our much maligned "MSM" does plenty of water-carrying and deflecting for Dear Leader.

And the more i think about it, im not sure if it was any better or worse back then. I mean, we still dont know what's on those tapes, pics, and CD's that Epstein kept under lockdown on his island.

We're at a point in history that "4 dead in O-hi-o" seems like a quaint nursery rhyme, so nothing really shocks me anymore

Demographics of respondents to these live polls now have to be questioned. Who these days answers calls from unknown numbers and even if answering would endure 15 minutes of questioning ?

One pollster tried it with me, but started by saying my first name. Did they seriously think I would give out any information after acknowledging the possibility the responses could be linked to me personally ?

And the difference between the two would be (except age)?


In 1946, after entering a race for an open seat in the U.S. House of Representatives, future President John F. Kennedy used a creative tactic to muster an electoral advantage. A popular candidate in the race was Boston City Councilor Joe Russo. To siphon support from Russo, the Kennedy campaign persuaded and bankrolled a custodian domiciled in the district with no political experience or political aspirations to enter the race. His name was also Joe Russo. The City Councilor Joe Russo complained that someone had “seen fit to buy out a man who has the same name as mine.” But the city councilor had no recourse. John F. Kennedy won the race. -- HuffPost

If a Kennedy-Markey race emerges, don't be surprised to see the Kennedy's pull out one of their old dirty tricks from the family playbook by entering a second Ed Markey or perhaps Marky Edward. Just enough to confuse the elderly and non-English speaking voters like they did in '46. BTW, on the same weekend that the Kennedy's planned a funeral with Joe III as pallbearer, I think the poll could have waited a week. No shame whatsoever.


1946 was a different time. MA had a 50/50 healthy political party affiliation split which required competition for votes. Dirty tricks like that aren't needed anymore in super majority machine politics.


1. Reaching back to a 1946 House race? For something that 100% WON'T happen in 2020? How is that relevant?

2. The poll was in the field before the death of the young woman.

3. There's no evidence as to who commissioned the poll, certainly none that you've presented.

4. You'd know a lot about shamelessness, wouldn't you?


How about Marky Mark give it a run too?


Ah, Mr. Burns running against Smithers.

You can't wait another six years for Markey to retire, and maybe build up more of a record of your own?