Brown lost the election because of all these uneducated voters came out, saw a D next to some woman's name and filled it in. That is MA for you.
Brown wins a special election because those folks who come out in droves for a presidential election don't otherwise.
I think this is more than a little unfair. While I agree that Brown lost because of the letter next to his name, I think the voting public were actually pretty well informed about this election. The problem was, the majority of MA voters were scared to death of having Republicans take control of the Senate.
This is the problem with Senate and to a lesser extent Congressional elections. Because so much is voted on party lines in those houses, and the balance of power can have such a huge effect on what gets done, party plays a much bigger role than even the presidential election, where I think the individual is taken much more into account.
I don't think it's unfair at all. More people come out for presidential elections to submit their American Idol like votes. In the process it gives anyone with a D next to their name here in MA an advantage.
Do you live in MA? Because speaking as someone who does my darndest to avoid political ads, etc. it was VERY hard to avoid this election. The market was saturated with information about Brown and Warren. The vast majority of people knew who they were voting for.
Yes, I live in MA and work in Boston. And let me tell you, I can't remember a race and ad campaign(s) LESS about the issues than this Warren/Brown race.
That's different than being uneducated. You are right that this election was all about the parties. But that doesn't mean people didn't know who or what they were voting for. They were voting for control of the Senate.
You were suggesting that living in this market and being saturated with information (ads ect.) somehow meant that people knew the issues. The vast majority did not, partially because the ads didn't address anything of substance. I learned that Scott Brown hates woman and that Elizabeth Warren lied about being an American Indian.
No, what I said is that they knew who they were voting for. Your original post (which was incredibly inflamatory towards everyone who voted for Warren IMO), suggested that the voters didn't even know who Warren was, just that she had a D next to her name.
I think plenty of people voted for Warren because she is a Democrat. But I don't think that means they are "uneducated".
It is not inflammatory. I think I was pretty squared away in making my point, but let me put it this way: Warren benefited from the increased number of uneducated voters that make their way out during the presidential election here in MA. If this were Texas I would be saying opposite and would be talking about how Brown benefitted.
Your point would be merit-less in either scenario without corroborating information. Your assumption that the vast majority of people who voted in this election that didn't vote in last election is conditional on 3 points:
1) That they are in fact, uninformed.
2) That they are in fact, more uninformed than the people who voted last time.
3) That they voted democrat.
You can't validate any 1 of those 3 points. You accusation is empirically baseless aside from the fact that more people voted.
And, on top of that, one would have to think that it was even more baseless considering Mass is the stat with the highest level of average educational attainment, and there is a clear correlation between educational attainment and voter knowledge.
I'm sure that some of the people who voted this time that chose not to vote last time were 'uninformed' (although, as Chris said, that's relatively impossible), but there is nothing to say that a larger part of those people were more uninformed this time than in a non-Presidential election cycle.