[ClearCase_guy]

Agreed. I am a MA resident and within my state, Scott Brown and Mitt Romney are seen as zealous rightwing extremists who hate poor people and want rich people to pay no taxes.

I voted for Scott Brown last time.
Elizabeth Warren is worse than Scott Brown.
But Scott Brown has shown himself to be undeserving of my vote. He'll have to get elected without my vote in November, because I don't vote for leftists, and I don't vote for the lesser of two evils. I oppose evil, I don't support it.

Same goes for Mitt.

[Verginius Rufus]

I don’t know if Mitt can get to 270 electoral votes without Massachusetts. Nixon managed to in 1972, but it was a squeaker.

[sportutegrl]

If Scott Brown’s win puts the Senate in the GOP’s hands, it will be enough.

[shiva]

I don't vote for leftists, and I don't vote for the lesser of two evils. I oppose evil, I don't support it.

By not voting you certainly do.

If you do not vote, you can't complain in here, or anywhere for that matter, on the results of the election.

[The Angry American]

When your only realistic option is to vote for the lesser of 2 evils you vote for the lesser evil. The control of the U.S. senate is at stake. As a staunch conservative Romney is my least favorite candidate. Will I vote for him or waste my vote by voting for an unelectable 3rd party candidate thereby helping the democrats? I will vote for Romney. There’s too much at stake to allow the democrats to continue to screw up this country.

[from occupied ga]

vote your conscience. One vote more or less for Romney in MA isn’t going to change things, FL would be another matter