Three selected paragraphs from a WSWS article on the Senate race:

Under the undemocratic US two-party system, there is no reflection of the leftward-moving views and aspirations of the broad masses. If the people of Massachusetts were actually voting in a referendum on an even minimally progressive healthcare program--say, the expansion of Medicare to cover every American--there is little doubt they would approve it by a massive majority. Obama gives them no such choice. ...

At least in the short term, the mass disappointment and growing anger toward Obama and the Democrats redounds to the advantage of the Republicans. The perverse peculiarity of the US two-party system is that no matter how often voters express their desire for progressive change, the candidates once in office discard their campaign promises and ignore the views of the voters, in order to serve the interests of the financial-corporate elite. However bitter the internecine rivalry between the two parties, there is little in the way of substantive differences dividing them.

The fact that the Democrats have so much difficulty beating, and could even lose to a run-of-the-mill right-wing politician in the most liberal US state is a testimony to their bankruptcy and political duplicity.

Initially, I supported Coakley because of her excellent record on domestic violence and child abuse, but when I met her in person, and heard what she had to say, I was bowled over.

Those who think that passioante progressive Coakley is no better than Brown have been infected with the "Bush is Gore" viral mindset, which resulted in the death of millions.

A Coakley win, even a narrow one, would problaby be seen by Obama and Congressonal leaders as affirmation of their policies and politics.  Positive reinforcement of negative behavior is a dangerous thing.  It might mean for Democrats winning the battle (Mass Senate) and losing the war (Nov elections).

We live in a world where all things military, prosecutorial, police etc are reflexively viewed as sacred and presumptively to be accepted whatver the proposition might be.  Another prosecutor, general or flag-waving war-hawk in power is nearly always dissappointing to me.  Folks in these professions or with these beliefs are all too human, often espousing "patriotic," "moral," or "tough on crime" positions simply to scare and then pander to fearful voters.  Not anything readers here don't already know, but the cumulative effect of these pols continues to eviscerate our Constitutional republic.