Does anyone think this helps the Democrat?

With the Massachusetts Senate seat unexpectedly in play, Democrats are weighing alternative scenarios for passing a health bill without their filibuster-proof majority.

. . . One liberal Democrat, Rep. Anthony Weiner (D., N.Y.), said many lawmakers have decided that, if she [the democratic U.S. senate candidate in Massachusetts, Coakley] loses, the party would have no choice but to cram a plan through as quickly as possible, while working to delay Mr. Brown's arrival to the Senate.

"We're going to have to finish this bill and then stall the swearing-in as long as possible," Mr. Weiner said. "That's our strategy, a hurry-up-and-stall strategy."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703959804575007592511058472.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

Does anyone think the Democratic candidate is helped by publicly announcing your intent to thwart the will of the people by denying the seat to the "wrong" winner and ignoring the verdict of the voters?