Scott Brown Wins
So Scott Brown won in Massachusetts. I am shocked. Having lived there for nearly three years and knowing the temperature there, I'm surprised. I honestly think that Coakley lost because she's a moron and insulted Red Sox Nation and the Everyman. Parts of Massachusetts are very "everyman." I would say that outside of Harvard and Government Center it's very blue color. I think she insulted those folks.
Do I think this is a consensus on Massachusetts opinion of President Obama? Not necessarily. I think people are opposed to his policies (specifically I mean Health Care and Cap and Trade), but most people still like him and if faced with the 2008 election again, they would vote for him again (had they voted for him initially).
So I'm not sure that people going to the polls felt like they were voting against Obama. I think they may have been voting against a super majority. Because traditionally, I think most people do not like a unilateral party in complete control. I think people like debate and did not like the Democrats super majority. But again, that could be me projecting.
But where do we go from here? Well Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are apopoleptic right now. And they have the tough choice of angering the voters by not seating Brown until the vote is passed, angering the voters by taking the health care bill via reconciliation, and I forget the third method ... maybe there are just two.
First - they can't not seat him. There are already lawyers getting ready to sue that he's seated within the next few days. Massachusetts law is very clear here.
The second one is much more likely. And likely to cost many Dems there seats. All of the elections this year are now up for grabs. Most noteably (oh contain my glee) Barbara Boxer's seat out in California (oh would that it were so!). I don't even know that she has to lose, as long as she has to campaign and work for it.
My thoughts on the election:
1 - it's good because the super majority is gone. But ...
2 - Dems should rest easy because I don't know everything about Brown, but I imagine he's a pretty progressive conservative, a la Olympia Snowe. However, when it comes to Health Care specifically, they are in trouble. Because the people don't like the bill under consideration, and they don't like the way the process / debate has gone forward. This vote for Scott Brown I think illustrates how angry people are with the process.
3 - Coakley was a moron. And the Dems took Ted Kennedy for granted. They thought he had kept that seat because he was a Democrat. Not so. He had that seat because he was him. With him gone, people were not going to just hand it over to any old Democrat just because they had a D behind their name.
I'm happy. The world is still a scary place. But today I'm happy.
Do I think this is a consensus on Massachusetts opinion of President Obama? Not necessarily. I think people are opposed to his policies (specifically I mean Health Care and Cap and Trade), but most people still like him and if faced with the 2008 election again, they would vote for him again (had they voted for him initially).
So I'm not sure that people going to the polls felt like they were voting against Obama. I think they may have been voting against a super majority. Because traditionally, I think most people do not like a unilateral party in complete control. I think people like debate and did not like the Democrats super majority. But again, that could be me projecting.
But where do we go from here? Well Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are apopoleptic right now. And they have the tough choice of angering the voters by not seating Brown until the vote is passed, angering the voters by taking the health care bill via reconciliation, and I forget the third method ... maybe there are just two.
First - they can't not seat him. There are already lawyers getting ready to sue that he's seated within the next few days. Massachusetts law is very clear here.
The second one is much more likely. And likely to cost many Dems there seats. All of the elections this year are now up for grabs. Most noteably (oh contain my glee) Barbara Boxer's seat out in California (oh would that it were so!). I don't even know that she has to lose, as long as she has to campaign and work for it.
My thoughts on the election:
1 - it's good because the super majority is gone. But ...
2 - Dems should rest easy because I don't know everything about Brown, but I imagine he's a pretty progressive conservative, a la Olympia Snowe. However, when it comes to Health Care specifically, they are in trouble. Because the people don't like the bill under consideration, and they don't like the way the process / debate has gone forward. This vote for Scott Brown I think illustrates how angry people are with the process.
3 - Coakley was a moron. And the Dems took Ted Kennedy for granted. They thought he had kept that seat because he was a Democrat. Not so. He had that seat because he was him. With him gone, people were not going to just hand it over to any old Democrat just because they had a D behind their name.
I'm happy. The world is still a scary place. But today I'm happy.
Comments