Breakdown
January 20, 2010
Now that the dust is settling from Scott Brown’s victory yesterday, I’ve got a few thoughts to add to the analytical stew:
1. Massachusetts may not be as liberal as we think. That sounds like a no-brainer at this point, but I think at least part of this upset could (should?) have been predicted much earlier. Flashback to the 2008 Democratic primaries: Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, and Deval Patrick all endorsed far-left candidate Barack Obama. Massachusetts voters overwhelmingly chose the more centrist Hillary Clinton. That in itself doesn’t put the state in play for Republicans, but it does indicate that Massachusetts may belong to a more moderate breed of Democrats.
2. The timing of Brown’s surge seems to correlate to the series of midnight/weekend/holiday voting (and vote buying) on the healthcare legislation in the House and Senate. Given open debate and honest politicking, Massachusetts voters may have been willing to support it by electing Martha Coakley. Even they are furious with the way it’s been done thus far.
3. This may be an indication of another 1994-style Republican takeover brewing. Or, it could be the best thing to happen to Democrats. It’s up to them. If Coakley had won, the healthcare takeover would have been a sure thing, and the voter ire we saw in Massachusetts would have boiled over nationwide, assuring a repeat of 1994. If Democrats are sincere about revisiting the product and the process, they may be able to turn the boil into a simmer and have a greater chance of retaining control of one or both houses in November.
4. Republicans are looking for ways to replicate Brown’s victory this November. This scares me. Seriously, I’m going to have nightmares about hundreds of wannabe candidates buying pickup trucks for their upcoming campaigns. The GOP is a lot like the music industry in that, if they find something that works once, they figure it will work a thousand times, so they try to replicate it in cookie-cutter fashion. There are lessons that can be learned and tactics that can be adopted (with some tweaking), but the end results will have to be organic to be successful.
5. The NFL Championships are this weekend, and here are my picks: Colts over Jets, 31-17; Saints over Vikings, 27-24.
January 21, 2010 at 17:48
I think you may be right about #3 but not necessarily for the same reasons. If either party actually had the juevos to go ahead and limit the health care debate to three or four topics that resonate deeply with most voters (maybe exclusions, cancelling upon developing illness & anti-trust)and then force the dreaded filibuster it may expose senators of both parties to show what is really most important to most of them, retaining their office. This might actually cause some of our governing bodies to begin working for the betterment of the citizenry first rather than their own self-preservation.
Still a noggin scratcher as to why “free-marketeers” support the anti-trust provisions America’s health insurers operate under. Only real industry/sector to have such a benefit. I don’t believe the ‘well baseball has an anti-trust exemption’ arguement would stand up to much scrutiny.