The aftermath of Scott Brown’s historic win last week, when he was voted in to fill "The People’s Seat" in Massachusetts, is quite fascinating. Pundits and politicians have been scrambling and speculating about why a predominately liberal state would elect a Republican to the Senate. Those on the right are taking a victory lap and may be seeking advice from Brown, while a handful of Democrats are doing some soul searching. Senator Evan Bayh sees it as a wake-up call and Senator Joe Lieberman urges the Democratic party to move more toward the center. Then there is Governor Howard Dean.
As the news broke over this election, Rachel Maddow interviewed Dean. His analysis included blaming Bush for the Democrat's loss and, a few breaths later, affirming, "People who blame others are losers." In an awkward and spirited exchange between, MSNBC’s Chris Matthews and Dean over Brown's victory and the future of the Democrats' health care reform bill, Dean came up with some interesting conclusions. "Yesterday, the problem was that people wanted more," stated Dean. Matthews pointed out the differences between the two candidates: Martha Coakley, who is very progressive and in favor of a public option versus Brown, who said that he would "kill the bill." Asked Matthews, "Why didn't they vote for the candidate for the public option?" Dean's response? "They want real change"!
Let me see if I have this straight. In essence, what Dean is saying is that the Independents and Democrats who voted for Brown wanted the public option in the health care bill, so they voted for the candidate who campaigned as "Mr. Forty-One; the vote to filibuster." Were the voters sending smoke signals or is Brown secretly a progressive, masquerading as a conservative?
While Dean continues his delusional interpretation of the Massachusetts Senate election outcome, many have turned to second-guessing the mood of the country, including President Obama. Why are the people "angry" and "frustrated?"
Let's take a look at what transpired during the past year: bank bailouts, the GM takeover, and the passing of the February 2009 $787 billion stimulus package, which was marketed with the assurance of economic recovery and the creation of jobs, yet our economy is still in the dumps and unemployment has risen to 10%. Okay, so Obama inherited an economic mess, but what about tone and direction?
.jpg?t=20120209092158)
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Rolling Red
I remember all throughout the second G.W. Bush term, street stencil graffiti saying "Bush Lied". I feel like stamping the pavements with big bold red or flourescent-white "Obama lied". Perhaps it is time for American voters to realize that, as I heard it said, the Republicans and the Democrats are two faces of the same coin. How about a massive civil disobedience campaign to tell people to stay home and NOT vote - in a protest. I imagine a 10% voter turn out - would send a message.
2 - Dan(Miller)
Christine,
It seems to be axiomatic that if something does not work, more of the same is all that's needed.
When I was in Venezuela years ago, I was told a story about a crew race. One boat was Venezuelan, the other German. The Germans won. The German boat had one boss and the rest were oarsmen. The Venezuelan boat had one oarsman and the rest were bosses (jefes). In the postmortem, the Venezuelans tried to figure out why they had lost. They decided that they hadn’t had enough jefes.
Dan(Miller)
3 - Christine
Dan I see your point on the bosses..just not quite following how it applies here.
4 - Christine
OK, Dan I think I get it now. lol
5 - Dan(Miller)
Christine,
They did something pretty stupid, lost the race and decided that in order to do better next time they needed to do more of the same. Sort of like, "the beatings will continue until morale improves."
As you note in the article,
"Yesterday, the problem was that people wanted more," stated Dean. Matthews pointed out the differences between the two candidates: Martha Coakley, who is very progressive and in favor of a public option versus Brown, who said that he would "kill the bill." Asked Matthews, "Why didn't they vote for the candidate for the public option?" Dean's response? "They want real change"!
If the Obama Administration wants to pull its fat out of the fire, it should stop doing what it's been doing so poorly and listen to the folks in Massachusetts and elsewhere to learn why the independents are deserting. They may well want "real change;" that does not mean they want the change pushed by Dean, et al
Dan(Miller)
6 - Christine
Dan, I was focused on the bosses not the metaphoric aspect of your comment (doing more of the same and expecting a different result, insanity, I think?)
Thanks for the more thorough clarification.
7 - jeannie danna
Christine,
After reading your article, I have a couple of points to make.
I agree with you that our government is getting way too big and definitely way too powerful. Look at the latest SCOUTUS ruling.
The first point is that this elitist attitude you have cited really became apparent to all during W's administration.
The way I understand the transition from the Clinton administration to the Bush administration, is that the bipartisanship, if there ever was any, was thrown right out the window.
Secondly,wasn't the introduction of the position of "CZAR" was also started by George W.? Along with the formation of Homeland Security, which all but stripped the other offices such as FEMA of any real power?
This, and the fact that so many of these appointments were filled by friends of the president, instead of the best most competent choices, leaves me very wary of both parties.
So, not being a Democrat or a Republican, "What the hell am I supposed to do here in America?"
My party does not exist. :(
8 - jeannie danna
That should have been SCOTUS! sorry.
9 - Christine
Jeannie, It is tough these days to trust any politician. It seems that power corrupts most. So who the heck knows what any of us should or will do. :(
10 - roger nowosielski
You are getting radicalized, Jenny.
Here's a suggestion: join the party of Cindy.
11 - roger nowosielski
should be "Jeannie."
And I may as well add Christine into the mix.
12 - Silas Kain
Five days later and the pundits still spin the election results. The dynamics of the Massachusetts Senate race really had little to do with Bush or Obama. On the day Ted Kennedy was laid to rest, the MSM and the political parties were certain that the seat would remain with the Democrats. After all, the Bay State is allegedly blue. No exit polling was in place -- the MSM figured the seat was already in Coakley's possession. HA! Guess again.
Even die-hard life long Democrats weren't convinced that Coakley was the "one". And, believe it or not, Vicki Kennedy's "endorsement" in the days before the election wasn't convincing. Many of us felt that she was coerced into campaigning for Coakley. Scott Brown won Ted Kennedy's own precinct in Hyannis which speaks volumes to the inadequacies of the Coakley campaign. Like it or not, politics are local and this campaign in particular has proven the point.
13 - roger nowosielski
Well, here' on op-ed piece, Silas, in support of your take. And I tend to agree.
14 - Christine
Roger are you starting a new political party? lol
Silas, I agree politics are local, however, whether the election was a reflection of Bush/Obama or not; it (and the elections in November I think it was) is scaring a lot of Dems and it makes more for the pundits to analyze and talk about.
15 - Christine
And yes, they are all "spinning it" to their advantage!
16 - roger nowosielski
Yes, thus far we have three members: Cindy, Mark (Eden) and I. Jeannie and Silas are "potentials." And Archie is waiting on the wings.
17 - Christine
Wow, sounds great. Is it the BC Party? I'll sign up as long as we get permission from Cindy.
18 - jeannie danna
Silas,
I came back to this thread to see if Christine had a comment for me. and I am happy that she answered me.:)
I know I am not the most amicable commentor here. But I don't change my political convictions, or any other beliefs that I hold dear to my heart at the drop of a hat,in-order to fit in with whoever is more popular at the moment.
So with all due respect, realize that Scout Brown is not the answer either!
Christine doesn't flip flop back and forth with the wind.
19 - roger nowosielski
Cindy is always recruiting, Christine.
20 - jeannie danna
Christine, #9
That is what every person in America is saying right now. It's not because O is in power, it is because the American citizen is not in any.:(
See ya later, my favorite Conservative.:)
21 - Silas Kain
Jeannie, let me drive a point home here. I agree Scott Brown is NOT the answer but he is a conduit. The election results are an affirmation of the voters' disapproval of politics as usual. Sure there are issues where I side 100% with Martha Coakley -- especially social issues. That being said, there are times when overall dissatisfaction with the process must transcend specific issues. Reversal of Roe v. Wade, for instance, was not of major concern to me. Why? Because Scott Brown made his case very clear. Roe v. Wade is the law of the land -- and that's Brown-speak. Coakley supporters attempted to make the case that a vote for Brown was a vote against women. Wrong again. Anyone remotely familiar with Brown, his wife and daughters knows damn well that Mr. Brown is far from the sexist Keith Olbermann has made him out to be.
Neither party has all the answers, Jeannie. The Tea Party movement, as flawed as it may be, is a logical manifestation of voter frustration. White voters are scared because their so-called "majority status" is coming to an end. There's a race problem in America that no one is willing to discuss. Along with it there remains a distinct battle of the sexes as is evidenced by the simple truth Hillary Clinton should be President today by conventional political wisdom.
The new book Game Change has opened my eyes to a few things which no one seems willing to discuss. Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer are sexist. That's right, I said it. They didn't want Hillary to be the nominee because they were scared of Bill. You know what, Jeannie? The voters are a bit smarter than that. Whatever Bill Clinton's shortcomings may be, voters would have cast their ballots for Hillary based on her merits. The pundits and spin-meisters would have attempted to marry her to Billy-boy but it would not have stuck. There's a mistrust of the electorate, Jeannie. And it thrives in both parties. The voters feel it and the voters have responded. The tables have been turned. It's now we, the people, who don't trust them - the keepers of the government. Regardless of political affiliation one thing is quite clear for me -- incumbents must go, period.
22 - Heloise
Christine what's with you? You're slipping. No talk of "populist anger?" That's the economic bottom line. People are angry. They got the change memo, signed up for, drank of the glass of change, voted their anger and puff we got Plouffe and Obama and Axlerod and Emmanuel in the WH.
I am a true centrist. I have been blogging about the evils of Summer, Geithner and Bernanke as the beasts that ate the people's money. In this case the street trumps populism...period.
It's not that complicated. People want jobs and want to stop hurting financially. My stock portfolio took a beating but I got most of my money out in time. Other people need to retool and did not see this meltdown coming. Who knew that teaching and living in Texas would be a pancea for prosperity?
People are in a panic. Dems and GOP have to deal with it. It ain't over for either party. Scott was listening, he had his ear to the populist ground and came up a winner.
I take credit cards :)
Heloise
23 - Christine
Heloise, I thought I was addressing the "populist anger." I think I referred to it as "the people." Did I not use the proper lingo? I agreeâ€"â€""it's the jobs stupid!" Obama is NOW trying to change his tone. The State of the Union is coming....we will see more.
Silas, I am going to get the Game Change book this week. Only political book I've been excited about since Jonah Goldberg's, Liberal Fascism. Heard the story about Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer against Hillary. They are jerks.
Jeannie: Big Hug!
24 - Heloise
Yup, you gotta be politically correct i.e., use the proper buzz words. In this case it's "populist anger." Or I like this slip better: Populust Caution.
H
25 - Christine
Thanks Heloise, I am new to blogging and politics is just a hobby!