A Lighter Shade of Blue
The result of the January 19, 2010 special election was supposed to be a forgone conclusion. In Massachusetts, the bluest of blue states, a Republican hadn’t been elected to a Senate seat in nearly 40 years, we were told, over and over. Once Martha Coakley won the Special Democratic Primary to fill the US Senate seat long held by Ted Kennedy, the seat was hers by right.
In a state where Democrats outnumber Republicans 3-1, Martha Coakley wasn’t even going to need to campaign, at least not very hard, to defeat Scott Brown, a mere state senator and a Republican to boot. There would be no need to spend millions on advertising. And President Obama certainly wouldn’t need to clear his schedule to come up here and campaign for Martha Coakley. She’s a Democrat, after all, and this is Massachusetts.
Apparently, the voters of Massachusetts didn’t get the memo. With a few weeks to go in the campaign, the presumed ho-hum Special Election became a national referendum on the current Democratic health care legislation and single-party rule in Washington.
Could it be that even in Massachusetts, where electing a Democrat to follow Ted Kennedy would all but assure the passage of the senator’s career-fulfilling dream of health care reform, most people opposed a wholesale revamping of the nation’s health care system?
Yes, it was true.
Even in Ted Kennedy’s home state, his pet health care legislation was revealed to be less popular than people assumed. Once the Lion of the Senate was no longer around, it turned out that even in the birthplace of Camelot, most people didn’t want anyone messing with their health care plans.
With polls showing the race tightening, suddenly, political ads pushed the furniture store ads off the TV and radio airwaves. Bernie, Phyl, Bob and Elliot would have to step aside until January 20. In a state where for Democrats campaigning is optional, the airwaves were filled with Martha Coakley ads, attempting to swamp Scott Brown’s own considerable advertising campaign.
The main thrust of the Coakley ads was to remind Massachusetts voters that Scott Brown was a Republican. In one radio ad in particular, the voiceover repeatedly referred to him as “Republican Scott Brown,” as if “Republican” were his first name. The announcer’s voice literally dripped with disdain as it uttered the word “Republican.” Martha Coakley’s supporters thought that simply labeling the state senator as a “Republican” was enough to convince Massachusetts voters not to vote for Brown. Perhaps Coakley’s people never heard of Richard Tisei.
“Republican” may be a dirty word in the most extreme Democratic precincts, but most Massachusetts voters, including many Democrats, are more open-minded than that. They are tolerant of diverse views, and given a real choice, don’t always vote along party lines.
Many have suggested that Republicans have gone too far to the right. But I seem to recall the GOP running a moderate, John McCain, in the 2008 Presidential election. And didn’t Martha Coakley recently emerge as the winner of a Democratic Primary that became a contest to see who the most left-leaning candidate was? Between nationalizing health care and giving civilian trials to war criminals – tell me again which party is flirting with extremes.
January 19 wasn’t just a win for Republicans, who are less than 15 percent of registered voters in Massachusetts. Tuesday was a victory for independent-minded voters of all stripes, including traditional Democrats, who have in recent years watched in dismay as the party of JFK and Tip O’Neill was taken over by left-wing ideologues.
Scott Brown spoke to those independent voters and traditional Democrats who were open minded and tolerant enough to listen to his common sense message of moderation, even if he did have an “R” next to his name.
Tuesday, January 19 was a victory of populism over elitism, of humility over the arrogance of power.
In the days since the election, I’ve seen a lot of bitterness and disdain expressed – comments dismissive of the voters and their choice of Scott Brown. It’s on the blogs, on Facebook and in letters to newspapers. One party’s bullet-proof supermajority has been reduced by one vote, and now there is great dismay and gnashing of teeth over the fact that that somebody with a different viewpoint will also have a say.
But the people know that rule by one party – any party – does not lead to good things. On Tuesday, the people of Massachusetts, the bluest state, said that they did not like the direction in which one party was leading them.
The message has been transmitted. Only time will tell if it has been received.
[This column originally appeared in the January 21, 2009 Wakefield Daily Item.]
Filed under: Columns & Essays, News, Opinion, Politics | 4 Comments
Tags: Barack Obama, campaign, campaigns, Congress, Democrat, Democratic Party, Democrats, Edward Kennedy, Edward M. Kennedy, election, Health Care, independent, independent voters, JFK, John F. Kennedy, Massachusetts, political campaign, Politics, President Obama, President of the United States, Republican, Republican Party, Republicans, Scott Brown. Martha Coakley, Senate, soecial election, Ted Kennedy, Tip O'Neill, United States Senate, US Senate, voter, voters, Washington
Search this site
Categories
Flickr Photos
Archives
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
Recent Comments
Dr. Ed on Why the Warrior logo vote stil… Dr. Ed on Why the Warrior logo vote stil… Dr. Ed on Why the Warrior logo vote stil… WaffleCat on Why the Warrior logo vote stil… John Breithaupt on Why the Warrior logo vote stil… Blog Stats
- 317,489 hits
LINKS
4 Responses to “A Lighter Shade of Blue”