A wicked good Senate win
It was the final nail in Martha Coakley's coffin and it came around 3 p.m. yesterday when I got an e-mail update that Ray Flynn just announced he voted for Scott Brown in the special election to fill the U.S. Senate seat left open by the death of Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass.
Who the heck is Ray Flynn, you ask? He was the 52nd mayor of Boston until President Bill Clinton appointed him U.S. Ambassador to the Holy See (that's the Vatican). Think Big Democrat and even Bigger Irish Catholic.
If you told me that I would see the day when an Irish Catholic, former Democratic mayor of the one of the Bluest cities in one of the Bluest states in the nation would vote for a Protestant Republican state legislator to fill Ted Kennedy's U.S. Senate seat, I would have told you, as they might say in South Boston, get the #$%& out!
As it turned out, that was the latest of a long line of events that Democrats never saw coming in the special election to pick the heir to the Kennedy legacy.
Most of America only saw the comedy of errors that was Democrat Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley's snake-bit campaign in its final throes...from her avoidance of public debate and her less-than-ready-for-prime-time performance in the only televised debate of the campaign....to her calling pitcher Curt Schilling (who had endorsed Brown) a Yankee fan on statewide radio -- that's right, the same Curt Schilling who led the Red Socks to not one, but two World Series Championships after a century of heartbreak, in a state where the Holy Trinity and the 'Sox' are looked upon with similar zeal and reverence...to her suggestion to Roman Catholics (who make up more than 40 percent of the Bay State electorate) that maybe they shouldn't work in Emergency Rooms if they don't like Democrats' push to require all health care workers to provide abortion services and counseling as part of the health care reform package being debated in Washington.
Whew, that's a lot to get in one sentence...let alone in the final week of a heated campaign, just as the last undecided voters are making up their minds, which is what Coakley did. It was as if her campaign made list of things not to do and then, in the final 10 days, went out in did them. It was the most bizarre thing I've seen my years as a political hack.
But as bad as Coakley was as a candidate, she should have won is the most liberal state in the nation, from where a Republican has not represented it in the U.S. Senate in more than 30 years. So, what happened?
One: Scott Brown was and is a kick-a$$ candidate. He connected with ordinary people who felt left behind by the Harvard Square liberals who control Democrat politics in Massachusetts. Because he was a relative unknown, the Democrats discounted him as a serious threat (although a poll conducted by the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee last fall showed Coakely only leading the upstart by 15 percentage points, according to the Washington Post). This gave Brown time to introduce and define himself to voters before the opposition did; Brown was up with campaign ads over the Christmas holiday while Coakley didn't start until two weeks ago. Who voters saw was an attractive man with an attractive family, a conservative who was not so rigid that he seemed unreasonable to Independents and moderate Democrats. He talked about "conservative" values that a lot people share...about being fiscally responsible, of how we are right to be skeptical about government wanting to nationalize (i.e., take over) one-sixth of the nation's economy under the guise of health care reform, on the need to get government out of the way of businesses that want to create jobs, and that war on terrorism is far from over and we should demand our nation prosecute this war with an eye on winning it. Brown's line during a rally on Sunday kind of summed it up: "I'm Scott Brown. I'm from Wrentham. I drive a truck and I am asking for your vote." When Coakley and the Democrats tried to strip the paint off of him as George W. Bush with a New England accent, no one bought it.
Two: Congressional Democrats and President Obama over-played their hands on health care. They took the election victories of 2008 as a mandate to move forward with a Leftist agenda that the vast majority of Americans don't support. Walk into a coffee shop and ask people what they think of the Internal Revenue Service, and then ask them if they want the same bureaucracy that runs this paragon of government efficiency to make life and death decisions about your spouse or child. If you do, you will have no trouble understanding why majority of people don't like the health care take-over legislation being debated on Capitol Hill. Democrats never bothered to ask, and now they are paying the price. A smart man said once, "It's the economy, stupid." It's hard to get worked up about the uninsured when you're one of the one in 10 Americans who doesn't have a job. After bailing out the corporate greed of Wall Street, the Democrats and President Obama ignored the people directly impacted by the avarice of capitalism who are now paying the price on the unemployment lines. Karma has a way of coming around.
Three: Democrats, and their sycophantic friends in the national media, have consistently underestimated the growing discontent among the multitude who live between the D.C. Beltway and the Hollywood Freeway. The elite on the Left and at the networks have called these folks everything from gun-hugging anarchists to practitioners of lewd acts. But the American Intelligentsia has not been able to conveniently explain them away. These are real people, have families and vote. They are distrustful that government fix all that ails us, and they are dead tired of politicians who say one thing to get elected and do the opposite once in office. The Democracy of the Internet has made it impossible for elected officials to hide behind carefully crafted news releases to the folks at home while remaining cozy with the special interests that fund their reelection coffers and ply them with swanky dinners at the Capitol Grille. Ignore these people at your peril.
That said, there are some admonitions I want to pass on my Republican friends and colleagues who feel the need to gloat over the Brown victory, as well as recent Republican victories in the New Jersey Virginia gubernatorial races.
Voters are rejecting President Obama and the national Democrats' policies -- especially on health care -- but not out of anything Republicans have done. We're just Brand X at a time people are looking for a new soap. Remember, the people who are turning their backs on the President and Democrats are the very same who kicked Republicans to the curb in the last two elections.
Republicans took control of Congress and the statehouses in the 1990s because we stood up and said, "We are not those bums and if you give us the chance, we will make the tough decisions that need to be made." For a while we did that and produced results. But then we turned into "those bums" and voters showed us the door. If Republican are going to win at the national level -- and here in Michigan -- we have to articulate a strong vision for what we will do if given the keys of power and the, and convince the people we are, again, worthy of their trust.
Scott Brown showed us that a solid conservative can win in a Blue state. That's reassuring for us here in Michigan, who have languished under seven years of inept Democratic leadership that has seen this great state go from being the engine that drove the nation's economy to a rust bucket everyone is ashamed to ride in. Brown did it by not making apologies for his conservative principles, and then reached out to Republicans, Democrats and Independents and showed a willingness to work on the issues where we share common ground: the need for good-paying jobs, a smaller less costly government that works, winning the war on terror.
So, to my Republican friends: OK, gloat, but only a little, and then get back to work. Today, the wind is on our backs but there a lot of ground to cover between now and November 2. The Democrats will not be caught so flat-footed next time.
- Bill Nowling's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend







Bill Nowling is a fixture on the Michigan political scene. Over the years, Bill has developed long-standing relationships with local and national reporters and bloggers who call him daily to find out what’s really going on in and around Michigan’s Capitol.











Massachusetts and the United States
Perhaps you're surprised, Bill--but I agree with a fair share of what you've written here. Coakley's campaign was totally lame, and Brown was an attractive, underestimated candidate. Addendum: an attractive, underestimated candidate with a big American truck, a great haircut and a barn coat. And a very short election window. What Scott Brown did was masterful politicking.
The Great Curt Schilling Debacle illustrates the kinds of issues that resonate with low-information voters. Never overestimate American voters' depth of concern with critical political questions--after all, there's still a large percentage of them stuck on Obama's birth certificate.
Scott Brown was not the first to show us that a (tall, good-looking) solid conservative could win in Massachusetts. Remember Mitt Romney? Perhaps Jennifer Granholm won because she was good-looking and appealing, too. And lots of people (as you note) win elections because voters are sick of what's being flogged on the media (right and left)-- and willing to give someone else a chance.
And it's there that your argument overreaches--your contention that Massachusetts voters rejected the health care...what did you call it?...takeover? Massachusetts voters may have been worried that the federal government will mess up the state-mandated MASS health coverage they already have, which serves 95% of the population--a much more comprehensive public plan than the one Congress cobbled together. Frankly, they don't need to worry about health care in Massachusetts. If some guy in a pickup is promising jobs and getting tough on terror--they're in.
Play ball.
Geeky factoid: Tall and/or good-looking conservatives
have done rather well in Mass politics when they run for Governor -- just ask Bill Weld (tall) and Paul Cellucci (good-looking).* In fact, there have been 14 GOP govs and 12 Democratic govs since 1914.
Perhaps, but look at the exit poll results
Conducted by Rasmussen:
There weren't any exit polls in MA
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/19/massachusetts-exit-polls_n_428655.html
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703837004575013111682315540.html
Whole Big Buncha Numbers
That's a lot of data, Bill, but some of it actually proves my point. If you're living in a state where 95% of voters have health insurance, by state fiat, you're among the group of people who worry that the federal health insurance bill will actually make things worse for you. Unless you're one of those foolish, tree-hugging lefties who believe that health care is a human right.
From Research 2000's post-election polling, yesterday, immediately after the Election ended:
By a margin of three-to-two, former Obama voters who voted for Republican Scott Brown yesterday said the Senate healthcare bill "doesn't go far enough." Six-to-one, Obama voters who stayed home agreed. And to top it off, 80% of all Massachusetts voters still want the choice of a public option in the bill. You read that right. Even Scott Brown voters wanted a healthcare reform that includes a public option.
Garrison Keillor, noting that while other TV stations were doing wall-to-wall coverage of the Haiti disaster, Fox News was covering the Massachusetts election, said:
"Great heaps of dead bodies are moved by front-loaders and dumped, uncounted, unidentified, into open pits in a stricken country while people feast and walk treadmills on enormous cruise ships sailing a hundred miles off the coast en route to the Bahamas and Jamaica. That's the real world, not the paranoid hallucinations of the right."
Finally, poll analyst extraordinaire, Nate Silver, who hails from Michigan posted what I thought was the best statistical analysis of the results at this URL:
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/01/in-health-care-reform-new-iraq-war.html
And said:
It's time for the aforementioned Majority to call the aforementioned Minority's bluff. If they do, the American people can witness a grotesque honest-to-God Filibuster where the opposition tries to talk the legislation to death, or each other. Taking full advantage of the absurd Senate rules that the Segregationists utilized in times past, the GOPs would block final consideration with floor speeches and parliamentary tactics. The Democrats would have to match them bluster-for-bluster.
It would be a Bombast Marathon...droning around the clock, seven days a week where the esteemed members could talk till they dropped, or until they realized that the people had decided they were a bunch of pompous out-of-touch buffoons. Actually, they already had that kind of opinion of the Democrats after watching all their sleazy wheeling-and-dealing to create a passable health care bill. A final battle could at least expose the Republicans to some of the scorn. Health Care would get its up-or-down after nearly a year's warfare.
And that, my friend, is the truth.
A fourth point
Massachusetts already reformed its health care -- a pretty good model, in fact, and signed into law by Mitt Romney -- and no one took the time to explain how a nation-wide version of health care reform wouldn't hurt Bay Staters.
Not for nothin', but here's a fifth: Massachusetts independents have outnumbered Dems for a while (they've outnumbered Republicans for eons). Even with the predictably Dem turnout in urban areas & Boston's inner ring 'burbs, there was no solid base of support for Coakley across the state. In fact, she got fewer votes in every county in MA than Obama did in 2008.
Martha Coakley is a terrific AG -- she's smart, focused and relentless. For this race, though, Martha Coakley AG didn't show. The candidate running for Kennedy's seat was termed unexciting, patronizing, and entitled -- and those were just the comments from my Dem friends!
Bill, I do take issue with your comment about "seven years of inept Democratic leadership" bringing Michigan to its current state. Jobs have been draining out of the state since 2000, and Granholm inherited a deficit from her GOP predecessor. The state senate has been under Republican control for quite some time, too. Frankly, the performance of just about everyone in Lansing has been pretty mediocre...
Excellent analysis
Great blog, Bill. I agree with everything - especially your last line. The Democrats should be thankful that this election came around in January, 10 months before the November general election. They just got slapped in the face big-time, which means they have 10 months to try and get it right.
By and large, voters are like an impatient NFL owner. They don't care who's coaching the team, as long as they win. And if they don't win, they'll keep changing coaches every couple of years.