Legal Commentary

Lessons From Massachusetts: Punching The Hippies Does Not Work

By Big Tent Democrat

Let me first state what I think this means for 2012 - it means that Barack Obama will win Massachusetts by double digits and Scott Brown will be unceremoniously dumped as senator from Massachusetts. No matter what the Dems do in response. I start with this view because I think it is important understand what the lessons of Massachusetts are about - November 2010.

Now the Massachusetts result provides many lessons for November 2010. Joe Sudbay cites to analysis by Scott Jensen of PPP:

This was a repudiation of Barack Obama. Certainly Martha Coakley was a bad candidate and ran a terrible campaign but that doesn't change the fact that we found Obama's approval rating at only 44% with the electorate for today's contest, a huge drop from the 62% of the vote he won in the state in 2008. Brown won over 20% of the vote from people who cast ballots for Obama in 2008, and we found that most of those Brown/Obama voters were folks who no longer approve of the job the President is doing. And in one of the bluest states in the country barely 40% of voters expressed support for the Democratic health care bill.

[. . .] -Voters hate both parties right now and that's to the GOP's advantage. One of the most remarkable things about Brown's victory is that it comes even though only 22% of voters in the state have a favorable opinion of Congressional Republicans, with 63% viewing them unfavorably. He was able to overcome that because almost 20% of voters held a negative opinion of both Congressional Democrats and Congressional Republicans. And with those folks Brown had a 72-24 advantage over Coakley, reflecting the reality that in a time when voters are disgusted with all politicians they'll vote for the one that's out of power.

Things could turn around for the Democrats between now and November but it's hard to dispute the notion that this could be 1994 all over again.

(Emphasis supplied.) I've said this forever - election are first and foremost, a referendum on the governing party. A lot of people have spent they year whistling past the graveyard of poor polling by Dems, because the GOP polled even worse. I hope that form of denial is now dead and buried for good.

This referendum manifests itself in 3 ways - the motivation of Republican voters, the motivation of Democratic voters and the motivation of casual voters. In Presidential election years, the casual voters play a very important role in the referendum. In off year elections, much less so. the enthusiasm levels of Republican and Democratic voters is paramount.

Republican voters are extremely motivated. There is little Dems can do to stop this. That is why moving right for 2010 is a fool's errand. But Dems can motivate Dem voters - by fighting for Dem values. Will that be enough to stave off defeat in 2010? I do not know, but I know it is the only viable option that Dems have now.

As I wrote below, the Senate bill is not perceived as fighting for Dem values. Its passage will not increase Dem voter motivation. The Senate bill has been part of the problem. Perhaps it can be part of the solution if it includes other important steps, not the least of which will be fixing the Senate bill now through reconciliation. But those Establishment Dems who think passage of the Senate bill in isolation is a positive step for Dems are whistling past the graveyard. Standing alone, the Senate bill hurts Dems for 2010, it does not help. As part of an overall push for Dem values, it can be a part of the solution.

Speaking for me only

Full post as published by TalkLeft on January 20, 2010 (boomark / email).