The failure on Tuesday night of Democrat Martha Coakley to succeed the late Sen. Ted Kennedy is a political catastrophe for national Democrats. Almost unfathomable given what appeared to be an insurmountable lead for Coakley one month ago, the loss of Kennedy's seat puts the Senate Democratic caucus below the 60 votes needed to overcome Republican filibusters, endangering the passage of health care reform and imperiling President Barack Obama's entire 2010 agenda.
Coakley's stunning special election defeat in perhaps the bluest state in the Union speaks clearly to the sour national mood facing the President and his party right now. If this result and widespread polls are any indication, Democrats can expect to be walloped in midterm elections in November.
Blame for Coakley's drubbing can be traced in great part to the candidate herself. Coakley ran one of the most aloof, incompetent major campaigns in the last 10 years, worse even than Creigh Deed's much-maligned effort in Virginia for governor last fall. The general agreement is that she was too content with a big lead in the polls, putting forth a lackadaisical effort after she won the primary, and not constructing a good field organization, voter identification list, or spending much money. It did not help that Coakley herself is a wooden personality.
Naturally, the winning of a Massachusetts Senate seat by Republicans for the first time in 38 years cannot be attributed solely to a mediocre nominee; rather, larger issues are at play, particularly the President's low popularity and 2009 record weighed heavily in the outcome.
A week ago, a CNN poll found a growing enthusiasm gap between Democrats and Republicans, with Republicans more electorally energetic, and polls in this contest bore that out. A raft of polls taken shortly before the election showed large swaths of Democrats abandoning Coakley to back her opponent. For Massachusetts Democrats to support a Republican for U.S. Senate speaks to how poorly the electorate views the Democratic Party right now.
Republican Scott Brown's victory over Coakley is a visceral illustration of the disgust many voters feel towards the party in charge right now. Rolling into office last January with the White House and robust majorities in both houses of Congress, Democrats like those in the Bay State expected the President to institute broad legislative and social changes, and have not gotten the legislation they expected.
Obama's inability to rally Democrats two days before the election shows just how much political potency he has lost among his base because of the government's unproductive 2009.
The immediate consequences for Democrats' are clear. Because Democrats have still not yet approved a final health care compromise, the swearing-in of a new GOP senator throws a wrench in the process. In what would be a particularly tragic irony to many Democrats, Brown could hold the deciding vote to kill the legislation by voting with Republicans to filibuster any final product.
Under Massachusetts law, Brown could receive a certification to the seat after military and absentee ballots are counted and all results are verified, something which could be dragged out until first week of February. For his part, Brown is already demanding to be seated immediately and any delay is likely to be attacked by Republicans as a ploy to ensure the passage of the health care package. Expect Brown to become a senator sooner rather than later.
Democrats thus have very limited time to find common ground between the House and Senate. If they delay Brown's swearing-in, they risk further crystallizing national opposition to reform and badly delegitimizing any legislation that is passed. Congressional leaders are already discussing having the House approve the Senate bill straight-up, but given deep reservations in the lower chamber and that the lower chamber has been rolled by the Senate so many times in the process already, this would be a tough pill for Members to swallow. Still, if Brown is sworn in this week, Democrats may have no choice but to take this option or finally consider passing reform through budget reconciliation; otherwise, there will likely be no reform package passed. This would constitute a failure of titanic proportions for the President.
Of course, Obama and Democrats would never have been in this position if Congress had moved with greater urgency to pass what the President has called one of his top priorities. But last year, with the President refusing to provide any precise leadership, Congress dithered, frittering away months on meaningless negotiations without making any progress. With Brown's imminent elevation, the party is in a horribly precarious position.
The impact of Brown's election is even more far-reaching than health care. Now that Republicans are in control of 41 Senate seats, they can block the passage of any substantive Democratic legislation with a unified filibuster. With President Obama now looking increasingly weak and Democratic poll numbers falling, large party losses in November look virtually certain.
Politically, Republicans thus have no reason to help Obama claim any legislative victories. In 2009 with 40 votes in the Senate they did this to good effect, and now with enough Members to stave off a cloture motion, there is little question they will continue holding up significant legislation, likely making all the items on the Democratic wish list - cap-and-trade, a jobs bill, robust Wall Street regulation, immigration or bankruptcy reform - dead on arrival.
And this to say nothing of the impending retirement threat: with Coakley's defeat, numerous Democrats will head for the retirement exits, telling themselves that if Democrats cannot hold Ted Kennedy's seat in the bluest of the blue states, there is little point in staying for and enduring an electoral bloodbath in November. You can rest assured that Pelosi, Democratic Congressional Campaign chairman Chris Van Hollen and powerful New York Sen. Chuck Schumer are now burning the phones to assuage their terrified colleagues and blame the loss solely on Coakley.
As all this transpires in the coming weeks and months, there will be much finger-pointing; but there needn't be.
National Democrats have no one to blame but their own weak candidate and President Obama's lack of accomplishments in 2009.
Jeffrey Feldman: The Lesson of the Lunch-Bucket Democrats
The story of candidate Obama's failures in presidential primary states like Pennsylvania and Massachusetts was remarkably similar to the story coming out of last night's loss in the Massachusetts Senate race.
I'd imagine no one at the White House got much sleep last night.
What new solutions do the Republicans have to help our economy, to fix health care, and to create jobs? Why isn't anyone in the media asking the Republicans what new ideas and solutions they have? I know why.....because they have no new ideas and solutions other than to say "no."
If we don't get a health care bill passed, and our countries health care system (which is 30% of our economy) goes broke and bankrupt, than who will everyone blame?
Ah, the hell with it....the Independants and Republicans don't need health care reform. FOX news will fix our health care system! The simple minded mentality in our country has become embarassing and outrageous. The Democrats have been working very hard for a year for a health care system that will benefit us all, yet the Republicans have the nerve to say that President Obama and the Democrats are not working for "change."
I urge the Democrats not to give up on health care reform and the health care bill. Future generations depend on a healthy health care system that is working properly, and does not put our country deeper in debt. We need to spend now to save later so future generations can benefit from a quality health care system.
But for some reason you still seem to have faith in the Dems...
My only question is why?
Also, pointing out that the Republicans don't have any good ideas either certainly doesn't make much of a case for the Democrats in general does it?
Speaking as a Massachusetts independent who voted for Scott Brown, I most certainly do want national health care reform. But I don't see any reform in the bloated, obnoxious, outrageously expensive, corporate-friendly bill that Congress is trying to shove down our throats.
What new solutions do the Republicans have to help our economy, to fix health care, and to create jobs? Why isn't anyone in the media asking the Republicans what new ideas and solutions they have? I know why.....because they have no new ideas and solutions other than to say "no."
If we don't get a health care bill passed, and our countries health care system (which is 30% of our economy) goes broke and bankrupt, than who will everyone blame?
Ah, the hell with it....the Independants and Republicans don't need health care reform. FOX news will fix our health care system! The simple minded mentality in our country has become embarassing and outrageous. The Democrats have been working very hard for a year for a health care system that will benefit us all, yet the Republicans have the nerve to say that President Obama and the Democrats are not working for "change."
I urge the Democrats not to give up on health care reform and the health care bill. Future generations depend on a healthy health care system that is working properly, and does not put our country deeper in debt. We need to spend now to save later so future generations can benefit from a quality health care system.
Strategically the Democrats have bungled a potentially great situation. They should have been the ones screaming about the irresponsible corporate elites. They should have been the ones demanding accountability before any bailouts. And they should have been the ones pushing through a MASSIVE jobs bill. Instead, all we got was a watered down "stimulus" bill and an almost poison "health care reform" fiasco. The Democrats will reap a bitter harvest for the mess they have sown.
And, in the end, all of this is the responsibility of the man at the top. He never set a firm course and demanded accountability. He was too eager to compromise for the bipartisanship pipe dream.
* Ralph would have had Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld in jail
*The banks would be on their knees
*No theft of public money would've been used to prop up Crony Capitalism.
*Political freedom would have blossomed.
*WTO/NAFTA/CAFTA would've been cancelled
*All troops would 've been home from Iraq/Afghanistan
*90% of fraud and waste would've been cut from the DOD
*The Constitution would've been reinstated as a binding document
*Single Payer Helathcare would've been passed.
While BO is a wonderful and inspirational speaker, he lacks courage and leadership skills necessary to govern. I saw it when he was a Senator with his extention of funding for Bush's Iraq/Afghanhistan war, reauthorization of the Patriot Act, and vigorous refusal to prosecute Bush on serial war crimes. Same man then as now. Appeasing Conservatives who will never suppport you only makes him look weak, cowardly, and lacking his own ideas.
Oh, if it were only so easy to get rid of these ticks...
We will likely have a crippled Republican Party and a reviled Democratic Party for at least another 4 years.
Right now, the Senate bill is the best reform that can be passed right now, and if it fails, nothing will be fixed for another decade. We can't afford that disaster. The Senate bill is still far, far better than the status quo.
He promised change. He absolutely has not brought about change. The guy has no leadership skills. Further, he wants to be liked by republicans. He's weak, inept, terrified of having to fight republicans or wall street.
But people still want change. Hence, Brown wins.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with passing a health care bill with 51 votes. But Obama refuses. Why????????
I voted for Obama. But not again.
Next time, I'll vote third party.
Democrats negotiated away every consumer protection to other Democrats.
If the situation were reverses, the a republican would have never wrote an article like this.