The Massachusetts Senate race is a watershed event that has enormous implications for this political year. The media is intent on making it a referendum on President Obama and his health care reform plan. But that interpretation of the results is just flat wrong.
President Obama maintains a fairly robust 55% approval rate in Massachusetts. And while it is true that the polling indicates that the "Obama Health Reform Plan" as a general concept is not very popular there, the individual components of reform continue to have substantial levels of public support -- both in Massachusetts and around the country.
The fact is that if you see enough TV spots saying that the "Obama health care plan" will cost jobs, take away your freedom, and cut your Medicare (all factually wrong) -- you start to believe it. Because of the massive length of the health care battle, the pro-health care reform forces, have simply been outgunned on TV by the big insurance companies and the Chamber of Commerce (mainly funded by the big insurance companies) that have pockets of infinite depth.
On the other hand, if you ask people if they want to end the ability of insurance companies to use preexisting conditions to deny care; make health insurance available at affordable prices to everyone; require insurance companies to spend the bulk of their premiums on health care instead of profits and CEO salaries; or give people the alternative of a public option -- you get very strong support.
Add to that the fact that 98% of people in Massachusetts have health insurance because of their own state-based health care reform -- and almost 80% are happy with their health insurance -- and it's clear that the race there was not at all a referendum on health care reform.
There are, however, major critical lessons for Democrats in the Massachusetts defeat:
Lesson #1.The big take away: don't run a bad campaign. The Coakley campaign made four critical errors any one of which, by itself, probably cost her the election.
First, they did not follow the first law of the Obama campaign to "leave no stone unturned." Coakley went on vacation in the Caribbean after her primary victory. She didn't campaign and she didn't raise money. When the campaign's pollsters -- the respected firm of Lake Research -- proposed doing a tracking poll after the primary, they were told there was no money. As a result, the campaign was caught flat-footed as Brown began to surge.
The reason you leave no stone unturned in a campaign, it to account for the unexpected. Yes, Coakley was 20 points up on Brown after the primary, but if the campaign was not asleep at the switch it would have discovered the Brown surge while it could still be stopped.
Second, the campaign allowed Brown to define himself -- and Coakley -- for swing voters. When Brown began a wave of advertising between Christmas and New Years, it went unanswered. The moment Brown began to surge, the campaign should have hit back and defined him as a shill for the Big Banks and insurance companies -- not the attractive, charismatic outsider he appeared to be to many voters.
Third, the campaign allowed their candidate to be perceived as the elite insider -- and ceded to Brown the role of crusading outsider. Democrats win when they appear to be what they ought to be -- populist agents of change -- not competent insider technocrats. That is particularly true when people are angry at the status quo.
Forth, unbelievably, the campaign had no field program. It was left to the heroic efforts of Organize for America (OFA) to try to save the day by improvising a field program in the last week and a half. More than anything else, Coakley lost because of a wave of Republican turnout. Until OFA arrived there was no apparatus in place to increase Democratic turnout. That borders on political malpractice. OFA did everything it could. Over the last weekend OFA made over 1.2 million turn out calls to potential Democratic voters. But great field programs -- particularly door to door programs that are the most effective means of boosting turnout -- must be organized with several months of lead time -- not a week and a half.
OFA proved once again how invaluable it is to the Democratic Party. Were it not for their efforts -- and the Obama trip to Massachusetts -- Coakley could have been routed in a blowout that would have shaken Democratic confidence to its foundation.
Even with all of these problems, Coakley might have still pulled it out had Brown himself not been an exciting, engaging, energetic candidate with an interesting history who ran a flawless campaign. In the end, elections are about the candidate and their campaigns. People vote for people; and to the voters the quality of their campaigns is a powerful symbol of the qualities of the candidate.
Lesson #2: There is a great deal of anger in America that is focused first and foremost on people's own economic prospects and frustration that change appears so difficult. Democrats have to do everything in our power to deliver jobs. And we must focus that anger at the people who caused the economic meltdown and are delaying fundamental change: the insurance companies, the Big Wall Street banks, the energy companies.
The fact of the matter is that when people are angry, if you don't focus that anger on the people who really caused their problems -- they will focus it on the people in charge -- in this case Democrats -- even if they were not mainly to blame.
It was the financial sector -- Wall Street speculators, the Big Banks, the insurance companies -- that caused the worst economic disaster since the Great Depression. And the Republicans -- and their "markets uber alles" philosophy -- made it all possible.
Democrats must have a clear, populist frame to win elections in 2010. In Massachusetts the campaign began to talk about the President's proposal to tax Wall Street in the final hours, but it was too late. Coakley had allowed herself to be framed as an insider, a technocrat versus a crusading populist outsider -- even though Brown will, in fact, go to Washington and vote down the line for the big insurance companies and Wall Street Banks.
To appeal to independent voters we do not have to be "more moderate" or "measured" as some have argued. We must be bolder and more populist.
And the problem is not -- as one commentator argued last night -- a frustration with the "fiscal overreach" of the Democrats. The problem is that we have not produced enough jobs. Democrats must pass a large jobs program now, and the deficit can't stand in the way. And let's remember, it was George Bush who turned a Clinton surplus into more debt that all other previous president's combined.
Lesson #3: We have to keep our base inspired and mobilized -- to make change and to win elections. The Massachusetts special election taught the same lesson as the Democrats' catastrophic loss in 1994 -- we have to inspire our voters to go to the polls. Democrats lost control of Congress in 1994 because our voters stayed home.
In Massachusetts, the right wing base was infused with excitement over the possibility of taking progressive icon Ted Kennedy's Senate seat -- and hobbling Obama's agenda in the Senate. The Democratic base was not inspired by the relatively bland Coakley and has been generally dispirited by the difficulty of passing health care, Lieberman's sabotage of the public option and the general recognition that Barack Obama can not simply wave a wand and make change.
The insurance companies, Wall Street banks and energy companies haven't just rolled over and played dead. They have put up tough, tooth-and-nail battles to defend the status quo.
Though I don't believe that the shape of the health care bill would have likely been a great deal different, there is no question that President Obama would be in better political shape with the base of the Democratic Party if he had been a more forceful advocate of the public option and appeared more forceful in taking on Wall Street.
On the other hand, Progressive leaders across America need to direct their own frustration at the forces that are defending the status quo and standing in the way of the Obama agenda. They need to take personal responsibility for rallying the base against our true enemies -- Wall Street, the insurance industry, the energy companies and the Republicans -- not encouraging cynicism and disaffection of base voters. That sense of frustration lead directly to a victory for Brown and now we are stuck with one more huge impediment to change in the U.S. Senate.
Lesson #4: Democrats must do whatever is necessary to pass a good health care reform now. The President, House Speaker and Senate Majority Leader have all pledged to do just that. The absolute worst response to the Republican victory in Massachusetts would be to cut and run. We have to muster our forces and do whatever is necessary to get it done.
Bad enough that the late Senator Edward Kennedy's seat is now in the hands of a Republican that does not share his progressive values. We must do whatever is necessary to assure that the fulfillment of his life long dream of health care for all is not thwarted as well.
That will probably require that some portion of the bill be passed through the budget reconciliation process that requires only 51 votes, now that the Senate no longer has 60 members who caucus with the Democrats. If so, so be it.
The idea that a minority of 41 members of the Senate can thwart the will of the majority is fundamentally undemocratic in the first place.
In fact, the Senate needs to change its rules to eliminate the abusive use of filibusters that now effectively require 60 votes to pass any significant piece of legislation.
The Massachusetts loss was a set back for the Progressive agenda. But it is in times of adversity that voters get to test the mettle of leaders and political parties. Time to square our shoulders, stand up straight, and show America that we can really make fundamental change.
Read more reactions from HuffPost bloggers to the Massachusetts special election
Robert Creamer is a long-time political organizer and strategist, and author of the recent book: "Stand Up Straight: How Progressives Can Win," available on Amazon.com.
Jeffrey Feldman: The Lesson of the Lunch-Bucket Democrats
HuffPost TV: Sam Stein: Obama Administration Has To Cut Its Wall Street Ties (VIDEO)
HuffPost TV: Arianna On 'The Ed Show': Obama Must Offer More Than Words (VIDEO)
1) Don't sleep through your own campaign.
2) Don't try to get in front of the train, Mr Obama; get in the conductor's seat.
3) Try to get people fired up to do what needs to be done. Provide some vision and some leadership.
4) Pass HCR. Show that you can make change.
So far there have been three elections that seemed to have been promoted as important barometers of how 2010 elections might go. The people have voted and they are rejecting the course this country has started taking over the past year. The policies are being REJECTED! People want jobs in the private sector, not government candy and/or jobs. They want the government out of the way and not stepping in and trying to regulate a recovery, which is failing as most intelligent people know.
The Creamers of the world keep wanting to push governemt into our face whether we need it or not.
A Center on Budget and Policy Priorities study released last month found that the Bush tax cuts and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan account for over $500 billion of 2009's $1.4 trillion deficit, with the economic downturn accounting for another $400 billion. Over the next 10 years, Bush's tax cuts and war spending will account for $7.1 trillion, yet the right maintains Obama is bankrupting us.
The conservative think tank, American Enterprise Institute, reported: “the economy responded to the massive stimulus.” Our financial markets seem to agree, as the S&P 500 is up 73% since last March. In the last month of Bush's presidency, 741,000 jobs were lost. Last month, we lost 85,000. Though far from optimal, this represents an almost tenfold improvement in less than a year of this administration's reign. And yet, the right seeks to advance the delusion that this president is a fascist who seeks our demise.
Conservative Bruce Bartlett, a fellow at the Heritage Foundation who worked for both Reagan and George H. W. Bush, states: “So much of what passes for conservatism today is just pure partisan opposition, it’s not conservative at all.”
Certainly, this assessment can be verified by examining the recent performance of Congressional Republicans.
The country needs solid leadership desperately, not obstructionist zealots.
In Washington there is no leadership, there are only survivors. And as far as obstructionsts (I assume you are referring to Republicans) it is both parties playing the role. Whatever stops more government intrusion into our lives is a good thing!
"Lesson #3: We have to keep our base inspired and mobilized -- to make change and to win elections. The Massachusetts special election taught the same lesson as the Democrats' catastrophic loss in 1994 -- we have to inspire our voters to go to the polls. Democrats lost control of Congress in 1994 because our voters stayed home."
Expect more Democratic voters to stay home, and more left-leaning Independents to vote against their own interests (to vote for republicans) for many reasons and beginning with Obama's FIRST BIG MISTAKE: his tacit pardoning of Cheney and Bush. Obama came in wimping from the first, and he and we will pay "big time." Let's face it, People. It is too late for Obama to do anything good of substance. Can you spell L-A-M-E D-U-C-K?
A majority of Americans (according to the polls) WANTED a public option health care reform bill.
The party proposing this reform occupies the presidency AND has a majority in both houses of Congress.
WHAT the F***?!!!!!!
The Republican MINORITY and Big Business are clearly the real power brokers here. And have apparently ALWAYS been. The concept of America as a representative democratic republic is a farce.
Why try to change anything, when the best, most hopeful and altruistic of efforts smash like insects on the windshield of a juggernaut called "corporate special interest married to theocratic fundamentalist oppressors determined to control every individual's personal choices in the name of a desert nomad god'.
We are f*****.
A whole country held hostage by reactionary Neanderthals determined to keep us mired in their fantasy vision of an America that never existed in the first place.
More years of deadlock.
More generations owned and kept chained up to minimum wage lives without benefits as wage slaves to the corporations that very obviously and clearly are the REAL government.
I'm done.
Been fun talking with you all.
Goodbye.
I'm going home now to bunker down and entrench for the coming American Dark Ages.
My Congressman supported the current House bill that Passed. The Senate ( I have read ) will not have 60 votes to pass the House bill.
Therefore, there are two bills that must be combined AND then the resulting bill must pass the Senate and the House.
It is all very confusing to me too. I cannot respect a Congress that puts corporate America before the people.
Here's a question for all, where were all these well-meaning advisors to the Democrats "after the fact"
BEFORE the election?
Didn't these smart people see this happening, too? Where was this column a month before the election? Was it only the Coakley campaign and Rahm Emanuel in the White House asleep at the switch?
I would think that many advisors, similar to our author here, must have seen the inevitable train wreck coming when Coakley was tanning in the Caribbean and not answering the Brown attacks. Where were these advisors to sound the alarm bell? It's not like this seat was not important. And it being the former seat of the Lion of the Senate one would think the Democrats would have atleast shown Teddy the respect his career deserved and protected his seat like a mother bear protecting it's cubs. Where was that protection.
Yes, we had a Christmas day terrorist threat on an airplane---but far more scary is how the Democrats left Teddy Kennedys seat unprotected. How dare they?
Ted Kenndy was the Lion of the Senate. So now when I want to call a Democrat I feel like saying,
"here kitty, kitty"? Ain't no lions left in the Democratic party by the looks of it.
Certainly the fiasco of the handling of the crotch bomber didn't help. No amount of slick campaign slogans can erase the incometence of not interroagting the guy.
Coakley lost because she, in a word, sucked. Mr Creamer has it right. It was political malpractice.
It's possible Brown might still have won if the Coakley campaign had had an actual pulse, but the fact is her campaign did not have a pulse. So we'll never know.
I'd actually suggest that her campaign get added to the playbook as an example of how never to run a campaign, ever.
On the subject of 'incometence' (sic) of not 'interroagting' (sic) Mr Abdulmutallab, I guess you'll be glad to know that he was 'interroagted' for some time before he was Mirandized. And then he was 'interroagted' some more. And then he gave up his network.
So on the whole, it looked pretty cometent.
By failing to support, represent, and vote FOR the interests of the PEOPLE who voted for the Democrats, the Democrats basically have said "Screw You" to their base, and the voters in Mass. have replied--"Screw You, too!"
Are you comparing us to Somalia? yemen? Afghanistan?
Are we ungornable becuase we largely reject this health Care bill?
The government is supposed to work for the people who elect them. this is noit maoist China where the peoploe work for and swear allegiance to Chairman Mao.
i am very upset with Obummers administration-yes i voted for him, for my family's sake for their future,i believed what he said on the campaign trail-my wife and i are furious at big money being so close to the president-it seems like big money has won again-i belive Obama was told to behave or else...
we are mad as H3LL-do we move out of country???
we are scared of the future of America for our children's sake,where is common sense ? justice ? compassion for those who need a hand up-why do multiple families have to live in one residence just to get ahead? why does health care cost so much yet free all over the world where people are not as productive as the US ? no free college? why wars with so many? why do people all over the world hate us so badly? hating our government /corporate policies around the world that are inflicted on darker skin colored nations with great natural resources with gun, bomb and boot heel?
the MA vote reflects the apathy that many have with Obama and his broken promises-we are sad, sad about this vote
Progressives believe in governmental leadership and moving foward to meet the challenges of a changing world. We do not believe in a nanny state- that's one of the biggest lies conservatives spread. Conservatives are for the status quo. Conservative leadership is an oxymoron- you don't need leaders if you're not going anywhere.
The problems this country has are real. Republicans don't believe this country has problems unless the solution is to bomb them, cut spending or cutting taxes. You'd proclaim power to the people but turn it over to corporations who write our laws for their own gain. The conflicted moral compass, hypocrisy and greed that you represent as a party is only outdone by the biased close minded people who vote for them.
You want to proclaim "the constitution, the constitution." Save it! GWB and the republicans shreaded the Constitution- it was meaningless to you then so your hypocrisy is all we hear.
Name them! don't let them hide in the shadows
I AM THE BASE! I will not vote in another Democrat until I see an EFFORT AND RESULTS.
As a MASS voter, I am getting screwed by the MASS Insurance racket to the order of $912 this year in penalties for not signing up with the CORPORATE THIEVES! (Yeah, governor Patrick and state reps, YOU are next!)
Wars, Wall Street theft, Bankers' cancer in federal agencies, cap and trade theft, corporate agendas etc...... Yeah. EXCITE ME PLEASE!
Who's taxes have gone up under Obama- mine went down. Lies are so becoming for
conservative types.
What have conservatives done for this country over the past 20 years??? How about 50? Good luck finding something positive.
Now we find that the Supreme Court will allow big business to gain more power over the political process. There is no hope.
I suggest you find some.
In my opinion, if Coakley had had an effing clue, she would have realized that Brown being the double digits in polling was a problem.
But she didn't, and the race was textbook Aesop.
The New Deal saved millions of jobs, kept people working and fed and staved off the suffering of millions of Americans. It worked- anyone who doesn't believe that is too bias for common sense.
The stimulus worked too. The problem with it was too small and too cmpromised- it needed to be bigger, needed to include less tax cuts and less pork. A better idea is to just give all the money to the wealthy people and let it trickle down- maybe cut their taxes again.
You did say re-distribution of wealth. The wealthiest people in this country got richer while the poor, middle class and even upper middle class have less now. Conservatives are always concerned about the wealthy having money and paying less taxes. Typical "me, me, me, I'm th only one that matters"- the party of me first.
IT'S GONNA GET ME!!!!!!
If these Republicans actually believed that the media was this enemy, they would have anticipated that this enemy would have creamed them for not practicing the same as they preached back then. Either they know it's a lie or they're masochistically begging to be humiliated.
Correction: with a Supermajority, the Democrats could do whatever Joe Lieberman and Ben Nelson want. It sounds to me, JanP, that you have a wildly exaggerated notion of how much party discipline there is in this country. Senators are not OBLIGATED to do whatever Obama commands. We're not Britain, there are no penalties for disregarding the leadership's wishes.
If the Republicans had allowed an up or down vote, we would not have needed to get every Democratic Senator on board. With a 51 vote majority ruling, we would not have needed toe corrupt deal to get Nelson's support.