Libertarian Leanings

Brown vs. Coakley And Ideological Overreach

As the Wall Street Journal points out, when Obama moved into the White House, Democrats didn't have to do a blessed thing except sit back and take all the credit for what we all would expect to happen anyway.  But they blew it.  Big time.

Tomorrow marks the anniversary of President Obama's Inaugural, and it's worth recalling the extraordinary political opportunity he had a year ago. An anxious country was looking for leadership amid a recession, and Democrats had huge majorities and faced a dispirited, unpopular GOP. With monetary policy stimulus already flowing, Democrats were poised to get the political credit for the inevitable economic recovery.

Twelve months later, Mr. Obama's approval rating has fallen further and faster than any recent President's, Congress is despised, the public mood has shifted sharply to the right on the role of government, and a Republican could pick up a Senate seat in a state with no GOP Members of Congress and that Mr. Obama carried by 26 points.

[...]

The real message of Massachusetts is that Democrats have committed the classic political mistake of ideological overreach. Mr. Obama won the White House in part on his personal style and cool confidence amid a recession and an unpopular war. Yet liberals in Congress interpreted their victory as a mandate to repeal more or less the entire post-1980 policy era and to fulfill, at last, their dream of turning the U.S. into a cradle-to-grave entitlement state.

Democrats are ignoring the voters.  This race wasn't supposed to be even close, this special election in Massachusetts.  Massachusetts Democrats outnumber Republicans by 3 to 1, yet Massachusetts voters have about a 50-50 chance of sending the 41st vote against health care reform to the US Senate by electing Republican Scott Brown. 

And what does Democrat House Speaker Pelosi intend to do about it?  Why, she plans to ignore the voters, of course.

"Let's remove all doubt, we will have health care -- one way or another," Pelosi told reporters in San Francisco. 

But how?  The Speaker was less clear on that question.

"Certainly the dynamic would change depending on what happens in Massachusetts," Pelosi said. "[It’s] just a question about how we would proceed. But it doesn't mean we won't have a health care bill."

Privately, Democratic Congressional leaders are less certain.  The most likely scenario, and one preferred by the White House, is for the House to simply pick up and pass the bill that passed the Senate on Christmas Eve.

Massachusetts voters, if you haven't gotten out to vote for Scott Brown yet, go now and do it.  There is a lot riding on it and your country is depending on you.

Today's The Day

Sissy Willis urges her fellow Mass voters, "Don't vote alone!"

We're emailing the following message to all our Massachusetts friends and relatives as part of Scott Brown's voterbomb push to get out the vote for tomorrow's special election:

Tomorrow's the big day.

We Tea Partiers behind enemy lines here in Taxachusetts sprang to life under ideal growing conditions afforded by big-government overreach last year, and now is our moment to fire "The Scott heard 'round the world."

Scott Brown has asked me and other volunteers to write to our friends and neighbors to fulfill a pledge to make sure you will be voting for him in tomorrow's special election to fill what some have called the "Kennedy seat." As our candidate explained to a clueless David Gergen in last week's debate with Democrat Attorney General Martha Coakley:

"It's not the Kennedy seat. It's not the Democrats' seat. It's the people's seat!"

Yesterday frequent commenter CaptDMO noted with some amazement that Tea Party fever in the form of active support for Scott Brown has spread north of the boarder into the Granite State.

This weekend I was amazed to see a couple folks waving at passing motorists while sporting "NH Conservatives for Brown" placards, along the "strip" (Commercial avenue that NOW looks like ANY well developed Mass. retail strip-complete with vacant stores and buildings) of our resort community that caterer heavily to folks from, well, ...Mass. folk, with "extra" cash to spend on affordable recreation and tax-free retail shopping.

I wonder if our southbound guests made the connection, as they returned to their home state from the weekend?

The usual local suspects. No "imported" astro-turf folks.

In my reflections on last year's September 12th Tea Party in DC I made an optimistic prediction that appears to be coming true today.

I have to say, I came away from the weekend with a fairly high degree of optimism.  There were tens of thousands, probably close to a half a million people there who, like Susan and me, invested a little money and a lot of time to make it to this Washington event.  We spent eighteen hours in the car to get there and back.  Not everybody traveled that far, but there were some who came farther.

This is not the crowd that plans to stay home on election day.

Today's the day, and the Tea Party crowd isn't staying home.  I must confess, though.  Optimistic as I was last September, never in my wildest dreams did I imagine Massachusetts would be in play.  But here we are!  Do us all proud, Massachusetts!  Elect Scott Brown!

Update:  CaptDMO is quoted on Sisu.

Yesterday's Assortment of BS

Reading through the essays appearing on yesterday's Real Clear Politics, I couldn't help but be struck by the pure BS that comes leaping off the pages.  Here they are in no particular order.

How to Pass the Bill--Whatever Happens Tuesday, by Jonathon Cohn who seems to think this health care takeover has been a deliberative process.

...Snowe has grown increasingly disenchanted with health care reform. And after her vote against it on the floor, the Democratic leadership has become increasingly disenchanted with her.

Snowe's main complaint--that the process seemed rushed--makes no more sense to me now than it did when she first raised it.

I suppose you could say it's true, calling the process rushed doesn't make sense to Mr. Cohn, but then Mr. Cohn just wants a bill.  It doesn't matter what's in it, so how long do the Democrats need to talk about it?  

Under the headline His health-care agenda at risk, Obama stumps in Massachusetts, which should actually come under the heading, "missing the boat", Paul Kane and Karl Vick write in the Washington Post,

Brown's momentum has been fueled by his success in tapping voter anger about double-digit unemployment and massive federal spending.

Well, yes, but no mention of health care reform?  Brown bills himself as the 41st vote against it.

But the grand prize goes to the inimitable Paul Krugman with What Didn’t Happen.

The Obama administration’s troubles are the result not of excessive ambition, but of policy and political misjudgments. The stimulus was too small; policy toward the banks wasn’t tough enough; and Mr. Obama didn’t do what Ronald Reagan, who also faced a poor economy early in his administration, did — namely, shelter himself from criticism with a narrative that placed the blame on previous administrations.

Is he kidding?  Obama took every opportunity, and then some, to put blame on the Bush administration. Throughout his first year in office, every other time he's opened his mouth it was to say he inherited a mess from the Bush administration that he's cleaning.

Scott Brown For Senate - Coakley Sinking

A well-connected Democratic strategist tells Byron York that the bottom has fallen out of Martha Coakley's poll numbers, and he's talking about her internal poll numbers.  According to this strategist, Coakley's own numbers have her down by five points in her race against Scott Brown for the Senate seat that once belonged to the late Ted Kennedy.  

And that means it's time for Obama to start putting a little distance between him and Martha.

Given those numbers, some Democrats, eager to distance Obama from any electoral failure, are beginning to compare Coakley to Creigh Deeds, the losing Democratic candidate in the Virginia governor's race last year. Deeds ran such a lackluster campaign, Democrats say, that his defeat could be solely attributed to his own shortcomings, and should not be seen as a referendum on President Obama's policies or those of the national Democratic party.

The same sort of thinking is emerging in Massachusetts. "This is a Creigh Deeds situation," the Democrat says. "I don't think it says that the Obama agenda is a problem. I think it says, 1) that she's a terrible candidate, 2) that she ran a terrible campaign, 3) that the climate is difficult but she should have been able to overcome it, and 4) that Democrats beware -- you better run good campaigns, or you're going to lose."

With the election still four days away, Democrats are still hoping that "something could happen" to change the dynamics of the race. But until that thing happens, the situation as it exists today explains Barack Obama's decision not to travel to Massachusetts to campaign for Coakley. "If the White House thinks she can win, Obama will be there," the Democrat says. "If they don't think she can win, he won't be there." For national Democrats, the task is now to insulate Obama against any suggestion that a Coakley defeat would be a judgment on the president's agenda and performance in office.

Let's see.  Brown is riding a surge, largely on his promise to be the 41st vote against Obama's health care legislation.  But a Brown victory will not be a reflection on Obama's agenda.  Do I have that right?

Brown Surges Ahead of Coakley

A new poll shows a shift in favor of Republican Scott Brown in the Massachusetts Senate race.  It's a potential disaster for the Democratic political agenda.

The Suffolk University survey released late Thursday showed Scott Brown, a Republican state senator, with 50 percent of the vote in the race to succeed the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy in this overwhelmingly Democratic state.

Democrat Martha Coakley had 46 percent. That was a statistical tie since it was within the poll's 4.4 percentage point margin of error, but far different from a 15-point lead the Massachusetts attorney general enjoyed in a Boston Globe survey released over the weekend.

The Suffolk poll also confirmed a fundamental shift in voter attitudes telegraphed in recent automated polls that Democrats had dismissed as unscientific and the product of GOP-leaning organizations.

And it signaled a possible death knell for the 60-vote Democratic supermajority the president has been relying upon to stop Republican filibusters in the Senate and pass not only his health care overhaul, but the rest of his legislative agenda heading into this fall's mid-term elections.

Brown has pledged to vote against the health care bill, and his election would give Senate Republicans the 41st vote they need to sustain a filibuster.

A Coakley campaign ad accuses Scott Brown of voting with Republicans 96% of the time.  It may be a counterproductive smear.  In light of recent Rasmussen polling, guilt by that particular association may help Brown more than it hurts.  In one poll Republicans lead Democrats by nine in the generic congressional ballot.  In another the number of Americans identifying themselves as Democrats at its lowest in the last seven years.  Coakley may not be the sharpest knife in the drawer.

Special Interests vs. Voters' Interests in Massachusetts

When candidate Obama promised that the health care debate would be televised on C-Span, he said it was so that everyone would be able to see who represents the voters and who represents the special interests.

Specifically, then-Sen. Obama said on the campaign trail that "we'll have the negotiations televised on C-SPAN, so the people can see who is making arguments on behalf of their constituents and who is making arguments on behalf of the drug companies or the insurance companies."

Based on candidate Obama's promise, one might reasonably expect President Obama to see that this important debate is conducted in an environment in which constituent interests would get fair representation.  Transparency!  That's the ticket! 

Well, transparency is definitely not in the cards.  And if there is any doubt about which interests Democrats represent, special or voters', look to the Massachusetts special election between Republican Scott Brown and Democrat Martha Coakley.  The seat held by the late Senator Ted Kennedy is up for grabs and a victory by Scott Brown represents the potential 41st vote against Democrats' health care legislation.

As first reported by Timothy Carney of the Washington Examiner, the host committee for the fundraiser at Pennsylvania Avenue's Sonoma Restaurant includes lobbyists for Pfizer, Merck, Eli Lilly, Novartis and sundry other drug companies that have been among the biggest of ObamaCare's corporate sponsors. Other hosts—who have raised at least $10,000 for Ms. Coakley—include representatives from UnitedHealthcare, Blue Cross Blue Shield, Humana and other insurers. As far as we can tell, the insurance industry claims to oppose ObamaCare's current incarnation.

Naturally, lobbyists from America's Health Insurance Plans and Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, the major trade groups, were on hand too. Money follows power in Washington, obviously, though this example seems especially inexplicable given that Ms. Coakley's GOP opponent, state senator Scott Brown, may be the last chance to defuse the health-care doomsday machine. But maybe someone in the press corps will bother to mention this episode the next time President Obama takes aim at the "special interests" he claims are opposing his agenda.

Against overwhelming public opposition, the only things keeping ObamaCare alive at this point are power politics and the misguided corporate cease-fire that Democrats have either coerced or bought—or is homegrown at companies like Pfizer that are deeply invested in more government control of the economy. Ms. Coakley's election would make that outcome a certainty.

When Democrats complain about special interests, it's important to recognize that government is its own special interest.

Brown and Coakley Debate

In their debate last night on WTKK radio Martha Coakley asked Scott Brown about an endorsement he got from a Massachusetts pro-life group.  It was her lead-in to an attack on Brown for sponsoring an amendment she said would allow hospitals to deny emergency room care to rape victims.   Apparently she was referring to a conscience clause that would allow medical workers the right to choose not provide abortions.  I suppose a distortion like that coming from Coakley isn't really really a big surprise.

In his response, Brown said that he was proud of all of his endorsements and drew distinctions between himself and Coakley on federal funding of abortion, partial-birth abortion, and parental consent laws. "I want to be a jobs crusader. I don't want to be a social crusader," he said.

Interrupting Brown the fourth or fifth time, Coakley's voice grew more stern and she demanded that Brown tell her "What does that bill do?"

"I'm not in your court room, and I'm not a defendent," Brown replied with a smile as he pushed back against her question.

A Sunday Boston Globe opinion poll has Coakley with a comfortable 15% lead, but according to Rasmussen, though it's Coakley's race to lose, she can still lose it.

...in a special election, turnout is typically much lower and always much harder to project. Collectively, the data suggests that Coakley remains the favorite, but Brown has attracted enough support to remain competitive. With just over a week to go, it is possible that a candidate mistake could dramatically shake up the race.

As always, turnout in special elections is very difficult to project, so all projections must be made with caution. Absent a major event, it is still possible to envision a long-shot, low-turnout scenario where Brown pulls out a very narrow victory.

Clearly, his supporters are more enthusiastic about the race and that gives him a chance.

It depends upon the determination and enthusiasm of Brown's supporters, and if Sissy Willis is your typical Brown supporter his chance look pretty good.

But if it's real change you're looking for — to stop Obamacare with that all-important 41st Republican vote — Scott Brown's your man. If you're with us, please put your money where your heart and mind are and contribute to Scott Brown's Moneybomb at redinvades blue. They're shooting for $500,000 in this one day, January 11.

[...]

Update: Over the top: "Thank you! $1,303,302.50 raised!"

$1.3 million in one day!  Not bad!

Update:  The Lowell Sun, of Lowell Massachusetts, endorses Scott Brown.

Brown vs. Coakley

On June 22, 2007 the junior Senator from Illinois, Barack Obama, spoke in Manchester, New Hampshire to urgency of taking government back from the special interests.

Americans of every background and belief are hungry for a new kind of politics -- a people's politics that reconnects them with their government; one that offers not just a vote at the ballot box, but a voice in Washington and an assurance that the leaders we send there will hear it.

The banner on Obama's website, Organize for America, urges people to believe.

I'm asking you to believe.  Not just in my ability to bring about change in Washington... I'm asking you to believe in yours.

Though he vowed to take government back from the special interests, Obama neglected to mention that government is, itself, a special interest. There is no place in Obama's government for voices of the people, and nowhere is this more evident than in Massachusetts where Scott Brown challenges the anointed Kennedy successor, Martha Coakley.

The Democrat remains the favorite in such a liberal state, especially now that the unions and national Democrats have become alarmed by the polls. Bill Clinton will campaign for Ms. Coakley this week, and Mr. Brown can expect an assault linking him to George W. Bush, if not Herbert Hoover. But a sign of their worry is that Democrats are whispering that even if Mr. Brown wins, they'll delay his swearing in long enough to let appointed Senator Paul Kirk vote for ObamaCare.

With only 40% of voters favoring Obama's health care reform compared to 55% opposed -- 45% strongly opposed -- Obama and congressional Democrats listen only to voices that agree with them.

Young Guns

Meet the Young Guns of the Republican party.

The recent wave of Democratic retirements bodes well for Republicans. Yet they are still largely winning by default. The public doesn't like the Democratic agenda, but it hasn't forgotten the GOP's own corruption and loss of principle. And crafting a new image is a tough haul for a minority that is stuck responding to events, and that is still populated by many of the same, entrenched faces.

What is happening instead is a real (if underreported) effort to reshape the party from the bottom up—to, in effect, repopulate it with a crop of reformist candidates in the midterm. Behind the effort are three congressmen—Wisconsin's Paul Ryan, Virginia's Eric Cantor and California's Kevin McCarthy.

Among the Republican Young Guns is New Hampshire's Frank Guinta who stepped down as Manchester's mayor to run against Carol Shea-Porter in the1st Congressional District.

An early GOP-sponsored poll showed Shea-Porter leading Guinta 43%-34%, which has been noted as very promising for Guinta due to the fact that at the time of the poll, he had never campaigned for office outside of the Manchester area.

It should also be noted that according to another poll done by University of New Hampshire, Carol Shea-Porter's constituent support reveals "troubling numbers for her reelection" according to UNH pollster Andy Smith. Her constituent support is well below 50 percent, with her favorability/unfavorability rating at 38% and 37% respectively, with 27% neutral.

A poll conducted by Populus Research on September 2, 2009 has Frank Guinta within the margin of error against incumbent Democratic Congresswoman Carol Shea-Porter. The poll has a 4% margin of error; Shea-Porter leads Guinta 46.3% to 43.4%. Ten point three percent are undecided.

Shea-Porter is perhaps best known for avoiding constituent anger over health care reform.

Obama's C-Span Promises

When Nancy Pelosi was asked if the health care industry takeover negotiations would be televised on C-SPAN, as President Obama had promised time after time, she flippantly replied. “There are a number of things he was for on the campaign trail,” quipped Pelosi, who has no intention of making the deliberations public. Here is Obama, promising time after time.

Via Patterico.