breaking news: pigs spotted in the pattern at logan.

Massachusetts has voted on Kennedy’s successor.  Republican Scott Brown won, and Democrat Martha Coakley contributed an object lesson in How Not To Run A Campaign, losing the seat held by the most liberal member of the Senate…to a Republican. 

This morning, I pictured a Marley-like ghostly apparition of Ted Kennedy, following Martha Coakley around from now until she dies, jingling his chains at her and moaning, “Woe! Woe!”

The ultimate irony, of course, is that Ted Kennedy planted the seed for the loss of his own seat.  When Kerry ran against Bush, Teddy pushed the state legislature to change the process that allowed the governor to appoint a successor…because the governor at the time was Republican Mitt Romney.  There was a lot of talk about how “the will of the people needed to be heard”, so they changed the law to require a special election instead.  Fast forward four years, and a Democrat sits in the governor’s chair again…and the Will of the People all of a sudden comes back to bite Kennedy in the ass posthumously.

All over the Intertubes, pundits are already either predicting a bloody rout for the Democrats in the midterm elections, or assuring us that the election was not a referendum on Obama or his health care plan, but I think the Dems had better sit up and take notes.  If you can lose Kennedy’s old seat, in a state where Dems outnumber Republicans by three to one, your agenda may not have traction with the public, to put it mildly, and barging ahead with business as usual may cost you dearly come November.

Apparently, Brown’s victory was largely due to his ability to sway the Independent vote.  Just like NH, Massachusetts has more “independent” registered voters than Republicans and Democrats combined, and Martha Coakley just found out that you don’t win those folks over by doing some light campaigning in front of folks who already swing your way already.  Brown, on the other hand, ran like he actually wanted to win the election, not like he was just waiting for the inevitable coronation.

I think the Democrats’ loss of “Kennedy’s seat” to the Republicans has chipped away at the sense of inevitability that comes with elections in areas heavily dominated by one party.  If Massachusetts can vote a Republican into Teddy’s well-worn Senate chair, then nothing’s a sure thing anymore.

One thing’s for sure….it’ll be an interesting election year.


17 thoughts on “breaking news: pigs spotted in the pattern at logan.

  1. Anon says:

    Mass seems like the perfect place for the birth and emergence of the “Independence” party.

    Of course, it would be co-opted and destroyed from within ala the Libertarians.

    And besides, just as the joining of a “party” is anathema to “l”ibertarians, so would it be that independents, once organized, no longer would be.

    On further thought, I really think the answer for the future of this country (and absolutely for me) would be to go to a “no-party” system.

    Free people, voting their conscience without regard to labels and “leaders”? Nah, that’ll never work.

  2. perlhaqr says:

    In other news, Satan is reporting record low temperatures.

  3. Jay G. says:

    They’re making snowmen in hell, boys.

  4. […] what to say about the Scott Brown/Martha Coakley affair.  I’ve decided to steal a quote from Marko. I think that the Democrats’ loss of “Kennedy’s seat” to the Republicans has done is to […]

  5. crankylitprof says:

    I’ve been singing all morning — to the tune of “The Ballad of the Green Berets:”

    “Flying the sky! Flying bacon, flying high!”

    Of course, the chances that the current Dem leadership will remove their heads from their rear apertures and learn something from this is almost certainly nil.

    • Jay G. says:

      Ah, but it would be less than nil if Coakley had won. At least with the Brown win, some of the more middle-of-the-road Democrats might start to re-evaluate their positions…

    • Dixie says:

      Thanks for getting that stuck in my head. To return the favor, I’ve been humming “Blood on the Risers” as I’ve watched the Dems come unglued.

      She counted long, she counted hard, she counted on Barack,
      She heard the news, she saw the count, she felt an awful drop,
      The gaffes from her campaign spilled out and showed up on the news,
      And she ain’t gonna lead no more.

  6. Shootin' Buddy says:

    Brown won? Unpossible!

    Why I’ve read on blogs that the Republican party is merely a regional party, confined to the shoeless, banjo players in the South.

    No way Republicans can win by acting like Republicans above the Mason-Dixon line? Pffft, the pundits will never believe that.

  7. Rick R. says:

    I do have to take issue with one comment.

    Based on voting records, Teddy was the CONSERVATIVE senator from Massachusetts. . .

    Of course, we can always make Lurch a sad panda by replacing him next go-around — how long CAN his face go?

  8. Rusty P. Bucket says:

    Hi all~ obviously the election was ‘stolen’ and the votes from all the dead people weren’t counted!

    I demand a re-count!

  9. Antibubba says:

    The real irony is that this gets a lot of Democrats out of the hot seat. With Obamacare filabusterable, they can now back off o

  10. joe says:

    I wonder if the Republicans in Montgomery county VA will get off their duffs, man up, and actually run a candidate in the next congressional election. This may inspire them to…

  11. Eric says:

    From Neal Boortz via Twitter: “Email from listener. The election yesterday was merely a “courtesy flush.” The rest of the turds get flushed in November.”

  12. Steve says:

    So if fatboy is haunting Martha Coakley, does that mean MaryJo Kopechne is following him?

    I haven’t heard many of these political analysts bring up the fact that one of Brown’s oft stated lines was that he would be the 41st vote against Obamacare, that and Mass has 11 left wingers in its delegation, so what do the voters have to lose by electing him.

  13. Wild Deuce says:

    Some of the “impartial” pundits and talking heads I’ve heard keep saying that this election means the opposite of what the ‘tea partier nuts’ say it does. They say this only means that people are dissatisfied with the slow progress of Obama’s agenda and the Democrats need to step up the pace of his agenda in order to save seats in November.

    I swear you can’t make this stuff up. They have a serious disconnect going on upstairs somewhere.

    • Sendarius says:

      I hope they keep it up. It can only help grease the slide.

      I want to see the Democrats in disarray, and a restoration of the traditional freedoms due all Americans, by the time I have saved enough to immigrate.

Comments are closed.