Scott Brown is owning the dems in the commonwealth state

"Betrayal of his legacy" might be a bit strong, but clearly he would want final passage of either the Senate bill or what was agreed to by both houses of Congress. Kennedy's failing heath and eventual death is one of the reasons the process got bogged down for so long.

But whatever your viewpoint, Kennedy didn't own the Senate seat; the people of Massachusetts did. Today was their day to choose, not his.

 

They'd have to pay for other states to get what they have.

 

What if they offered Maine what they offered Nebraska? We won't know what would have happened because they never tried it. They gave up on wooing her when they got Nelson.

Bull. ****. He voted with the Massachusetts Republican Party. There are several key differences between the national and Massachusetts GOP parties -- not to mention that Brown is to the left of most Republicans even just in MA.

C'Mon. The dude has voted pro choice, pro environment, pro health care and pro union on more than one occasion in office. Sound like just another GOP Senator to you? To me he sounds exactly like every other New England Republican, and like most of the New England Dems (Sanders is about the only exception that comes to mind in the Senate).

I'm not saying there is no difference between Brown's vote and Coakley/Kennedy's. Obviously there is a shift to the right. But it's not some jump off the deep end. Brown isn't going to magically become Tom Coburn just because of his party. He wasn't Coburn in the Massachusetts Senate, and I'm more inclined to believe he votes the same way in the US Senate than that he suddenly becomes Sarah Palin. There are voters in Massachusetts that he has to appeal to if he wants to stay, and they don't vote the same way that Republicans in Mississippi do. It is incredibly presumptious to assume that every Republican is going to believe the same thing and vote the same way. The only way to achieve ideological purity would be to purge themselves of members in states like Massachusetts, not embrace them. If they want to have representation there, their party reps will necessarily hold a different viewpoint than one in another state would. This ain't rocket science.

The Dems are going from a 60 vote supermajority that they never used to a 59 vote majority. It's not the end of the world. It's more than any other party has had in something like 80 years.

The people who are acting like Scott Brown is the nuttiest right winger in history are doing no one any favors. Just as it is hysterical to me to listen to right wingers fall over a guy with the same amount of state level experience that Obama had (whaddya wanna bet that experience won't be an issue if Brown runs for Prez?), it is funny as hell to listen to left wingers take a middle of the road technocrat and desperately paint him as some radical undercover extremist. You should ask Hannity for tips. Maybe Brown talked to Bill Ayers once.

 

I'm not aware that cutting Medicare was much of an issue in this election.

Anyway I'm not sure your prescription for what the Democrats should've done is that valid as that basically would've meant nothing since practically no Republican was willing to work on health care or the stimulus package. At that point if the antidote to being arrogant and ideological was to do nothing I doubt the Democrats would be in any better position now. More likely worse.

That said while I think the priority of blame goes to Coakley for doing her best to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory national issues certainly played a role in this election. At this point though I don't think the Democrats can turn back in regard to health care as a complete collapse on that will be much worse for them. Ironically Coakley's defeat might actually help the Obama Admin. as it will guarentee that the Senate version gets passed and not the House since the Senate won't have to vote again if the conference bill is exactly the same.

 

Brown is simply a more compelling candidate, for better or worse. Seems like a not-dumb guy to me, but we'll see.

 

I like how Republicans can cherry pick between pro-Libertarian gubermin bad types or Granma is gonna lose her meddycare types.

Must feel great to know that neither side is socialist.

 

I'm sure deals were offered to both Snowe and Collins. I find it hard to believe that Reid wouldn't even engage in backroom dealing with them.

That may be true but coming in as freshman senator without even getting to serve a full term he is going to be highly constrained by party hierarchy. The Republican caucus might let him vote his way on nonclose and non controversial votes but they are going to put a lot of pressure on him regarding close and controversial votes, like health care if it comes up to vote again, or else he might find himself sitting on meaningless committees and suffering a big drop in fundraising in 2012. Remember Brown up until a few months ago was a virtual unknown and the RNC poured a lot of money into his campaign. THey are going to keep a close eye on him.

Agree and I think a lot of people are overblowing this election. It hurts the Democrats but they certainly have a huge majority and a lot can change in the next few months.

 

What's the opposite of Blue Dog?

Red Bull?

 

YEAH!!!!!!!!! GO BROWN. FILLABUSTER

 

Not sure anyone from my side of the aisle will agree with this, but I think heads need to roll in the Obama White House. This election was never taken seriously enough by the Administration until it was too late. They ignored the fact that Kennedy's state had had a Republican governor for 16 years, starting with Weld in '91 and ending with Romney in '07. Why anyone would think this election was a "gimmie" simply because it was Ted Kennedy's seat is beyond my comprehension, but that was the attitude for far too long.

Time to roll out the chopping block. I'm still thinking about who needs to go. If Obama could fire the Democratic leadership in Congress, that would be a great start, but he can't, so he needs to look to his own house. Too many things trying to be done at once. Too many agendas. Too many people trying to be pleased. It was time to be LBJ tough. Heck, Jack Kennedy tough. Maybe this will be a wakeup call. If they are even remotely taking the 2010 elections for granted, they need to wake up and smell the coffee. This had nothing to do with the Republican Party and everything to do with the leadership in Congress and the people giving the President advice. In my opinion.

 

Would new hires start at the back of the line to get Congressional approval?

 

Watching Olbermann tonight was priceless.

 

I have no doubt that he did. This does not mean that he offered them as much as he did Nelson though. Once he had 60 there was no need to woo them anymore.

There are still many tricks that the Dems can use. Apart from the slingshot/ping pong strategy, there is reconciliation (or some combination of the two). There are retiring Republican Senators in New Hampshire, Ohio, Missouri, and Kansas with absolutely nothing to lose, but who could still gain a lot for their states. They could promise Brown that there won't be any opponent from the Dems in 2012 if he flips.

Realistically he owns them. There's no point in them kneecapping him in the primaries. He's their golden boy -- the only Repub that can win in the bluest state in the Union. What are they going to do? If they get too cute Brown can pull a Specter and flip. There's no one else for them to beat him with. They don't have committeeships to hold over his head. As far as fundraising I have no doubt that he will vote for the big businesses that will respond by bankrolling his campaign. That's what New England Republicans do. Like I said that doesn't surprise me in the least. He will not, however, be a So Con religious nut. He's done with the Tea Baggers. He doesn't need them anymore.

I don't see him being constrained by party hierarchy. I think that the short timespan before his reelection (in a Presidential Year no less) means that he will have to keel more towards his own election chances and less towards power plays in the Senate. As far as the RNSC pulling funding I don't think the Mass GOP has anyone to credibly threaten Brown with. The Dems have a lot more carrots to offer than the GOP does, and more sticks as well.

I think that there are several Senators licking their chops right now. Any one of them just became the most important vote in America. They can demand whatever they want. But the compromising will still go on.

It's hard to maintain perspective when the nuts and bolts of this stuff are on 24/7 live feed cameras. Historically however our first attempt at legislation is usually flawed. We almost never get it right the first time. Suffrage has come in bits and pieces over the course of our history. It took 3 Civil Rights Bills to get full equality for all races (and we still forgot to include sexes and sexual orientation). It took us longer than any other country in the Western World to ban slavery. This is the way that our system functions. We move at a snail's pace and compromise until the basic foundation, however flawed, is laid. Then we continue to refine that base until we get it right. We started compromising with the Constitution and have yet to stop.

I still believe that something will be passed. It's not going to be perfect -- it never was going to be. But it will be better than what we have now.

 

I'm going to apologize for this tangent but I am curious as the JFK fan that you are what do you mean by "Jack Kennedy tough"? Obama has gotten more major legislation passed in his first year than Kennedy did. Not to mention the Democrats also lost seats in the House in 1962.

 

I'm not on your side of the aisle but I look for Obama to chop some heads off and change tactics. Up until now, I didn't give much credence to the notion 2010 would be like 1994. Right now, that looks like a definite possibility. At some point, Obama must fire up the base of his party to get them to the mid-term polls. It's the "base" voters that represent a larger part of the electorate mid-term than in presidential years and if the Dem base isn't fired up and motivated, 2010 will be a bloodbath. The cloak of bipartisanship needs to come off because Republicans will have none of it under any circumstances. If Obama stays the course, the Dems probably lose the House.

Obama's upcoming State of the Union address was already huge. Now the pressure is at the point of explosion. He better lay out an aggressive agenda and a solid case for believing in it or he and the Dems can kiss the rest of 2010 goodbye. The economy won't save them unless Dems voters are given hope, which is lacking right now.

On the other hand, the Republican base is so energized I almost expect national Republicans to overplay their hand, but they may get away with it.

 

I accept your apology and will give you mine for not getting into this argument again at this time. What I'll do is post part of a tribute from Ronald Reagan to Jack Kennedy in 1985. Enjoy... Reagan did these things well.


And when he died, when that comet disappeared over the continent, a whole nation grieved and would not forget. A tailor in New York put a sign on the door: ‘Closed due to a death in the family.’ The sadness was not confined to us. ‘They cried the rain down that night,’ said a journalist in Europe. They put his picture up in huts in Brazil and tents in the Congo, in offices in Dublin and Danzig. That was one of the things he did for his country, for when they honored him they were honoring someone essentially, quintessentially, completely American.

Many men are great, but few capture the imagination and the spirit of the times. The ones who do are unforgettable. Four administrations have passed since John Kennedy’s death, five presidents have occupied the Oval Office, and I feel sure that each of them thought of John Kennedy now and then, and his thousand days in the White House.

And sometimes I want to say to those who are still in school, and who sometimes think that history is a dry thing that lives in a book, that nothing is ever lost in that house. Some music plays on. I have been told that late at night when the clouds are still and the moon is high, you can just about hear the sound of certain memories brushing by. You can almost hear, if you listen close, the whir of a wheelchair rolling by and the sound of a voice calling out, ‘And another thing, Eleanor.’ Turn down a hall and you hear the brisk strut of a fellow saying, ‘Bully! Absolutely ripping!’ Walk softly now and you’re drawn to the soft notes of a piano and a brilliant gathering in the East Room, where a crowd surrounds a bright young president who is full of hope and laughter.

June 24, 1985.


http://www.jfklibrary.org/JFK+Libra.../History/1985+Tribute+by+President+Reagan.htm

 

Not looking good for Obama. It's amazing how fast you can fall.

 

For those of you that keep referring to it as Ted Kennedy's seat ..Please Stop!! It is the Peoples Seat!!

Goooo BROWN!!!
This is a great day and I am just as happy as if the Rockets won the championship I was a bit down the Chargers lost but this is actually so much more important and better!!!

 

Excellent post. I'm obviously a Democrat and have been one for a very long time now, after years as a "liberal independent," and I have been increasingly frustrated with the way the administration has handled things in its relationship with Congress. The President and his administration have bent over backwards, time and time again, to attract bipartisan support for the agenda they were elected to advance. Time and time again they have been rewarded with what amounts to a big "**** you!" Well, while it would have been better to have taken a stronger hand from the get-go, better late than never. Stop trying to please everyone. Far too many just don't care or don't give a damn. It is absurd to cater to the GOP after the actions of that party in Congress during the last two administrations. Bush never vetoed anything the Republican Congress wanted to do, not anything worth mentioning, and look at what that got us. Why bend over backwards trying to get support they are not going to give? All they want is for Obama to bend over, not support any of his agenda.

Take names and kick ass. I don't know who needs to do it. Jack Kennedy had Bobby carry his water and LBJ carried the can himself. Whoever can effectively work the backrooms for Obama needs to put it in overdrive. Past time for the President to use the bully pulpit to get both his own party in Congress to pass his agenda, and to attack the Republicans in Congress who are attacking him and his party. It's a two way street. He can talk until he's blue in the face, but if he gets no response from the other side of the aisle, what's the point in making a public display of an effort to do so? He's tried and it has been a failure. Sishir said that he got more passed in Congress than Kennedy did his first year, but it was not due to bipartisan help of any real significance. Make fewer public appearances and then make the ones you pick count. He's spread himself too thin, in my opinion. The President needs to make fewer trips and take care of business in Washington.

Whoever thought this was going to be easy should be fired.

 

He's still a novice warming up to his seat. Obama's inability to form a game plan against Wall Street without his Goldman advisors has been one of the sorer spots to me so far.

2010 looks a lot worse now though.