"The Democrats brought this on themselves," you say? You don't know the half of it.

[WilliamPitt]

In the days before the election, I kept trying to make the point that much of the dynamic driving the MA Senate election was local and not national. Today, all the pundits are saying Coakley's loss will have a national impact on the Democrats and Obama, and they're right.

But it still went down because of local shit.

Here's a prime example.

Back when Kerry was running against Bush in 2004, Republican Mitt Romney was governor of MA. The rule in MA was that the governor has the power to replace a departing Senator, and the buzz on Beacon Hill was that, if Kerry should beat Bush, Mitt would appoint a Republican to take Kerry's seat.

So the Democrats in MA changed the rule in the legislature and stripped the governor of the power to make Senate replacements.

I don't remember what my opinion of this was at the time - 2004 was a pretty busy year - but I'm pretty sure I was right up there with the amen chorus saying "Strip Mitt of this power!" because of course Kerry was going to win, and we can't have a GOPer taking his seat.

Oops.

So they changed the rule, which became moot when Kerry lost and returned to the Senate, and then Democrat Deval Patrick won the governor's race, and then Teddy died, and they didn't change the rule again to allow for governors to appoint Senate replacements.

Which is why that fucking election happened yesterday. Because we changed the rule and didn't change it back. Or, more accurately, because we changed the goddam rule in the first place. Patrick could have appointed someone and this whole disaster could have been avoided.

But it happened, thanks to local shit.

Pardon me while I go punch myself in the face.

[Jakes Progress]

1. To Democrats, the future is next week. nt

[kentuck]

2. Good info.

Thanks Will.

[JVS]

3. The party would look pretty fucking lame if it had changed the rule back.

[WilliamPitt]

7. They looked pretty lame the first time

The capacity for shame is not a valued commodity on Beacon Hill...and I think they'd trade looking lame for avoiding this debacle.

[SpiralHawk]

4. I figured you were to blame, Pitt.

You might as well accept blame for the Patriots FAIL in the playoffs, too.

[WilliamPitt]

9. I do

Wore my Bruschi jersey all year. Total jinx.

:P

[cali]

5. no self-harm, please. just posted, will, about the corruption on

Beacon Hill and Coakley's non-response to it.

[zonkers]

6. Interesting. Do you think there would have been blowback for changing it back?

Probably not. Was faiure to change it back jut an oversight? Wonder why no one in media has mentioned this till now?

[WilliamPitt]

8. "How come no one in media has mentioned this till now?"

The media? Do it's job? Answer your own question.

As for blowback, sure, there'd have been some "Oh, there they go again" comments from Howie Carr in the Herald...but the blowback would have paled in comparison to the blowback we're dealing with today.

[Tom Rinaldo]

10. Sorry Will, can't go there with you

It would have been too nakedly, blatantly, cynically a political ploy for Democrats to ping pong the rules governing Senate replacements based on who was governor at the time. The biggest block of voters in MA today call themselves Independents, not Democrats. I think that would have played out poorly in the long run in MA.

Meanwhile local goes global instantly. Look at the national effect that the deal Nelson cut for Nebraska had. Had your state manipulated the Senate in the way you suggest it would have been used as a club against Democrats everywhere in the nation.

[WilliamPitt]

14. I made an important edit above

To wit: they shouldn't have changed the rule in the first place.

:grr:

[Tom Rinaldo]

20. OK, now I can go there with you :) n/t

[hfojvt]

11. it shouldn't have mattered

For example. Do you think, if the Republican Kansas legislature had changed the rules because a Democrat Sebelius was Governor and they thought Brownback was gonna be President and then Pat Roberts died, that the Kansas Republican Party would have lost a special election? i don't.

But I certainly heartily approve of your last line :P

[Gregorian]

12. I was wondering why there was an election. Thanks for posting.

Now I know. I feel like I'm on a merry go round of stupidity. It feels like we're going nowhere. But then I'm not an optimist. So things might be better than I think.

[The Backlash Cometh]

13. Another brave post.

Self-reflection is the hardest image to take.

In politics, it's the behind the scene machinations that keep me an Independent, but it is refreshing to see when people are willing to see the faults in their own party. There's hope that the flaws will be fixed, rather than allow them to consume the party.

Now that this process has begun, keep in mind that the mainstream will only hear what is repeated the most and the loudest. So don't let yourselves be defined by whatever the pundits come up with.

[saracat]

15. That isn't what the majority of voters said and that is only partof the picture

The party apparatchnicks on ALL levels are to blame from the WH on down. They got their entitlement candidate with no primary GOTV and saw no reason to apologize or make it smell better.Add the national issues to the local and disaster ensues. No sense trying to simplify or deflect blame. there is plenty of responsibility to go around. Democrats need to become Democrats again and an attitude adjustment all around is needed. People need to be put above politics and the New Democrats aren't doing so.

[davsand]

16. Was she really the best candidate the Mass Dems had to offer? REALLY?

I kept on hearing the talking heads talk about the campaign she ran--and they really were pretty disparaging. I have to admit, even my 12 year old about fell out to hear about anybody taking a freaking VACATION in the final weeks of a campaign. (Can you tell what kind of world my kid has been living in??) Kevsand and I both commented that what we were hearing about was probably only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to campaign screw-ups. It seriously sounds like she not only managed to BLOW a 20 point lead in the last month, but that she didn't even show up to DO it!!! THAT takes skill.

I know she's the current AG in the state--is THAT how she managed to win that Primary? Did she mount a campaign then or was it name recognition that carried her to the point of being a Senate candidate?

You gotta know--I'm living in a state where the Governor got impeached for trying to SELL a Senate seat--this shit is a blood sport for us here in Illinois. Color me amazed!!


:shrug:



Laura

[WilliamPitt]

17. She won the primary.

That's pretty much that.

I voted for Capuano. Selah.

[davsand]

19. So, she DID run a race to win that Primary?

That was my question, completely. It sounds to me like she knows how to run a real campaign (or did at some point in time) and then chose not to this time around--for a SENATE race!!! Hell of a time to punt--ya know?

:wtf:


FWIW, I honestly don't see this election as being anywhere near as critical for the Dems on a national level as some are claiming--if anything I think it will give the party a much needed kick in the ass. Mass. will suffer an idjit Senator for a while, but your state's loss will probably end up saving the DNC in the long run...


Laura

[WilliamPitt]

22. She beat some solid challengers in the primary

including the fellow I voted for, Capuano. In the general, however, she campaigned on her belly. It was disgraceful, especially considering the campaign lion she sought to replace.

Up-side: Joe Lieberman is now de-nutted. He no longer has the 60th-vote cudgel to wield. He'll be gone after the next election.

So.

[nichomachus]

18. It's called "unintended consequences" and it bites you in the ass every time. n/t

[Blue_In_AK]

21. Alaska changed the rule about governor appointments

after Frank Murkowski appointed his daughter Lisa to fill his seat when he quit the Senate and became governor. We were glad the rule was changed last year when we thought Palin might appoint herself to finish out Ted Stevens' term if he had been forced to quit.

Personally, I prefer special elections, even though we may not always get the result we want.