CLT UPDATE
Sunday, January 24, 2010
The stunning January Thaw
Revolution 2010 is launched in Massachusetts
It was - for the second time in
Massachusetts history - the shot heard round the world, or at the very
least from coast to coast and surely in the halls of Congress.
Scott Brown won this one fair and square with his down-to-earth charm,
his hard work and his forthright position on issues - and with the help
of that much-disparaged by the opposition pick-up truck.
But it is also true that Brown was the right candidate at the right time
with the right message. And it’s that message that the White House and
congressional Democrats can no longer ignore. After all, if the people
of Massachusetts can send a Republican to the U.S. Senate to fill the
seat Ted Kennedy had a lock on for 47 years, then the revolution has
indeed begun.
And like that battle in Concord more than two centuries ago, this is
only the opening round.
A Boston Herald editorial
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
A revolution begins
The Tea Party movement that stoked antitax protests from
Seattle to Washington, D.C., found its inspiration in Revolutionary-era
Massachusetts. And this week it helped fuel a modern political revolt right here
on the turf of its tea-dumping forbears....
“It was a miracle moment,’’ said Christen Varley, a 39-year-old blogger from
Holliston who helped found the Greater Boston Tea Party last year. “Boom, he
went from zero on the radar screen to what everyone was paying attention to.’’
...
In a scorching analysis circulated a week before the election, Massachusetts
small-government activists Michael Cloud and Carla Howell tried to dissuade Tea
Party voters from supporting Brown, noting that as a legislator he had supported
health care reform in Massachusetts and urged voters to defeat their popular but
unsuccessful 2008 ballot question to eliminate the income tax.
“Scott Brown is the worst fake tax-cutter in the Massachusetts legislature,’’
they wrote. “And a fake ally is more dangerous than an open enemy,’’
Senate candidate Joseph L. Kennedy, a 38-year-old Libertarian from Dedham who
was a Tea Party enthusiast before he was a candidate for the Senate against
Brown, thinks he should have been the beneficiary of the activists’ fervor.
“The people in the tea parties sold their own soul,’’ Kennedy said.
The Boston Globe
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Tea Party shows its muscle in Bay State
Across the country, the bailouts of Wall Street and the
banks, the big year-end bonuses for powerful executives, and the rapidly
ballooning federal deficit were feeding populist anger and resentment of the
Obama administration while providing the Tea Party movement with fresh energy
and issues around which to organize....
But it also heralds the coming of age of the Tea Party movement, which won its
first major electoral success with a new pragmatism, and the potential of
different elements of a divided Republican Party to rally around one goal....
Indeed, there was a spirit of pragmatism emerging here that had not been seen in
other races where conservative and Tea Party activists have become involved.
The New York Times
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Energy and Stealth of G.O.P. Groups Undid a Sure Bet
After the Wrentham Republican's surprise victory in the
bluest of blue states — for the seat long held by one of the Senate's most
liberal leaders — there were questions yesterday about the election's
implications in November and whether traditional Democratic strongholds might
suddenly become vulnerable.
In Danvers on Tuesday, voters went for Sen.-elect Scott Brown by 27 percentage
points. But that result didn't seem to rattle state Rep. Ted Speliotis,
D-Danvers, a veteran campaigner who's weathered similar political storms.
Local races, such as those for state representative and state senator, are often
determined by the candidates themselves, not party politics, he said....
A year after they were celebrating a historic victory, Democrats now are
contending with all the potential pitfalls of being the party in power....
[T]here is a risk that the Brown victory may change the way voters view even
local candidates from now on, Salem State political science professor Daniel
Mulcare said.
"Everybody is going to be looking at these Democrats in a new way. A harsher,
more scrutinizing way," Mulcare said. "They'll be looking with a new lens and
asking, 'Do you care about our issues? What have you done about our issues?'"
The Salem News
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Lesson for state's Democrats:
Take nothing for granted
There isn’t a Democratic politician around who hasn’t heard
the reverberations from Tuesday’s Senate election, and Gov. Deval Patrick is no
exception.
And last night in his State of the State message he tried his best to make
lemonade out of the lemons that Republican victory handed to liberal Democrats
everywhere.
“The best news is that - even on a cold, snowy day in January, for an
out-of-cycle election - the voters came out in force and engaged in their
democracy,” he said. “At a time when many feel powerless, people reminded
themselves and us that they have all the power they need to make all the change
they want.”
A Boston Herald editorial
Friday, January 22, 2010
Mass. reality check
A growing group of dissidents in the Massachusetts House
yesterday called on Speaker Robert A. DeLeo to open the chamber’s books, allow
healthy debate on all bills, and subject the Legislature to the laws that cover
other elected bodies - including laws on public records, open meetings, and
competitive bidding.
“We want the House to become a functional democracy,’’ the group said in a
letter, which was e-mailed to all 160 members....
One of the lawmakers who signed yesterday’s letter, state Representative Will
Brownsberger of Belmont, resigned his position as vice chairman of the House
Committee on Global Warming and Climate Change earlier this week.
“At a time of continued financial pressure I think it’s more important than ever
that we have an open management process in the House,’’ he said in an interview.
“Hopefully over the months to come, members will feel more free to join in a
conversation about the changes that are needed.’’
Said Representative Thomas Stanley, one of the original four dissidents: “The
House is broken. Checks and balances need to be restored. Members are frustrated
with the speaker’s indifference to our calls for an open democracy.’’
The Boston Globe
Friday, January 22, 2010
DeLeo urged to air House proceedings
In letter, 8 colleagues implore speaker to restore safeguards
They filed in and out of coffeehouses, all but crying
in their cappuccinos, barely touching their carrot cake muffins, still
in shock that Scott Brown - a Republican! - had been elected to the US
Senate in the state that pioneered universal health care, legalized
same-sex marriage, and normally sends 12 Democrats to Congress....
There is no better place to sense that mood than Amherst and Cambridge,
two outposts of extreme liberalism in Massachusetts. They share a
self-effacing nickname - “The People’s Republic.’’ They share (along
with Provincetown) the distinction of being the most pro-Coakley
communities, having handed her 84 percent of the vote. And they share
the shock.
“I’m upset. I’m heartbroken. I just hate the idea that the Republicans
have just won,’’ said Nick Seamon, owner of The Black Sheep, a
bakery/bastion of liberalism on Main Street in Amherst....
Across the Commonwealth, the Democrats’ dejection was no less palpable
at the 1369 Coffee House in Inman Square.
“In Cambridge I’m surrounded by disappointed and upset people now so I’m
not feeling that isolated,’’ Annabel Gill, shift manager at 1369, said
Wednesday as she fashioned an elegant leaf design in the foam of a skim
milk latte. “But it is a little unsettling to realize that more people
in this state want to vote [Republican] than I would have suspected, so
that does make me feel a little isolated.’’ ...
And in Cambridge, the only solace was the fact that the seat Brown won
will be up for grabs again in 2012.
The Boston Globe
Friday, January 22, 2010
Liberal bastions lament as the blue fades
Chip Ford's CLT Commentary
Greetings activists and supporters:
What an unbelievable week for Massachusetts -- for
America!
Who'd have ever thought we'd elect a Republican as our
United States Senator in our lifetime -- who'd have ever thought we'd
elect a Republican to fill the late Ted Kennedy's seat of all
things?
We have saved the nation!
What a team -- Republicans, unenrolled independents,
disenchanted Democrats, and Tea-Party patriots from across the nation
who heeded the call-to-arms. Some philosophical differences were
sublimated for the good of the nation and the survival of our historical
ethic, and the result was -- son of a gun -- a huge WIN that
resounded across the country and echoed beyond.
President Obama and the Democrat congressional
majority are stunned even more than we, set back on their heels.
Socialized medicine has run off the tracks and the president, along with
his U.S. Congress of sycophants, is reordering its priorities -- in fear
of survival.
Fear of survival is the theme, suddenly. Even
on Bacon Hill the vast Democrat majority is making moves -- sounds at
least -- that they got the message.
Feeling threatened too. This is political
theater at its best.
In Massachusetts, and in Washington, D.C., the
entrenched pols are feeling the heat.
The heat YOU generated.
How's this turn-around feel, patriot?
The Boston Herald
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
A Boston Herald editorial
A revolution begins
It was - for the second time in Massachusetts history - the shot heard
round the world, or at the very least from coast to coast and surely in
the halls of Congress.
Scott Brown won this one fair and square with his down-to-earth charm,
his hard work and his forthright position on issues - and with the help
of that much-disparaged by the opposition pick-up truck.
But it is also true that Brown was the right candidate at the right time
with the right message. And it’s that message that the White House and
congressional Democrats can no longer ignore. After all, if the people
of Massachusetts can send a Republican to the U.S. Senate to fill the
seat Ted Kennedy had a lock on for 47 years, then the revolution has
indeed begun.
And like that battle in Concord more than two centuries ago, this is
only the opening round.
Her fellow Democrats will attempt to blame the loss entirely on Martha
Coakley, her inability to connect with voters, her verbal blunders and
on assuming her primary victory was all she needed. Much of that is
true, but it is also true that Coakley promised to be simply more of the
same.
And voters here are tired of more of the same.
They don’t see the point of an expensive new health care bill that
threatens to damage the health care industry here, disrupt service to
Medicare recipients and tax us all - especially when we already insure
97.4 percent of our people.
They don’t see the point of paying higher and higher energy costs, when
the world’s pollution is not our fault.
They don’t see the point of growing the deficit so that our children and
grandchildren will be paying for today’s policy mistakes - including a
$787 stimulus bill that didn’t.
Most of all they are simply tired of the kind of Washington arrogance
that says “don’t worry, we know what’s best for you.”
Voters of Massachusetts wanted to take back the power that has been so
sorely abused. Yesterday they did.
The Boston Globe
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Tea Party shows its muscle in Bay State
By Stephanie Ebbert
The Tea Party movement that stoked antitax protests from Seattle to
Washington, D.C., found its inspiration in Revolutionary-era
Massachusetts. And this week it helped fuel a modern political revolt
right here on the turf of its tea-dumping forbears.
The anger driving this loose coalition of activists, united by a
distrust of government, helped vault a little-known Republican state
lawmaker into the Senate seat held for 47 years by liberal icon Edward
M. Kennedy.
As Scott P. Brown’s populist message began making inroads into Democrat
Martha Coakley’s commanding lead, the call went out online, via e-mail
and in chat rooms, drawing Tea Party activists to Massachusetts to woo
its famously liberal electorate.
“It was a miracle moment,’’ said Christen Varley, a 39-year-old blogger
from Holliston who helped found the Greater Boston Tea Party last year.
“Boom, he went from zero on the radar screen to what everyone was paying
attention to.’’
Several Tea Party activists now are considering candidacies for state
representative and state auditor, as well as Congress, said Varley. But
many are focused on just making a statement, rather than building a
viable third political party.
“I guess it’s just a way to vent our frustration, to make our voice
heard,’’ said Barbara Klain, who cofounded the Greater Lowell Tea Party
with a bunch of signs and no e-mail address. People were not sure what
to make of their Tea Party Boat Float in the Chelmsford Fourth of July
Parade, she said. Now she has about 400 members.
“It seems to be working,’’ Klain added. “I had no idea we were going to
have this impact when I started last year. It’s very satisfying. And
it’s a little scary, too.’’
Until recently, the Tea Party movement had not seemed to be surging in
Massachusetts. Activists in Boston, Worcester, and Lowell held protests
on tax day, April 15, like their compatriots. Some joined a Sept. 12
protest in Washington, D.C. But Varley’s group launched a website only
in December, a month after meeting with other Massachusetts activists
and deciding that they would not endorse a Senate candidate.
Enthusiasm for Brown began to soar, however, after the campaign asked
Varley to recruit voters for a fund-raiser and about 150 of those on her
e-mail list of 1,300 turned out for a snowy morning breakfast
fund-raiser in Westborough. He spent 2 1/2 hours, Varley said, talking
to conservative voters who urgently wanted to be heard.
“I spent the next two days saying, if you like Scott Brown, go out and
spread the word,’’ Varley said. “That’s what they did. And it
exploded.’’
The same thing was happening elsewhere, as conservative pundits began
training their attention on the race and activists from states including
Rhode Island, Connecticut, and New York began flocking to Massachusetts
to hold signs, make calls, or do whatever it took to help block health
care reform through Brown’s election.
That word-of-mouth fervor was helpful for a minority-party candidate who
had limited infrastructure in Massachusetts and no funding expected from
the national party that had given up on the seat.
Brown’s candidacy began going viral among conservatives just after the
new year, at about the same time the campaign launched a controversial
ad showing President John F. Kennedy’s likeness morph into Brown’s and
at a time when Brown was hitting the conservative airwaves and the
Coakley campaign was mostly dormant.
Brown was not a perfect fit for the Tea Party platform, an amalgam of
antigovernment complaints that coalesce around issues of shrinking
government and preventing national health care reform.
In a scorching analysis circulated a week before the election,
Massachusetts small-government activists Michael Cloud and Carla Howell
tried to dissuade Tea Party voters from supporting Brown, noting that as
a legislator he had supported health care reform in Massachusetts and
urged voters to defeat their popular but unsuccessful 2008 ballot
question to eliminate the income tax.
“Scott Brown is the worst fake tax-cutter in the Massachusetts
legislature,’’ they wrote. “And a fake ally is more dangerous than an
open enemy,’’
Senate candidate Joseph L. Kennedy, a 38-year-old Libertarian from
Dedham who was a Tea Party enthusiast before he was a candidate for the
Senate against Brown, thinks he should have been the beneficiary of the
activists’ fervor.
“The people in the tea parties sold their own soul,’’ Kennedy said.
Yesterday, as the next round of challengers lined up to continue the
electoral surge, Brown endorsed Republican Bill Hudak’s candidacy
against US Representative John Tierney.
Martin Lamb of Holliston plans to challenge US Representative Jim
McGovern; Brad Marston is running for state representative, and
independent Kamal Jain of Lowell for state auditor, members of the group
said. Massachusetts GOP chairwoman Jennifer Nassour was leery of giving
too much credit to the insurgent Tea Party movement.
“I couldn’t tell you who they were if they walked past me,’’ said
Nassour. “I think that really, the people that got involved on Scott’s
race were the ones that just really were motivated for things to be
different here.’’
That said, she is not going to decline the assistance when the party
represents such a small fraction of the state’s voters.
“We’re 12 percent, so quite honestly, anyone who’s going to come along
and help us are welcome,’’ said Nassour.
The New York Times
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Energy and Stealth of G.O.P. Groups Undid a Sure Bet
By Adam Nagourney, Jeff Zeleny, Kate Zernike and Michael Cooper
BOSTON — The e-mail message from a Massachusetts supporter to one of the
leaders of the Tea Party movement arrived in early December. The state
was holding a special election to fill the seat held by Senator Edward
M. Kennedy, it said, and conditions were ripe for a conservative ambush:
an Election Day in the dead of winter with the turnout certain to be
low.
“To be honest, we kind of looked at it and said, this is a long shot,”
said Brendan Steinhauser, the director of state campaigns for
FreedomWorks, which has become an umbrella for Tea Party groups. But the
group was impressed by the determination of organizers in this decidedly
Democratic state and was intrigued by the notion that this could be a
way to effectively derail federal health care legislation.
And so FreedomWorks sent out a query to dozens of its best organizers
across the country. Within days, the clamoring response made clear that
what seemed improbable suddenly seemed very attainable; within weeks,
the Tea Party movement had established a beachhead in Mr. Kennedy’s home
state.
While conservatives quietly mobilized behind a state senator, Scott
Brown, to fill the seat occupied by Mr. Kennedy for nearly 47 years,
Democrats paid but slight attention to a contest that by every
indication and by history should have been nothing to worry about.
Martha Coakley, the attorney general and Democratic Party candidate,
barely campaigned in the weeks after winning her primary on Dec. 8.
The vastly different responses of the two parties contributed to a
confluence of events that fundamentally altered the course of what
should have been a routine special election.
In Washington, Senate Democrats had to engage in tawdry horse-trading to
pass a staggeringly complex health care bill in the face of a Republican
filibuster, displaying Congress at its partisan and dysfunctional worst.
Across the country, the bailouts of Wall Street and the banks, the big
year-end bonuses for powerful executives, and the rapidly ballooning
federal deficit were feeding populist anger and resentment of the Obama
administration while providing the Tea Party movement with fresh energy
and issues around which to organize.
Here in Massachusetts, Mr. Brown began introducing himself with a modest
buy of television advertisements that would prove politically prescient:
portraying himself as the outsider battling the Democratic Party
establishment, in this case, Ms. Coakley.
It was less of a long shot than it seemed: The National Republican
Senatorial Committee had, nine days before Christmas, quietly conducted
a poll that found that among voters who seemed most likely to turn out,
Mr. Brown was just 3 percentage points behind.
Ms. Coakley did almost nothing early on, lulled by the knowledge that
Democrats had held the Senate seat for 57 years and emboldened by her
19-point win in a four-way primary. She disappeared from the trail for a
few days of rest. Her campaign, struggling for cash, was not conducting
polls in the very beginning of January, a critical period, and had yet
to run a single commercial.
By the time Ms. Coakley’s campaign and Democratic officials noticed that
things were not right in Massachusetts — after reading an outside
group’s poll on Jan. 9 that showed Mr. Brown holding a 1 percentage
point lead — the fire, as one White House official put it, was out of
control. The Tea Party reinforcements had arrived, and a conservative
group from Iowa started running commercials here portraying Ms. Coakley
as a big spender who would raise taxes, a powerful issue with
independents.
“It was a classic case of everybody getting caught napping,” David
Axelrod, a senior adviser to the president, said in an interview. “This
guy knew exactly what he was doing. He’s an appealing candidate.
Pleasant guy. He’s smart. He tapped into an antipolitician sentiment.”
The two-week period that upended the politics of Massachusetts and the
nation may well be remembered as the moment that undid the signature
initiative of the Obama presidency, his health care bill. It is a story,
based on interviews with more than three dozen people involved in the
race, of missed opportunities and tensions among Democratic power
centers here and in Washington.
But it also heralds the coming of age of the Tea Party movement, which
won its first major electoral success with a new pragmatism, and the
potential of different elements of a divided Republican Party to rally
around one goal.
Mr. Brown’s views may not have been perfectly aligned with all of the
conservative activists — in particular, he supports abortion rights,
though he opposes late-term abortions — but he pledged to vote against
the health care bill, opposed a cap-and-trade program to reduce carbon
emissions and opposed proposals to grant citizenship to illegal
immigrants. In the final week of the race, he raised $1 million a day on
the Internet.
“For us, this is not so much about Scott Brown as it is about the idea
that if we really collaborate as a mass movement, we can take any seat
in the country,” said Eric Odom, executive director of the American
Liberty Alliance, who helped organize last spring’s Tax Day Tea Party
rallies to protest government spending from his home in Chicago.
For all the political power of the Democratic Party — its control of the
White House and both houses of Congress — this contest highlighted
serious flaws in its political operation heading into the tough midterm
elections, from the political affairs office of the White House to the
Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. It demonstrated the extent to
which the White House was distracted by the exceedingly difficult task
of passing a health care bill before the State of the Union address,
along with dealing with an attempted terrorism plot on Christmas Day.
And for Congressional Democratic leaders already chafing at the
political cost of Mr. Obama’s health care plan, it was confirmation that
the bill could be deadly at the polls for any member of Congress in a
competitive race next fall.
There were many missteps on the ground by Ms. Coakley — off-putting
remarks and gaffes, local memories of problems in her tenure as attorney
general, a seething sense among many residents that she was considering
herself entitled to their votes. Many voters were as angry with the
Democrats who have long run the state as they were with the ones in
Washington, and they enjoyed a bit of nose-thumbing on Tuesday. But if
there is one question on which there appears to be a consensus among
Democrats today, amid a period of full-blown blame trading and
recriminations, it is that the defeat of Ms. Coakley could have been
prevented.
“If we had defined Scott Brown earlier, if we had been able to go up on
the air earlier, if the Democrats had passed Wall Street financial
reform in Washington,” said Celinda Lake, a pollster from the Coakley
campaign, looking weary as she arrived on Tuesday night at the Sheraton
Hotel in Boston for her client’s concession speech. “There are lots of
things that we could have done.”
A Dead Time
On the Sunday after Christmas, the senior members of Mr. Brown’s
campaign gathered at his headquarters in Needham. It was a dead time of
year, politically. Mr. Brown did not have a lot of money. Ms. Coakley’s
strategy seemed clear: to coast to victory with a quick under-the-radar
campaign. Democrats in Massachusetts and Washington were enjoying the
holiday — she was resting up; the president’s chief of staff, Rahm
Emanuel, was in India; Mr. Obama was in Hawaii — and few were paying
attention to the long-shot state senator from Massachusetts.
By contrast, the National Republican Senatorial Committee zeroed in on
the race — and the possibility to seize a victory — weeks before the
Democratic committee realized its candidate was in real trouble. A poll
conducted for Republicans on Dec. 16 showed that Mr. Brown was within 13
percentage points of Ms. Coakley and trailing by only 3 percentage
points among voters who said they definitely intended to vote.
“It almost seemed too good to be true,” said Senator John Cornyn of
Texas, chairman of the committee.
The absence at this critical juncture of the White House or the
Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, led by Senator Robert Menendez
of New Jersey, strategists in both parties say, was a turning point that
touched off a series of mistakes from which the Coakley campaign would
never recover.
Mr. Brown intensified the pace of his campaigning after that meeting in
Needham. He began running biographical ads — one even featured a grainy
image of a young John F. Kennedy — and turned up at campaign events
across the state.
A review of Ms. Coakley’s schedules showed no public campaign events
between a stop where she read Dr. Seuss to schoolchildren on Dec. 23 and
an appearance in New Bedford on Dec. 30. Mr. Brown’s schedule that week,
on the other hand, was full: a stop at a coat drive on Christmas eve,
six stops scheduled for the day after Christmas, and seven more the day
after.
Mr. Brown’s surge should not have been a total surprise. Ms. Lake, the
pollster for Ms. Coakley, said early surveys conducted before the
primary detected that “independents were an ornery lot in an angry
mood.” But those surveys did not alter the campaign strategy for Ms.
Coakley or set off alarm bells for Democrats in Washington.
“Everybody took their foot off the pedal more than they should have,”
Ms. Lake said.
Under the Radar
As Tea Party activists headed to Massachusetts, the National Republican
Senatorial Committee made a deliberate decision to keep a low profile.
It baffled and to some extent misled Democrats, who thought that the
committee had concluded the race was unwinnable. But Republican
officials, after a series of primary challenges from conservative and
Tea Party candidates, have learned the dangers of being identified as an
establishment candidate. They determined the best way to help Mr. Brown
was not to be seen as helping him.
“We did not want to provoke the D.S.C.C. into a big spending battle too
early, which would have allowed them to chip away at his positives in a
way that they would have eventually won,” said Mr. Cornyn, often
criticized by Tea Party groups as the embodiment of the establishment.
And Mr. Odom, with the American Liberty Alliance, had dismissed the race
as unwinnable, too, until about 10 days ago, when the number of e-mail
messages urging his group to jump into the race began to reach 50 a day.
He sent out e-mail messages to the 60,000 people on the
taxdayteaparty.com list, urging them to donate and he headed to Boston
himself.
Indeed, there was a spirit of pragmatism emerging here that had not been
seen in other races where conservative and Tea Party activists have
become involved. “He’s the kind of Republican who will give
conservatives heartburn, but it’s better than the other side,” said
Erick Erickson, the editor of RedState.com. His Web site does not
typically endorse any candidate who supports abortion rights. But by
late December, it was posting almost daily appeals directing readers to
Mr. Brown’s Web site to contribute.
A Blank Slate
The first wave of Democratic party operatives arrived in Massachusetts
about two weeks before Election Day, only to find that it might have
already been too late. Even at that late hour, some campaign strategists
said they found gaps in basic procedures. The electronic database of
voters was not updated, three party officials said, and there was no
reliable voter identification list to find supporters among independent
voters.
Dennis Newman, the chief strategist for the Coakley campaign, said it
was “absolutely false” that there was no current voter database.
Mr. Newman said that the campaign had spent most of its money in the
primary, which it had expected to be the tougher race, and then had
trouble raising money when things tightened. When the race became a
referendum on health care, he said, Ms. Coakley was put in the tricky
position of defending a health care bill to voters in a state that
already has near-universal coverage.
Whatever the reason, Ms. Coakley’s campaign took the stance of a
front-runner, determining that the best way to defeat Mr. Brown was to
ignore him. It had done relatively little to draw attention to his
voting record and positions that could have halted his rise.
If the campaign had been viewed as competitive, Ms. Coakley might well
not have left the trail for a few days, several Democrats said. More
important, she might have used that critical period at the end of
December and in the opening days of the New Year to run advertisements
introducing herself to voters — who knew her only vaguely as the
attorney general — and making the case for her candidacy. Instead, she
decided it made more sense to wait until the final week to run her
advertisements.
The result was that she was sort of a blank slate, and Mr. Brown’s small
advertising buy, combined with the more ambitious attack advertisements
financed by the Iowa group and others, were able to define her. Several
Democrats here and in Washington expressed frustration that Ms. Coakley
— who is not based in Washington and who as attorney general could
easily have portrayed herself as the crusader working against corruption
and special interests — permitted herself to be identified as the
establishment.
Last Thursday, after the White House awoke to the danger, Mr. Axelrod
called Mr. Newman, a senior adviser to Ms. Coakley, to ask what the
White House could do to help; he was assured, as Mr. Axelrod later
related the conversation to associates, that things were in place and
that Ms. Coakley was wary about getting any more operatives from
Washington.
Mr. Axelrod later expressed surprise to associates that the Coakley
campaign had not requested a visit from Mr. Obama to help turn out
Democratic voters who seemed underwhelmed by the candidacy. (Many black
voters who were enthusiastic about Mr. Obama in 2008 failed to vote on
Tuesday.)
The next day, with new polls showing the race was virtually tied, Ms.
Coakley called Mr. Axelrod and asked if Mr. Obama would come to Boston.
There was some debate about whether Mr. Obama should make this trip.
Some of Mr. Obama’s advisers warned that the president would suffer
political damage if he went and lost. Others said they thought the visit
would reinforce Mr. Brown’s message that Ms. Coakley was the tool of
Washington. But as Mr. Obama contemplated the stakes of a loss —
starting with his health care bill — it was determined there was no
other choice.
The president, described by associates as increasingly distressed about
the campaign, headed to Boston Sunday for a rally in which he could
barely hide his discomfort. Mr. Obama all but pleaded with Democratic
voters to be more “fired up” than they were in 2008. But two days later,
his call went unanswered.
Kitty Bennett contributed reporting from Washington.
The Salem News
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Lesson for state's Democrats:
Take nothing for granted
By Chris Cassidy
The question now among political experts: Will there be a Scott Brown
effect this fall?
After the Wrentham Republican's surprise victory in the bluest of blue
states — for the seat long held by one of the Senate's most liberal
leaders — there were questions yesterday about the election's
implications in November and whether traditional Democratic strongholds
might suddenly become vulnerable.
In Danvers on Tuesday, voters went for Sen.-elect Scott Brown by 27
percentage points. But that result didn't seem to rattle state Rep. Ted
Speliotis, D-Danvers, a veteran campaigner who's weathered similar
political storms.
Local races, such as those for state representative and state senator,
are often determined by the candidates themselves, not party politics,
he said.
As proof, he points to the 2002 election, where former Republican Gov.
Mitt Romney captured 72 percent of the vote in Speliotis' district — but
Speliotis still won his race.
"I didn't lose a single vote," he said. "(Voters) look at me, and they
look at what I did. They recognize who I am and who I'm not."
Elections at the local level, where voters often know the candidates
personally, make them different, Speliotis said.
"The voters have a personal relationship with us," he said. "It's not
based on an issue or philosophy. It's based on a trust that that guy is
working for me. I can disagree with him, but he's working for me."
But some political experts yesterday said that Democrats have to regroup
— or risk rejection at the polls in the fall.
"This represents a tremendous wake-up call to Democrats in this state
and across the country," said Salem State College professor Robert
Brown, whose courses include crisis communications. "They need to be
thinking about this now, about how to react to what people in
Massachusetts have said."
Lingering unemployment, Brown's surprising surge and the confusing,
often ugly political battle over health care reform all seem to have
contributed to a drastic change in the political landscape from just a
year ago when a popular President Obama took the oath of office.
A year after they were celebrating a historic victory, Democrats now are
contending with all the potential pitfalls of being the party in power.
"Every single Democrat out there now is Goliath," Professor Brown said.
His advice to Democrats campaigning for re-election this year is to work
with the kind of energy of an ambitious political newcomer.
"You want to run like you've never run before," he said. "Take nothing
for granted."
And learn the lesson of the Coakley collapse, he said.
"Never, ever, ever underestimate your opponent — whoever you're running
against," Brown said.
Democratic Congressman John Tierney — himself an incumbent facing a
challenge this fall — was working in Washington, D.C., yesterday and was
unavailable for comment, a spokesman said.
Still, there is a risk that the Brown victory may change the way voters
view even local candidates from now on, Salem State political science
professor Daniel Mulcare said.
"Everybody is going to be looking at these Democrats in a new way. A
harsher, more scrutinizing way," Mulcare said. "They'll be looking with
a new lens and asking, 'Do you care about our issues? What have you done
about our issues?'"
One Democrat who may have reason to worry is Gov. Deval Patrick, who
finds himself in a three-way battle for re-election in November.
While the crowded nature of the race may actually help Patrick by
splitting the anti-incumbent vote, the governor's polling numbers need
improvement fast, Mulcare said.
"There's just general dissatisfaction with his performance, and he's not
very popular," Mulcare said. "Even if Coakley had won by 10 or 12
points, it was still going to be a tough spot for him."
The good news for Democrats is that November is still 10 months away,
and as quickly as the political pendulum appears to have shifted to the
right, it could just as easily swing left again.
But either way, Democrats can take measures now to help their cause in
the fall, Mulcare said.
"They have to realize there is a serious threat and not just assume
their seats are a given," Mulcare said.
The Boston Herald
Friday, January 22, 2010
A Boston Herald editorial
Mass. reality check
There isn’t a Democratic politician around who hasn’t heard the
reverberations from Tuesday’s Senate election, and Gov. Deval Patrick is
no exception.
And last night in his State of the State message he tried his best to
make lemonade out of the lemons that Republican victory handed to
liberal Democrats everywhere.
“The best news is that - even on a cold, snowy day in January, for an
out-of-cycle election - the voters came out in force and engaged in
their democracy,” he said. “At a time when many feel powerless, people
reminded themselves and us that they have all the power they need to
make all the change they want.”
Well, yes and no.
This is an election year - a fact made obvious by Patrick’s pledge last
night not to cut state aid to cities and towns or Chapter 70 school aid
to those communities. But that election is 10 months away, and the
restlessness that found its voice on Tuesday isn’t about to subside just
because there isn’t a ballot to be filled out at the moment.
“Be angry - but channel it in a positive direction,” Patrick urged.
“It’s easy to be against something. It takes tough-mindedness and
political courage to be for something.”
He’s certainly right on that score. But he missed a golden opportunity
to enlist those teaparty folks and all of those who are tired of
business as usual whether it’s on Capitol Hill or Beacon Hill in
actually doing something about making needed reforms in state government
- which he mentioned in just one line of his speech.
But even as state House and Senate budget writers yesterday acknowledged
a $3 billion structural deficit in next year’s budget, the governor
failed to prepare lawmakers or voters for what that will mean when he
files his fiscal 2011 budget next week. And that sure sounds like
business as usual.
The Boston Globe
Friday, January 22, 2010
DeLeo urged to air House proceedings
In letter, 8 colleagues implore speaker to restore safeguards
By Andrea Estes
A growing group of dissidents in the Massachusetts House yesterday
called on Speaker Robert A. DeLeo to open the chamber’s books, allow
healthy debate on all bills, and subject the Legislature to the laws
that cover other elected bodies - including laws on public records, open
meetings, and competitive bidding.
“We want the House to become a functional democracy,’’ the group said in
a letter, which was e-mailed to all 160 members.
Eight members signed the letter - four more than had authored previous
letters criticizing DeLeo, a fellow Democrat.
The earlier letters were more narrow, challenging DeLeo to release
details of $378,000 in legal bills the House paid in connection with the
state and federal investigations of former House speaker Salvatore F.
DiMasi. DeLeo has refused, citing lawyer-client privilege. He hired an
outside lawyer, Daniel Crane, to review the bills, but has refused to
say even how much Crane is being paid.
One of the lawmakers who signed yesterday’s letter, state Representative
Will Brownsberger of Belmont, resigned his position as vice chairman of
the House Committee on Global Warming and Climate Change earlier this
week.
“At a time of continued financial pressure I think it’s more important
than ever that we have an open management process in the House,’’ he
said in an interview. “Hopefully over the months to come, members will
feel more free to join in a conversation about the changes that are
needed.’’
Said Representative Thomas Stanley, one of the original four dissidents:
“The House is broken. Checks and balances need to be restored. Members
are frustrated with the speaker’s indifference to our calls for an open
democracy.’’
In an e-mailed statement, Seth Gitell, DeLeo spokesman, said the speaker
“has worked to make the House a more open and transparent place’’ and
has “kept an open-door policy with members, meeting with them in groups
and individually’’ on many issues.
State Representative Ann-Margaret Ferrante, who is in her first term,
defended DeLeo. “He’s been very open. He’s constantly made himself
available to me, asking what he could do to help me represent my
district better.’’
Ironically, she said, at a conference for new lawmakers last year, one
of the legislators who is pushing DeLeo to make changes, Lida Harkins,
urged newly elected lawmakers to follow the speaker’s lead.
“People want us to do the people’s business and not have infighting,’’
Ferrante said.
Harkins has said she will run for the state Senate seat of Scott Brown,
the newly elected US senator. Others signing the letter were state
Representatives John Quinn, Matt Patrick, Joseph Driscoll, Steve
D’Amico, and William Greene.
Quinn said he has filed bills that have been bottled up for months in
committee, including one in mid-August that would have provided sales
tax relief to consumers.
The Boston Globe
Friday, January 22, 2010
Liberal bastions lament as the blue fades
By David Filipov
AMHERST - They filed in and out of coffeehouses, all but crying in their
cappuccinos, barely touching their carrot cake muffins, still in shock
that Scott Brown - a Republican! - had been elected to the US Senate in
the state that pioneered universal health care, legalized same-sex
marriage, and normally sends 12 Democrats to Congress.
In the days since the unthinkable happened, diehard Democrats have been
forced to confront results that suggest Massachusetts votes much the way
rest of the country does - blue on the edges with a big red swath in the
middle. They have grappled with the possibility that the Commonwealth,
until this week viewed by the much of the country as an outpost of
extreme liberalism, may not be all that. And that has left them blue -
in the other meaning of the word - over Martha Coakley’s defeat.
There is no better place to sense that mood than Amherst and Cambridge,
two outposts of extreme liberalism in Massachusetts. They share a
self-effacing nickname - “The People’s Republic.’’ They share (along
with Provincetown) the distinction of being the most pro-Coakley
communities, having handed her 84 percent of the vote. And they share
the shock.
“I’m upset. I’m heartbroken. I just hate the idea that the Republicans
have just won,’’ said Nick Seamon, owner of The Black Sheep, a
bakery/bastion of liberalism on Main Street in Amherst. Yesterday,
Seamon served up one of his best-selling Republican Party cookies
(“because they are full of fruits and nuts’’), and summed up the jolt
delivered by the vote.
“We tend to be a little insulated here. We don’t spend a lot of time in
Central Massachusetts, or wherever they voted for whatever his name
was,’’ Seamon said.
Across the Commonwealth, the Democrats’ dejection was no less palpable
at the 1369 Coffee House in Inman Square.
“In Cambridge I’m surrounded by disappointed and upset people now so I’m
not feeling that isolated,’’ Annabel Gill, shift manager at 1369, said
Wednesday as she fashioned an elegant leaf design in the foam of a skim
milk latte. “But it is a little unsettling to realize that more people
in this state want to vote [Republican] than I would have suspected, so
that does make me feel a little isolated.’’
This week, Coakley supporters in Cambridge gazed at the electoral
aftermath beyond the Republic’s blue horizon and saw a political
landscape they barely recognized.
“It makes us realize that we’re not really as different as we’d like to
think, like, ‘Oh, we’re this Democratic liberal state,’ ’’ Arwen Downs,
a baby sitter, put it as she pushed an infant in a stroller along
Cambridge Street on Wednesday. “We’re not.’’
And she had a point. The thing about Massachusetts is not that it always
goes liberal, no matter what people in other states think. (Downs, who
hails from North Carolina, said her friends back home still think that
Massachusetts is “way out there, completely crazy.’’)
The Commonwealth had 16 straight years of Republican governors, a string
that ended with the election of Deval Patrick in 2006. Massachusetts may
have stood alone in the union against Richard Nixon in 1972, but it went
with Ronald Reagan twice.
The thing about Massachusetts is that it has always prided itself on its
uniqueness. Fans here don’t just root for a baseball team; they form
their own nation. The Commonwealth doesn’t have a capital; it has the
Hub. Massachusetts doesn’t just have history; it’s the Cradle of the
American Revolution. And now it has a mass of independent voters who see
themselves as revolutionaries for breaking the Democratic lock on the
state’s congressional seats.
“This election will go down in history as the one that changed the
country,’’ opined Tim Cyr, an independent from Plymouth who went with
Brown on Tuesday. “Someday we will tell our grandchildren about it.’’
Brown drew upon this revolutionary spirit throughout the campaign. The
“Scott heard ’round the world’’ never hesitated to play the patriot card
in a state where the very word evokes Massachusetts icons from Brady to
Revere. Evidently, that played well on Main Street.
And for some, on Cambridge Street.
At the 1369 Coffee House, John English sipped an espresso, leafed
through a National Rifle Association newsletter, and cackled with
palpable glee at what he saw as the larger meaning of Brown’s victory.
“I’m thrilled to death. The country’s watching us,’’ said English, a
helicopter pilot who proudly sported a Gitmo T-shirt and a brown leather
jacket “for Brown.’’ The rest of the country, he said, is going to say
that Massachusetts finally woke up.
But for those not caught up in the Brown revolution, there was little
comfort.
In Amherst, Seamon, owner of The Black Sheep, was planning to put a new
item on the menu to express his disappointment in the Democratic
candidate: The Martha Chokely sandwich.
And in Cambridge, the only solace was the fact that the seat Brown won
will be up for grabs again in 2012.
“Massachusetts as a whole is very different from Cambridge. We kind of
live in a bubble here,’’ Downs said. “I think if anything this will be a
test of how Cambridge can react as the minority instead of as the
majority. It shows that everyone has to get out and vote. It does make a
difference. You can’t just let it ride.’’
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this
material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior
interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes
only. For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
Citizens for Limited Taxation
▪ PO Box 1147
▪ Marblehead, MA 01945
▪ 508-915-3665
|
