New York Post: Heck Of A Job, Brownie!
Heck of a Job, Brownie!
Think maybe the voters of Massachusetts caught President Obama's at tention yesterday?
Think maybe he'll pay attention?
The message couldn't possibly have been more clear: Voters in the bluest of states turned to no-name Republican state Sen. Scott Brown to fill the shoes of their beloved Democrat, Ted Kennedy.
There went the Democrats' filibuster-proof lock on the Senate.
There went any reasonable presumption that Obama policies on health care, the economy and national security enjoy enough support to sway skittish congressional Democrats in an election year.
And there went the notion that Obama himself can muster the political horsepower to significantly influence politics and policy in the same nation that swept him into office just 14 months ago.
Polls had state Attorney General Martha Coakley up 20 points over Brown scarcely a month ago.
Yes, US politics have become so volatile of late that sweeping projections about last night's returns probably shouldn't be made quite yet.
Still, this is the fifth time in three months that Obama has focused his star power to effect political and policy outcomes -- losing each time.
It didn't work in Virginia and New Jersey, where he roller-skated in for Democratic gubernatorial candidates Creigh Deeds and Jon Corzine last November.
Or in Copenhagen, when he popped in to tout Chicago as host for the 2016 Olympics.
Or in Copenhagen again, last month, at the global climate-change conference.
And now this.
Obama needs to get better at anticipating outcomes. Each time he commits his personal prestige -- and that of his office -- and then loses, he diminishes both.
So far, he merely looks foolish.
But this is going to have serious negative consequences soon.
Coakley, for sure, bears great responsibility for her loss: She barely campaigned, taking time off to vacation and suggesting, at one point, that standing in the cold shaking hands with voters outside Fenway Park was beneath her.
She took the seat as a given.
But then, who can blame her? In Massachusetts, Democrats view Senate seats as entitlements.
And, of course, her campaign was riddled with damning gaffes: At a critical point, a Coakley ad misspelled the name her own state. She denied the presence of terrorists in Afghanistan.
She even called famed former Boston pitcher Curt Schilling a Yankees fan.
Meanwhile, independents troubled by America's course under Obama & Co. -- the stagnant economy, the health-care debacle, massive government spending, weak national security -- may have seen a chance to shift direction: Brown vowed to be the 41st GOP senator, ending the Democrats' ability to beat filibusters and pass bills.
He clearly pressed the right buttons: He vowed to block ObamaCare, which a broad swath of Bay State voters oppose. And he opposed Team Obama's decision to offer civilian trials to terrorists.
He won. Coakley lost.
But, obviously, so did Obama.
Here's hoping the president understands why.
Editor's comment: Read more here
Think maybe the voters of Massachusetts caught President Obama's at tention yesterday?
Think maybe he'll pay attention?
The message couldn't possibly have been more clear: Voters in the bluest of states turned to no-name Republican state Sen. Scott Brown to fill the shoes of their beloved Democrat, Ted Kennedy.
There went the Democrats' filibuster-proof lock on the Senate.
There went any reasonable presumption that Obama policies on health care, the economy and national security enjoy enough support to sway skittish congressional Democrats in an election year.
And there went the notion that Obama himself can muster the political horsepower to significantly influence politics and policy in the same nation that swept him into office just 14 months ago.
Polls had state Attorney General Martha Coakley up 20 points over Brown scarcely a month ago.
Yes, US politics have become so volatile of late that sweeping projections about last night's returns probably shouldn't be made quite yet.
Still, this is the fifth time in three months that Obama has focused his star power to effect political and policy outcomes -- losing each time.
It didn't work in Virginia and New Jersey, where he roller-skated in for Democratic gubernatorial candidates Creigh Deeds and Jon Corzine last November.
Or in Copenhagen, when he popped in to tout Chicago as host for the 2016 Olympics.
Or in Copenhagen again, last month, at the global climate-change conference.
And now this.
Obama needs to get better at anticipating outcomes. Each time he commits his personal prestige -- and that of his office -- and then loses, he diminishes both.
So far, he merely looks foolish.
But this is going to have serious negative consequences soon.
Coakley, for sure, bears great responsibility for her loss: She barely campaigned, taking time off to vacation and suggesting, at one point, that standing in the cold shaking hands with voters outside Fenway Park was beneath her.
She took the seat as a given.
But then, who can blame her? In Massachusetts, Democrats view Senate seats as entitlements.
And, of course, her campaign was riddled with damning gaffes: At a critical point, a Coakley ad misspelled the name her own state. She denied the presence of terrorists in Afghanistan.
She even called famed former Boston pitcher Curt Schilling a Yankees fan.
Meanwhile, independents troubled by America's course under Obama & Co. -- the stagnant economy, the health-care debacle, massive government spending, weak national security -- may have seen a chance to shift direction: Brown vowed to be the 41st GOP senator, ending the Democrats' ability to beat filibusters and pass bills.
He clearly pressed the right buttons: He vowed to block ObamaCare, which a broad swath of Bay State voters oppose. And he opposed Team Obama's decision to offer civilian trials to terrorists.
He won. Coakley lost.
But, obviously, so did Obama.
Here's hoping the president understands why.
Editor's comment: Read more here
Labels: News reporting
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home