send to a friend | print | comment

Dems have no one but themselves to blame in Massachusetts

Back when Barack Obama won the White House and Democrats solidified their control of both houses of Congress—and intermittently since then—I heard everyone from progressive pundits to Democratic leaders to members of the media talking about how the country had changed, how ideological and political leanings had shifted under the feet of a Republican Party that was now out of touch, regional, and slowly becoming irrelevant, and how we were in a new, post-modern era, or whatever they were calling it at the time.

But I’m from Westmoreland County. I knew the only things that had changed were the fact that voters who’d never before been involved in the political process were coming out in droves, and that those who really disliked us before only hated us more now. I knew that if progressives didn’t get down off of their high horse and start looking over their shoulders that the opposition was going to come back and bite them in the you-know-what.

And that’s exactly what’s happened.

Too many of us, including the Democratic nominee, seemed to assume that a Senate seat that had been in Kennedy hands for decades would simply stay so. In fact, Democrats seem to have fallen back into the lackadaisical trap they were in before Howard Dean took over the party several years ag0—that of assuming, incorrectly as they seem to have failed to learn, that certain areas of the country would always be reliably Democratic and that they don’t have to try too hard, if at all, to win in those places.

Of course, there are two flaws inherent in that thinking. One, it didn’t work when Republicans spent the 90’s making inroads into what had once been “reliably Democratic” territory. Two, since even more of the country went Democratic in the 2008 elections, that’s even more territory the Democrats risk ceding by taking for granted how hard it was to win them in the first place.

Indeed, I think one of the biggest mistakes President Obama has since taking office—aside from the times he’s sent his Justice Department lawyers into various courtrooms to defend questionable Bush-era policies—was in replacing Dean as Democratic National Committee in favor of Tim Kaine. I know Kaine is an Obama buddy and all, and he seems like a really nice guy, but you know what they say about nice guys. Dean’s 50 State Strategy is partly, if not mostly, responsible for delivering the House and Senate to the Democrats as well as the White House to Obama. The former governor is just the kind of aggressive, assertive leader that the often feckless Democrats need. Kaine just isn’t getting the work done.

Of course, Republicans shouldn’t be crowing too much over these recent victories either. Not only have local issues played an important role in GOP wins in Virginia and New Jersey, but I’d point out that, much like the Republican candidates running advertisements right here on pa2010.com, Republican candidates are not running as Republicans and, indeed, seem to be running away from the party’s brand.

Scott Brown ran as more of an independent-style Tea Partier than a Republican, and the new governor of Virginia actually aligned himself with many of Obama’s policies to defeat a Democratic candidate who distanced himself from the president.

I think both Democrats and Republicans have a lot to learn from these recent elections. Democrats need to learn the lesson that Howard Dean taught them all over again—that being GOP-lite isn’t going to cut it. And Republicans need to realize that their obstructionist stance isn’t impressing anyone but the far right of their base.

Voters are fed up with everyone. They are fed up with the party-politicking and the ridiculous games they all play with each other.

You guys—Democrat or Republican—had better all be looking over your shoulders now, because, at the rate you’re going, you’re all going to be looking for new jobs sooner rather than later.

January 21, 2010 at 8:00 am

--Tammy Alonso

comments

comments [2] | post a comment