I take it all back

I guess 2009 really did stink.  One year after giddily watching Obama take office it's hard not to be depressed about the way things have regressed in American politics.


There are many ways to explain the Republican win in Massachusetts tonight; arrogance by Coakley, who did not campaign for weeks after winning the Democratic primary to fill Ted Kennedy's seat; anger at the Democratic machine in Massachusetts, where Republicans have won elections for governor arguing that the Bay State needs to be a two-party state; finally, there was a consensus that Coakley was a pretty bad candidate and not nearly as charismatic as Brown.


One ironic aside.  For years, Rs complained that Ted Kennedy was an immoral and godless liberal.  Well, they just elected a dude who posed nude for a women's magazine.


But the details don't matter.  The Massachusetts Senate election will hurt Obama - and health care.  Short term, House Dems will likely pass the weaker Senate health care bill.  Long term, and by that I mean between now and November 2010, who knows how things will play out.


There is sincere anger with Obama from the left for keeping troops in Afghanistan and for not being more of a liberal.  Of course, the president gets it from both sides; the Rs think he has gone too far, though there is no proof of that at all.


I agree with Frank Rich, that the Rs are fighting so hard because they understand the country is demographically changing, and their brand is fading.  Wins like the one in Massachusetts may bolster R hopes for now, but I still think the arc of history should bend towards the Democrats.  Ideally, the Massachusetts election will remind Dems that Obama swept into office from the left.


But for the Dems to succeed in capitalizing on the demographics tilting the American electorate to the left, they will have to stand up to the Rs, tea baggers, Glen Beck, etc. and defend liberalism. Sadly, unless Paul Wellstone gets resurrected, it's hard to see that happening.


However, there is one person capable of doing that, and luckily that person is President Obama.  Let's hope this gets him more fired up and back in campaign mode.  The other good news is that the Republicans still a) have no message besides that they don't like the president; it's hard to win elections without a positive message; and b) their bench is incredibly weak, so the Dems will be running against crazies in some cases this fall.  And as Coakley found out, a weak candidate can undo huge advantages.


Finally, if employment catches up to the economy this summer and fall, fickle Americans will stop being so mad - and perhaps independents will start thinking for themselves - and reward the President for a fixing the economy.


Anyway, this is my snap assessment of the Massachusetts vote.  I'll revisit this Wednesday night to see if I made any sense.


One last word on independents.  Can we start calling them what they really are, which worst case is stupid and best case is a dilettante.  It seems to me that an independent is someone who doesn't follow politics but thinks their disengagement from the process and civic life gives them some kind of clarity of thought.  


When in truth, the opposite is true.  Since they have no core Republican or Democrat values, and they are not paying attention, they fall for the loudest or most charismatic voice.  I'm sure Obama capitalized from this in November, when his energy and vision combined with deep-seeded anger with George W. Bush to carry independents.  But it's also why 12 months later those same independents voted in a knee-jerk reaction for Brown in Massachusetts, and why others tell pollsters they are unhappy with the president.  They see the tea baggers complaining about big government and liberals so they go along.  


Like Homer Simpson (sorry for the insult Homer), there is literally nothing in their heads, no ideology or values - outside of a love for doughnuts and shitty beer - so they go with the loudest and last voice they hear.  Instead of stupid or dilettante I guess DEpendent is more appropriate.  But they are NOT independent.