Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why Scott Brown won - Eric Janszen

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Why Scott Brown won - Eric Janszen

    Why Scott Brown won

    Here in Massachusetts, a state with three times as many registered Democrats as Republicans and half of voters are independent, the senate seat previously held by the nation’s most famous Liberal Democrat, Ted Kennedy, was tonight lost to a relatively unknown Republican, Scott Brown. He beat the supposed Democratic shoo-in Martha Coakley by a narrow margin.


    Political analysis will chalk the loss up to Coackley's lack of charisma and her endorsement of the Obama health care plan. But Massachusetts has a long history of electing less than electrifying candidates to office, and it's not the health care plan itself but what it represents that puts voters off. There was more to this election than meets the eye.

    What did Coakley do wrong and what did Brown do right, and what does it mean for the 2010 Congressional elections in November?

    What Martha Coakley did wrong
    1. Didn’t campaign hard from day one. Voters don’t want an entitled public servant to replace one of the nation’s most famously hard working, Ted Kennedy. Unemployment may be at 10%, but the other 90% still have jobs and are paddling hard just to stay in place, and many are drifting backwards no matter how hard they try. They want their representatives to work as hard as they do and show them how they can start to move forward again.
    2. Over-used an association between Brown to Bush. Scott Brown is not GW Bush. Anyone who listened to him for one minute knew it, and the flimsy guilt-by-association tactic insulted every voter’s intelligence and reeked of small-minded party politics.
    3. Vilified bankers and capitalists. Americans are capitalists. They don’t hate the rich, they hate those who gain by unfair advantage. They don't hate bankers for banking, they hate bankers of buying influence that produced great wealth at taxpayer expense, and excessive risk taking that resulted in an financial crisis that wrecked the economy. But they blame the bankers less for buying the favors than they do the politicians for selling them. As many Democrats and Republicans swam in that sewer. Red or blue, they came out smelling is just as bad. Making it a party issue was a mistake.
    4. Over-played the role of government in solving economic problems. Americans fear excessive interference by the state in the one part of the economy that they know really can create jobs. No, not the government, the private sector. Coakley said she’d crack down on abuses by Wall Street and protect Main Street. She thought she was tapping into voter anger at the abuse of power by a financial elite but instead voters heard a promise cut off the lifeblood of the economy, the businesses that create jobs, with more taxes and regulation.
    5. Over-played the traditional role of the Democratic Party as better representing the interests of the middle class than the Republican Party. If that is true, then why did Obama administration hire Goldman Sachs executives to rescue Wall Street and run the economy? The hypocrisy is not lost on voters.

    In short, Coakley’s campaign treated Massachusetts voters as stupid and illiterate. Voters saw through the Coakley campaign’s lame and cynical attempts to exploit their anger and frustration over the mess that both the Republican and Democratic administrations created over decades. They do want heath care reform, but reform that helps them not the elected campaign contributors of their elected officials.

    But it took more than blunders by the Coakley campaign to lose a race that was once considered over before it even started.

    What Scott Brown did right
    1. Confronted the worries that keep voters awake at night. How are we going to get the economy growing again without expanding the enormous government debt that threatens our and our children's future?
    2. Addressed problems with basic, common sense solutions that cut across party lines.
    3. Claimed independence from special interests. Obama ran on the same platform. Time will tell if Brown keeps the promise.

    The Brown won because of his mostly non-ideological, practical, market-based solutions to our nation’s economic and social problems. He is fiscally conservative and socially liberal. He is by any other name a Libertarian but without the baggage that the Libertarian Party has collected over the years.

    Lesson for Congress

    The operative word for Brown is “independent.” Voters believe that both parties have been for sale for more than 30 years. Regardless of party, independence expressed as a clear and simple practical set of solutions that directly confront the greatest anxieties of voters is the key to winning in the 2010 Congressional elections.

    Members of Congress with a strong, ideological party identity, and a voting record that can be clearly traced to campaign contributors through sites such as OpenSecrets.com, who understand what this election means may now commence shitting bricks.

    What I want you to do

    If you are currently registered as either Republican or Democrat, re-register as an Independent. Why? This keeps the political machines on both parties guessing and forces the debate away from party lines and onto the issues that matter to you. It worked here in Massachusetts by accident. Maybe it can be made to work on purpose on a national scale.

    iTulip Select: The Investment Thesis for the Next Cycle™
    __________________________________________________

    To receive the iTulip Newsletter or iTulip Alerts, Join our FREE Email Mailing List

    Copyright iTulip, Inc. 1998 - 2010 All Rights Reserved

    All information provided "as is" for informational purposes only, not intended for trading purposes or advice. Nothing appearing on this website should be considered a recommendation to buy or to sell any security or related financial instrument. iTulip, Inc. is not liable for any informational errors, incompleteness, or delays, or for any actions taken in reliance on information contained herein. Full Disclaimer
    Last edited by FRED; 01-21-10, 06:24 AM.

  • #2
    Re: Why Scott Brown won - Eric Janszen

    Originally posted by EJ View Post
    If you are currently registered as either Republican or Democrat, re-register as an Independent.
    Ah but what about voting in the primaries? how many states are open-party system?
    Last edited by Slimprofits; 01-20-10, 12:05 AM.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Why Scott Brown won - Martha has NO Mass Appeal

      I agree with your analysis but, you ignored one critical analysis - Martha Coakley's lack of charisma or mass appeal.

      Elections are often come down to who would you rather have a beer with -how many would believe a beer with Martha would be enjoyable? Perhaps you should have an itulip Poll....

      Perhaps the Democrats might have won this one if they had persuaded Martha not to run and allowed Compuano (or another known Democrat Political person) or anyone with an ounce of charm to run. I know an 80 year old that voted for Martha in the Primary, as always voted for Democrats, but ultimately voted for Scott Brown. I suspect my 80 year old friend didn't fully like and ultimately didn't fully trust Martha - Image...Image ...Image.... Image.....Image...
      Its a Night of HOPE for our Republic - I wonder if President Obama is feeling HOPEFUL?

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Why Scott Brown won - Eric Janszen

        As an Englishman, living in the UK, it raises all sots of parallels with the expected incoming Conservative government in our General Elections to be held sometime this next six months. Perhaps the independent candidates will do much better than anyone thinks. Perhaps, neither conservative or labour will win. My, what a thought. Parliament filled with true independents. Now THAT is worth looking forward to. Same for the US..., WONDERFUL!

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Why Scott Brown won - Eric Janszen

          stocks tanking hard... off spx off 1.9%. gold off 1.5%. bonds up. dollar up.

          shtf in europe?

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Why Scott Brown won - Eric Janszen

            I hope Scott Brown represents a resurgence of a fiscally conservative, socially liberal GOP here in the Northeast. Republican office holders are becoming as rare as hen's teeth in these parts.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Why Scott Brown won - Eric Janszen

              EJ,

              Was any of Scott Brown's victory due to Coakley's role in the health care issue?

              Specifically Coakley's fundraising with pharmaceutical and health insurance lobbyists:

              http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/op...-81067542.html

              Here are some of Coakley fundraiser hosts with some of their current health care clients:
              • Thomas Boggs, Patton Boggs: Bristol-Myers Squibb
              • Chuck Brain, Capitol Hill Strategies: Amgen, BIO, Merck, PhRMA
              • Susan Brophy, Glover Park Group: Blue Cross, Pfizer
              • Steven Champlin, Duberstein Group: AHIP, Novartis, Sanofi-Aventis
              • Licy Do Canto, Raben Group: Amgen
              • Gerald Cassidy, Cassidy & Associates: U. Mass Memorial Health Care
              • David Castagnetti, Mehlman, Vogel, Castagnetti: Abbot Labs, AHIP, Astra-Zenaca, General Electric, Humana, Merck, PhRMA.
              • Steven Elmendorf, Elmendorf Strategies: Medicines Company, PhRMA, United Health
              • Shannon Finley, Capitol Counsel: Amgen, Astra-Zeneca, Blue Cross, GE, PhRMA, Sanofi-Aventis.
              • Heather Podesta, Heather Podesta & Partners: Cigna, Eli Lilly, HealthSouth
              • Tony Podesta, Podesta Group: Amgen, GE, Merck, Novartis.
              • Robert Raben, Raben Group: Amgen, GE.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Why Scott Brown won - Eric Janszen

                As a Massachusetts voter registered Independent, I have to say its easy to over-analyze this election. I agree with EJ that it was more about Coakley and the Democrats than about Brown and the GOP. And the GOP would be well advised to think that through.

                For a snapshot of how this is the case, go to the website of each candidate. Coakley's says nothing. Her platform is void of commitment and little anyone would disagree with. Brown's is direct and specific. And in the end I believe the voters failed to see Coakley as herself but as an extension of the Washington machine. You can look at it as a question of trust - we lost any sense we could trust what Coakley told us. But Brown, agree with him or not, is likely to do what he says. And isn't that part of what Americans feel is lacking in government?

                I otherwise have to agree with EJ's summary with cautionary notes on #3 and #4. While Americans do not hate bankers, the recent public hubris of the financial sector has tainted the public view of the wealthy. When I hear annecdotes like that of conservative, mid-Atlantic, working class men professing no CEO should make more than 4x the salary of any worker in the company, I know the public view has shifted from 10 years ago. And on #4 I think EJ has walked into a realm where the American psyche is confused and in flux. While the value of the economy is still forefront in the American mind, we are also seeing an awakening to the idea that free markets are not a universal and total solution. I think Americans know the neo-liberalism of Clinton and Bush did not work but can not yet tell you why or how and certainly are not yet prepared to assimilate alternatives.

                America is in flux (which I count as an exciting time of opportunity) and trying to characterize it in dogmatic terms falls short of the reality.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Why Scott Brown won - Eric Janszen

                  Originally posted by babbittd View Post
                  Ah but what about voting in the primaries? how many states are open-party system?
                  If you make a point of registering Independent to force the debate away from party lines, why are you concerned about voting in closed primaries which focus the debate along party lines?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Why Scott Brown won - Eric Janszen

                    Originally posted by Marek View Post
                    If you make a point of registering Independent to force the debate away from party lines, why are you concerned about voting in closed primaries which focus the debate along party lines?
                    his point is not how they vote, it's how the voters look to the campaigns. if they look like an amorphous blob... not red vs blue... the campaign designers/opinion shapers/etc. are in the dark.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Why Scott Brown won - Eric Janszen

                      Originally posted by Marek View Post
                      As a Massachusetts voter registered Independent, I have to say its easy to over-analyze this election. I agree with EJ that it was more about Coakley and the Democrats than about Brown and the GOP. And the GOP would be well advised to think that through.

                      For a snapshot of how this is the case, go to the website of each candidate. Coakley's says nothing. Her platform is void of commitment and little anyone would disagree with. Brown's is direct and specific. And in the end I believe the voters failed to see Coakley as herself but as an extension of the Washington machine. You can look at it as a question of trust - we lost any sense we could trust what Coakley told us. But Brown, agree with him or not, is likely to do what he says. And isn't that part of what Americans feel is lacking in government?

                      I otherwise have to agree with EJ's summary with cautionary notes on #3 and #4. While Americans do not hate bankers, the recent public hubris of the financial sector has tainted the public view of the wealthy. When I hear annecdotes like that of conservative, mid-Atlantic, working class men professing no CEO should make more than 4x the salary of any worker in the company, I know the public view has shifted from 10 years ago. And on #4 I think EJ has walked into a realm where the American psyche is confused and in flux. While the value of the economy is still forefront in the American mind, we are also seeing an awakening to the idea that free markets are not a universal and total solution. I think Americans know the neo-liberalism of Clinton and Bush did not work but can not yet tell you why or how and certainly are not yet prepared to assimilate alternatives.

                      America is in flux (which I count as an exciting time of opportunity) and trying to characterize it in dogmatic terms falls short of the reality.
                      my friends hate bankers... period... & so far as i can tell don't split hairs when it comes to how the rich got rich... they figure they stole the money.

                      but the main point holds... brown won for taking a firm position on the issues that mass voters care about, offered specific solutions, didn't scare them with right wing religious talk & takes independent positions. on the last item... he's new & unknown. voters assume he independent in fact not just word... after all, who can he do deals with? he doesn't know anyone. ;)

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Why Scott Brown won - Martha has NO Mass Appeal

                        Originally posted by BK View Post
                        I agree with your analysis but, you ignored one critical analysis - Martha Coakley's lack of charisma or mass appeal.

                        Elections are often come down to who would you rather have a beer with -how many would believe a beer with Martha would be enjoyable? Perhaps you should have an itulip Poll....
                        Yep! Elections are determined by the 25% of the voters who are swing voters. They typically won't be going to OpenSecrets.com, or the candidates websites, many can't even name their representatives. They are very susceptible to the 20 second negative ads during American Idol, and they have a memory span of 2 minutes.

                        But these same swing voters are very concerned that life hasn't returned to like it was before the depression started. I view this election as an anti party in power reaction.

                        It will be very interesting to see the reaction of the President and the Dems. The president has an opportunity to clean house and get a fresh start. We'll see if he lets this opportunity pass like he has many others.

                        I don't agree we should change our party affiliation in the hope of getting a responsive reaction from the parties. The problem is not the parties, it's the money in the process, and it will follow a 3rd or a 4th or a 5th party. Those 25% of uninformed swing voters are the cause of all this. They vote on emotions rather than informed opinion. They have neglected their responsibility to be informed voters and have made the power of money to move emotions to be the determinant factor in winning elections.

                        Nothing will change until elections are based on ideas, rather than the ability to twist emotions, and that won't happen until we remove the money problem from the process.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Why Scott Brown won - Eric Janszen

                          Here's a pretty good stab at apportioning the blame. Coakley gets her fair share, but it's only part of the story.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Why Scott Brown won - Eric Janszen

                            change

                            http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE60J38W20100120
                            Obama's TSA pick withdraws after Republican roadblock

                            WASHINGTON
                            Wed Jan 20, 2010 9:07am EST


                            WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama's pick to head the Transportation Security Administration, Erroll Southers, withdrew from consideration on Wednesday amid Republican concerns that
                            http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2...ple-are-angry/
                            January 20, 2010, 9:28 am
                            Brown: ‘People Are Angry’


                            In an interview with NBC’s “Today” show this morning, Senator-elect Scott Brown was asked if his victory was a referendum on President Obama.
                            “No, it’s bigger that that,” Mr. Brown said. “For us in our area, we have three speakers that were indicted, three senators that resigned in disgrace, we have out of control spending and taxation in Massachusetts, you couple that with what’s being proposed nationally, people are angry.
                            “They’re tired of the back room deals. They want transparency, they want good government, they want fairness and they want people to start working to solve their problems.”

                            Mr. Brown also said that voters would be angry if Senate leaders delay his swearing-in to push through health care overhaul.
                            “If they use political chicanery,” Mr. Brown said, “I think come the midterm elections, people will be very concerned and they will remember.”

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Why Scott Brown won - Eric Janszen

                              It seems we have two trains a runnin'....

                              The Democracy Train: the first nationally-important election discloses, in spades, the widespread 'dissatisfaction' of the electorate. Many here on the 'Tulip put faith in a Throw the Bums Out movement and are rightfully encouraged by this election result.

                              Then there's the Oligarchy Train: See the post, Hudson: FIRE Power Grab, for details on the disenfranchised end around in process.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X