Early this year, Scott Brown, won the Senate seat vacated by the death of Ted Kennedy. The Republicans touted this as a wave of change to come. The Teabagging movement claimed complete victory to the point where they felt they were the people who made the difference in Mr. Brown’s win. Living here in Massachusetts and witnessing this event, I can tell you that, even though Scott Brown ran a good and effective campaign, his victory can be attributed to the complacency and entitlement attitude of his opponent Martha Coakley, more than the great push from the Teabaggers. A perfect example of this is a quote from Boston Globe columnist Brian McCrory, in one of his articles; Brian McGrory, a columnist at the Coakley-friendly Boston Globe, accused her of being a "diva" who was dodging debates and skipping the flesh-pressing necessary to win. When asked by the Globe why she wasn't out stumping like Brown, she fired back: “As opposed to standing outside Fenway Park? In the cold? Shaking hands?” Reason.com Michael C. Moynihan This past week, the Teabaggers are claiming victory again and the Republican Party is claiming, “a failing influence” of President Obama, by the results of primaries and special elections that have taken place around the country this week. Now, I am not an expert on politics but I feel I am the average Independent Voter. This is how I am seeing what the results mean. Remember, no party can win an election by themselves. It is the support of the Independent Voter that tips the election to either candidate.
Now, let us take a look at two of the races taking place. The defeat of career Senator Arlen Specter to Two terms Congressman Joe Sestak and the special election for the Congressional Seat vacated by the death of Congressman John Murtha. Many have said the loss of Specter was a rebuke to President Obama. Yet, during Mr. Specter’s campaign neither President Obama nor Vice President Joe Biden openly campaigned for him. The Teabaggers fought for Tim Burns but, Democrat Mark Critz made a stunning comeback in the final days to capture the seat.
The following is an article from U.S. News and World report which I think illustrates the true meaning behind the Sestak and Critz victories; http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/2010/05/20/specter-critz-results-send-mixed-messages-for-democrats.html
Specter, Critz Results Send Mixed Messages for Democrats
Joe Sestak was able to knock off Specter but Democrats do have one bright spot
By Caitlin Huey-Burns Posted May 20, 2010
Democratic Sen. Arlen Specter is the latest causality at the hands of frustrated voters targeting incumbents. Specter lost to two-term Rep. Joe Sestak in the Democratic primary. Analysts say that Sestak's campaign commercial, showing footage of Specter saying he switched parties to get reelected, drove the candidacy of five-term Republican turned Democrat to the grave. "It was the most brilliant and devastating commercial since 1986," says Terry Madonna, director of the Franklin & Marshall College Poll. "It showed Specter in his own words and the truth of it remained, he said it and that reinforced Sestak's nine month argument." The commercial struck a loud cord with Pennsylvania voters. "Many of the electorate perceived [Specter] as being very evasive of where he stood on a lot of things," says Jerry Shuster, a professor of political communication at the University of Pittsburgh. "His switch appeared to be manipulative of the electorate." Low voter-turnout also contributed to Specter's loss. "It has been clear from the beginning that the lower the turnout, the better Sestak would do," says Madonna. Only 24 percent of Democrats and 27 percent of Republicans showed up to vote Tuesday in their respective primaries. Tuesday's rainy weather also could have affected voter turnout. Pennsylvania voters tend to be older and have difficulty getting to the polls, according to the state's Election Commissioner Chet Harhut. Sestak will face a heated race against Republican Pat Toomey in November, in what will be a "super expensive race that starts today," says Shuster.
Toomey, a former Wall Street trader, small business owner, and congressman lost to Specter in 2004. Madonna says Sestak, a former Admiral with a three decades in the Navy, will have a good chance of beating Toomey in November if he rails against the establishment, congressional spending, and focuses his campaign on creating jobs."[Sestak] has to tell his narrative, his great narrative," says Madonna, referring to Sestak's naval career. "Toomey will have a bit more of a problem with his biography. He will have to defend his stint on Wall Street." There was an important exception to the anti-establishment cloud hovering over this year's races. Democrats were victorious in a special election for the late Rep. John Murtha's seat Tuesday. The southwestern Pennsylvania district supported Sen. John Kerry in 2004 then backed Sen. John McCain in 2008. The region is thought to be strong indication of how voters nationwide will feel come November. Democrat Mark Critz, a former Murtha aid, beat Republican businessman Tim Burns 53 percent to 45 percent in a race originally pegged by pollsters as a dead heat in the days leading up to the election. He will be sworn in Thursday. But Shuster says Critz's win should come as no surprise. "They liked Critz and they liked Murtha," he says. "Because he worked for Murtha and because of the party hierarchy, he'll have a distinct advantage because he's familiar with all the right people."
Though Critz will take office immediately, he won't go long without a fight. He must face Burns again in November. "Historically, in Pennsylvania, the Republicans will vote fairly straight Republican," says Shuster. "But Democrats are more prone to switch." In that case, both candidates will have to target their campaigns at voters on the edge.
As for the race between Senator Blanche Lincoln and LT. Governor Bill Halter, It is a simple case of throw the bum out. I believe Senator Lincoln did not listen to her constituents enough and staying true to the Democratic Party theme. She finds herself in a position where trying to explain her performance has become an agonizing up hill battle.
Now the Teabaggers are opportunists. The overwhelming victory of Rand Paul over the mainstream Republican Candidate Trey Grayson is hailed as a significant step to the power of the Teabagging movement. Senator Jim DeMint, a Republican from South Carolina heralded Mr. Paul’s victory as a defeat of the Washington political establishment. I find that humorous since Mr. DeMint is a part of that very establishment. To me, I believe Mr. Paul’s victory was attributed to name recognition, for one. His father, Congressman Ron Paul, is believed to be the inspiration to the Teabagger movement. I believe the defeat of Tray Grayson is more of a rebuke of the mainstream Republican leadership of the likes of Senator Mitch McConnell and former Vice President Dick Cheney more than it is towards Washington.So, enjoy your fifteen minutes of fame all you Teabaggers. Maybe you can stretch it into twenty minutes. The effect you will have on the mid term elections this year remains to be seen. But, I truly believe, if the backwards thinking of the Teabaggers should gain power, it will be short lived. We have come too far as a nation of rights and freedoms for all to return to the days of racism and bigotry. Those days are gone. That is what makes our country great.
That’s How I See It.
Websites of Reference:
http://reason.com/archives/2010/01/15/the-incredible-incompetence-of
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Brown
http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/2010/05/20/specter-critz-results-send-mixed-messages-for-democrats.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blanche_Lincoln
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/19/us/politics/19elect.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rand_Paul
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/19/us/politics/19elect.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul
來給你加油打氣!!!保重!!! .................................................................
ReplyDelete