Once in awhile I do a post to highlight topics which are important but not quite enough to merit a full post. Since I’ve discussed the Scott Brown victory several times this week, I don’t want to keep hammering the subject but I did get additional dispatches worth mentioning. So here goes.
Earlier this week, I spoke with U.S. Senate candidate Dr. Eric Wargotz about helping out with the Brown campaign. This is his “official” release on the subject:
Queen Anne’s County Commissioner Eric Wargotz took time off from his own campaign for U.S. Senate in Maryland to travel to Massachusetts over the weekend to work for Scott Brown’s Senate campaign. Commissioner Wargotz stated, “We felt the single most important thing we could do for our Country was to be in Massachusetts helping Scott Brown be the 41st vote against socialized medicine.” Wargotz volunteered with the Brown Campaign’s “Freezin’ for a Reason” get-out-the-vote effort by going door-to-door in six inches of fresh snow.
“It was amazing to watch the voters take back their Senate seat. The common theme at the polls was that people were tired of being told what do and how to vote. They were tired of machine politics that produced nothing but bigger government, less choices and less freedoms,” said Wargotz. “After meeting voters on their doorsteps, many asked how they could help. These were – Republicans, Independents and Democrats – who had simply had enough. I was witnessing history unfold before my eyes.
The same game-changing history is now unfolding here in Maryland. For decades, Maryland’s U.S. Senate seats have been controlled by special interest groups and have been entirely unresponsive to the needs of the average Marylander. But Marylanders, much like the citizens of Massachusetts, are tired of politicians who think they “own” their seat. The two U.S. Senate seats afforded Maryland by our Constitution are owned by the citizens of Maryland. This fall, look for the citizens of Maryland to take one back!
Whether the citizens of Maryland actually wise up and change their U.S. Senator remains to be seen, but as a campaign tactic this was brilliant. In one fell swoop Eric created a little bit of campaign buzz for himself, learned a little bit about running in a large-scale statewide race, and perhaps created an IOU which can pay off handsomely later on – do you think a fundraiser with a popular sitting Senator wouldn’t be lucrative? Obviously there’s a downside if Brown turns out to be a RINO like his New England counterparts Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins generally are, but in the moment this has to be considered an early advantage in the race for the GOP nod.
Tim Phillips of Americans for Prosperity was also beaming; here’s part of it:
In crystal clear fashion, (Massachusetts voters) told President Obama and Congressional Democrats to end this health care takeover now.
The meaning and magnitude of Scott Brown’s historic victory is truly stunning.
Consider Massachusetts. Before Mr. Brown’s victory last night no Republican Senate candidate in Massachusetts had won since 1972. The seat he was seeking had been held by Ted Kennedy for almost 50 years and the Kennedy family was on the campaign trail against him. All 10 congressional districts in Massachusetts are held by Democrats. In 2008, the congressional Democrat in Massachusetts with the lowest winning percentage was Barney Frank – and he won with 68%! Just 12% of voters in Massachusetts are registered Republicans.
But, Scott Brown did not win because voters suddenly love the Republican Party. He won not with a message of “Send more Republicans to Congress.” Instead, his most salient message was “send me to Washington to be the 41st vote against the health care takeover.”
The Democrats know this as well. On Sunday when President Obama campaigned with Ms. Coakley, neither of them said one word about health care — the issue on which the President has staked everything. They know that even in Massachusetts — the liberal bastion of the nation — their health care takeover has been rejected by a majority of the people.
Before Tuesday, Massachusetts was the largest state with one-party representation in Congress, yet they have elected the occasional Republican to lead the state.
Phillips has a point, though, when he opines that the message Brown sent was not nearly as much pro-Republican as it was pro-conservative. And perhaps it’s only because Democrats had worked their way up to utter control of Congress by getting the 60-vote majority, but nonetheless Scott Brown was victorious thanks to a nationwide effort. Given a 58-42 Senate majority for Democrats instead of 60-40, maybe Martha Coakley would’ve won and Dr. Wargotz would’ve stayed home. You never know, but being the prospective 41st vote certainly helped Scott Brown win.
And what effect did TEA Party activists have? Amy Kremer of the TEA Party Express had some thoughts:
These (Rasmussen Poll) numbers are amazing. In Massachusetts, one of the bluest of blue states, 40% of voters view the anti-tax, anti-government spending, greater personal liberty tea party movement favorably.
This is an effort that began less than one year ago, and yet the awareness and support for the tea party movement has reached a sizable chunk of voters in Massachusetts.
We saw the first hints of the power of this grassroots uprising in the NY-23 Special Election, where conservatives rose up and forced the GOP to drop their support for the liberal DeDe Scozzafava. On that same day voters in New Jersey and Virginia also delivered a shockwave to the political system.
And now, a great victory has been won in Massachusetts.
Many different groups involved in the tea party movement contributed to Scott Brown’s victory in a number of ways, and each brought their own strengths to the table. The totality of this effort was a massive surge in fundraising for Brown, volunteers for Brown, and hundreds of thousands of phone calls made in support of Brown and the Get-Out-The-Vote effort.
Some of the tea party movement’s critics have repeatedly sought to undermine this movement by sensationalizing the occassional personality clash or difference in tactics by one group or another. But in the end principles drive this movement and the passions of tea party activists brought them together in common cause once again.
To those who oppose this movement and who think that we in the tea party movement are going away, or that we won’t work together, you are wrong. Too much is at stake, and tonight’s victory in Massachusetts is just the start of things to come.
To be fair, the original release also stated that the unfavorable number for the TEA Party movement is 41 percent, and if you use the Rasmussen rating of strong approve/strong disapprove they’re at a minus-6. (The similar factor for President Obama, though, has reached minus-20 at times.)
If you think about it, though, given the constant bombarding of the mainstream media portraying TEA Party participants as lily-white racist gun-toting radicals and liberals’ constant use of the derogatory term “teabaggers” (since the term has a homosexual connotation) to describe them it’s pretty surprising their support is so high in Massachusetts. In a state like Texas or Oklahoma, my guess is that TEA Party approval ratings would be in the 60’s or even 70’s.
Don’t forget, though, that group is the one who nationalized the election. Until the eleventh hour, national Republicans were providing little assistance to Scott Brown, so it was a truly grassroots effort. TEA Partiers and others of like mind realized that, with the proper amount of assistance to get out his message, Brown could actually win the special election.
Of course, on a national scale TEA Partiers would have to multiply their efforts manifold to get similar results because November’s races won’t be as easy to nationalize. But they can stay sharp in the interim with the number of primaries we as a nation go through before the main event (such as Rubio vs. Crist in Florida.)
Obviously it will be difficult to nationalize races like we have in Maryland and Delaware, but it’s possible.
If one good candidate can emerge to face Barbara Mikulski, hard work (and a little corporate help thanks to the recent Supreme Court decision) could convince Maryland voters it’s time to turn away from having a partisan Democrat hack as our Senator.
Delaware may be a harder case because odds-on favorite Mike Castle is comparatively liberal by TEA Party standards, and Christine O’Donnell has ran and lost statewide before. But Democrats may do us a favor and try to keep one Senate seat the “Biden seat” instead of the “people’s seat.” Biden is biding his time about running, though, so he may decide to stay as AG and try again later once his father retires from the political scene.
The impact of Massachusetts will be felt for awhile, but political events have a way of shifting constantly and this euphoria could be just a footnote in a few months. We can enjoy it now, but there’s more work to do.
