I think that everyone will read the result through the eyes of their own hopes, desires and prejudices. I doubt that it was caused by any one or two issues for a majority of the voters. I think it was a general protest against the situation in the country and Washington’s inability to do much about it.
One theory is that it was primarily about terrorism and the White House’s decision to try the so-called underwear bomber in a civil courtroom. That theory is supported by the fact that at Christmas time Martha Oakley was ahead by 15 points in the polls and the extreme slide in her poll numbers started after that event. If that theory is correct it could not have been primarily about health care, unless as some have suggested it was because of the secret negotiations between the democratic leaders in the House, Senate and White House to reach an accommodation on a final health care bill rather than do it though a normal conference committee. I personally doubt that the latter fact could have been a major factor and agree that terrorism issue was one of the important factors.
Of course Martha Coakley ran the world’s worst campaign and made some comments about Fenway Park and Curt Schilling that rank with the famous “Rome, Romanism and Rebellion” comment that cost Blaine the Presidency in a nineteenth century presidential election. To belittle Fenway Park and Schilling in Boston is not politically far from attacking the Vatican and the Pope in Rome. Clearly that was a major factor that indicated her ignorance of popular reality, lack of emotional connection with the so-called common man, and possible intellectual arrogance, circumstances not designed to win popular favor in an election.
I see the voting result as an expression similar to the scene in the movie “Network” where the protagonist hangs a sheet outside his window with writing to the effect of “I can’t stand it and I am not going to take it anymore.”
I do not believe that the result is so much about certain specific issues but rather about the toxic cocktail of conditions such as continuing joblessness; bailouts of financial institutions (banks and AIG) without any relief for their victims (denial of bankruptcy cram downs in foreclosure proceedings); protection of the health insurance industry (no repeal of their antitrust exemptions and protection against competition through a public option); protection of the pharmaceutical industry (prohibitions against foreign drug purchases); proposed compulsory purchases of health care insurance (taxes) on individuals not fortunate enough to receive such insurance tax free from an employer, etc., etc. etc.
Add to that mix the spectacle of outrageous bonuses paid to the financial executives responsible for the toxic mess and massive fees paid to those who lobbied for them to obtain massive bailouts from the taxpayers, and who isn’t or wouldn’t be mad as hell?
Some of the voters voted in protest of the prevailing conditions and the failure of the Congress to solve the problems and some expressed their votes with their feet by declining to participate and staying at home.
An additional alleged factor was that various segments of the Democratic Party, including the Mayor of Boston, did not want to see Coakley claim the Senate seat for the remainder of Edward Kennedy’s term and allegedly sat on his hands, thereby denying her as many as 100,000 Democratic votes in the hope of having someone else, perhaps himself, run for and take the seat in the upcoming 2012 general election.
