Why Brown Won

Published anonymously to avoid the charge of treason, “Common Sense,” a pamphlet written by Thomas Paine became an instant success in January 1776, selling 120,000 copies in its first three months and half a million in its first year. The mantra of Paine’s work, which was structured much like a Quaker preacher’s sermon with sprinklings of Biblical verse, was an incendiary argument for the abject rejection of British rule. Paine’s words galvanized an incensed colonial population, uniting attitude with action. “Common Sense” called for independence of thought and self-rule and that’s exactly what the colonies got.

Two hundred and thirty-four years later there has been a new calling for common sense and again the people, from the very state where thought morphed into action and resulted in revolution, have spoken. Perhaps it’s fitting that Republican Scott Brown has been elected to the United States Senate from Massachusetts, a state known as much for liberal leanings and fortunately once again, for common sense as well.  But the message that Scott Brown touted in his campaign for the special election of the late Ted Kennedy’s vaunted seat, was pretty obvious – “We can do better.” “Yes we can.” Sound familiar?

Two issues were at the crux of Scott Brown’s huge upset over Martha Coakley, healthcare and terrorism. The democratic candidate fell in line and backed the ridiculous policies of the Obama administration regarding the grossly mishandled Christmas day underwear bomber, policies that resulted in a lawyered-up terrorist and forever lost intelligence, all at the expense of American’s liberties, and paid for by them. Common sense came to light as the Massachusetts electorate said, “Wait a minute – that’s doesn’t make any sense.”  Scott Brown as in turns out is for waterboarding on extreme case terrorist subjects and doesn’t consider the method of interrogation to be torture. Abdulmutallab is hardly an extreme case, however that being clear, read his Miranda rights and excused from interrogation after just 50 minutes of light questioning - an action green-lighted by the Obama administration, supported by Coakley, and rejected by voters in the Bay State. Scott Brown capitalized on that part of common sense, but what really sent the people over the top was the debate on health care.

Massachusetts has its own health care plan and the anger welled up for the commonwealth’s voters at  Harry Reid’s hastily put together plan, full of secretive negotiations and backroom deals – the cornhusker kickback, the Louisiana Purchase, deals funded by taxing the health care benefits of people and employers who already had plans of their own.  Senate democrats insisted that only “Cadillac” plans would be taxed, but regardless of the automobile associated with the tax, Massachusetts voters saw the plan as having very little to do with common sense and spoke with their votes.

For their part, the Obama administration quickly threw Coakley under the bus. How could the State’s Attorney General lose after having such a huge lead? Surely it must be because she was a terrible candidate and having nothing to do with president’s policies.  In fact, according to team Obama, Scott Brown’s win was a re-affirmation of the Obama victory in 2008. Robert Gibbs on Scott Brown’s win as said to Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday: “More people voted to express support for Barack Obama than to oppose him.” No kidding – he really did say that. A loss is not a loss after all – it’s a win for Barack Obama. 

Chris Wallace: It wasn’t the same thing that swept Barack Obama into office. Scott Brown explicitly campaigned against the Obama agenda. His approval rating among that electorate was 61%. Their enthusiasm for Republican policies among that electorate was 40%.

Chris Wallace: But your not suggesting that this was a mandate for Barack Obama?

Robert Gibbs: No. Of course not. But I’m also not suggesting that what you said a minute ago meets the truth test either.

Chris Wallace: You don’t think that when they voted for Scott Brown they were voting against Obama’s policies?

Robert Gibbs: That’s not what they told pollsters. No.

Robert Gibbs on Scott Brown’s win: That may be what he campaigned on but that’s not what the voters in Massachusetts said in the Washington Post poll… They did a poll of voters who participated in why they voted. Right. More people voted express their support for Barack Obama than to oppose him.

Common sense prevailed with the electorate of Massachusetts on Tuesday but was vacant from the White House and now President Obama has embarked on a new urgent populism that will never work. The reason it won’t work has to do with the President himself and his own ideology – common sense will see right through it.