January 21, 2010 08:24 PM UTC

Bennechusetts

•  
• by: JO

Lesson 1 from Massachusetts: Scott Brown received more votes than Martha Coakley, and was therefore elected to the U.S. Senate.

Thus endeth the lesson.

Massachusetts ain’t Colorado. Take it from an eye-witness. BUT the Senate race in Colorado could go the same way, albeit for slightly different reasons.

One fact emerging from Boston is that Coakley assumed she had a safe seat, ran a lackadaisical campaign, and let a supporters of the Tea Party movement sneak up on her, realizing that she had blown it when it was too late for Obama to help.

But another fact emerging from Massachusetts, and one that may well have a common thread in Colorado, is widespread discontent with … well, with things in general.

Job market: sucks. Housing prices: suck (for the owners, anyway). Health care reform: sucks. (Strange that Democrats should be paying the price for this, but fact is that Democrats tried to do something, watered their plans down, and in the end may not be able to pass even a watered-down version, to the disgust of everyone.)

In this atmosphere of widespread discontent, being the incumbent party is arguably not the place to be. But that is where Michael Bennet seems to be, certainly according to his loyalists on this site. Certainly no one is arguing that he was the Appointed One thanks to a governor who manifestly reckoned his chances of reelection weren’t good enough to stay in the race!

And in a time of widespread disgust with the overall economic picture–especially the behavior and role of major banks–being the recipient of ever-greater donations from those banks (now apparently unlimited, per the US Supreme Court), and the widely disparaged Pharma and health care industries, might not be the place to be either. But there’s MBennet, front and center with his FEC filings in 10 pt Ariel. “This Campaign Financed by Bankerbucks.” Hmmmm. Is there such a thing as turning lemonade into lemons? Could prove to be so.

Argue as you may that Romanoff might have taken such contributions too. But he didn’t.

Argue as you may that Romanoff might also have been the Establishment Appointee. But he isn’t.

Argue as you may that Romanoff didn’t really win four elections. But he did.

Argue as you may that Bennet has visited every county. WOW! Hasn’t Romanoff, the former Speaker of the state house of reps? I’m shocked! Appalled!

Is Bennet a “leader” in the health care reform debate? Or is he among the very first advocating a smaller program, urging that the Democrats listen to Republicans?

Has Bennet ever done anything as senator (besides vote against cram-down? besides argue for a smaller stimulus to help create jobs)? Of course not, and I don’t blame him for that. Not only is he a freshman, but he is also not elected and thus lacks the particular bona fides that come with winning an election. Not his fault, but nevertheless it’s a fact: he has no record in public life to run on.

Is this the Year of the Incumbent? The Year of the Corporate PACman? Is that the mood across the 1,800 miles separating Denver from Boston?

Easy enough to argue that 2010 will be rough sledding for Democrats everywhere. Even harder to argue that Michael Bennet is the ideal flag-bearer.