Yeah, that’s right – I just gave a sitting Democratic Senator the finger.
?There?s going to be a tendency on the part of our people to be in denial about all this,? Bayh told ABC News, but ?if you lose Massachusetts and that?s not a wake-up call, there?s no hope of waking up.?
OK, maybe. But you have to properly read the sacrificial entrails to divine the appropriate response.
?It?s why moderates and independents even in a state as Democratic as Massachusetts just aren?t buying our message,? he said. ?They just don?t believe the answers we are currently proposing are solving their problems. That?s something that has to be corrected.?
Well, he’s actually right about this. People are recognizing that what Democrats are doing are not solving their problems. Where Bayh goes wrong is direction.
? The only we are able to govern successfully in this country is by liberals and progressives making common cause with independents and moderates,? Bayh said. ?Whenever you have just the furthest left elements of the Dem party attempting to impose their will on the rest of the country — that?s not going to work too well.?
Wrong. Wrong wrong wrong. You want to know why Democrats lost this seat? Because people like Evan Bayh dragged out the process and watered down the bill. Yes, Coakley was a weak candidate, and Brown (relatively) strong. Yes, Brown campaigned strongly on voting down the healthcare bill. But if the bill had already passed and been signed into law, Brown’s got no hammer to swing with.
Allow me to explain.
Turnout was low in areas won by Coakley, and high in areas won by Brown. The margin of victory was just about 100,000 votes. This would seem to indicate what Bayh thinks it does – that people don’t want health care reform.
Except it doesn’t.
For starters, Massachusetts already has statewide “universal” health care. Signed into law by Mitt Romney, BTW. In addition, Mass voters slightly favored the federal proposal, and they are about split on whether or not their own plan has been a success or not. Most interestingly, the American people at large think the current version of the bill isn’t liberal enough: by about 2-1 Americans have favored the inclusion of a public option – something the Senate stripped from the bill.
As is usually the case, Republican Know-Nothings were strongly anti-reform, and strongly motivated. Democratic voters were not strongly motivated; by the candidate, by the personal stakes, and by the infuriating centrist nature of Senate Democrats, and it showed in the turnout.
Bayh has it wrong. He’s the problem, not the solution. Even Bayh’s own constituents want him to be less of a pansy and more liberal.
In a Research 2000 poll conducted last weekend, 52 percent of Indiana residents said they favored the government offering everyone a government administered health insurance plan like Medicare. Another 42 percent opposed the idea.
The Research 2000 poll, which had a margin of error of 4 points, showed that 62 percent of voters have a favorable opinion of Bayh, while only 30 percent have an unfavorable view of him.
Most would seemingly prefer he avoid a supporting a filibuster, however: Twenty-nine percent said they would be less likely to vote for Bayh in the general election in 2010 if he joined Republicans in a filibuster against the bill because of the public option. Eighteen percent said they would be more likely to vote for him, and 55 percent said it would have no effect.
Among Democrats, 54 percent said they would be less likely to support him in a primary, and 40 percent said it would have no effect. Six percent said they’d be more likely to vote for him.
Sack up, Bayh. You are the problem. You are the one blocking the reform both the American people and your constituents want. You are the reason people think Democrats are spineless and ineffectual. Stop being such a wuss, or GTFO.