Matt Yglesias pauses, surveys the situation, thinks deeply and comes to an eminently enlightened conclusion. Well, enlightened for him:
We’re much more likely looking at a situation where Brown’s victory becomes an excuse for people not to do things they didn’t want to do anyway than a situation where Brown’s victory is the actual reason those things can’t be done.
By God, I think the boy's got it.
Kinda.
There are a whole lot of Democrats - progressives and moderates alike - who have stifled serious misgivings about Obamacare for a very long time. They didn't like it, but they were willing to play the game for the sake of the party. Brown's victory ends the pretending. If the party cannot hold the bluest seat in the bluest state, then it's every pol for himself from this point on.
The same cannot be said with cap-and-trade: It's been stillborn since it left the House. Only Obama and a few senatorial loonies are still pushing that bit of dreck. Brown's victory simply removes any hopes Bambi's team had of getting most Democratic senators to swallow any part of it. The only question now is whether Obama is smart enough to quietly drop it and move on to more pressing matters (like the economy).
However, Matt misses the essential point: This isn't about supposedly lilly-livered senators like Evan Bayh. This is about bad legislation that voters do not want. The pros are coming to the conclusion that biting the bullet for the sake of Bambi's ego is simply no longer a viable alternative politically. The children (and that includes Matt) are going to have to deal with it.
Comments