Now that we have had a year to see what “hope and change,” is all about, the time has come to “hope for some change.”
That is why I am voting for Scott Brown in his US Senate race here in Massachusetts against state attorney general Martha Coakley on January 19th.
On stage with Barack Obama today (Sunday) at Northeastern, Martha said that people, “deserve someone who’s going to handle the tough problems and get us back on track.” She hit the target but not the way she expected. In my opinion, a vote for Scott Brown, not Martha Coakley, sends a clear message that the current administration is trying to take this country in directions we do not care to go.
Scott has promised to be the 41st vote against the health care reform bill. It interests me that already strategies are in circulation detailing what the Democrats will do statewide and nationally to thwart the impact of an elected Scott Brown.
Someday there will be a book written about Martha Coakley’s race for the US Senate. The title? “How Not to Conduct a Political Campaign.” The writer will detail Martha’s head-scratching decisions to try to avoid debating Scott Brown as well as avoiding the voting public.
I think that probably the toughest thing for Martha has been to try to speak positively of Obama’s administration. He is strongly approved by a miniscule 27% according to a January 17th Rasmussen poll. Presenting oneself as less of a lock-step partisan for an unpopular national government has been an untried strategy for Martha.
Another big surprise has been the usually predictable Boston Globe running articles critical of Martha’s campaign. What are they trying to do, increase circulation??
Another positive for Scott’s electability is “Mad Money’s” Jim Cramer saying that a Brown election would cause a huge stock rally because it would be considered pro-business. Who wouldn’t want that??
The Far Left has not done Martha any favors. An example is MSNBC’s Ed Schultz saying on his Friday radio show that he would try to vote ten times if he lived in Massachusetts to keep Scott Brown from winning. In a bygone era, someone could get away with these types of remarks because they would not be distributed very far or very fast. Not anymore and Ed has unwittingly stirred up folks to vote against Martha.
Anyhow, I am voting for Scott again – I did in the primary as well.
The optimist in me has the race close but the difference being the votes that Independent Joe Kennedy gets. I can imagine some confused Democrat voters, who would have chosen Martha otherwise, mistakenly selecting the Kennedy name.
It is safe to say that a Scott Brown win will have me recalling the Winter Olympics at Lake Placid, when in the final seconds of the upset of the Russian hockey team the announcer said, “Do you believe in miracles?” A Martha Coakley loss would certainly fall into that category.