Tuesday, January 12, 2010

Go Scott Go

From National Review Online:
Nearly 30 years ago, Ronald Reagan was in a high-school gymnasium in Nashua, N.H. His chances of winning the GOP presidential nomination were dimming, ever since George H.W. Bush scored an upset win against the Gipper in the Iowa caucuses. Before the debate in Nashua, Reagan became angry about other candidates being blocked from participating in the event. He tried to address the situation with the debate’s moderator. The moderator, a local newspaper editor, wasn’t pleased, and promptly moved to cut off Reagan’s microphone. Reagan, of course, would have none of it, saying: “I’m paying for these microphones, Mr. Green!” It was a wonderful, assertive moment that helped make Reagan Reagan.
Tonight, Scott Brown, a Massachusetts Republican, had a vaguely similar moment during the final debate of the campaign for Teddy Kennedy’s former Senate seat. David Gergen, the debate’s moderator, asked Brown and his chief opponent, Democrat Martha Coakley, whether they will stop the health-care bill so beloved by Kennedy. Brown paused for a moment, and looked over at Gergen.
“With all due respect,” said Brown, “it’s not the Kennedy’s seat, and it’s not the Democrats’ seat, it is the people’s seat.” You could hear the roars from South Boston to Cape Cod. Coakley looked dumbfounded. Here’s why: Brown’s words hit at the heart of the question that’s driving this special-election campaign: Will Massachusetts' vote be based on its past or on its future?
Coakley is betting on the past. She repeatedly tried to tag Brown as just another Bush-Cheney automaton. It didn’t work. “Ms. Coakley, you can run against Bush-Cheney all you want, but I’m Scott Brown,” he said. “I live in Wrentham. I drive a truck. And, yes, it has 200,000 miles on it now. You’re not running against them. You’re running against me.”
As much as the pundits want to make this race about Teddy, it’s not. It’s about Massachusetts, and the tough choices its voters face in the near future. One candidate gets that, the other doesn’t.

No comments: