The Scott Brown Election Is A Referendum On The Establishment

by Melissa Clouthier | January 20, 2010 2:09 am

“This is YOUR seat.” — Senator Scott Brown

Lest the Republicans get too smug as they look toward the 2010 midterms, I’d suggest a strong dash of humility. The Democrats seem incapable of humility[1] so I’ll spare my breath.

Scott Brown ran against Obamacare, yes. He ran against stupid DOJ policies toward terrorists, yes. Most of all, her ran against an entitled, tyrannical establishment that has been telling the American people, for far too long, that they know better than you.

Scott Brown knew the people were sick of it. He summed up the sentiment in these words[2]:

“With all due respect, it’s not the Kennedy’s seat. It’s not the Democrats seat. It’s the people’s seat.”

In short, “The ungovernable country just told those governing to go to hell.” — Erick Erickson


So, this year, the people aren’t going to support just any Republican or any Democrat or any “chosen” candidate because he or she is self-funded. Guess what? The people will fund the candidates they choose. The people will be the “big” money.

Scott Brown was down by 30 points in December. 30. And the people rallied to him. A couple of weeks ago, I was stunned. Who is this guy? I was starting to the emails and Direct Messages and the pleas for help to get the word out.

I was skeptical. Kennedy’s seat. Massachusetts. Yada, yada.

Well, guess what? The people did speak. And they put their money where their mouths were, too. Money poured into Brown’s campaign in the final days and the average donation was between $50 and $75. Patrick Ruffini accurately predicted[3] this was a good risk to take. And there were those of us who cheerfully promoted the money bomb–go for a cool million, I said–and guess what? It happened.

Imagine this happening race by race as the people choose their candidates. Imagine politicians across the spectrum who actually represent their constituents and act responsively to their desires, too.

Well, that’s a lot to ask, I know, but there are hopeful signs already.

Lorie Byrd reports that Barney Frank is backing away from health care reform. She says[4]:

They have seen what the voters in even Massachusetts think about it and they don’t want to go down in flames over it. They want some bipartisan cover. This win gives them an “out.”

Well, the President is going to turn to “jobs, jobs, jobs.” You know what? I think it’s too little, too late[5].

The American people are outraged. They have seen the House, Senate and the President wrap themselves up in what they rightly see as a huge, vast new entitlement and they see the country as broke. What the hell are these people thinking, Americans wonder. While American citizens have tightened their belts, Washington, D.C. has loosened theirs, with “our” money.

And Democrats want a new stimulus package. And Democrats want to “double down” on health care[6].

I’m not sure that even the Republicans understand the vehemence here. There are some who still pooh-pooh the Tea Party movement even as hundreds of thousands marched in Washington, D.C. on their doorstep.

That’s some disconnect.

The people are choosing. They are sick of being told by their “betters” what’s good for them. Any candidate that condescends, takes for granted, turns a deaf ear and ignores the will of the people will go down like Martha Coakley. Every seat will be contested[7] if the constituents are discontented[8].

She lost because she talked, acted, and sounded like just another out-of-touch, know-it-all. She’d go to Washington and tell the people how it was going to be.

The people are kinda sick of listening. There’s a new boss in town and it’s the voter.

It’s time public servants get back to the art of service and pay attention to the boss.

  1. incapable of humility:
  2. these words:
  3. Patrick Ruffini accurately predicted:
  4. She says:
  5. too little, too late:
  6. “double down” on health care:
  7. Every seat will be contested:
  8. discontented:

Source URL: