A lot was written and will be written about the Coakley-Scott Senate race that recently took place in Massachusetts. Most of the writing and observations were typical and banal, nobody will be diminished when those blogs, columns and articles fade from memory. However, I did stumble upon one article that I thought made a very worthy observation, one that is insightful and instructive and can be carried forward. It was an article written by Bill Pascoe for CQ Politics.
While I think the article ultimately draws an arguable conclusion, I think it stands out for drawing our attention to the differences between a democrat and a liberal. I find the observation to be an important one, and a worthy contribution to the political conversation.
Begin with the fundamental point that’s been totally overlooked in virtually all the discussion about the race: Massachusetts is not primarily a liberal state … it is a Democratic state.
There’s a huge difference between the two.
In Massachusetts, while it may — may — be true that the majority of liberals are Democrats (traditionally, Massachusetts Republicans have been more progressive than Massachusetts Democrats — think Ed Brooke, or William Weld, or even Mitt Romney ca. 1994) — it is definitely true that the majority of Massachusetts Democrats are not liberals.
The difference can perhaps best be demonstrated by this clip from “Good Will Hunting.” Matt Damon and Ben Affleck are Democrats; the pony-tailed Harvard undergrad is a liberal.
Or look at it this way: There are two kinds of Democrats in Massachusetts — there’s the Mike Dukakis Democrat, and the Tip O’Neill Democrat.
Pascoe points out that Massachusetts voted for Hillary rather than Obama during the primaries and he goes on to conclude that the democrats lost the race the night they selected Coakley. I think that is an oversimplification. But that is no matter, because the article should be noted for the point Pascoe draws above. You can read the full article here.
Once you settle upon this distinction, you can re-tackle the question of why the Obama administration – like the Clinton administration before them – governed too far to the left when they first assumed office. The candidates and their handlers tend to be the worldly educated liberals that Pascoe describes; they probably reflect their own values back upon the voters that elected them, failing to comprehend that Pelosi style liberals are in the minority even within their own party. They then govern toward that liberal “base” without understanding that it was actually traditional democratic and independent voters with more centrist values and attitudes that really elected them. So they rule to the left until the people give them that gut-check moment that finally nudges them back to center, bewildered, but wiser.
