So as we all know by now, Scott Brown, a Republican, won handily in rock solidly Democratic Massachusetts in Tuesday’s special election.
As I often do, I read the editorials of the New York Times, Wall Street Journal and Boston Globe to see what their learned editors are thinking.
Yesterday (Wednesday), the NYT editorial pages were completely silent about the Brown win. Too blown away to comment, I guess.
Today, they came out with a remarkable demonstration of being in denial.
The best part of the piece is this gem in para 2:
“To our minds, it is not remotely a verdict on Mr. Obama’s presidency, nor does it amount to a national referendum on health care reform…” (emphasis added)
I mean maybe you could get away with saying ‘not entirely a verdict’ – but ‘not remotely a verdict’, that’s a fantasy.
I know for me, I explicitly voted for Brown for exactly those reasons — and I normally would not have voted at all because a Dem win in MA is usually a given.
I doubt I’m the only one motivated to vote like this – at least 2 people I know did likewise, and the news is replete with stories of entire families, even multiple generations, of lifelong Democrats, getting out to vote for Brown.
Update: Just noticed they’ve closed down comments on the piece. After 229 largely telling them they were idiots, I guess they’d had enough.