Tip O’Neill famously said that “all politics is local.” But for Republicans in New England, the opposite may now be true.
On Nov. 6, Republican candidates running for federal office lost every single race in every single New England state: 21 for Congress, five for Senate, and one for president. Outside of New England, no state experienced such a clean sweep. Senators Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire and Susan Collins of Maine are the only Republicans left standing — but they weren’t up for reelection this year.
Comments
No longer Proud of My state
For years I told people Massachusetts was a democratic state with an independent streak - sadly I think that is now longer true. This is not about Brown vs. Warren it's about Tiesi vs. Tierney - how can someone like this represent us in Congress. It's reached the point that a ham sandwich would get elected in Massachusetts if there was a D after their name.
The Democrats have built a state wide machine - much like Chicago under Daley - I'm very worried about our state.
I was surprised by the outcome of this race, but let's face it the voters in that district had something of a hobson's choice to make. Vote for a candidate who is a reliable vote for the issues they care about, but has some questionable ethical baggage or vote for a candidate who isn't tainted by ethical problems, but is wrong on the issues. I guess the voters decided that another Republican vote in Congress would be a bigger problem for the disctrict and the nation. I'm pleased I didn't have to make that choice.
The problem isn't Tiesi or Brown or Romney. People did not want to see the "radical right" of the Republican Party controlling any portion of the US govt. If not for gerrymandering the Repubs would have lost the House. Again all you have to do is look at the numbers. The problem is the devolution of the Party. It's love affair with the southern wing the very center of the regressive portion of the party. Tiesi and Brown got caught up in the disgust with the faux "conservatism" of the national party.
gerrymandering is a bi-partisan problem - and in Massachusetts it has prevented republican congressional members.
There will obviously need to be some changes in the way that the image of the Republican party is presented to the electorate. Expect to see a lot more brown people in the political ads, expect to see more campaigning in places where immigrants live like southern Texas etc. Pay close attention to what they are saying however.Unless they take a step off the Jesus-train, unless they actually stand up for the rights of women to make their own healthcare decisions, unless they recognize that gays and transgendered people have rights to live as they choose, unless they respect the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, and The Endangered Species Act and most importantly, unless they begin to recognize the need for a lot more public investment in scientific research and development, public education and the promotion of real science over mythology, tell them to take their appeals to minorities and say "Thanks, but no thanks!"
What happened to the New England Republican of the John Volpe, Frank Sargent mold? Extremists luk in both parties however. The ultra-liberal democratic faction controls their party much in the same way the ultra-conservatives control the republican.
Many of us are happy with Dems winning.These election results clearly show that.
The truth is that a Repub winning the US Senate seat would mean disaster for us since it could mean a Repub Senate majority and Repub candidates also know that. For a Repub to say that they're "moderate" means nothing in this context.
It meant something in the past when the national party had not lost its moorings.It would take a lot more than "rebranding" and selling"inclusivity" and "moderation" to a voting population that is too smart and determined to buy it.
This comment has been removed.