What Brown and Obama have in common.
On Tuesday, Scott Brown won a U.S. Senate seat. He’s a Republican, and he won in Massachusetts. Talk about an upset. The next day, in an interview with ABC, Obama said that Brown got elected for the same reasons he got elected. In a sense, he’s right.
Barack Obama got elected because he promised Hope and Change. He promised transparency. Obama said he would clean up politics. He promised an end to partisan bickering, and promised to work with Republicans. And he promised to work hard for Americans.
Scott Brown won because he promised to change the way politics is done in Washington. He promised to vote for smaller government, and promised to work hard for the taxpayers. He vowed to oppose the dirty health care bill, full of payoffs and deals with lobbyists.
Clearly, the two campaigns touched on a similar sentiment. Americans want Washington to work for America, and stop working for the Congressmen. Obama absolutly got elected because of the desire to shake things up in Washington. But once he sat down in that Oval Office chair, Obama proved to be, at best, just another politician. Indeed, he brought enough of the Chicago-style hardball politics that he may be making things worse. Transparency, honesty, and bipartisanship are nowhere in sight. Obama’s rapidly-dropping poll numbers aren’t just because of a bad health care bill, or about the bad economy. Obama lost the respect of many centrist voters when he turned his back on the open government that he promised to bring.
Scott Brown was able to harness the anger at Obama to overcome an early 30-point deficit in Massachusetts. Will he squander his support as Obama did? It’s too early to say. It’s also too early to suggest Brown as a Presidential candidate. Americans probably won’t be voting for an inexperienced Senator for President in 2012. But Brown doesn’t need to be President to be successful. All he needs to be is honest.