Exactly one year after the inauguration of America’s first black president, the American voter sounded an alarm: preferences have changed. Scott Brown, a Republican senator for only five years, managed to strike an unprecedented blow to the Democrats by unquestionably winning the special election for the Massachusetts Senate seat. The Democrats, humiliated by defeat in a state that has been their territory for over 38 years, now find themselves fighting for not only to pass healthcare reform through Congress but especially to win back voters.
Even more so, Obama had better take Scott Brown into consideration, the Republican who proved his ability to electrify voters, since midterm elections for Congress take place at the end of the year, and the presidential election is coming up in 2012. Before then, the Democrats need to win back voters; otherwise, Obama’s run for re-election will be jeopardized.
It is true, however, that Republican Scott Brown benefited from the American people’s tendency to vote for the party not in the White House during the first years of a presidency.
It is a shocking defeat for the White House, which lost the seat held by the late Edward Kennedy. Brown’s victory was so extensive that he managed to get votes from Cape Cod, the community where the liberal Edward Kennedy lived and died.
Changing the party allegiance of the 60th, filibuster-proof vote for healthcare reform means the Democrats have to negotiate with the Republicans, which can easily be interpreted as ideological weakness. If they refuse to negotiate and choose to focus on continuing the fight, they risk paralyzing other projects along the way. Whatever the decision, the Democrats need a victory, and fast, so that by the 2012 elections, they will at least be able to point to one achievement out of the hundreds of promises made by Obama during his campaign.
Such a defeat is hard to take in, especially since there is no state as Democratic as Massachusetts. It is clear why the Democrats see the election as a reason for alarm and a sign that the public is growing increasingly impatient with what it interprets as a lack of results from Obama.
The last concern that the Democrats need was expressed by journalist Matt Drudge: “Will he [Scott Brown] run for president?” The Republicans did have a real alternative to Obama after 2008, after all.
La fix un an de zile de la investirea primului presedinte de culoare al Americii, Barack Obama, electoratul american a dat un semnal fara tagada: preferintele sale s-au schimbat radical.
Scott Brown, senator republican de doar cinci ani, a reusit sa le dea o lovitura fara precedent democratilor, castigand fara echivoc cursa pentru Senatul american din Massachussets. Democratii, umiliti de infrangerea intr-un stat care a fost fieful lor timp de 38 de ani, se vad pusi in pozitia de a lupta pentru ca reforma sanatatii sa treaca totusi de Congres si mai ales sa-si recastige electoratul alienat.
In plus, Barack Obama ar face bine sa ia aminte la Scott Brown, care a demonstrat ca este capabil sa electrizeze votantii, intrucat alegerile pentru Congres au loc in 2010, iar cele prezidentiale in 2012. Electoratul trebuie readus de partea democratilor pana atunci, altfel insasi realegerea lui Obama este in pericol.
Republicanul Scott Brown a beneficiat, e drept, de tendinta publicului american de a nu mai vota, pentru Congres, membri ai partidului care tocmai a dat presedintele, in primii ani dupa prezidentiale. Mai greu decat asta a contat insa emotia populara- mania provocata de valul mare de asteptari neimplinite inca de Barack Obama.
Este o infrangere socanta pentru Casa Alba, care a pierdut locul detinut in Congres de regretatul Edward Kennedy, senatorul democrat mort in august in urma unui cancer agresiv. Victoria lui Brown a fost atat de cuprinzatoare, incat senatorul a castigat pana si comunitatea din Cape Cod unde a trait si s-a stins liberalul Edward Kennedy.
Brown devine astfel al 41-lea republican in Senat, care are 100 de locuri. Rivala sa in Massachussets, Martha Coakley, era singura speranta a democratilor de a-si pastra cele 60 de voturi necesare, conform regulamentului, pentru a pune capat amanarilor la nesfarsit invocate de republicani pe tema proiectului de reforma a sanatatii.
Schimbarea apartenentei celui de-al 60-lea mandat necesar democratilor pentru a-si impune legea reformei sanatatii ii pune pe acestia in pozitia de a negocia cu republicanii, ceea ce poate fi interpretat ca slabiciune ideologica. Daca refuza sa negocieze si se concentreaza pe continuarea luptei, risca sa paralizeze alte proiecte. Orice decizie ar lua, democratii au nevoie rapid de o victorie, pentru a putea arbora, la alegerile din 2012, macar o realizare din sutele de promisiuni facute de Obama in campanie.
E greu de inghitit o astfel de infrangere, mai ales ca nu exista stat mai democratic decat Massachussets. Este limpede de ce democratii considera votul din acest stat drept un "semnal de alarma" ca publicul sanctioneaza ceea ce considera a fi o alarmanta lipsa de rezultate din partea lui Obama.
Singura grija care le mai lipsea democratilor a fost vocalizata de jurnalistul Matt Drudge: "Va candida Scott Brown la prezidentiale?". Nu de alta, dar republicanii nu aveau, pana acum, nicio alternativa credibila la Obama, dupa infrangerea din 2008.
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link
.
Time will tell whether the strategic ambitions of the French-German alliance, including those regarding the European army, will jeopardize the EU's cohesiveness, and especially how much longer they can work together within NATO.