The main lesson people are taking away from Scott Brown’s relatively strong showing in the polls is that Democrats are facing major headwinds as we turn the corner toward the 2010 midterm campaign. And that’s all accurate enough. I do, however, think it’s also worth making a different point. Namely that Brown finds himself running in a winnable race, and yet he’s overwhelmingly likely to lose. . . . [T]he formula for winning as a Republican in Massachusetts is pretty clear—you want to be independent from the machine, and generally for lower taxes and less regulation than your Democratic opponent, but also decidedly not as right-wing as the kind of guys the GOP runs for Senate in Alabama.And Brown’s just not doing that.
I read some guy the other day who is of Yglesias's ideological orientation who said he was deleting his RSS feed to Yglesias's work because it wasn't very informative and his commenters were often more insightful.That Yglesias is so of the left side of the beltway that he cannot objectively look at Scott Brown's campaign without seeing "right-wing hatemonger" suggests he is too poisoned in his partisan world view to be effective for his side. But then I'm a right-wing hatemonger. What do I know?