Reply #1: Yes, they voted for their interests, as they saw them.

[TayTay]

There are two kinds of change elections: positive and negative. We had a negative change election Tuesday. Yes, the message was to "throw the bums out" but the reason behind it amounts to "we voted for change the last time, got a big donut hole for our efforts and are now just voting to express anger." The point of the damn election was to show anger and call the Dems out. That was the point. Union workers did that too.

This was not a vote FOR anything. It was a "plague on both your houses" vote. Scott Brown wasn't elected to do anything. He wasn't questioned about any of his stands. He was the right guy, in the right place at the right time, a perfect political storm. He was elected as a cipher. We know, in the tiny political world, that he is a fraud. The big outside real world thinks we are all frauds, so what difference does it make. It was a cynical election. We feed fuel to this fire of cynicism when we blame the voters for what happened and confirm their worst suspicions about latte liberals. (Latte liberals want to be the smartest guys in the room. That is most important to them. Wicked smart folks but not exactly the people you pick to get your back in a fight.)

Fishermen are blue-collar workers. They feel like they get the shaft from the government and from environmental agencies. Maybe they feel that way because they are getting the shaft. Read me: http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/01/22/review_criticizes_fishery_policies/

Can we ever learn anything from stories like this? Maybe we should listen to people who tell us they have a problem and not lecture them on how to behave. That is the real lesson from Tuesday.