I'm an optimist by temperament, so if you're not, take this with a grain of salt. And I'm also a big believer in democracy. Whether it's a good thing or a bad thing, there's no doubt that Martha Coakley worked very hard to lose this race. Yeah, there are a ton of people who could have stepped in and helped earlier, and that might have turned it around, but she's running to be a US Senator, and my personal belief is that you don't get to be a US Senator if you don't have the necessary leadership skills to run a winning campaign. I know, old fashioned, right?
So that's thought one.
Thought two is that we might get better legislative results with 59 votes than with 60. Not because I think bipartisanship is magic, but because there are several craven, corrupt, and not very bright Senators as a part of the 60 vote Democratic majority, and being able to pass legislation, but only if we have all of them on board has meant some pretty crappy legislation. I'm hoping this means that we do something about the filibuster, but don't think the odds of that are good as long as Harry Reid is running the Senate. But getting nothing done might well be better than letting Lieberman set the agenda.