Clayton (you guys remember him, right?) suggested this and I think he is right.

My working theory of the Massachusetts race is that a lot of Democrats desperately want Scott Brown to win.

From Blanche Lincoln to Ben Nelson to Evan Bayh, they are privately praying Scott Brown cleans Martha Coakley‘s clock.

Now they won’t admit it in public, but they know if Brown wins, the odds that they’ll be able to smother Obamacare in its crib go up significantly.

For months Rahm Emanuel, Bill Clinton, and a host of conventional wisdom talking heads on the news networks and in the op-ed page of the Washington Post have been saying that 1994 happened because the Democrats did not pass health care deform then. It has become the working hypothesis for Democrat leaders and has been used repeatedly to get Democrat votes for Obamacare.

They say that if the Democrats were to pass health care deform now, it will inspire the Democrat base and get people motivated to go to the polls.

Well, here we have Massachusetts, a state that is overwhelmingly Democrat and has its own version of Obamacare already, and the voters appears to be breaking toward the Republican who has pledged to vote against Obamacare.

If Brown even pulls close to Coakley — he does not have to win in a state so overwhelmingly filled with Democrats — it will be a clarion call that Rahm’s working hypothesis is fatuous nonsense as most of us already know.

With Obamacare hanging in the balance and Massachusetts voters deciding if it will pass or fail, you would think if Rahm’s hypothesis is true, the overwhelmingly Democrat oriented voters of Massachusetts would be beating down the door for Martha Coakley.

But they aren’t. Lincoln, Bayh, Nelson and many of the House Blue Dogs already know this because they are going home to angry voters opposed, regardless of party, to this health care plan. They know if Brown wins, they may be spared a vote and, consequently, defeat in November.

Hypothesis fail.

By the way, I hope Mitch McConnell and the GOP in Washington are paying attention. Being the Party of No isn’t a losing strategy.