There are many lessons that we can take from Republican Scott Brown's comeback victory over Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley for the U.S. Senate seat left vacant by Ted Kennedy's death.

One lesson is that victory should not be taken for granted. Coakely thought that because she was running for the seat formerly held for 47 years by a "lion" of the Democratic Party, she could walk in to office. She was wrong.

Another lesson is that a personal connection with voters can't be taken for granted. During the brief race, Coakley developed a reputation for not hanging around to mingle with voters, shake hands and kiss a few babies. She chose to focus on meeting with the state's powerbrokers to get her message out to the people. She should have delivered the message-that her election could determine whether this country falls backward or at least makes attempts to move forward and try something different-herself.

The final lesson has nothing to do with Coakley or Brown but speaks to the mind of the U.S. voter. We are fickle and impatient. We have unrealistic expectations and are unwilling to admit our role in the decisions our country makes, instead choosing to blame politicians.

After 8 years of President Bush, and the huge hole he left this country, President Barack Obama has had only a year, in the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, to try and make changes. By any estimation, he has had great successes.President Obama has changed the perception of this country around the world by reaching out to others, gotten a health care bill passed in both houses of Congress, signed a huge stimulus, kept campaign promises to refocus this country's military endeavors and tried to be honest, admitting when he has made mistakes in judgment and not pretending that he alone has all the answers.

Just one year after voting to give someone else four years to try something different, the voters of Massachusetts voted in someone who agrees with everything that many of them voted against in voting for President Obama.

Brigid Harrison, professor of political science and law at Montclair State University in New Jersey, said voter impatience often grinds policy decisions to a halt.

"There is an immediacy that people expect change now. I read one comment that Democrats drove the economy in to the toilet and I thought: Haven't Republicans been in power the last 8 years? We live in an era in which voters expect instant results, and when policy makers fail to deliver, we don't have deeply held ideological beliefs so we tend to be more fickle," said Harrison.

"What tends to happen is we wind up with divided government. When that happens, policy makers are constrained because they can't enact their agenda. We put our policy makers in a stranglehold," said Harrison.

And we lock our country in a state of inertia. "The question for President Obama," said Harrison, "is are his re-election chances more important than policy."

Now comes the real test for Obama. He must be able to make an argument to some Republicans and their supporters about why we need change now in this country. He should explain why it is important to not oppose important policies that can help Americans for the sake of political gain. If Republicans are against health care reform, then they have to propose some viable solutions, not spread lies about how a change in policy will effect the average American.

Although the situation is dire, it is not lost:

"I don't think we can be timid in pursuit of an agenda that lifts the economic security of people," Obama Senior Adviser David Axelrod told Politico. "In substance, the mission can't change. If the mission changes, then we really will betray the people who sent us here."