Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Suffolk: Scott Brown remains "untouchable"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 05:52 AM
Original message
Suffolk: Scott Brown remains "untouchable"
Source: POLITICO

April 07, 2011
Categories:Senate races
Suffolk: Scott Brown remains "untouchable"

<snip>

A Suffolk University poll surmises that Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown "remains untouchable" against all Democratic challengers considering a bid against him and finds that 55 percent of voters think the freshman should be reelected.

In the poll of 500 Bay State voters taken April 3-5, Brown leads all opponents by at least 15 points, with the exception of former Rep. Joe Kennedy, who has already indicated he won't run. Brown also boasts a 58 percent approval rating, tracking even a point ahead of President Obama.

<snip>

Brown also reported raising $1.7 million over the first fundraising quarter, bringing his cash on hand total to $8.3 million.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/blogs/davidcatanese/0411/Suffol...



Massachusetts media polishes the Brown turd on an almost daily basis. You'd think Massachusetts had only one Senator.

And Massachusetts media has also pushed the "independent" myth hard.

On the other hand, a poll involving an incumbent who has not yet been campaigned against should not scare anyone (or lull anyone).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
CBHagman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 05:55 AM
Response to Original message
1. A great deal can happen even in a period of months...
...especially in politics. I think the Dems should be looking for their strongest, toughest candidate and load for bear (well, elephant).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 05:56 AM
Response to Original message
2. Then no body serious will run against him.
Which is too bad because he's an idiot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
harmonicon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 06:27 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. wasn't the problem that no one serious ran against this last time? nt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 06:41 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. She had never run for anything but AG and had no help from anyone, not the DNC, not
a Single Dem "star" (after Bubba--only during the primary, tho).

Near the end, Vicki Kennedy graciously campaigned for her, although the Kennedys had been hurt that Coakley had set up campaign offices while Sen. Kennedy was still alive.

The WH kept saying Obama had no plans to campaign for her, practically right up until he boarded a plane to fly here Sunday night. By then, Brown had something like a 22 point lead, and voting started Tuesday morning.

Very odd how Dems in general handled that one of a kind, historic election, esp. while hcr was pending.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
harmonicon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 10:30 AM
Response to Reply #5
20. I remember it being a pretty weird situation...
but I also remember that she herself didn't seem to take it all that seriously - that she thought she could just walk right in to the senate. Of course I was thousands of miles removed from it, so I wasn't getting the same coverage as locals, but that impression was clear enough that it stuck.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalCatholic Donating Member (37 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #20
23. no, you're right.
I have a close friend who worked on her campaign. She told me that there were people coming in, but Coakley didn't want to take their advice. She also didn't hit the pavement the way Brown did. It was a lousy campaign...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hubert Flottz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 06:36 AM
Response to Original message
4. I'll bet Red could beat Brown.
I'd vote for Red Peters and flush that Brown turd, ASAP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bucolic_frolic Donating Member (36 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 06:48 AM
Response to Original message
6. It's All in His Name and Looks
He's a good looking guy. He has charisma, and sex appeal as a youth. That goes a long way to making the public comfortable with him, in liberal Massachusetts.

Also the name Brown helps a lot. Has anyone ever done a study of how many politicians with the last name of Brown win elections? I'd bet it's a high percentage. Again, people are comfortable with that name, and familiar with it.

So until Dems dent the visage and public comfort, it's not going to change.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Davis_X_Machina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 06:55 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. It's The Truck.
I have two union-member brothers in MA who both voted for Brown, and will vote for him again, on entirely image-connected grounds.

The amount of unpaid political advertising he got in 2010 from Boston sports radio, in a sports-obsesed market, had to be heard to be believed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 07:30 AM
Response to Reply #7
11. +1 on "unpaid political advertising" and from all local media.
His wife worked for Boston 5 and our local TV stations lean right anyway.) He's gotten it almost every day, until now.

Besides, Brown ran a deceptive campaign from Day One, including associating himself with JFK.


Democrats need to get on the ball!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dawson Leery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 10:28 PM
Response to Reply #11
25. So the media is looking at Scotty's real record?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 07:22 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. Massachusetts liberals vote on looks and sex appeal? Seriously?
Someone tell Palin, fast.

Brown won bc Koch, Romney, the RNC and Republicon avorices like Main, Guiliani and Schilling backed Brown to the hilt with $$$, campaign organizaion, nationwide advertising, etc. They populated his rallies with folk from as far away as Seattle. See Reply #5 for what Coakley got from Dems.

Massachusetts liberals didn't vote for Brown. They stayed home. (Remember, we've had Romneycare for years.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
russspeakeasy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 07:40 AM
Response to Reply #6
14. Kloppenburg ?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 07:25 AM
Response to Original message
9. Polls in Sept 1994 had Romney tied or leading Ted Kennedy...
Polls in Sept 1994 had Romney tied or leading Ted Kennedy. Senator Romney might caution folks on utility of early polls #mapoli #masen2012
http://twitter.com/#!/professorU/status/559569413311201...


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 07:27 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. it's different. brown's the incumbent. this is more like Jim Jeffords
it's gonna be hellava hard to get Brown out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 07:37 AM
Response to Reply #10
13. VERY different. Given what the Kennedy's name meant in Mass., and how much Ted had done for the
state--and almost every individual in it--it was astounding Kennedy even had to fight for that re-election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 10:45 AM
Response to Reply #13
21. I think her point was that this is not the same as Teddy/Romney
Edited on Thu Apr-07-11 10:46 AM by karynnj
and she suggested a closer parallel. A Republican incumbent in a very blue state facing a Democratic challenger.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalCatholic Donating Member (37 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 01:24 PM
Response to Reply #13
22. Remember...
we also had LOTS of Ted Kennedy stories that were horrific. The sainted Ted Kennedy that was eulogized was not the Ted Kenned that I remember growing up in Massachusetts. He evolved and matured a lot quite a bit after the Romney election. The thing that amazes me is that Ted Kennedy never felt that seat was his seat and neither did the people of Massachusetts. He always ran for it- he ran harder then Coakley did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freddie Stubbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 07:34 AM
Response to Original message
12. Everyone thought that Mike Castle was a shoe-in last year
The Tea Party crowd has been grumbling about him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 07:45 AM
Response to Reply #12
15. Also different. Castle lost a Rethug primary. Brown won't.
Besides--if the only way a Dem can win a U.S. Senate seat in Mass is for someone like "I am not a witch" to beat Brown in a Rethug primary, we'd be so screwn it would not be funny.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 08:09 AM
Response to Original message
16. You are so right on the MA media being completely biased in his direction.
What they do cover is this poll that shows that 55% say he should be re-elected. As to what he does, the papers have the following theme - he is independent, thoughtful and he reads the bills. (Forget that there are NO thoughtful comments from him on any issue. As to the idea that he is the only Senator to actually read the bills, why is he never able to speak in detail about any of them. ) As a person, he is like everyone and is in touch with everyone. (Even though it was the Senior Senator who actually had two town halls where he answered unvetted questions - while Brown refuses to even answer reporters, much less have a real town hall. )

Anything that does not fit that theme - gets little coverage.

Yesterday he voted to stop the EPA from regulating greenhouse gases. Yet, they did not cover that vote. I just used google news and apparently, this was not important enough to write about. Then there was the game Brown played with funding planned parenthood - he voted for the House budget that did that, then had his office give the papers a statement saying it was on planned parenthood saying he was against the cuts ---- while RW sites were saying that it was about title X funds, but not specifically PP. Can you imagine what the papers would do to ANY other politician taking two opposing positions at the same time. All that was heard or seen in MA media was that Brown was against defunding PP.

In addition, I don't think any of the MA papers covered Brown's praise of the Ryan budget - link to what Brown said - http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/04/scott-brown-...

What they did cover was a recent Senate speech, where Brown rambled off topic and complained about there not being enough bipartisanship for a few minutes - and here is the Boston Globe story raising it to the level of a seminal speech: http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2... /

Here is that speech (which is oddly no longer available on CSPAN , but it is in the Congressional record)


Mr. BROWN of Massachusetts. Mr. President, I enjoyed the previous speaker's presentation. I come to the floor to talk about the ongoing negotiations between the White House, Speaker Boehner, and my colleagues in the Senate regarding the appropriations for the current fiscal year.

Since the beginning of the 112th Congress, the House and Senate have been trying to find common ground to finish the appropriations for fiscal year 2011. Instead of reaching a long-term compromise, we passed no fewer than six short-term continuing resolutions.

Not only does that disrupt our military men and women who are trying to serve but also every other facet of government and people's lives throughout this country. The funding resolutions that provide little in the way of addressing our staggering deficit have little certainty with our trading partners and absolutely no certainty whatsoever to the world market in terms of our ability to manage our Nation's finances.

Sadly, rather than reaching a workable, bipartisan solution, responsibly addressing our staggering deficit, which is expected to reach $1.5 trillion this fiscal year, our leaders have repeatedly given us false choices between continuing resolution proposals that don't go far enough to reduce Federal spending and proposals that I believe establish the wrong priorities for me and my State and many other people as well throughout this Chamber.

I believe many of the choices that were made disproportionately affect low-income families and seniors. One of my Senate colleagues, if you remember, characterized this process as a ``Hobson's choice.'' I agree. The world right now is looking for two things--the world markets, financial markets--and the people who invest in this country are looking for two things. They want us to do a lean and mean budget, get our fiscal and financial priorities in line now. They are also looking for us to tackle entitlements, whether it is military, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, et cetera. Then they will know that, in fact, they can invest here.

When they invest, the money will be safe and they are actually going to get a good return. When Pimco doesn't even do more bonding with America, that is a sign. When we have other countries throughout the world being downgraded by the bonding services, it is a problem. We are in this financial kind of roll to negativity. We have to get our fiscal and financial house in order right away.

I have been absolutely disappointed, and I know everybody listening in the gallery and those watching today have been absolutely disappointed by the pace of negotiations between the two Chambers. We have had FAA legislation. I want to fly in a safe plane. I get that. We have done the patent bill, and I want safe drugs and everything. I get that. We are on the small business bill now, and the Senator before me spoke--I am on the committee. I am happy to do it, and I get it. But are you kidding me? We are in the biggest financial mess we have ever been in, and we are doing everything but dealing with the financial mess.

Here we are with over a $14 trillion debt. For people listening, when I came here, we had an $11.5 trillion national debt. Now it is over $14.3 trillion and counting. The deficit, unfortunately--despite passing six different CRs and an understanding that passing it would move our negotiations further along, we are once again faced with the likelihood of a government shutdown.

I never, ever thought I would be a Senator from Massachusetts and come here and say: Oh, my gosh, I was here when they shut down the government. What do I tell the staff and the people back home? I am not going to participate in that. I am going to be a problem solver. If you are liberal or conservative, Republican or Democrat--I don't care what your party is--I am going to find solutions to try to avoid any type of government shutdown. I don't want one. Nobody I am talking to wants one.

We have to get these negotiations in perspective. We have to actually express to our leaders, as I just did, that, hey, we are concerned. I want to make sure we tackle these issues.

While the Federal budget is only a small part, gosh, I can't tell you--and Senator Carper is here. How many times have we been in committee hearings and they are talking about wasting billions and billions of dollars--$76 billion just through one program that we are attacking.

I was in the military budget hearing the other day. It is $104 billion over budget for one weapon system. Are you kidding me? Really? It is phenomenal.

We are debating cutting, I guess, $61 billion, give or take, but we don't have a problem with going over budget $100-plus billion in various programs and wasting billions of other dollars. So, on one hand, we are fighting about a small, minute part of what we are doing, and on the other hand, we are giving away the money.

There was just a report that came out that said we are wasting billions of dollars on duplication. Executive order No. 1: Let's fix it so we don't have to worry about that, and that money we save can be used for seniors, kids, Pell grants, and all of the things people are fighting about right now. I will say, however, a government shutdown absolutely serves no purpose and is in nobody's best interest--not our country's, not the workers', and it is not in the global economy's best interest.

I, for one, stand ready to work with any Senator or any Congressman or member of the administration who wants to get together and solve these very real problems. However, I am encouraged about the recent developments in the negotiations, which was the news breaking yesterday that a possible deal is close. That is great. They are talking about $33 billion. I just cited $104 billion in one military program. In Medicare, $76 billion goes out every year just because--I am happy doing it, but the world is looking for that fix, the lean and mean budget, but also for us to get entitlement reform, eliminate the waste and abuse--commonsense things that every person in this Chamber and everybody listening does in their homes and businesses.

Why can't we treat the Federal Government like a business for once? This makes no sense to me. I am not the new guy anymore. You are the new guy, Mr. President. Congratulations for being the Presiding Officer today. Being the new guy, I hope you agree with me that we have to kind of work together--and we have tried to do that, you and I, Senator Carper, and others--to try to find that common ground. I think we agree on the number. It is just a question of do we tackle it here or there.

I am from the approach of let's do a little of everything and satisfy every special interest and political interest and just get the problem solved. It will take real choices, tough choices right now. Everybody listening now absolutely understands that everything is on the table. We have to be fair and judicious in our cuts . How do we go from A to Z overnight? There is no transition period or no consideration for jobs, and, actually, the safety of people in some of these cuts .

I stand ready to work with each of you to do what it takes and put politics aside. Listen, is there an election this year? I don't think so, because I am looking at 2011 right now--2011, as the one year, the one chance we have to actually solve problems, folks. In 2012, we can do whatever we do in the political season. I get it. For right now, we have a great opportunity to send a message to all those folks who say Washington is broken. In Washington, it is like, you are great, you are great, everybody is great. Senator Carper is great. He is one of my best friends here. But, listen, outside Washington, they have no clue what we are doing. They don't trust us or think we are addressing the real problems that affect our great country.

Our collective work begins by having a clear understanding of the seriousness of our budget concerns. I know we have had bipartisan meetings. I am so encouraged, as a relatively new Member, that we have had about 60, 65 people come together to hear the number. Is it fact, fiction, or real? What is it?


We agree we are in trouble. So why aren't all the leaders of this great country--and there is plenty of blame to go around--getting together and seriously letting us know what the priorities are? Why doesn't the President call my office, or anybody else, and say: Scott, these are my priorities. I challenge you to work with me to get them done.

What are his priorities for cuts ? Does anybody up there know? I don't know. If he called you or me, I know we would give him the respect the office deserves, and we would go out and say: I will work with my colleagues, Mr. President, or Mr. Leader, or Mr. Minority Leader, and we will find those common things we can do. We can start with the report that just came out and eliminate all that duplication. In some instances, I think it was 26 agencies doing the same thing. Are you kidding me?

I believe the responsibility we have been given is huge. Look at these young people. A lot of them came to the charity basketball game we had last night. It was so exciting to see their faces. They are excited to be here. Every one of them is saying: Oh, my gosh, I have been in the Senate, working for these people. We look up to them, and we expect them to do better and be better. They challenge us on a daily basis just by those bright eyes, the fact they are out back studying when they have a few minutes--some more than others, I might add--and they are looking for us to solve problems. It is really not even them we are worried about; it is their great-grandchildren.

If we do nothing--is that what you want us to do, folks, nothing? I am not going to be part of the do-nothing caucus. I am going to look to find commonsense solutions and work toward commonsense goals, regardless of the outcome. If I lose, whatever, but I will have played a role in history. Right now, at this time, we need to make a difference, a change.

I am so hopeful and I am an optimist. I believe we can do it better. I believe we have an opportunity to do it better right now. With our leadership and that of the other Senators who are going to be here soon, we can get together and solve the problems. We can battle in 2012. The country is looking at us now to make a difference. I hope we will find the ability to do so. If we don't, then we will have missed a great opportunity to solve problems.

Thank you. I appreciate the Chair's patience and his occasional smirks.

I yield the floor.


Whiney egomaniac anyone??

(I tried to get the CSPAN video, but this speech is no included if you search for Brown and after getting it from the Congressional record and thus knowing the date, I went to the date on CSPAN - and Brown's time is allocated there but if you click you get a screen that says it can't be viewed or bought. http://www.c-spanvideo.org/videoLibrary/clip.php?appid=... )

This rambling - PREPARED - speech has no ideas and no proposals, yet the "liberal" Boston Globe and other MA media covered it as an important speech. Sadly, they gave no coverage to the far more influential Senator's speech - maybe because it blasts the values behind the Republican CR budget and included the point that the deficit is record high not just because spending is record high, but because tax rates (revenue) are at a historically low point. Kerry's speech is an incredible statement on the values behind the cuts.

link to Kerry's speech - http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/SenateSessionPart135... and continuing on http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/SenateSessionPart135...

What all three of these things have in common is that Brown voted or spoke with the Republicans and against what is very likely the direction that would be favored by most in MA. Yet NONE of these very controversial positions were covered for what they are.

This is a long rant - but if you want to see the extend they are covering for him - read this article on his first three months - and the transcript of the interview they had with him - and then barely used. There is also a video of the interview and you will find they worked hard to extract comments that seem coherent and use pictures of Scott to bridge from one part to the other. article: http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2...
transcript: http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2...

Neither Teddy or John Kerry would need that type of rewrite, but can you imagine what the BG would have done to either if they were even half so clueless?



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 08:41 AM
Response to Reply #16
17. We hear what Brown had to say about almost everything. Not so much Kerry or any Reps.
Edited on Thu Apr-07-11 08:44 AM by No Elephants
He is the only Rethug in our delegation. However, if you had only our local media to go by, you'd assume he was the only member of our delegation.

P.S. Mass. Dem politicians and Dem voters need to start making noise. And come out from under the damn radar!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 08:48 AM
Response to Reply #17
18. I was shocked to see the amount of coverage Brown gets
They have had articles on each bill he introduces - or co-sponsors. Yet they often do not have articles on things actually passed written by the Representatives or Kerry. It is frustrating to see the comments on those articles asking why he is doing all the work of the delegation!

It is stunning that they had articles speaking of how Brown getting a seat on the Small Business Committee was considered a triumph and a place where he could help MA technology and other small businesses - forgetting that they had called the committee unimportant when Senator Kerry chaired it and did a huge amount for MA and the Country or that he is still a member of the committee.

The hard part for the Democrats is that anything they say will be taken as partisan and compared to what the "liberal" media says.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greybnk48 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 09:27 AM
Response to Original message
19. Look what happened to Feingold!
Lots of money bought ads that ran all day every day against Feingold and Kagen in WI (thanks to the Koch's) and they're both gone. It amazes me how easily people were and are swayed by the t.v.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dawson Leery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 10:14 PM
Response to Original message
24. Even with this?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Sep 02nd 2014, 07:47 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC