I understand the mentality of voters in MA considering voting for Brown

[cali]

at least I think I do.

They want to believe that Brown is bipartisan and open minded; that he's a moderate and they want to lessen the partisanship they see as bottling up any progress at bipartisan solutions in the Congress. They want to believe that they are open minded enough to vote for a Republican.

In Vermont we voted for Jim Douglas, our erstwhile Republican Governor term after term (Vermont has two year terms for Governors). I think the mentality was largely the same (though in Vermont retail politics is everything and Douglas cut more ribbons than a gift wrapper at Bloomingdale's during the holidays).

Brown blew it last night. Not only did he come off as testy and partisan despite his insistence that he's the most (or second most) bipartisan Senator, he gave Scalia to his answer about model Supreme Court Justices. The crowd booed loudly and he went on to hedge his bets by naming Kennedy, Roberts and Sotomayor. In that moment, he looked like the craven phony he is. And Warren got an excellent hit in when she said that the Brown campaigning in MA is a reasonable moderate but that isn't who he is when on the campaign trail for the RSC out of state.

Scott Brown Shot Himself In The Foot During Debate With Elizabeth Warren

Massachusetts Democratic Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren covered her face as the crowd booed her challenger, Republican Scott Brown. Brown had just hailed Justice Antonin Scalia as his "model" Supreme Court justice, and Warren was already using the opportunity to pounce.

<snip>

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/scott-brown-scalia-supreme-court-massachusetts-senate-debate-elizabeth-warren-2012-10#ixzz288YoiL0

[H2O Man]

1. The real Scott

Brown was exposed in last night's debate, much in the manner the real Willard Romney was exposed in the 47% film clip.

[graham4anything]

2. that is only part of it-there is a problem with Warren's fans pushing her for higher office

Elizabeth Warren should pledge she will fulfill all 6 years and even vow to run for reelection.

I know alot of people that are liberals are pushing her higher, and alot of voters think she is a transient in the senate seat and that she will ignore her seat in a year or two going higher.

Should she make a pledge, it would seal the deal and she would win.

And working class people in Mass. are also still sexist.
They loved Teddy because he drank with them in their bars (even though his family was rich),
and they loved him being a populist and his brothers they loved, one of them.

She should be leading by as much as Obama is in the state, but something is wrong there.
And we need her left voice leading the senate when Harry Reid retires.

[magical thyme]

4. this. ^^^^^^

I lived in central Mass for 26 years. I think this is closer to the truth.

There also is a hidden contingent of rw nutcases there. I remember when I was looking for land to set up my farm. Was stunned once to find a parcel in a "private" neighborhood with a network of shared private lanes with names like "The American Way" and "Patriots Lane." Hand painted "Keep out" and "don't tread on me" signs were posted in front of the houses, etc. Apparently a winger had purchased a large parcel and subdivided it, selling lots at low prices to other wingers.

And then there was the time a german shepherd came bounding across the street to check out my car, and his owner came running, calling out "Here Adolph! Here boy! Here Adolph!" (At least he was good to his dog. gaaaah!)

This was all ~20 years ago...I'm sure it's only grown since then...

[cali]

5. No, she shouldn't be leading by 30 points

Brown is the incumbent and he's done a fairly good job at portraying himself as a moderate who works well with the White House and dems in the Senate. It's bullshit of course, but it's effective bullshit.

People in MA didn't love Teddy because he drank with them in bars. They loved him because they believed he related to them.

There are plenty of left voices in the Senate beside Harry Reid. Sherrod Brown for one (and yes, he'll win), Pat Leahy, Barbara Boxer.

I do agree that sexism comes into play.

Warren did a good job last night and I think we'll see polls that reflect that.

[KharmaTrain]

3. It's All Personality...

From what I've gleamed from reading and watching is that Brown is "likeable"...and that he claims to be "bipartisan". His whole shtick is to make people think Prof. Warren is "out of touch" or "elitist" while he drives around in his pick-em up truck. He hopes she was as bad a candidate as Coakley was and that he could just "outshine" her with his bullshit. It worked two years ago but I don't see it having the same effect today.

All throughout last night's debate he claimed he was "independent" but blew that to hell when he named Scalia as his ideal justice. Brown's biggest hope is for the low information voter and hopefully the Commonwealth of Massetchussets doesn't have many of them. By his trite attacks on Prof. Warren Scotty is betraying that nice guy image...

[Iggy]

6. uhhh, just how/why did Nakey Scotty Win

Ted Kennedy's senate seat-- after Kennedy held it for what? 32 years?

??

[cali]

7. Coakley was a truly terrible candidate

that's a lot of it. And Brown campaigned well.

[Arkana]

13. Actually, it was mostly Coakley campaigning badly.

REALLY badly. Like double-facepalm badly.

[Iggy]

17. Thus Why was she considered the "best"

candidate?? who's running the circus here?

[Iggy]

16. BINGO!!

which gets to the larger point-- there's a big problem with the people running the democratic
party, the DNC, etc...

it was in fact easy for a half-smart guy like Brown to win.. to see the arrogance/stupidity in
the dem party in MA. has anyone there learned a lesson from this?

I doubt it

[Seeking Serenity]

15. And I think Brown's retort to the phrase "the Kennedys seat,"

that it wasn't the Kennedys seat, it was "the people's seat," was one that could have resonated with a fair number of voters.

Just the $0.02 of someone who watched that race from afar.

[geckosfeet]

9. Maybe. Maybe. But the rwingers that I know in the state, are morons. They don't want bipartisan.

They are partisan as hell and want anyone but a democrat. The bs they spin about Warren is hateful and absurdly unbelievable. Make no mistake, the fact that br0wneye praised scalia will raise their teabagger estimation of him.

Contrary to popular myth, there are a lot of rw teabag types around here. Not a majority, but a significant number. There just are not enough of them to win it for any republican without independents and some democrats joining in. So, a lot of money is coming in from outside the state to bankroll that sorry asshole, and portray him as a reasonable bipartisan and even as an independent. They know they need more than the moron teabag vote to win. The moron teabag vote is desperate for any republican who is at all electable. And the people who are at all independent or fantasize about bipartisanship may vote for him.

br0wneye has always been and asshole. Turnout was low in the replacement election and Coakely sucked at campaigning. I think as long as the Warren campaign emphasizes br0wneyes partisan voting record and the damage that he has done in his short time in office, AND the ties to outside RW republican money that bankrolled him first time around, she will win it.

The republican partisans have been shown for what they are, hateful, deceitful morons. All Warren has to do is keep giving br0wneye the opportunity to demonstrate that he is indeed one of them.

[karmkay]

11. Not to bright?

At least that's what sprang to my mind when "bipartisan" Brown named Scalia as his model SCjustice. He scrambled to recover by naming more, but the sound bite had been created and the boos were raining down.

[littlemissmartypants]

10. Nice thread.

Thank you.

[Harriety]

12. Yes, for two terms we here in Minnesota voted in (moderate) Tim Pwelenty.

See where that got us. It's going to take awhile to get our affairs in order here after he totally blew it with the budget.

[reformist2]

14. Yep. Brown exposed himself as a wolf in sheep's clothing. Warren needs to home in on that in her ads

Warren's strongest point was when she said that the "independent" Scott Brown that talks to the voters of Massachusetts is far different from the Scott Brown who goes around the country bashing liberals.

[Capt. Obvious]

18. That answer may be worth a fraction of a percentage point if that

Voters won't care because they can't even name a Supreme Court Justice. The people who do care about that answer already know who they're voting for.

We look at that answer as the gaffe that will torpedo Scott Brown - that's just wishful thinking.

Brown has been slimey, petulant and aggressive with his lies and attacks and that is actually swaying voters more than a Supreme Court answer.He's actually moved the likely voter column 8 points (as in voters are less likely to vote for Warren because of X) on the Native American issue alone. Now he's relentless with his attacks on her work as a lawyer and that's going to cloud the issues and most likely move polls.

He only needs a few points as it is.