Brown -- Not Good Enough

In the end, Scott Brown was just too small to be a US Senator from Massachusetts.

Oh, there are plenty of things to say about why the race went the way it did -- and I'll write many of them when I've had a little bit of sleep.

But Massachusetts expects their Senators to be big figures. National figures. People who have purpose and stature.

Elizabeth Warren, whether you like everything she has to say, and whether she ends up being a good Senator, surely qualifies. You know what issues and passions drive her; you sense that she wants to shape the Commonwealth and the country. 

You saw her speak in a major prime-time slot at the national convention; you saw her defend her ideas at a Senate hearing; you saw her on 60 Minutes and the cover of Time.

Brown is small, and grew smaller as the campaign progressed.

After some $30 million of ads, and all the media and debates, can you say why Brown wants six years in the Senate? 

I know where he stands on a few issues. I know he doesn't want to raise any kind of taxes, on any person or company. I've heard him talk about independence and moderation and bipartisanship, but I have no idea to what end or with what aim.

Whenever I, and others across the state, looked to Brown for those answers, we instead saw him sneer at "Professor" Warren; demand that her employers prove that she had earned her credentials honestly; allow and encourage offensive racist and misogynistic taunting; and purport that his cohabitation with a wife and daughters exempts him from answering serious policy questions about the health and financial well-being of women.

Then we saw him slink away from the final televised debate.

Scott Brown is not a bad guy. And a majority of Massachusetts residents feels that he is a good Senator.

But in his campaign, he was small. Much too small. And ultimately, that is why Massachusetts replaced him for someone bigger.