Another Senate Special Q, this one from "Steve" via email:
Curious if you think there could be a Republican Primary if there is a Senate special election?
Depends if you mean serious or token. Remember: Scotto had a primary in the 2010 special, against Jack E. Robinson. I would fully expect almost any Republican, Scotto included, to get a primary.
I just watched Scott Brown give his farewell floor speech (thanks C-SPAN2!), which for the most part sounded like what you may have heard at the end of the televised campaign debates, or in his election-night concession speech. He mostly stressed the need for independence and bipartisanship, and praised himself on that score: "I'm proud that I did keep that promise to be independent."
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.
I'll take a coupla Scotto Qs together; "Elias Nugator" asks:
If Scott Brown tanks next month, will his wife Gail Huff perhaps consider a political career or her own?
What candidate was hurt more by the Peoples Pledge that Brown/Warren took?
Second question first. I think it's clear that Brown ended up getting hurt more; he needed to do far more to break down Warren's credibility as a candidate, and was forced to do it himself -- and it's not so easy to beat up on your female opponent while simultaneously trying to battle the impression that you (and your party) are insensitive to women's issues.
In this week's issue of The Phoenix -- in print and online now -- I have a few things to check out. I have a feature looking at the race between state senate president Therese Murray and second-time Republican challenger Tom Keyes. I also have a column lamenting the lack of debates (and attention to debates) in Massachusetts congressional races.
I thought Scott Brown did much better in tonight's debate than in the first one. Elizabeth Warren was fine. David Gregory was no John Keller.
I was surprised Warren didn't do more to tie Brown to Washington Republicans, which I would think should be part of every answer. Fortunately for her, Brown did his own damage by naming Antonin Scalia as his idea of a model Supreme Court justice (after a lengthy pause that made him look like he was trying to remember the name of a justice -- as one wag said to me, I think we can all agree that "Scott Brown" and "lightning round" don't go well together).
Not sure how useful the deep-dig is in this poll, but here it it anyway.
--Top number: Elizabeth Warren 43, Scott Brown 38, with a somewhat unlikely 18% undecided.
--Their favorable/unfavorable ratings are almost identically strong: 53/33 for Brown, 53/36 for Warren. And a very impressive 58% approve of the job Brown is doing as Senator, with 33% disapproving.
Happy Ask Me Anything Day! "CS" asks:
Do people REALLY care about the E.Warren/native american thing? I was
really shocked that Brown is bringing up such old, dumb news. Or am I
in the minority?
...and "Deb" asks:
Who are the people in Brown's latest ad?
Deb is talking about the ad that can be seen here, which is the second from the Scotto camp since the first debate talking about the Native American controversy.
Elizabeth Warren's campaign outraised the Scott Brown campaign by well over a million dollars in the pre-primary period, which ran from July 1 through August 17; she has now out-raised him by $7 million in the election cycle, although he came in with more than that left over from his January 2010 Miracle On The Charles. So, although they have now spent pretty equally, he still ended up with a little more cash on hand at the end of that reporting period.
Lord Almighty, I thought I was done writing about this NVRA/DTA nonsense. I've got other nonsense to write about, people.
But no, Senator Scotto sez today that Elizabeth Warren should reimburse the Department of Transitional Assistance the quarter-mil or so it spent complying with the settlement it entered into for failing to comply with the National Voter Registration Act of 1993.
"The whole thing doesn't smell right." It “smells wrong and ... is wrong."
So says US Senator Scott Brown. The odor currently offending his nostrils emanates from the daughter of Elizabeth Warren, who chairs the board of an organization that is largely responsible for the actions that resulted in the welfare-recipient voter-registration story I posted about yesterday morning
The Junior Senator from Massachusetts has a new web video up, riding the surf of conservative attacks on Barack Obama's supposed attack on free enterprise. Titled "Let America Be America Again" (is America not currently America? when was it last America? and what is it now?) the video shows Presidents of both parties extolling the virtues of capitalism, followed by clips of Obama and Elizabeth Warren arguing that public works contribute to private-sector success, and finally Scotto himself declaring that he LUUUUVS small businesses and such.
Scotto has announced his bottom-line numbers for the second quarter of 2012, following E-Dubs. Neither of them included their spending figures, but having both a + and - button on my calculator I have been able to compute that Elizabeth Warren spent about $6 million and Scott Brown spent about $4.4 million.
That's an awful lot of money before the All Star Break.
"JasonR" asks, via blog and email:
I'm wondering if you could give us your thoughts on the likelihood that
Senator Kerry would be appointed to Secretary of State, should President
Obama win re-election. That being said, who are the leading candidates
to replace him? Ben Downing? Kim Driscoll? The telegenic Tom Conroy im
guessing is waiting to run for Treasurer.
Loving the questions --please keep 'em coming!
"Mathew Helman" (of ProgressMass) asks:
How would you rank Scott Brown's "Killer B's" in terms of how much each hurts Brown with Massachusetts voters: 1) Big Banks & Wall Street; 2) Blunt Amendment; 3) Big Oil; 4) Buffett Rule
1) Small amount
2) Slightly less small amount