Brown had so little to say that had any substance.  All he wanted to do was character assinate Warren.  I grew up in a family whereby my grandmother told her grandchildren that we were part American Indian.   We thought it was great and never had to defend it to any one.  It is just a talking point for Brown because he has nothing to say.   He is a light weight who was condesending to Warren and his foolish grin whenever she said anything about him was obnoxious.  Warren took the high road and continously drove home her points.   She is one cool cucumber who will give tham all fits when she gets to Washington

am SO disappointed in Elizabeth Warren's performance. She used the word "Republican" only a few times. It was as if they were both members of the same party, and the only thing that mattered was the differnces between them -- not the differences between the Republican and Democratic party. It wasn't until the end that she brought up how Scott Brown is trying to get Mitt Romney (and Republicans) elected. 
     She should repeatedly hammer home that Scott Brown is a Republican and has CHOSEN to be a Republican, the party of Mitt Romney. He's not an independent --- he part and parcel of the Republican party, and its platform.  To win,she must repeatedly use the words "Republican" and "Mitt Romney" to remind people what party Scott Brown has aligned himself with. 
      She also missed the opportumity when Scott Brown praised Hillary Clinton. Well, if he thinks so much of Hillary Clinton, then she's out the door if Mitt Romney comes in. Talk about disruptive to foreign policy!
      Elizabeth  Warren: please please use the words "Republican" and "Mitt Romney" at least once in every answer , or every other answer, in the next debate.  Republican Republican Republican. That's who Scott Brown has chosen to associate himself with. The party that chose Mitt Romney to lead the country -- the man who believes 47 percent of the country doesn't matter. Repeat this and repeat this because that's really what Scott Brown is about.

Senator Bipartisan/bicameral acted like a mexican jumping bean.  He stuttered, stammered and mis-spoke.  He tries to sound so important and comes across as a lightweight.  His ego knows no bounds.

I agree that Elizabeth should bring up the Republican/Romney issue everytime she answers a question.  Brown is no more bi-partisan than I am.  He votes with the dems when it doesn't count--that is his way of snookering the dems and independents into thinking he can work with the other side.

To Scott Brown's supporters he seemed to be putting it to Elizabeth Warren.  However instead of substance he cited partisan groups, threw un-called for insults and tried to impugn the reputation of a nationally recognized teacher and researcher.  It was small time.  I hope people understand that subsidies to enities like oil companies means loss of revenue for other programs.  In essence it is a tax on the rest of us.  Somehow Brown related this to prices at the oil pump.  Oil prices are dictated by the world market not government subsidies.  Dropping the oil subsidies will have no impact on oil prices.  For him to bring up the heritage question again shows how small minded he is.  If this is his biggest criticism it is a loser except to the narrow minded.  Sen Brown's other mantra was that Prof Warren would raise taxes when the exact reverse is true.  The good Senator wants to hold lower taxes for 98% of taxpayers hostage unless a 5% extra tax on taxable income above $250,000.  If your taxable income is $300,000 that is an extra $2500.  This is hardly a major burden with people at that income level.  In short Sen Brown is a die in the wool Republican.  He is definitely ideologically aligned with Mitt Romney.  If you are not voting for Mitt Romney then it is crucial Elizabeth Warren has your vote to carry out what the majority of people expect from their government. 

Scott Brown has been a steady and relaible Senator. No way should he be replaced by this woman, who is a pure academic policy wonk. 

Prof. Lizzy has a reputation as having been a fierce academic debator as a girl.  Well, it sure did not show tonight, when she was in fact a naggy scold, seemingly trying to rotefully bang a few of her chosen ideas into the minds of voters she hopes will send her to Washington.  The first 20 minutes of the debate, in fact, seemed much like a Warren campaign commercial when moderator Jon Keller gave her leave to speak.  Brown was a bit harsh on Lizzy, not the nice chivalrous fellow he sometimes seems to be. But this was a political debate and nice was not the rule.  Over and over, Lizzy tried to bang Brown on the head with her accusations of how he voted in the U.S. Senate, what he said in radio interviews, and - at least 7 times - how he wanted big oil to receive U.S. subsidies paid by taxpayers.  Over and over.... Over and over... In some households, that would be termed the tactics of a shrewish nag.

Brown, for his part, tried to address each of the accusations that Lizzy tossed at him, from his alleged voting against equal pay for women, to failure to vote to send former U.S. Soliciter General Kagan to the U.S. Supreme Court, a move Warren asserted was an indication that Brown does not favor women's health issues and that he voted against a prochoice woman Supreme Court candidate. Brown acknowledged that he voted against Kagan, and said he hoped her actions on the court would prove wrong.  He also pointed to his all female family as demonstrable reasons that he favors many issues related to the female gender. 

Brown scored an unanswered blow when he tied huge Harvard Law School salaries paid to Warren and her professorial husband, housing allowance, interest free loans from Harvard and her being paid a quarter million dollars by Travelers Insurance as indications that Warren is hardly middle class, contributes herself to high college tuition costs, and that she joined a major corporation in its efforts to do harm to American industrial workers harmed by asbestos.

Warren seemed to think that her major point was - besides her repeated litany of Brown's allegedly unacceptable votes on taxes and other issues - that if the Republicans take over the Senate, an unacceptable chairman would oversee the Environmental Protection Agency on energy matters.  She also said that the costs for a controversial Canada-Gulf Coast oil pipeline rejected by the Obama administration would be better spent for non-carbon energy sources.  The only other point she made that was somewhat major was her expression, twice, that she wants to see Barack Obama as commander-in-chief, again.  She did not try to burden Brown with a load of the troubled Mitt Romney campaign, even as Brown repeatedly, and somewhat convincingly, reminded the debate audience that he is one of the most bipartisan members of the U.S. Senate at a time when solutions to many of the nation's most servious problems demand working across the aisle with members of the opposition party.

Debate One to Brown . . . Not a knockout, but certainly a strong decision in his favor.

I'm originally from Massachusetts.  The fact that the Commonwealth might actually re-elect this inarticulate tool (let alone having already elected him once) makes me sad for what the state has become.

I might think about Brown if he was an Independent but the GOP is hideous.

It's hard to know how the voting public will respond to this debate, but Sen. Brown seemed to acting contrary to his Mr. Nice Guy political ads when he kept attacking Warren about the Indian heritage thing. It's certainly a legitimate issue for him to bring up, but not one on which the election should hang. His continual harping on it bordered on bullying. It was not a pleasant sequence.

Elizabeth Warren showed her desperation during the debate by continually striking out at Scott Brown because she doesn't have enough substance to stand on her own and talk about her own ideas. She has no qualms about making up facts to suit her needs and tell bald face lies about his votes and his records. Shame on you Elizabeth! We need more bipartisan senators like Scott Brown in Washington. It's the only way we'll get anything done. Warren will vote party lines 100% of the time, and that isn't good for anyone, no matter who you are!

Warren proved to me she is able and ready to give those Republicans h-e-double hockey sticks in Washington.Put up your dukes Mitch McConnell Elizabeth Warren is gonna fight!

Lizzy got spanked but good  tonight! I don't think she will ever mention the high cost of college again.....HA Ha

Someone needs to educate Brown about the difference between genotype and phenotype.  That he needs to make the point Warren doesn't look like a native American Indian, within the first minute of this debate, speaks volumes to his ignorance and obsession with keeping attention off himself. His smirks and condescending attitude were unbecoming, especially for a 'Senator soldier.' Hope Warren's brother can let Brown know what real combat was like when they talk, since Scott didn't get to see any himself ( unlike a majority of Massuchusetts National guardsman this past decade).  Sorry,  but, I can't be impressed with a guy who talks at close to the speed of light, not letting us actually digest what he is saying.  And just one question, if he has such disdain for Warren, a Democrat, why should anyone believe he can be bipartisan, since most other Democrats share her views and ideas?
By the way, what are Brown's OWN ideas for stimulating the economy and reducing the deficit? About the only thing I got from him was he won't raise anyone's taxes. Great, but is that going to solve any of our problems??

People vote for people they like. EW is not likeable. Senator Brown will be re-elected. Sad fact in Massachusetts is that despite being BLUE.....women have had a tough time getting elected. Spreading Bull was not the best candidate.    

Brown a decisive winner this evening...............Warren no retort to excessive HLS salary, asbestos sell-out, etc. Say good night Liawatha!!

who are these dopes on this post who see the boy senator as bipartisan? if he is bipartisan then why is his campaign accepting money from the koch brothers.....notorious super PAC contributors to those candidates that want to keep energy prices high. does one honestly believe that the fraud boy senator would buck these guys. I wish I could smile in amusement at those below who think/believe l'il scotty is looking out for Massachusetts...but I can't. with oil prices this winter possibly hitting $4.00/gal and a fraud taking money from those who want to keep energy prices high....there is a disconnect with the boy senator and those below who advocate he is bipartisan. I'll take Elizabeth Warren who will truly work on behalf of our state

If tonight's performance was an example of the best advice his campaign staff had to offer, Brown needs to fire them and bring in a new team. He has real strengths (as does Warren), but has not managed to get that message across.