I'll vote for a person that will cross the aisle 76% of the time, Elizabeth Warren, in my opinion, will NEVER cross the aisle, she will vote 100% of the time with democrats. How about studying other democrats in the senate and see how they voted.

I'm certain you mean "Progressive", as in left wing Democrat, as opposed to "progressive", which means "open to improvement". Just another set of selectively chosen but meaningless statistics, shaped to project a point of view, not a truthful trend.

This shows that Scotty is as plastic and detached from reality as Mittster and Lapdog Eric. Neither understands that misleading the public is LYING. If you only are bipartisan when it doesn't matter, your senate career is pretty much a series of lies.

100 - 76 = 24%. He 'crossed the aisle' 24 percent of the time, not 75.

When it matters, he'll vote for anything that favors millionaires.

Where's the comparison to other Republican senators? Without that context, which a reporter for a high school newspaper would have known to include, the story is not terrible meaningful. I bet Brown's bucking his party 24% of the time on crucial partisan votes makes him one of the more independent-minded Republican senators, consistent with his claims.

This is propaganda from the Warren campaign and its fellow travelers. It won't sway any opinions. Scott Brown crosses the aisle more than any Republican senators except Collins and Snowe, and more than any Democrats period. He votes with his party 76% of the time, wow, what a shock, who would have guessed? I hope the people providing money to this group feel like they got value for their investment. If I'd paid for this piece of "research" I'd want a refund.

This is easily one of the stupidest stories on the political topic that the Boston Demohack propagand sheet has run this silly season. An admittedly "progressive" advocacy outfit does a purported analysis of a Republican senator's voting record and finds that he did not vote the way a progressive senator should vote. Well.. gosh almighty... A Republican who voted with his party the majority of the time... But is this mob of Demohacks expecting that having a 'MA' inside the parentheses that appear after the senator's published name obligate him to vote with the progressive's favorite leftlisters? Scott Brown is a Republicn, less conservative than most, but still a GOP member, and thus improves the Massachusetts congressional delegation. Running this sort of claptrap in the Globe is not likely to get him ousted by a Harvard professor with questionable credentials.

Brown voted with his party 76% of the time on the tough votes? I'd call that evidence of BEING bipartisan! Do you really expect it to be 50%? Check our other Senator, Kerry .... I'm pretty sure that he votes about 99% with his party.

Comparing Brown and Kerry makes no sense. Kerry's personal philosophy matches his parties and it matches the majority opinion of Massachusetts. There are times when all three are not in line, but that is rare. As to being willing to cross the aisle when he believes it the right thing to do, you have an excellent example from his freshman term. Kerry was the only Democratic Senator from New England to vote for Gramm/Rudman. This was because he is fiscally responsible. Brown, is in a more complicated situation. I really don't know Brown's personal vision because I have never heard him speak of anything beyond cliques - like being for jobs or being bipartisan - both of which everyone is for - in words and theory. The Republican leaders like McConnell, Paul Ryan and John Boehner are usually NOT where the majority of Massachusetts are. Therefore, if Brown voted 100% of the time with his party, he would have absolutely no chance of reelection. Kerry's Gramm/Rudman vote actually showed more political courage than Brown's (with the Democrats) votes. In Brown's case, there would have been a political cost to voting WITH the Republicans.

You might want to look at how often Senate Democrats crossed to vote with the Republicans between 2003 and 2007 when the Republicans controlled the Senate. The number of filibusters was far lower than the Republicans fought in 2009. This in spite of the fact that in 2009, the Democrats had a bigger majority than the Republicans had in that interval. There is ALWAYS more likelihood to cross the aisle when the other party has the majority. Most of the bills acted on originate from that side. I suggest that you look at how people like Ben Nelson, Blanche Lincoln and Evan Bayh voted.