Scott Brown looked back at last November’s results, realized how devastating his loss was to Elizabeth Warren and wisely decided against another run for US Senate.
Meanwhile, Massachusetts Democrats should thank Brown, his barn coat and pickup truck for teaching them an important lesson.
Comments
We get what we deserve. Still in shock that stellar democrats like Lyin'Liz, Tierney, and Deval are elected. Massachusetts is a national disgrace. Funny too, that the Globe keeps plagiarizers.
For a "national disgrace", we seem to be doing pretty well compared to the rest of the nation. Personally, I couldn't live somewhere that I despised. They say Mississippi is nice this time of year.
Move to Texas if you hate it here so much - it's not changing.
You are correct. It wasn't only Coakley's loss. In my opinion she deserves 70% of the blame by showing no enthusiasm. I know, I saw and heard her speak at two rallies. But the party apparatus made and gave bad advice. Upcoming contests look interesting. Lynch vs. Markey on the Democratic side and ? on the Republican side. Then Big D vs. Big R.
Massachusetts Democrats are not worried about the voters growing weary of one-party rule because so many of the voters, most of whom are Democrats, benefit from it. In the words of the legendary bostonsheppard:
"We truly have crossed the Rubicon, where the political elite and the public employee unions have created an insurmountable patronage-driven, taxpayer-financed political feedback-machine. Too many paychecks now are printed by this system for elections to matter."
Do you suppose we're going to have to endure 36 more years of Ed Markey?
With his stance on the environment alone, just that single issue, we would be lucky and well-served if he should live so long.
Markey only cares about his pocket. An AlGore/LizWarren style, rubber-stamp, limousine-liberal, I'm smarter than you phony.
absolutely no indication of being a qualified executive which governors as opposed legislators need to be
"Wisely" Poor Joan, he didn't do it because he thought he'd lose, he's understandably beat. Also, Warren won for one reason only, the Obama coat tails..it's revisionist history to say she won with "gravitas" she has no gravitas. She's a sheep
Given your pastoral "vocation", your reference to Senator Warren as a "sheep" is sort of ironic, don't you think?
Funny how those coattails work. I voted for Elizabeth Warren for several reasons, but Obama wasn't one of them. I have to admit, though, strong dislike of the National Republicans meant that it was impossible for me to vote for Brown. It was the Republican coattails that sank Brown.
In other words, I don't think it was a Warren win so much as it was a Brown loss. Considering the early polls, it was Brown's race to lose and he succeeded.
Joan, you're forgetting about the inner cities, this was a presidential election, a fiscal conservative couldn't possiblly beat a liberal democrat in a state where welfare abuse is rampant, of course, you would have to go over to the Herald to read those stories. Elizabeth Warren will bring nothing to the table except vote lock step with the democrats. she hasn't said a peep about the Governor's tax hikes, she was in attendence that night, obviously now that she's in, the middle class isn't her concern.
The way people vote, based on their political philosophy has nothing to do with "welfare abuse". What on God's Green Earth are you talking about? If people are not following the rules with respect to the provision and delivery of public services, that is just as much of a concern to the state agencies involved and to the district attorney under a Democratic administration as it would be to a Republican administration.
This comment has been removed.
Liz who? Isnt she off scalping the middle class now?
Yeah, the Bureau of Consumer Protection was all about hurting the middle-class. Inane comment, but it was the only way to work in your terribly clever pun on Native Americans, I assume.
MEAN-WILLIE is correct but maybe I can indelibly etch the CFPB on your memory board so you will never look foolish by posting such junk again:
"The CFPB's First Three Actions Against the Credit Card Companies
Daily Beast 05 Oct 2012
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau announced on October 1 its third significant enforcement action, against American Express. The new regulatory agency said the credit card company violated consumer protection laws "at every stage of the consumer experience, from marketing to enrollment to payment to debt collection." The CFPB found that American Express companies had told customers they would receive $300 for signing up with a certain program; charged illegally high late payment fees; used different credit ratings for customers based on age, a violation of federal lending laws; failed to fully report customer disputes to credit bureaus; and told customers that paying off old debt would improve their credit scores when, in fact, American Express was not reporting the payments at all. The enforcement ordered mandated that American Express end the illegal practices, repay $85 million to some 250,000 customers, and pay $27.5 million in civil penalties to various federal agencies."
Your welcome.
All the sour grapes repubulicans complaining here. Thay are finding it hard to accept their roles as losers. Perhaps they should just leave the Globe and go read the Herald. Then they can draw upon the infinite wisdom of that intellecutal giant Howie Carr.
This comment has been removed.
I'm sure most of us will never know how draining it is to run for a high-level public office, especially in this state. I do not blame Scott Brown for bowing out of this race. He faced two costly election cycles in a very short span, and would've needed to repeat that same cycle again in this case. Furthermore, as we are all aware, it would've been an uphill battle each election against a powerful political machine and an aggressive media bent on his defeat. Let's be honest Joan, you and your employers were going to favor whomever the Democratic elite hand-picked has the next Senator for us. If he won in July, he'd likely have to face a young redhead with a famous last name in the next election, a candidate who will treated like the Messiah by the Globe.
It's good to see Stephen Lynch ignore the memo from the Democrat's inner circle and make a run. Now Ed Markey will be meet the people and ask for their vote, something Martha Coakley felt was unnecessary.
Scott Brown has left the kitchen, the building and political life. I didn't know the heat in Massachusetts could get so uncomfortable in February.
Brown has no executive experience what-so-ever. His political life is over.
What political executive experience does and did Lying Lizzie ever have?? BYTW, whaever happened to her since she moved to Washington? She can't believe she got a better job thsn "working" one class at Harvard....
SBKJD, I want my legislators to legislate, when it comes to Gov, I like them to have exec. experience. Hence why Charlie Baker would be 10x the candidate Scotty boy would be.
great coli
great column. agree he would win gov race.
The wave of Republican governors other states have been forced to endure--Rick Scott, Scott Walker, etc.--are powerful chess pieces in play for the wealthy and their corporations. The American Legislative Exchange (ALEC) is calling the shots in those states, to the detriment of the people and the disgrace of democracy.
INCREDIBLE1 is not correct with his main fact: Most of the voters are NOT Democrats, most of the voters are Independent:
"KNOWN IN MASSACHUSETTS as “unenrolled” voters, independents have become a larger and larger share of the electorate, both in the state and nationally, according to polling and registration data. Today, nearly 53 percent of Massachusetts voters belong to no political party, the highest proportion in at least 60 years. Nationally, the Pew Research Center estimates that there are more independent voters now than at any time over the past 75 years."
I would also submit that BOSTONSHEPPARD is a legend in his own mind....and maybe yours, but he is factually wrong also: The number of Americans unionized in the workforce is under 12%, the lowest in 97 years. Hardly a election-winning voting machine:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/24/business/union-membership-drops-despite-job-growth.html?_r=0
In 2011, Massachusetts' unionization rate was 14.6%. Does that seem overwhelming to you? Put another way, 85.4% of Massachusetts workers are NOT unionized.
Incredible1 is wrong on the order of 99.9 % of the time. An incredible record.