What can Brown do for the U.S.A.?

One of the first important tests of the Republican party in 2010 will involve a suburban Irish "Generation Jones" attorney from the Northeast.

No, it's not me. Although I have a lot of similarities to the Republican candidate to replace Ted Kennedy in the U.S. Senate, State Senator Scott Brown (one difference is I do not have a child with any entertainment talent)

No, Brown is more of the sort of candidate we need to be running--a self-starter who rose up the ranks from the vast suburban middle class.

The Massachusetts Republicans almost made the same mistake many Republicans are making for 2010---running a certified pre-owned candidate.   However, former Bush 43 Chief  of Staff Andrew Card declined to run for the open seat.

So, let's answer two quick questions. Is Brown a guy worth backing and does he have a plausible hope of winning?

I think yes.

Before Senator Kennedy's untimely demise the Boston Globe was touting Brown as a rising star in the Republican ranks.  The Globe pointed out that Brown won re-election against a well-funded Democratic opponent by 18 points in a district where Barack Obama won by 20 points. Why? Perhaps because Brown was perceived as a problem-solver and a straight shooter.

Brown is focusing his campaign as being a fiscal conservative and a Washington outsider.  Ironically, this sort of persona worked well for candidates for Massachusetts Governor for over a decade, starting with the admittedly more liberal William Weld.  But until Deval Patrick won in 2006, Massachusetts Republicans had a long streak of winning non-presidential elections.  (Patrick is now painfully unpopular)

This makes one question whether Massachusetts reputation as a one -party bastion is somewhat inflated by increased presidential year election turnout.

In 2006 Deval Patrick received about 1.2 million votes. But the Democratic gubernatorial candidates in the contested 1990, 1998 and 2002 elections received between 900,000 to 1,100,000 votes; the Republican candidates ranged from a low of 985,000 to Weld's 1,175,000 and received a remarkably constant % of the total vote cast---from 50.8% to 49.8%

On the other hand, Republican presidential candidates in 2004 and 2008 got...hmmm...about 1.1 million votes in Massachusetts.

So it seems the Republican vote might be a bit "stickier"  in MA then the Democratic vote,  which baloons in high turnout contests, and this makes a difference when the special election is scheduled for January 19, 2010, when weather conditions in New England are likely to be adverse.

If we are going to sneak over the finish line in the Bay State, this might be the best chance to do it.

One thing which will be critical is whether the Democratic primary on December 8 turns out to be a bloodbath. The present contenders are Attorney General Martha Coakley, Congressman Mike Capuano and Congressman Stephen Lynch

All three contenders are from Boston or its urbanized close-in suburbs. Coakley leads in early polls, but lacks the seven figure warchest of the incumbent congressmen. No woman has won a major office in Massachusetts history, Coakley would be the first.  Of the House members, Capuano has a reputation as a a wonkish but doctrinaire liberal; Lynch is a blue-collar pro-union pro-life candidate who may appeal to swing voters but could struggle in a feminist dominated statewide primary.

So, the chance for blood on the floor is there. But the geography is also important.  Brown is from the area Republicans have traditionally amassed statewide margins--the I-495 belt on the fringe of the Boston media market.

In the 2002 election almost 80% of the the total vote in the Commonwealth was cast in the Boston media market and Romney won by more than his statewide plurality here; Democrat Shannon O' Brien actually carried the areas in the Providence, Springfield and Albany TV markets.  And the critical area was not the close-in urbanized area. O'Brien won the city and the close-in's by a 209,000 to 134,000 margin. But in the rest of Middlesex and Norfolk counties, and in Essex and Plymouth counties...Romney amassed a 576, 000 to 414,000 margin.  In the reaches beyond I-495 (metro Worcester and Cape Cod) Romney won  by 202,000 to 144,000.

Now, obviously neither Bush or McCain attained these sorts of margins in the fringe of the Boston media market.  They also weren't perceived as attentive to the local zeitgeist.  A Scott Brown might well succed as being seen as a "local guy" not one of those nasty Red State Republicans.    

So , while Boston is not a "cheap" TV market, Massachusetts may not be that a expensive state to "play" in, since more than 85% of the voters are covered by just two in-state markets; (Springfield is a rather cheap market; costs about 1/7 of Boston per point) .    A MA campaign today is cheaper than a VA or NC campaign in this day and age; where one needs to buy either multiple markets or "waste" a lot of coverage. 

And we are taking about a short campaign; especially post-primary.

I don;t need to mention that the impact of a Brown victory in the perceived heartland of liberal Democrats would have a rather disheartening effort on national Democrats.

We'd do well to keep our eyes on this race. I'd rather seen us spend money here than propping up someone in a 60% GOP district with poor manners.