Fight Everywhere: Scott Brown for Massachusetts

Worcester Opening 052 by State Senator Scott Brown.

In the past 48 hours, the blogosphere has awakened to the cause of Scott Brown in Massachusetts. There hasn't been any recent public polling, but my sense is that a poll of likely voters would show Scott Brown within single digits of Martha Coakley, with those most likely to vote opting strongly for Brown. Perhaps the lack of polling betrays the conventional wisdom that Coakley would win in a rout, but maybe one of the more forward-looking public pollsters like Rasmussen or PPP will prove me wrong and poll this thing. 

The case for a Brown upset can be summed up as follows: A January 19th special election would likely skew the turnout universe more Republican than it ever would be in the Bay State. The race has received comparably little attention, so turnout is likely to be low, and a minor surge in Republican turnout could go a long way. 

Then there's the enthusiasm gap: we're already seeing Republicans far more likely to vote in 2010, even beyond the waning of the Obama-only 2008 young voter base. Republican enthusiasm is white hot right now, possibly hotter than it will be in November 2010, because of health care. 

And here's where the mammoth significance of playing in MA-SEN comes into the discussion: if Brown wins, Obamacare is dead. 60 becomes 59. Because Democrats will have lost the Liberal Lion's seat, whose photo stands in the Democratic Cloakroom with the words "Let's get this done." Any chance we have to take out the Obamacare abomination, however remote, is a fight worth fighting. The Senate is currently scheduled to come back into session on January 19th, the day of the Massachusetts special election. Harry Reid could move this up if it looked like Brown could win, but he'd have to get a conference done, pass it through the House, and then get it through the Senate. Not likely. And not before Republicans would scream bloody murder. 

Then there is a bit of recent electoral history. It's true that Massachusetts has deserved the mantle of the most Democratic state in its recent history. But that Democratic loyalty is not quite as strong as it was. Massachusetts is now within two points of California in Presidential partisanship, handing Obama a 26-point win to California's 24 points. In California, a larger and more diverse state, we are talking about a possibly competitive Senate race with a recent history of electing Republican governors. Let's also remember that Massachusetts Democrats are not Obama Democrats. Despite the blessing of Kennedy and Kerry, Obama lost the state by 10 points on Super Tuesday. In October 2007, Republican Jim Ogonowski came within 6 points of beating Niki Tsongas in the MA-5 special, and that was in a bad political climate for Republicans. And a final point that bears remembering: Massachusetts has a Cook PVI of D+12. In a strange low-turnout election scheduled during the winter months, Joseph Cao won LA-2 in a D+25 district. Martha Coakley may not be stashing cash in the freezer, but weird things happen in special elections (as NY-23 also showed us). And an extra, final point: in a sleepy, low-turnout special election in CA-10, that no one believed Republican David Harmer could win and which attracted minimal support from national Republicans and the blogosphere as everyone was focused on Doug Hoffman, we came within 10 points. The Cook PVI rating of that district was D+11. That could have been a lot closer with extra resources and political capital spent. 

All in all, taking a calculated risk in MA-SEN is worth it. Nobody doubts this is an uphill fight, but I don't want to be the guy who decided not to take a stand only to find out that we lost by 6 on election night when everyone assumed the Democrat would win running away and didn't fight. 

In full disclosure, my company provides some online services to the Brown campaign, but I'm not privy to their decision making process nor did I consult them about this post. I do know that people are uncharacteristically fired up about this race and that enthusiasm has followed a hockey stick trajectory in the last 48 hours. It's not out of the question that Brown could raise another half a million dollars online between now and election day, with a moneybomb planned for January 11th. But it's up to us to get the job done.

Your rating: None


That's nice and all...

...but Scott Brown is just another big-government RINO, who actually supports government-run healthcare. Want someone who actually believes in limited government, AND who's on the ballot on 1/19? Then support Joe Kennedy (Independent).

And with a name like that (even though he's no relation), he's bound to pull more votes from the Dems who just don't know any better.

No more Joe-kes

Not gonna give a spoilah the time o' day.

Another shiny new toy.

I wish that the Republicans would stop chasing after every shiny new toy.  Why get excited about a politician with zero record. 

Too many Republicans chase the new toys because most Republicans in office are such pathetic disappointments.  Maybe is the Republicans actually nominated and elected competent politicains instead of intellectually dishonest personalities, then the Republicans would not feel the need to chase after shiny new toys such as Brown.

Is there not one Republicans in the U.S that has a decade of experience that demonostrates the ability to lead, manage, develop policy, and control spending?

I guess you haven't been paying attention.

I guess you haven't been paying attention.

Ronald Reagan taught us the deficits don't matter. - Dick Cheney.


"if Brown wins, Obamacare is

"if Brown wins, Obamacare is dead."

Nice Slogan (for liberals).

It works both ways--not because Mass liberals are fired up for Obama, but because it is more like (or can be easily spinned as) Teddycare in Massachusetts; or more accuaretly a liberalcare in a liberal strong hold.  And if Scott Brown is stupid enough to campaign on that slogan, that will assure a Coakley win in a rout, rather than say a possibly weak two digit win. If the poll numbers do move with the late surge of enthusiasm from anti-HCR conservatives in Massachusetts, you can expect an equally strong, if not stronger, backlash. Scott Brown will be put in a spot and I suspect  he will take all the pains to proclaim his support for HCR. (If i am not wrong, Coakley even threatened to vote aganist HCR if it did not include a public option.) Of ocurse, i am not privy to polls indicating the mood of tradtional republican voters in Mass. But my gut feeling says it is a BAD move to openly attack health care reform in Mass. Stealth campaign, might work to move a few points up, but i don't think it comes anywhere close to pull a surprise victory.

There are lightweight candidates

and then there is Scott Brown.



The national party wants nothing to do with him:

GOP lets Scott Brown fend for himself

Local Republicans outraged committee not giving more in Senate battle

GOP U.S. Senate candidate Scott Brown has been all but abandoned by the same national Republican committees that pumped hundreds of thousands in campaign cash to former governors Mitt Romeny and William Weld during their long-shot bids for U.S. Senate.

But you go right ahead and send in your hard-earned dollars. What is he going to do with this "moneybomb"? One week is hardly enough time for even the best paid media consultant to fabricate an air of seriousness and achievement for him.

Perhaps we should await the next Dede Scozzafava...

since the national party bosses obviously know better than us what is in our best interest.

(BTW, good thing no racy pictures of her were around from past decades)

Dunno John, a decade in the legislature and 20 plus years as a military officer and an attorney, and we need some media guru  "to fabricate an air of seriousness and achievement for him."  Is that how the "reality-based community" thinks--or doesn't think?

On a practical standpoint, you can have your media ready to go a week out and wait on cash to deliver to the stations to air it. TV stations don't run on credit;  but production costs of ads are a fraction of what it costs to air them. SOP is cash on day before ad airs; or it gets "bumped".

I see you are still in denial

about who it was exactly who screwed the pooch in NY-23

Here is it a hint: it was you, and people like you.

Scott Brown is not a military officer. He is a JAG in the Mass Nat'l Guard. How many tours in Kuwait, Iraq I or Iraq II, or Afghanistan has he done?

And the only person who thinks that being an attorney is an achievement is you, naturally.

More "Reality-based" commentary from the clueless "John Smith"

Scott Brown is not a military officer. He is a JAG in the Mass Nat'l Guard

Hmm, John, you have to BE a military officer to BE a JAG.  Maybe if you had the intelligence required to a ): get admitted to law school ; and b): pass the bar examination; you might actually know this.

Go back to your think tank and get better talking points. Please.

Calling a desk-bound JAG in the National Guard who has never

spent a second in harm's way a military officer is like calling the guy who manages the NYFD pension fund a fire fighter.

Naw, that's what you guys do

Like "Vietnam Veteran" Tom Harkin.  Who spent as much time "in harm's way" as Scott Brown. 


It's January 1 and yet we already have a strong contender for

non sequiter of the year. Congratulations - but pace yourself, man - you've got another 364 days with which to demonstrate your foolishness, you don't want to exhaust your reserves of comment fail all at once.


Truthfully, I'm tired of both political parties give us 'their' candidate without us, the American voter, having a say in the matter.  Yes, Brown could easily be another big-government politician, but I'm wanting to see who the voters want. 

My frustration of career politicians, I think, is shared by many voters.  If you want to read a great book, just out, it's about Americans fed up with federal tyranny, career politicians & ends up starting the 2nd American Revolution.  Great political thriller & something that shows what people in Mass. know about bad govt. (Lexington 1775).  Let Mass. start the ball rolling. Mass., just know the rest of the country is praying for you to make the right choice. 

It's a must read if u want to see what's in store for us over the nxt 3 yrs.

republican leadership? Keep looking

"Is there not one Republicans in the U.S that has a decade of experience that demonostrates the ability to lead, manage, develop policy, and control spending?"

Republican Leadership Checklist Over the Past 10 years

1. Balanced the budget - Check

2. Caught Bin Ladin - Check

3. Found weapons of mass distruction in Iraq - Check

4. Secured the borders- Check

5. Secured the ports - Check

6. Secured the airports- Check

7. Demonstrated competency during a natural disaster in a mediumish sized city- Check

8. Solved Israeli-Palistine issue - Check

9. Created a roaring economy- Check

10. Returned jobs from overseas- Check

11. Stamped out al qaeda - Check

12. Kept North Korea from developing missles capable of reaching the U.S. - Check

13. Able to convince allies to play hardball with Iran over nuclear program- Check

14. Solved global warming- Check

15. Devised a comprehensive immigration policy - Check

16. Kept aliens from taking over the world- Check

17. Ended world hunger- Check

18. Put a Starbucks on every corner- Check

19. Enabled the White Sox to win the World Series. - Check

The reason that they don't have leadership is because they have obviously solved everything. What else is there to lead on?

What ? No "Violates the Constitution" item.....?

Surely the Republicans "Sworn to uphold the Constitution" have at some time in the past Previously violated the swearing in Oath...... like the Current Pelosi/Reid combo of Health Care Legislation has Trashed the Constitution ? ?

Any Republican Trash list should at least have some Equivalent Line Item to the current Administration's "Constitutional Baseline Violation" that is the Healthcare proposal of the Democrats in Congress.

Even the Wall street Journal has a list of Unconstitutional Points of the Proposed HealthCare bill.  They stopped at Three Violations,  as it was useless to go beyond common sense in the consideration of the Constitutional Violations of the Bill under Consideration by the UnConstitutional Congress.

I just surfed the Brown

I just surfed the Brown wave.  Nobody thinks he has a chance.  Maybe he's within 9  points ("single digits). 

Does he have any ideas?  Does Ruffini have any ideas, other than to write positive but empty posts about people who pay him?