Brown: “Maybe there’s a new breed of Republican coming to Washington”

posted at 4:35 pm on January 20, 2010 by Allahpundit

Via Greg Hengler, the two best minutes from today’s introductory presser. What exactly does it mean to be a “Scott Brown Republican”? Boris Shor guesstimates:

In particular, based upon his voting record in the Massachusetts State Senate as well the Votesmart surveys of MA state legislators (include his own from 2002), I estimate that Brown is to the left of the previously leftmost Republican in the Senate, Olympia Snowe of Maine … and to the right of the rightmost Democrat in the Senate, Ben Nelson of Nebraska… Just as important, Brown stands to become the pivotal member of the Senate—that is, the 60th least liberal (equivalently, the 40th most conservative)–a distinction previously held by Nelson…

Scott Brown is a politician, not a kamikaze pilot. As David Mayhew argued in 1974, the first and proximate goal of politicians in the United States is to get re-elected. Brown will have a far harder time in 2012 against some credible, seasoned Democrat who won’t get surprised again (or run so badly). Turnout will be higher in that presidential year, meaning the Democratic base will be far more evident at the polls. And the Democrat will get to ride Obama’s coattails, influencing independents in the Democratic direction. And Brown doesn’t have that many years to build up the incumbency advantages that other freshman Senators get. He won’t have brought home as much bacon, and he won’t have risen too far in Congress.

Translation: Scotty B’s a Republican — an orthodox one on most issues, in fact — but if you want to have any chance of holding this seat long-term, you’d better be prepared to cut him some slack. Re-read that second paragraph in the blockquote as often as you have to until it sinks in. I think he’ll be a reliable vote on national security, partly because of his military background and partly because “more rights for terrorists!” ain’t winning the Dems any elections even in Massachusetts. But he’s going to have to throw a few votes to The One to preserve his electability, likely starting (but certainly not ending) with Supreme Court appointments, so let’s make peace with the concept now.

I think he’s going to have a relatively easy ride from the Republican base. He’s a likeable guy, he preaches federalism and fiscal responsibility, he undermines the media’s “southern wingnut” narrative about the GOP, and, oh yeah, he’s singlehandedly stopped ObamaCare dead in its tracks. He’s a Judd Gregg Republican, essentially — who just happened to figure out a way to win Ted Kennedy’s seat and give grassroots conservatives their biggest (only?) thrill since Bush beat Kerry. Lots of goodwill in the bank here. Lots.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

He may be a RINO, but he’s a hell of a lot better than a marxist progressive posing as a democrat.

cntrlfrk on January 20, 2010 at 4:37 PM

Brown is to the left of the previously leftmost Republican in the Senate, Olympia Snowe

haha that’s awesome.

crr6 on January 20, 2010 at 4:38 PM

ExACTLY, Allah.

tree hugging sister on January 20, 2010 at 4:38 PM

He has already been on the phone to The Won. He’ll vote for the HC bill if MA is exempt from it. /s

Caper29 on January 20, 2010 at 4:38 PM

oh yeah, he’s singlehandedly stopped ObamaCare dead in its tracks.

That’s actually a result of a lot of teamwork, which we should continue.

pedestrian on January 20, 2010 at 4:39 PM

Brown is to the left of the previously leftmost Republican in the Senate, Olympia Snowe
haha that’s awesome.

crr6 on January 20, 2010 at 4:38 PM

And false.

No way this cat votes for Porkulus.

CDeb on January 20, 2010 at 4:39 PM

He’s the best we can hope for from Massachusetts. Better, in fact, than we can reasonably hope for. Commencing cutting slack.

David Mickelson on January 20, 2010 at 4:39 PM

he preaches federalism and fiscal responsibility

If he practices what he preaches I will be slim, dumb, and happy.

WashJeff on January 20, 2010 at 4:40 PM

As long as our boy is a fiscal conservative and kills Obamacare, we heart Brown

John the Libertarian on January 20, 2010 at 4:40 PM

“…and, oh yeah, he’s singlehandedly stopped ObamaCare dead in its tracks.”

Happy Feet!

(I just can’t get enough!)

Seven Percent Solution on January 20, 2010 at 4:41 PM

Well, if some commenters are calling Mike Pence a RINO on Michelle’s site, Brown will be, what, a traitor?

SouthernGent on January 20, 2010 at 4:41 PM

Exactly Allah. He won’t be DeMint, but he better not be Snowe. Because this love affair will be over in a few months.

cubachi on January 20, 2010 at 4:42 PM

He is a fiscal conservative, anti jihadist, pro military…from MA, I’ll take him.

d1carter on January 20, 2010 at 4:42 PM

Brown: “Maybe there’s a new breed of Republican coming to Washington”

Change I can believe in.

RealMc on January 20, 2010 at 4:43 PM

And the Democrat will get to ride Obama’s coattails,

What coattails?

MarkTheGreat on January 20, 2010 at 4:43 PM

As long as he’s not supporting amnesty, crap-and-betrayed, and/or socialized medicine, I’m cool with the guy.

Doughboy on January 20, 2010 at 4:43 PM

Actually, I don’t know if he is to the left of Snowe.

He’s pretty tough with respect to national security, and he is in favor of across the board tax cuts.

Remember also that Snowe cast a vote in favor of getting the Senate bill out of the Finance Committee. If faced with that vote today, Brown would not do that. He probably will vote against Porkulus II also.

Doodad Pro on January 20, 2010 at 4:43 PM

He is am a East Conservative: more fiscal than social. People have to realize that not a lot of people are religious in the East Coast, and if he wants to keep his seat he should worry more about the fisacal aspect than the social aspect.

dmnari on January 20, 2010 at 4:43 PM

I think he’s done in 2012. I just see no possible way for him to win again.

I hope I’m wrong.

taney71 on January 20, 2010 at 4:43 PM

I think Brown is just what he says he is. He is not pretending to be DeMint here. He is a northern Republican. Strong on national security and fiscally conservative. But he is not DeMint. I just hope people do not hold that against him.

Terrye on January 20, 2010 at 4:43 PM

He’s wrong on Israel, and that DC article doesn’t state his position on amnesty specifically. Weak areas. Otherwise, he has potential. Work with him. Mold him. Craft him.

MadisonConservative on January 20, 2010 at 4:44 PM

I estimate that Brown is to the left of the previously leftmost Republican in the Senate, Olympia Snowe of Maine

How did Snowe vote on porkulus, again? I’m certain that I heard Brown call for tax cuts, not bailouts last night.

Vashta.Nerada on January 20, 2010 at 4:44 PM

funny thing is all the purist of various conservative or libertine stripes out there, who hated Bush and refused to vote for McCain with his 80 ACU rating and all…..are thrilled with the much more Liberal Brown winning, who they supported, unlike McCain.

idiots.

jp on January 20, 2010 at 4:44 PM

haha that’s awesome.

crr6 on January 20, 2010 at 4:38 PM

He’s well to the right of Coakley, so it’s still a win for us. As many here have said, over and over again, he’s the best we can get given the state.

So why do you think this is a surprise to anyone?

MarkTheGreat on January 20, 2010 at 4:44 PM

Anyone know his stance an amnesty?

txag92 on January 20, 2010 at 4:44 PM

It’s almost too good to be true. The win, the character this guy exudes, the stall of health care “reform”.

scalleywag on January 20, 2010 at 4:44 PM

Who the hell is Boris Shor? Who the hell is AllahPundit, for that matter?

DaydreamBeliever on January 20, 2010 at 4:44 PM

Agreed. A Massachusetts Republican is better than a Massachusetts Democrat.

changer1701 on January 20, 2010 at 4:45 PM

It will be a lot easier for him to leave the reservation on a few things if we, as voters, do our job this November. Turn the house into a 50/50 scenario and pick up 5 or so more seats in the senate, and he has some wiggle room to survive a while. He’s going to be put in some tough spots politically until that happens though.

Either way, I think it was pretty well understood that he isn’t going to be a reliable vote on everything but that was only spoken about in hushed tones. I think most understand this is Massachusetts, and this sticks a dagger in the health care process, and he is as good as we could have hoped for in this scenario. Actually, better than we could have hoped for.

stldave on January 20, 2010 at 4:45 PM

Just part of the “narrative spinning.” He’s not really a conservative, so it’s okay what happened. BS. He doesn’t share my views on social issues completely, and I’m going to assume he’ll vote for judicial candidates I dislike, but there is no way he’s left of Snowe on fiscal issues. He wouldn’t have voted the senate bill out of conference, for one thing. And, as someone mentioned above, he wouldn’t have voted for porklulous, either.

jdp629 on January 20, 2010 at 4:45 PM

My gripe has always been the nomination of liberal Rs in conservative districts. Do we really need a, say, Grahamnesty in South Carolina? We can’t do better?

Anyway, as far as I’m concerned Brown’s election is like Frodo getting out of Mordor in one piece and I’m super-cool about it.

Gymkata on January 20, 2010 at 4:46 PM

I bet he wouldn’t have voted for the Baucus bill to come out of committee.

Olympia Snowe couldn’t resist “history” while Scott Brown ran his entire campaign around being the 41st vote.

I just can’t see him being to the left of Snowe.

Anyway, what I get out of this piece is this: Brown is a true Republican, but the moral police of the right will not like him, even though he is a true limited Gov’t/anti-tax Republican. He made a statement about letting the people of MA decide an issue with a referendum. Not to mention the R’s are outnumbered 4-1 by the D’s in MA.

If he’s a RINO, then I have no problem with RINOs. At least he understood the meaning of Climategate unlike Mr. Graham. At least he believes in securing the borders, unlike Mr. McCain. At least he believes in a stong defense unlike every single Democrat save Jim Webb (maybe).

I guess I just don’t see the problem, or I’m unwilling to even remotely consider anything these moron know-nothings try to tell us. Conservatism is supposed to be dead, remember?

Last but not least

…I estimate that Brown is…

Means: I have no clue and will invent my own narrative and push it like fact.

uknowmorethanme on January 20, 2010 at 4:46 PM

taney71 on January 20, 2010 at 4:43 PM

Before yesterday most people didn’t think he’d win this time, either.

changer1701 on January 20, 2010 at 4:46 PM

Brown will have a far harder time in 2012 against some credible, seasoned Democrat who won’t get surprised again (or run so badly). Turnout will be higher in that presidential year, meaning the Democratic base will be far more evident at the polls. And the Democrat will get to ride Obama’s coattails, influencing independents in the Democratic direction

That’s pretty funny. Coattails, like a sinking body in formal attire after the Titanic went down.

Vashta.Nerada on January 20, 2010 at 4:46 PM

Well, if some commenters are calling Mike Pence a RINO on Michelle’s site, Brown will be, what, a traitor?

SouthernGent on January 20, 2010 at 4:41 PM

I know. That’s ridiculous. Mike Pence is my congressman and I couldn’t be more pleased. He is absolutely one of the best of the best, period.

Oink on January 20, 2010 at 4:47 PM

are thrilled with the much more Liberal Brown winning, who they supported, unlike McCain.

idiots.

jp on January 20, 2010 at 4:44 PM

I wasn’t aware that Brown was running for president.

MarkTheGreat on January 20, 2010 at 4:47 PM

And the Democrat will get to ride Obama’s coattails,

Now that’s funny right there, I don’t care who you are.

Bugler on January 20, 2010 at 4:47 PM

That’s all we need. Fiscal Conservatives. The other crap shouldn’t freakin’ matter in a free country.

I hope Brown doesn’t go to DC and get caught up in the shiny objects the lobbyists will throw his way.

bridgetown on January 20, 2010 at 4:47 PM

What coattails?

MarkTheGreat on January 20, 2010 at 4:43 PM

The ones that helped Obama get victories for each candidate he stumped for.

lorien1973 on January 20, 2010 at 4:47 PM

This is all gobbledygook. Scott ran as a fiscal conservative, tough on terror, easy on the social issues conservative. His messages were clear and unmistakable and they resonated with people here. So long as he stays true to his word and does what he can on constituent services he’ll be just fine in 012.

What few people understand is, few people here were on board with Kennedy’s agenda but he had incredible constituent services. If you had a problem that he could help with his staff was all over it like white on rice.

TheBigOldDog on January 20, 2010 at 4:47 PM

But he’s going to have to throw a few votes to The One to preserve his electability, likely starting (but certainly not ending) with Supreme Court appointments, so let’s make peace with the concept now.

Let’s not. Who sits on the Supreme Court is more important than a Brown re-election. Or anybody’s re-election. I don’t care if that means no Republican holds a Senate seat for more than one term. Cycle em through. You saw “Big Red One” didn’t you? “Number One!…Number Two!…”

Chris_Balsz on January 20, 2010 at 4:48 PM

Please repub’s drop the social nanny crap. It won’t sell.

jsunrise on January 20, 2010 at 4:48 PM

And the Democrat will get to ride Obama’s coattails,

Those coattails sure are getting short lately.

conservnut on January 20, 2010 at 4:48 PM

coattails? obambi cannot even get a tie on

Ris4victory on January 20, 2010 at 4:48 PM

Scott Brown is a Romney Republican. There is nothing wrong with that. Just as long as he is fiscally conservative, and his vote isn’t for sale, he is in like Flynn.

portlandon on January 20, 2010 at 4:48 PM

I’m hoping that 2012 is such a huge Republican wave, that even candidates like Brown will be swept along.

MarkTheGreat on January 20, 2010 at 4:49 PM

God, give me the courage to change the things I can, the serenity to accept the things I can’t change, and the wisdom to know the difference.

Author Unknown.

Of course he’s going to have to cast some votes we’ll hate, but that’s a lot better than having someone in that seat that will cast nothing but votes we’ll hate.

Hog Wild on January 20, 2010 at 4:49 PM

Low taxes, Cut spending, no rights for terrorists, win the wars, ban partial birth abortion, more power to the states.

Sounds like a mainstream Republican to me. Get over the RINO meme.

joepub on January 20, 2010 at 4:49 PM

Kinda OT: Comment at DKOS about Obama

Yeah, I hear that during the SOTU he’s going to let Joe Wilson walk up to the rostrum and slap him across the face.

El_Terrible on January 20, 2010 at 4:49 PM

I’m sure plenty of the purists will do their best to ensure a lib takes the seat in 2012.

That being said, he’s not to the left of Snowe, I don’t know why people keep pushing this mantra.

Comparing state voting records and national records is like comparing apples and oranges.

reaganaut on January 20, 2010 at 4:49 PM

He’s against Cap & Trade, pro-Gun rights, fiscally conservative, pro tax cuts, pro death penalty, pro-Israel, against illegal immigration and amnesty, pro freedom of choice in education and pro veteran. His pro-choice position is about the weakest. From his website:

Abortion
While this decision should ultimately be made by the woman in consultation with her doctor, I believe we need to reduce the number of abortions in America. I believe government has the responsibility to regulate in this area and I support parental consent and notification requirements and I oppose partial birth abortion. I also believe there are people of good will on both sides of the issue and we ought to work together to support and promote adoption as an alternative to abortion.

That’s a pretty weak pro-choice position. His is definitely not a rabid “it’s the woman’s body, screw the clump of cells” position.

I am an arch-conservative and even I am pretty happy with guy.

mrsmwp on January 20, 2010 at 4:50 PM

but if you want to have any chance of holding this seat long-term, you’d better be prepared to cut him some slack

It isn’t really Brown I am worried about. It is the people of MA (apology to those I know in here form MA who are conservative) that will revert back.

upinak on January 20, 2010 at 4:50 PM

Work with him. Mold him. Craft him.

You sound like a young wife.

jaime on January 20, 2010 at 4:51 PM

I think he’s done in 2012. I just see no possible way for him to win again.

I hope I’m wrong.

taney71 on January 20, 2010 at 4:43 PM

Most people did not think he could win in the first place and they were wrong. So who knows? The man might be able to be a real success at this.

Terrye on January 20, 2010 at 4:51 PM

I’ll cut him some slack. Fiscal responsibility and strong on national security, the latter including illegal immigration, suit me fine. The ironic thing about his out of state grass roots support is that it can wither and die in 2012 depending on his actions, and I’m sure he’s aware of that. That’s why individuals carry a bigger hammer than the NRSC if we don’t allow them to make our decisions for us by sending them our donations. Eliminate the middleman and use the leverage wisely.

a capella on January 20, 2010 at 4:51 PM

To say that he’s left of the Hag Twins of Maine is preposterous. Is he a strict Conservative? No. But he’s Conservative where it counts–I really don’t care that he’s more moderate on social issues… because I’m definitely not.

If he starts voting for Son of Stimulus, and bailouts, and a wreck of a health care reform bill we currently have (not a new one that is made from common sense) then we’ll have problems.

Enoxo on January 20, 2010 at 4:51 PM

funny thing is all the purist of various conservative or libertine stripes out there, who hated Bush and refused to vote for McCain with his 80 ACU rating and all…..are thrilled with the much more Liberal Brown winning, who they supported, unlike McCain.

idiots.

jp on January 20, 2010 at 4:44 PM

To be fair, Brown didn’t give us McCain/Feingold nor has he and his “gang of 14″ sold us down the river.

Lily on January 20, 2010 at 4:52 PM

He’s wrong on Israel, and that DC article doesn’t state his position on amnesty specifically. Weak areas. Otherwise, he has potential. Work with him. Mold him. Craft him. — MadisonConservative on January 20, 2010 at 4:44 PM

I assume you’re talking about his “two-state solution” stance but that’s just pro-forma. I.e. “in the longterm, if the Palestinians meet their obligations, if they agree to such and such conditions, then of course they should have a state.”

In the meantime he has a very deep appreciation for Israel’s security needs, is against a settlement freeze, and has been known to muse aloud that liberal Jews don’t really understand Israel’s military situation.

omriceren on January 20, 2010 at 4:52 PM

Comparing state voting records and national records is like comparing apples and oranges.

reaganaut on January 20, 2010 at 4:49 PM

I think this is true.

Terrye on January 20, 2010 at 4:53 PM

‘A Judd Gregg Republican’. Don’t remind me how much I’m going to miss Gregg when he’s gone. I hope we get many more like him. The gal who is the front runner for the seat seems ok, but she does not have a public enough profile for me to get to know her well. Hey, NH GOP–you hear that? Time to do something about it?

jeanie on January 20, 2010 at 4:53 PM

Kinda OT: Comment at DKOS about Obama

Yeah, I hear that during the SOTU he’s going to let Joe Wilson walk up to the rostrum and slap him across the face.

El_Terrible on January 20, 2010 at 4:49 PM

I think we have just found us a new way to lower the deficit. Pay per view SOTU.

MarkTheGreat on January 20, 2010 at 4:53 PM

Who the hell is Boris Shor? Who the hell is AllahPundit, for that matter?

DaydreamBeliever on January 20, 2010 at 4:44 PM

Some assoc. prof. from the Univ. of Chicago one of Allah’s new go to guys.

thomasaur on January 20, 2010 at 4:54 PM

the purist of various conservative or libertine stripes out there

idiots.

jp on January 20, 2010 at 4:44 PM

libertine?

who’s the idjit?

John the Libertarian on January 20, 2010 at 4:54 PM

Hey, we can make fun of the RINO senators, but because they hung tough and hung together, we are now able to block this crap sandwich.

I may not like Collins and Snowe, but they did the right thing when it counted.

joepub on January 20, 2010 at 4:54 PM

I have no problem with his positions. We’d be well served to de-emphasize the social conservative side of things until we get people who are much stronger on economic conservatism.

bj1126 on January 20, 2010 at 4:55 PM

To say that he’s left of the Hag Twins of Maine is preposterous. Is he a strict Conservative? No. But he’s Conservative where it counts–I really don’t care that he’s more moderate on social issues… because I’m definitely not [strict conservative here either].

If he starts voting for Son of Stimulus, and bailouts, and a wreck of a health care reform bill we currently have (not a new one that is made from common sense) then we’ll have problems.

Enoxo on January 20, 2010 at 4:51 PM

left a portion of that train of thought out.

Enoxo on January 20, 2010 at 4:55 PM

This kind of Republican needs an engaged electorate – once they fall asleep, the politicians engage the special interests.

Queen0fCups on January 20, 2010 at 4:55 PM

He may be a RINO, but he’s a hell of a lot better than a marxist progressive posing as a democrat.

cntrlfrk on January 20, 2010 at 4:37 PM

There’s a difference?

KeepOhioRed on January 20, 2010 at 4:56 PM

I’m getting confused now. Is Brown a Chamberlain-esque candy-ass RINO or is he not?

:)

innominatus on January 20, 2010 at 4:56 PM

Hey, you have to start somewhere. At the very least, a fiscal conservative outta MA is worth the inevitable disagreements on other more social-related issues. It’s a start to bring MA back toward the fold.

search4truth on January 20, 2010 at 4:56 PM

To be fair, Brown didn’t give us McCain/Feingold nor has he and his “gang of 14″ sold us down the river.

Lily on January 20, 2010 at 4:52 PM

To be fair, McCain is a pro life, pro military, fiscal conservative and that gang of 14 also gave us Roberts and Alito, two very conservative justices. And as for McCain/Feingold, even conservatives like Fred Thompson supported it. I think McCain supported that legislation because of the corrupting influence of money in politics. We can disagree with his methods, but I do think he was trying to do the right thing. The country would be a hell of a lot better off with him in the White House than with Barack Obama. Just ask Sarah Palin.

Terrye on January 20, 2010 at 4:57 PM

Exactly how is he a RINO? He is for lower taxes, smaller government and national security and no bringing terrorists to American soil.

Queen0fCups on January 20, 2010 at 4:57 PM

Who the hell is going to run against him in 2012 and win? If the Democrats had anyone better than Martha Coakley, he/she would be getting sworn in as Senator tomorrow. I guarantee that Democrats are going to do something stupid like drag Mike Dukakis out of retirement or something. Their House delegation are all hopelessly leftwing morons who could not win a statewide electon if they tried.

They don’t have much of a bench right now, since most of them have gone to jail or are about to get tossed out on their asses this fall.

rockmom on January 20, 2010 at 4:58 PM

“Social Issues” includes universal health care.

jaime on January 20, 2010 at 4:58 PM

I’m getting confused now. Is Brown a Chamberlain-esque candy-ass RINO or is he not?

:)

innominatus on January 20, 2010 at 4:56 PM

AP made a bet with his Twitter pals last night how long it would be before someone called Brown a RINO.

He’s frothing at the mouth hoping he wins the bet at 2 months.

Enoxo on January 20, 2010 at 5:00 PM

There’s a new sheriff in town???

Oil Can on January 20, 2010 at 5:00 PM

I am an arch-conservative and even I am pretty happy with guy.

mrsmwp on January 20, 2010 at 4:50 PM

+1

mwdiver on January 20, 2010 at 5:00 PM

I do think he was trying to do the right thing.

Terrye on January 20, 2010 at 4:57 PM

That’s what the liberals say as well, when they decide that their principles are more important than the constitution.

Money does not corrupt politics. Hidden money does. There should be no limits on how much an American can contribute to the candidate of their choice, so long as the donation is declared as close to immediately as is technologically posible.

MarkTheGreat on January 20, 2010 at 5:00 PM

Can you tell someone is a lobbyist? Don’t the pedal themselves as “experts” in one subject of another? AND, even if you know you don’t take any funds from anyone, how do you keep up with your office and campaign staff to make sure they aren’t taking any money? Washington is such a pit.

Cindy Munford on January 20, 2010 at 5:00 PM

LOL more of this crap about Brown being a closet liberal or RINO.

Yet to see any evidence of that. Being moderate or libertarian on social issues does not a RINO make.

On the issues that matter, from the general role of government, to fiscal policy, to ethics, to foreign policy — the guy is a CONSERVATIVE, and ran as one. He is a new breed: the Tea Party breed.

jjraines on January 20, 2010 at 5:01 PM

libertine?

who’s the idjit?

John the Libertarian on January 20, 2010 at 4:54 PM

I meant libertine not Libertarian.

jp on January 20, 2010 at 5:01 PM

“Social Issues” includes universal health care.

jaime on January 20, 2010 at 4:58 PM

He’s not for universal health care. He doesn’t believe people in one state should pay for the health care of another state.

But he does believe states should be health care insurance reform–just not what the Democrats are trying to shove through from backroom deals.

Enoxo on January 20, 2010 at 5:01 PM

Brown won espousing such moderate ideas as cutting taxes, killing Obamacare and waterboarding terrorists .
He could be liberal on everything else and still be a million times better than the average Northeast Republican senator for the last 50 years.

jjshaka on January 20, 2010 at 5:02 PM

What few people understand is, few people here were on board with Kennedy’s agenda but he had incredible constituent services. If you had a problem that he could help with his staff was all over it like white on rice.

TheBigOldDog on January 20, 2010 at 4:47 PM

I’ve heard that before about the real secret to the Swimmer’s continual reelections.

Based on my contact with MA people, I think many people will identify with him and if he is perceived as fighting for the average guy, he could be in office a wicked long time.

Lou Budvis on January 20, 2010 at 5:02 PM

I meant libertine not Libertarian.

jp on January 20, 2010 at 5:01 PM

Unfortunately, there are a lot of people who don’t realize that there is a difference.

MarkTheGreat on January 20, 2010 at 5:03 PM

I’ll wait to see how Brown votes before making a determination of his RINO status.

Bishop on January 20, 2010 at 5:04 PM

Yesterday I swore that if Brown won, for two full years, I would refrain from calling Brown a RINO. I would refrain from calling Brown, Lindsay Graham’s boyfriend. I would refrain from calling the fine citizens of Massachusetts, Massholes. And I will refrain from comparing Tom Brady to women’s genitalia.

I intend to keep my promises.

myrenovations on January 20, 2010 at 5:04 PM

Comparing state voting records and national records is like comparing apples and oranges.

reaganaut on January 20, 2010 at 4:49 PM

Excellent point! How did Barack Obama’s record in the IL State Senate compare to his record in the U.S. Senate?

Besides, as a State Senator, Scott Brown had to adapt his voting record to his constituents in his district, which may be further left than the entire state of Massachusetts, which he will now represent.

Conservatives SHOULD be willing to cut him some slack because he’s from Massachusetts, but if he does what he campaigned to do (fiscal responsibility, cutting government spending, national security, against socialized medicine) he’s conservative enough. His position on social issues won’t matter unless Republicans win a majority in the Senate, which is not likely in 2010, and Scott Brown will have to run for re-election in 2012.

Steve Z on January 20, 2010 at 5:06 PM

Terrye on January 20, 2010 at 4:57 PM

Hey I’m with you on this. I voted for McCain and I was going to even before he named Palin as running mate. I was just pointing out that Brown hasn’t yet done anything to make the base mad. And say what you will, McCain/Feingold and the gang of 14 did upset a lot of people.

Lily on January 20, 2010 at 5:06 PM

he preaches federalism

Which is the difference between ones vote on state health care and one acknowleging that the federal government doesn’t have the power to intrude on that same space.

If someone is truly a federalist, then his positions on state issues are almost unrelated to his views on federal government. Understanding the domestic limits of federal power is the key.

neurosculptor on January 20, 2010 at 5:06 PM

And Brown doesn’t have that many years to build up the incumbency advantages that other freshman Senators get. He won’t have brought home as much bacon, and he won’t have risen too far in Congress.

I believe the electorate in MA is aware of that. As long as the Obama-Reid-Pelosi regime continues to embarrass itself with delusions of grandeur and Utopian policies, the independent voter in MA (in 2012) will again vote against the Democratic Party.

It won’t be a cake-walk, but the GOP losing the seat in 2012 is not a forgone conclusion.

BobMbx on January 20, 2010 at 5:07 PM

Obama defeated Coakley and created Brown. Both wouldn’t be where they are today w/out Obama.

JiangxiDad on January 20, 2010 at 5:07 PM

Can you tell someone is a lobbyist? Don’t the pedal themselves as “experts” in one subject of another? AND, even if you know you don’t take any funds from anyone, how do you keep up with your office and campaign staff to make sure they aren’t taking any money? Washington is such a pit.

Cindy Munford on January 20, 2010 at 5:00 PM

Lobbyists have to register and report all of their political contributions. Anyone who gives more than $250 to a federal candidate has to report their occupation. Many campaigns ask for the information no matter how small the contribution. So there is way to not accept money from lobbyists, as long as they are complying with the law.

rockmom on January 20, 2010 at 5:07 PM

I’m getting confused now. Is Brown a Chamberlain-esque candy-ass RINO or is he not?

Allah is a Chamberlain-esque candy-ass RINO. Brown is an alleged RINO. From his speech last night on terrorism, even if he turns out to be a RINO, it doesn’t appear he will be a Chamberlain-esque candy-ass RINO.

mwdiver on January 20, 2010 at 5:08 PM

I swear the Party Purist crap is being organized by Axelrod’s office. It is in their best interests that the Conservative movement destroys itself by going the Purity route.

Holger on January 20, 2010 at 5:09 PM

Even if he would turn out to be the worst RINO in the WORLD (which I doubt), it was all worth it to see the media and all other lefties slack-jawed & suicidal last night and today. Unforgettable.

hoosiermama on January 20, 2010 at 5:10 PM

Enoxo on January 20, 2010 at 5:01 PM

I guess that’s the point, isn’t it?

All economic issues are “social issues”. As a matter of fact, when arguing for the right to health care, liberals frame it as a social issue, while conservatives frame it as an economic freedom issue.

It really depends on what side you’re on whether it’s a “social issue”.

For liberals, amnesty is a “social issue”.

jaime on January 20, 2010 at 5:10 PM

so let’s make peace with the concept now.

Done.

BadgerHawk on January 20, 2010 at 5:10 PM

That’s what the liberals say as well, when they decide that their principles are more important than the constitution.

Money does not corrupt politics. Hidden money does. There should be no limits on how much an American can contribute to the candidate of their choice, so long as the donation is declared as close to immediately as is technologically posible.

MarkTheGreat on January 20, 2010 at 5:00 PM

No, that is not what the liberals say. Right now if you ask most people they would say corruption was one of the greatest threats to our republic. The idea that the people with the money are up front about the fact that they are giving lots of money to someone to run does not make them feel a lot better about it. The truth is it costs a lot of money to run, more and more all the time and it creates a lot of temptation to politicians to cut deals.

I am not saying McCain/Feingold was a great thing or the right thing, I am saying that the idea behind it was not a liberal idea or a conservative idea..it was about money and corruption in the electoral process.

Terrye on January 20, 2010 at 5:11 PM

I swear the Party Purist crap is being organized by Axelrod’s office.

hmmmmmmmm

runner on January 20, 2010 at 5:12 PM

Comment pages: 1 2