Comments on: How He Did It: Behind The Scott Brown Win

By: Scott Brown Popular with Dems « A Pollster On Polling

Scott Brown Popular with Dems « A Pollster On Polling — Tue, 12 Apr 2011 19:37:07 +0000

[...] Poll by jpotteiger The Democrats were having a really bad time here in Massachusetts about 15 months ago. But, despite the fact that the Bay State isn’t quite as liberal as some might think, the [...]

By: Scott Brown: Votes with GOP & Popular with Dems « A Pollster On Polling

Scott Brown: Votes with GOP & Popular with Dems « A Pollster On Polling — Tue, 12 Apr 2011 19:35:55 +0000

[...] Democrats were having a really bad time here in Massachusetts about 15 months ago. But, despite the fact that the Bay State isn’t quite as liberal as some might think, the [...]

By: DickeyFuller

DickeyFuller — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 17:21:33 +0000

By his recent interviews, the world is now free to see that Mr. Brown is not very intelligent or articulate. I’ll bet that there are more than a few Mass voters who have buyer’s regret.

Although he is trained as a lawyer, Brown cannot seem to get simple facts straight.

He has become a laughing stock to the all the citizens of Mass who have a brain.

Mike Capuano would have won if he had gotten the nomination. Martha Coakley won only because the women of Mass were pissed off that the male political establishment threw their convention votes to Obama even though Clilnton carried the state 52-37.

I will now conceed that we made a mistake when we voted for Martha. She was not the right person for the job.

We look forward to taking the seat back in 2012 because Mr. Brown is just not up to the task. He is just another pretty face who posed nude. (This alone should have disqualified him, but, whatever.)

By: Mark

Mark — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 01:27:11 +0000

Talk about friday moring quarterbacking. You all need to get over yourselves.

Brown won because it is a referendum against Obama, Global Warming, and the massive increase of our Debt!
You all need to stop blaming Bush, it’s getting kinda stale now.

FYI.. Capuano would have lost too! If he was so good how come he did’nt win the primary…?

Keep up the hate, its a wonder Liberals have that title…when they are so intolerant of others views.

By: Frank Mannarino

Frank Mannarino — Thu, 04 Mar 2010 20:54:13 +0000

Brown is an ambarassment to Massachusetts. He is the death nail to progressive energy reform in the US and the reduction of CO2 pollution via Cap and Trade. I see large amounts of next generation jobs lost to this State and the US from his bogus positions on taxes at the expense of our environment and technology competitiveness world wide. Many plans for growth into the new energy economy are now on hold because no one wants to invest in the US poor energy and environmental policy. Like all actions, there are consequences. Ours will be less progress toward high quality jobs and the backseat to China, Japan and Europe for the next generation energy solutions. Thanks fellow greed driven Massachusetts citizens for putting yet another George Bush type brain in a position of power.

By: Matt Sandofsky

Matt Sandofsky — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 18:49:27 +0000

This is such a sad story. WBUR did an awful job providing key facts and analysis. If the people of Massachusetts understood that Scott Brown believed that millionaires billionaires should pay a lower marginal tax rate than people earning $50,000 a year (via his support of the Bush tax cuts), they would not have elected him. If they knew that many people have held at Guantanamo for years with no evidence, tortured, and then released with a simple apology, they would not have voted for Scott Brown.

The thing that bothers me most about the Scott Brown campaign was its refusal to answer key questions. For example, when asked whether he would vote for a fee on bank executive salaries, in order to recover some of the bank bail-out money, Brown simply answered “I don’t believe in raising taxes”. Whose taxes, Scott? When you refuse to tax societies wealthiest citizens in order to pay for the programs that have fattened their pockets, you are forcing average Americans to foot the bill. Why do you want to redistribute wealth from the bottom to the top, Scott?

By: Terry Reiber

Terry Reiber — Tue, 16 Feb 2010 12:58:28 +0000

I doubt Capuano would have been elected. This was really a referendum against the health care bill and the view that Democrats believe they are entitled to Massachusetts political positions. The independent voter (now the largest “political party”) won’t vote for candidates who put their party’s views ahead of the public’s interest.

By: Peter Petraitis

Peter Petraitis — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 23:26:52 +0000

We have to stop this sad history in America of voting for ‘pretty’ people from the media with no brains. Just because someone was a movie star or centerfold doesn’t mean they can govern correctly or have an accurate thought in their heads. Hollywood and media idolatry will be the undoing of America. Unfortunately, this all began with JFK. He happened to be smart as well, but the glitz that Camelot brought to Washington was in the end not a good thing for the nation. It turned everyone into a teenager. One has to look beyond looks. It’s called being mature and smart.

By: Rick

Rick — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 18:03:49 +0000

I am a lifelong Democrat. I did not vote for Coakley in the primary, but for Mike Capuano (who, I believe would have beat Brown) and I was never impressed with Martha. When I voted last week I put an “x” next to Martha’s name, not to vote FOR her, but to vote AGAINST Brown. I did actually consider voting for Brown, but I don’t agree with the Republican platform and most of what he says. But… he is much more charismatic and “likable” than Coakley.

I voted for Obama for many reasons, chief among them the public option clause in Health Care Reform. Maybe Brown will cause the whole messed up bill to go back and be re-written. While running for president Mr. Obama said “Health care reform without a public option is no option.” I’m one of those Democrats who hates the health care bill as it stands and hope that Brown WILL vote against it. It stinks! If the health insurance companies and drug companies like it, it stinks!

By: hortron

hortron — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 17:53:48 +0000

I agree with Shawn. As much as all the press is making this out to be, it was decided primarily on local factors. It’s funny if you look in 2006 Coakley won with 1.5m votes, but I imagine then they saw DEM next to her name and automatically voted for her.

Also, I think far before you can say it gauged the feeling toward Obama, it reflected the local feeling toward Patrick.

By: Shawn

Shawn — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 15:04:36 +0000

Maybe we’re overanalyzing this as far as “voter anger” and “Democrats vs. Republicans.” The Democrats simply nominated a poor candidate. Brown wouldn’t have defeated Capuano, and Capuano is to the left of Coakley.

By: jim

jim — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 14:43:33 +0000

How about a no party system? Remove the D and R labeling.
Let each public service employee speak and run campaigns on what they believe and not what their party tells them to believe.
Let citizens vote on what each person believes in what is best for America instead of what is best for a certain political party!

By: Tom Walker

Tom Walker — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 00:22:21 +0000

The Globe’s chart showed that if the people had voted for house reps they way they did for Scott Brown, 6 of 10 seats would have gone Republican–up from 0 of 10. As Scott Brown said, “The turning point was when Air Force One landed in Boston.” Obama-3 for 3. Doesn’t get it.
Cram doesn’t work. Several liberal Democrats in Congress said, after the election, “The people have spoken; we need to reconsider this.” Good for them. My favorite comments of the week were, from out of state people, “Welcome back to the US with a 2 party system.” We need both; let’s remember that.