Is The ‘Scott Brown Effect’ Fading?

By Monica Brady-Myerov (@bradymyerov)
Nov 4, 2010, 6:44 AM
13 Comments

Sen. Scott Brown, left, stumps for gubernatorial candidate Charlie Baker, center, and other Republican candidates at an rally in Foxborough, Oct. 30. (Dominick Reuter for WBUR)

BOSTON– Sen. Scott Brown used his clout in Massachusetts to stump for Republican candidates this election season — everyone from Charlie Baker for governor to Mary Z. Connaugton for auditor. He endorsed Jeff Perry early on in the campaign, too.

“The people of Massachusetts’ 10th Congressional District sent a message to Washington in supporting me and my bid for U.S. Senate,” Brown said. “Now you have another chance to shake up the status quo by electing Jeff Perry as your next United States representative.”

But in the end, voters rejected Brown’s suggestion to shake up the status quo. Every Republican candidate for Congress and those running for statewide office lost. The GOP did pick up seats in the House on Beacon Hill, but lost one in the Senate. Still, the chair of the state’s Republican Party, Jennifer Nassour, doesn’t see the races as a total defeat.

“The tremendous showing that we saw in those congressional races where these unknown people had really good races against entrenched Democrats showed the power of Scott Brown, the power of who he is, and the power of the party and that Massachusetts isn’t as blue as everyone would like to believe it is,” she said.

In the end, voters rejected Brown’s suggestion to shake up the status quo.

Brown’s win also energized Republicans in other states. Many asked him to campaign for them in this election. But in an analysis of 13 races around the country where Brown stumped, only five of the candidates he supported won.

And for some supporters who had felt the Brown wave of optimism, the post-election fall is hard.

“For me, I’m ready to move to Austin, Texas. I’m serious,” said Republican Lenny Demers, of Douglas, the town that gave Brown one of his largest margins of victory in the state. This election, Demers volunteered for Republican Tom Wesley’s campaign in the 2nd Congressional District. Wesley lost by 16 percent to 22-year incumbent Democrat Rep. Richard Neal. Demers was shocked.

“‘Cause I really thought Scott Brown’s election, we would mirror that to some extent, not exactly, but to some extent and we didn’t,” Demers said. “And as I was talking to my wife about it I think the linchpin about that is that Sen. Brown is 41 — we can stop the health care bill.”

So, he believes, without a motivating issue like health care, Republican candidates in Massachusetts didn’t do well.

Brown’s upset win in January over Democrat Martha Coakley set Republicans buzzing about a changing electorate in Massachusetts. But Coakley says her loss motivated the party.

“I think all Democrats, including me, saw what happened in January and vowed that it wouldn’t happen again,” Coakley said. “We all got out to work.”

So did Republicans, says Nassour. She says the party fielded good candidates and that wouldn’t have happened without Brown as an inspiration.

“We saw great candidates in Jon Golnick and Sean Bielat, for example, but they were never elected to office before. So I think that this is a fantastic showing by the two of them in their races, being 10-12 (points) behind entrenched incumbents, and if you look at Jeff Perry’s race, he was within five points of Bill Keating.”

“When you lose, you spin, when you win, you look at facts,” said Michael Goldman, a Democratic strategist for Government Insight Group.

“And the facts are this was the greatest year nationally for Republicans,” Goldman said. “And not one single Republican won (here). If you can’t win in the greatest year of Republicans victories nationwide, how are you going to two years from now when Republicans are going to be on the defensive?”

That’s also when Brown is going to be up for re-election.

More:

Earlier: Will Bielat become the new Scott Brown?

Crunching Numbers: Just How Blue Are We?

Please follow our community rules when engaging in comment discussion on wbur.org.

Panagiotis

Here is a much simpler, and more likely correct, explanation: There never was a Brown effect in MA. But there was a terribly run, arrogant Coakley campaign. The election of Brown, however, created an effect in exciting Republicans even more outside MA.
Melissa

Somebody should tell Mr. Demers that Austin is about as liberal as Texas gets. He might be happier in Williamson County.

I agree with Ms. Nassour in her assertion that Tuesday’s election results “showed the power of Scott Brown.” Thankfully, that power is apparently pretty minimal.
Sally Davis

Just another pretty face??
http://www.fibrowitch.net fibrowitch

There never was a “Scott Brown” effect. Martha Coakley more than handed the election to him on a silver platter. So much so that on Tuesday while I voted the Democratic ticket I voted against her for AG. She refused to get out and meet voters, had no clue who Curt Shilling was and had (has) zero interest in the issues she wold face in the Senate.

I wish Sen Kennedy had stepped down and allowed an open election, with his support a Democrat would have been elected. Instead we have a mess to deal with.
mo

Yes, just voting for someone on whether they have a D next to their name.
People like you are killing this country.
nancy pratt

I started to think of Brown as a real contender with the ad that had him making a speech and morphing in to Jack Kennedy saying the same things as Brown. Brilliant!!
Frank

Martha Coakley’s inept campaign helped to create the “Scott Brown” effect. And Charlie Baker’s inept campaign helped to destroy it.
a democrat

Monica, the Scott Brown effect was never real to begin with over 80,000 registratered democratic voters alone
in Suffolk County failing to cast their ballots in the special election as they had done for Obama in 2008 .

And this lack of democratic voter participation repeated iself again in surrounding towns where the get out the vote was almost none existant.

Plus, Martha should have gone right into Scott’s job performance as a state rep and his voting record up
front not later in her ads. .

I heard some residents in his district who said they wouldn’t vote for him. This information should have
been held up to the voters.

And of course, the farce about his voice in Wahington
being an “an independent voice ” when his record showed he voted 96% percent of the time with his Republican colleagues .
http://radvon.com/blog Erik

“For me, I’m ready to move to Austin, Texas. I’m serious,” said Republican Lenny Demers, of Douglas”

Isn’t Austin one of the most liberal cities in Texas?

Despite that, I think Lenny is onto something. All the MA right wingers should move down to Alabama for a year or two and see the reality of conservative “leadership.”
Lenny

Okay, so if I understand correctly, anyone in the Bay State who is not a left-wing liberal, such as Erik, is classified as a “Right winger”? Funny how liberals are “Tolerant” of [supposedly] everyone, that is, except anyone with any conservative values.
Stickman

Agree, had it been Michael Capuano running against Scott Brown, Mr. Brown would have had about as much chance winning in Massachusetts as Alex Rodriguez. Unfortunately, too few people paid attention in the primary, and from what I heard, a lot of people backed Coakley in the primary because they wanted to send the first woman senator from Massachusetts. I think that’s a fine idea, as long as the woman is also a good candidate for office. Unfortunately Coakley was not and is not.
maryk

Erik is just another snotty condescending left winger that some day is going to start another Civil War.
http://hubbub.wbur.org/people/aphelps Andrew Phelps

As soon as people stop acting like grown-ups, we close the comments.