Tweet
Scott Brown
It is possible that President Obama has handed Republicans a Senate seat by nominating Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) to be Secretary of State. If former Senator Scott Brown (R) decides to run in the special election he would start off with a large lead over the likely Democratic nominee Ed Markey, according to a new poll by MassINC.
Massachusetts
MassINC (1/16-19)
In the general election, what if the Democratic Party’s candidate were Ed Markey and the Republican Party’s candidate were Scott Brown? Would you be more likely to vote for Republican Scott Brown or Democrat Ed Markey?
53% Scott Brown
31% Ed Markey
0% Another candidate (not read)
3% Wouldn’t vote (not read)
12% Don’t Know / Refused
Elizabeth Warren (D) did recently beat Brown 53.7 percent to 46.2 percent in the last election, but Warren had broad grassroots support and was running during a Presidential election. The electorate in a special election is likely to be older and more Republican leaning.
Despite his loss Brown remains a strong candidate with high name recognition and still retains impressive favorability numbers. According to the poll, 55 percent have a favorable opinion of Brown and only 32 percent have an unfavorable opinion.
If Brown chooses to run he hase a real chance of winning but it is still possible he might sit out the election.
Photo by Dexta32084 under Creative Commons license
20 Comments
I guess I would be surprised, if Obama was a real democrat.
drunk tweeting last night, Mr Brown?
I think this is overstating Obama’s hand in the SOS nomination.
What I recall is Graham & McCain going after Rice… while… just like they did with filibuster reform… Dem Senators sat silent… knowing that Republican Senators would be called “obstructionist.” But in both:
1) the SOS nomination; and
2) filibuster reform
the real influence and power sat with silent Dem Senators.
Obama was a player in the SOS nomination, and the ensuing open seat. But, as I often see it, the real issue is a Congress that is highly averse to being held accountable. Members prefer to sit silent (in public) until issues “go away.” And that’s what happened with Rice, in turn creating the MA vacancy.
I say the MA vacancy is more a result of a feckless Congress than a result of Obama’s action.
John Kerry is a member of The Club. Susan Rice is not a Club member.
Brown is a master of slime.
He has been focusing on one lie, working it into all living room conversation as if it is a truism that everyone knows. Until it is not questioned anymore, at the point where you get a strange “you’re stupid” look, if you do.
It’s the lie that he is a true centrist, a super-hero here to save the country. And he knows that a centrist is exactly what the voters want.
Owned lock stock and barrel by the bankers. If Markey can’t turn his anti-Exxon cred into anti-banker cred against Pretty Boy, he doesn’t deserve to win. Presumably the gap is name recognition only. Let’s hope a robust campaign helps Massachusetts voters not make the same mistake again.
Dem, Repug, what difference does it make?
Was John Kerry really the only qualified candidate for state?
This is just one more episode of incompetence on the part of the democrats, resuscitating yet one more beaten republican. The dems do like to win the occasional election but they really are averse to actually governing.
The difference between Ed Markey and Scott Brown could not be more stark.
Seriously, this is one time the “who cares? they are alla same” tribe will be proven absolutely wrong.
FWIW, a quick google search indicates that Markey voted for AUMF. We probably don’t know how Brown would have voted.
A Republican Senator with a Republican president leading the charge to war – do you really think he would have voted against the AUMF?
I get it. Just trying to be factual, rather than speculative.
Regardless, that’s my point about:
It could be more stark, if a non-interventionist, pro-peace candidate was running.
My question about Markey,.. was the AUMF vote more about:
1) believing preemptive war was beneficial to American interests; or
2) believing that Congress should follow the lead of the POTUS; or
3) something else
?
Only the Senate is involved, not the Congress.
Obama did not even put the Senate to the trouble of taking a vote on Rice. He floated her name. He got signs confirmation would not be a cakewalk, so he nominated Kerry.
The very reason he got opposition was that the Republicans knew Kerry wanted State, just as we knew it. And they wanted Kerry out that seat so that could put Brown into it. That was obvious to me.
Obama could have left Kerry where he was, not nominating him for either State or Defense. Plenty of qualified people could have filled either of those slots.
Maybe that would not have been fair to Kerry. It came down to doing the right thing for Kerry or doing the right thing for Massachusetts. Obama chose Kerry.
Why?
My guess is that Dem Senators made it clear to him that they wanted another member of The Club at State.
It’s probably a combination of factors. I just think this is another example of the head fake routinely played for the American public. Again, it’s probably a number of factors. But I also think Dem Senators were quite happy to see it go to Kerry.
And another thought… do Dem Senators feel more important with a 55 seat majority or a 51 seat majority? I’m guessing some D & R senators would prefer to have a 51 seat, rather than 55 seat, majority.
IMO, the Party had no business deciding Markey was the candidate before primary campaigns even started.
Brown has already questioned whether Markey still lives in Massachusetts. (Others who have run against Markey for Congress have questioned it, too.) Markey’s wife works somewhere near D.C. The Markeys own a home near D.C., and no one in Massachusetts sees Markey unless he is campaigning. So, right there, Markey is vulnerable.
Markey looks like Massachusetts’ past. The good ole Boston Irish politician, ala JFK, but without JFK’s youth and charisma.
Scott Brown is a local media darling. Markey isn’t.
Scott Brown has statewide name recognition, big time. Markey doesn’t.
Elizabeth Warren had everything going for her: being a woman and Massachusetts was overdue for a woman in Congress or the Senate, a very bad year for a Republican to be running, given the rape talk and the 47% video, $40 million dollars. Perhaps most important of all, it was a Presidential election, not a special election, which Brown won the last time. And she still won by only 5 points.
Markey is not going to have any of that.
IMO, regardless of who should win, in a special election between Markey and Brown, Brown will win easily.
One less Democratic senator will make it easier for Obama to pass the right-wing agenda he secretly favors.
The more effective evil.
As a Mass. progressive I am very dubious about this supposed Scotto Brown lead over Markey in this poll. Markey has not been perfect in progressive terms but we just got finished getting rid of Scott Brown, an ignorant, smarmy, lying, condescending pimp for the Koch Brothers—and I do not see him beating Markey for Kerry’s seat. Well, at least Kerry’s gone—a war-blessing careerist who laughs at the International World Court, at human rights, and is THE #1 booster for Israel’s unilateral right to rule the world.
It’s the difference between Scott Brown and Ed Markey. I don’t care how true the Dem-Rep mega party is, this is night and day for climate change.