Most Read
    Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

    Hello-Hello Scott Brown? (Reader Poll)

    Hello-Hello Scott Brown? (Reader Poll)

    I know, I said Bye-Bye Brown last spring after he wrote an op-ed in Politico slamming the Ryan plan and playing into the Democratic meme that Republicans want to abandon seniors.  And he has been a disappointment on several key votes, such as Dodd-Frank.

    But…

    If not Scott, it will be Elizabeth “the factory owners owe us” Warren, who is pretty much dead-even in the latest poll released in the Boston Herald:

    Democrat Elizabeth Warren’s meteoric ascent in Massachusetts politics has landed her in a virtual dead heat with Republican U.S. Sen. Scott Brown, while two Democrats who passed on the race — Gov. Deval Patrick and former U.S. Rep. Joseph P. Kennedy II — could pose even bigger threats to the GOP incumbent, a new UMass-Lowell/Boston Herald poll shows.

    Brown is ahead of Warren by a 41-38 percent margin in a general election trial heat, a statistical tie given the poll’s 3.8 percent margin of error. Warren, who announced her campaign just last month, faces her first crucial test Tuesday night in a Democratic debate sponsored by University of Massachusetts at Lowell and the Herald.

    Brown has made a tragic mistake by tacking left, as I warned before, you can’t out-liberal a real liberal.  But he tried, and now voters who want a liberal will flock to the real liberal, and the Tea Party movement and disaffected Democrats will not help him because he stuck his finger in their eyes once too often.

    Is it time for us to reconsider, not because of Brown but because of Warren?  (Poll open until 7 p.m. Eastern today)


    DONATE

    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.

    Tags:

    Comments



     
     0 
     
     0
    Murgatroyd | October 3, 2011 at 11:56 pm

    The only way to get the message through to these people that they can’t count on us, and have to keep us happy, is to show them that we’re able to sacrifice the short term for the long term; that we’re willing to let a Warren win on the D ticket rather than a Brown on the R one.

    Ah, yes. The only way to win is to lose! To show the rest of the potential candidates that they can’t count on conservatives if a candidate deviates from ideological purity. To prove that we are too small a fraction of the electorate to ever win an election. That will rally people to our cause and ensure successful candidates!

    William F. Buckley said it long ago: do your best to elect the most conservative candidate who can win. Do you see any other even mildly conservative candidate for the Senate seat from Massachusetts who can win?

    If you don’t think Brown is conservative enough, challenge him in the primary — that’s why we have primaries, after all. When Brown votes stupidly — and helping to enact Dodd-Frank was both stupid and wrong — then educate him. (Have you written to him, to tell him what a stupid thing he did?) But threatening to withhold your support or your vote because he isn’t perfect, when his opponent is a nightmare, is not a sensible course of action.


       
       0 
       
       0
      Milhouse in reply to Murgatroyd. | October 4, 2011 at 1:08 am

      Do that and he will keep spitting in your face and telling you it’s raining. He may be the best we can find, but he’s capable of being better than he is. The question is why on earth should he, if we keep crawling back to him like dogs no matter how he treats us.


         
         0 
         
         0
        Murgatroyd in reply to Milhouse. | October 4, 2011 at 5:14 am

        He may be the best we can find …

        And that’s the problem, right there. Find someone better, support that person in the primary election, and then support the best candidate who survives the winnowing of the primaries.

        You still have several months. Conservatives and libertarians don’t yet have to choose between Scott Brown and Joe Stalin in drag. But if you can’t find someone better, go with the best you have, however imperfect. Temper tantrums won’t win you any elections or keep sociopathic politicians from trying to run your life.


           
           0 
           
           0
          Milhouse in reply to Murgatroyd. | October 4, 2011 at 7:46 am

          Far from a temper tantrum, abandoning Brown would be a calculated move, sacrificing the short term for the long. Again I ask you why on earth should Brown give a damn about us, if he knows we will always rally behind him in the end, because he will always be better than whomever the Ds put up? Why should he lift a finger to keep us happy? If you were in his position, with his views, would you alter your votes in any way to keep us happy? If we want the next Brown (and all the other Browns who are in there now) to care about us we need them to know that not doing so carries a price. But so long as we’re little children who can be relied on never to think of the long term, never to be willing to sacrifice now for an eventual gain, they know that we will never exact that price and they can do whatever they like to us with no fear.


             
             0 
             
             0
            Murgatroyd in reply to Milhouse. | October 4, 2011 at 11:37 pm

            If we want the next Brown (and all the other Browns who are in there now) to care about us we need them to know that not doing so carries a price.

            Yes! Tell all those other Republican officeholders in Masssachusetts that you’ll walk away from them if they aren’t absolutely perfect! That will show them!


     
     0 
     
     0
    Murgatroyd | October 4, 2011 at 11:25 pm

    Why should he lift a finger to keep us happy? If you were in his position, with his views, would you alter your votes in any way to keep us happy?

    If I were Brown, perhaps I would, and perhaps I wouldn’t. Maybe he’s doing what he thinks is right, and needs to be educated. Maybe he doesn’t think anyone cares about your side of the issues, but he is aware that there are people who will strongly oppose him if he votes the way you want him to. Maybe he’d change his voting pattern if you had an identifiable bloc that in the past had given him money and had organized like-minded voters to go to the polls. Maybe if you supported the campaign of a primary challenger he’d consider moving further to the right.

    I’ll ask you again: Do you see any other even mildly conservative candidate for the Senate seat from Massachusetts who can win? Have you even written to him, to communicate your dissatisfaction with his voting record? Or are you relying on him to telepathically discern that you didn’t vote for him because you didn’t like his policies? Do you believe that Scott Brown actually knows that you even exist, much less that you want him to vote more conservatively?

    If the answers to these questions are what I think they are, then yes, you’re just throwing a temper tantrum. And what you’ll get with your strategy of refusing to vote for someone who isn’t absolutely ideologically perfect is a different person in office, one who not only will spit in your face but will deposit various other body fluids elsewhere on your person.


    Leave a Comment

    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Notify me of followup comments via e-mail (or subscribe without commenting.)

    Font Resize
    Contrast Mode
    Send this to a friend