Skip to comments.Why Scott Brown might run for MA governor, not Senate
Posted on 01/14/2013 8:05:53 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Its not often an ex-senator gets a shot at his old job just months after losing. So Scott Brown is widely expected to jump at the chance, running in a special election for John Kerrys seat that presumably will become vacant within weeks.
But there are compelling reasons for Brown to pass on what would be his third Senate campaign in four years and hes thinking long and hard about them.
Topping the list: In 2014, he could run instead for Massachusetts governor, a job that Republicans have had much more success winning and keeping, as Mitt Romney can attest.
Even if Brown were to win an expected late spring special election for the Senate he would enter as a favorite hed have to pick up and do it all over again next year, in a higher-turnout contest that could also be tough to win. A loss in that race could end his political career.
That all makes for a wrenching decision for Brown: To make another run at Capitol Hill or hold off for the chance to reign over Beacon Hill. Sources tell POLITICO he has not made up his mind.
My sense is that Scott has a good chance of succeeding if he decides to enter the special, said Republican National Committeewoman Kerry Healey, who served as Romneys lieutenant governor. However, theres a lot of appeal to waiting for the governors seat.
There are opportunities in both.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
I’m in MA and frankly I think he’d be better off running for governor than senator again. I won’t vote for him for either office but I think he could win as governor.
“I’d rather he stay in Massachusetts and limit his RINO damage to the already Blue state.”
Yeah, Elizabeth Warren is so much better.
I guess we did not need Brown in the Senate anyway.
We have Senator Todd Akin and Senator Richard Mourdock to take his place anyway.
I wish he’d run as a democrat and stop infecting the GOP with his stench. (He can take is toady supporters with him)
At least we don’t have to hold our breath wonder if the liberal Brown will arise or the half Republican guy will show. It was a complete and utter mess having Scott Brown in the Senate. Glad to rid ourselves of the RINO. Send all RINOS back home. They are a nusense and why we are in the mess we are now. Conservatives ONLY need apply.
Phoney Brown is a Democrat, like Powell.
In a sense, the whole country would be better off of the moderates just became democrats. They might actually pull the democrat party back toward the middle a bit.
As it is, the moderates have moderated the GOP into a coma and its time for them to moderate the party that actually needs it.
Scott Bronw, Mr. “I’m not an automatic 60th vote for Obamacare... wait... I AM an automatic 60th vote! Sorry guys!”
Scott “the GOP needs to be more inclusive of gay marriage and abortion” Brown.
The sad fact of the matter is that Massholes simply lack the brainpower to elect anyone further right than a Scott Brown or a Mitt Romney.
One thing the Romney campaign taught me is that even when the GOP runs the most moderate guy possible and a genuinely generous guy with no skeletons in his closet, society's teat suckers and their cheerleaders in the enemedia will demonize him just as much as they will any conservative. Looking at the electoral map from November, it is hard to imagine any conservative who would have done better than Romney. It is equally hard to imagine any one who could have done worse.
There is no compromise with these sonzab*tches. And, sadly, with the scale of fraud and stupidity which we witnessed just two months ago, there is no hope of beating them electorally on a national scale. We must discredit their bankrupt evil godless philosophy and eradicate their leadership as we did the nazis at Nuremburg.
Or we must choose between the path of Chile (patriotic military coup) and Argentina (acceptance of permanent third world status) as a price to avoid or delay what must come to pass.
Scott Brown running for office again? Zzzzzz......
And people want to excuse him.
Scott “I am a Tea Party candidate -PSYCHE! I’m actually a loser RINO!” Brown.
I knew he wasn’t perfect but I didn’t expect him to be a radical leftist.
And low brain power idiots scream at us that we want to apply a “purity test” whenever we say we don’t want radical leftists idiots or RINOs [I know, redundant] as our candidates.
Reid came up with a parliamentary ruse and passed Obamacare by 51 votes. And they rushed up the seating of a new Dem senator...can’t recall which but could look it up...whatever, to get it passed. Scott Brown wasn’t the 6oth vote for Obamacare or the 51st vote or any vote. No Senate Republican voted for Obamacare. One confused House GOP member voted for it, but it would’ve passed without that vote. Forget his name, but he was new and was from LA.
Yeah, gotta love it.
I think I’m going to stop using the term RINO. The GOP is ALL alike now. They are all democrat wannabes.
The truth is, if there are Conservatives in today’s Republican party, it is they who are Republican In Name Only.
The term RINO may be a good name for our guys in a year or so.
Sarah Palin is the RINO. She’s certainly not what I see in today’s GOP.
He’s got the same handlers that Romney had. Governor would be a much better office from which to launch their next presidential-campaign gravy train.
A conservative out of MA? While the RINOs are a nuisance, it sounds like you’re much happier with the radical left taking all the seats. Get real!
I thought that Ted Cruz and Deb Fischer took his place in the Senate?
My understanding of “purity tests” isn’t what you described. A Scott Brown gets a slight pass ONLY bc he was taking Ted Kennedy’s seat in MA and promised to vote against Obamacare (which he did, but Reid’s trickery made that irrelevant). Scott Brown actually RAN as more conservative than he voted once he got in.
In general, your description would make us all big fans of Olympia Snowe, Colin Powell, Mike Bloomberg and every lily-livered liberal Republican you can name. Lisa Murkowski and ALL the routine backstabbers...
THAT’s not it.
Purity tests objected to revolve around someone who is mostly right on their issues and votes but has gone a little, or even more, astray on a particular issue, or had a judgement lapse and said or did something that was mistaken when looked upon in hindsight. Something in their public or private record that is amiss from perfection.
By the time Conservatives get through throwing all such imperfects under the bus, there aren’t enough supporters left of any one of the candidates to get them anywhere. And disgusted, disgruntled Conservatives have split off in all directions like scattering jackrabbits to a pickup truck filled with hunters firing away at them. Why? Because there was something wrong with all of those who ran, in their minds, or the one they supported, they overlooked the foibles of only that one person, and that one person couldn’t get anywhere, either.
That’s the purity test I’m aware of. Yours would indict Conservatives who object to purity tests as being supportive of overwhelmingly obvious, self-admitted, across-the-board liberal Republicans.
I believe they were being sarcastic by saying two losers took his place in the Senate. Didn’t happen, because they lost, and that seemed to be the point being made.
My experience has been to get screamed at whenever I or anyone else says “No more rinos”.
An example of what I am talking about.
Oh yeah, and House GOP member Jeff Flake from AZ won the seat of the retiring Jon Kyle. THREE new members...Deb Fisher being the only one that replaces a Democrat, the pretender Nelson who voted for Obamacare after making a deal for Nebraska. For which the voters of that state never forgave him. Ted Cruz replaces Kay Bailey Hutchinson and that is a good thing even though it wasn’t a party change.
Usually the mention of Akin and Mourdock are an effort by rinos to hide the extraordinary victories of conservatives in recent elections, and the failings of the rinos.
True, I was glad to see him take Kennedy's seat and we will always have that, and I thought that I was prepared to watch all the compromises that he would have to make, but I thought that he would be striving to move things gently right, while still trying to survive politically, what I did not anticipate was him moving left when he didn't need to.
Brown seems to be a true liberal at heart.
We should remind people that Akin was not the tea party candidate.
Rinos just gave Jimmy Carter his second term, they are desperate to get off that topic.
How about Senator Tommy Thompson and Senator Connie Mack IV ?
I lean towards the latter. It's difficult to determine how a conservative candidate would have fared, as we haven't had one in decades. The last one we had, did quite well though.
“One thing the Romney campaign taught me is that even when the GOP runs the most moderate guy possible and a genuinely generous guy with no skeletons in his closet, society’s teat suckers and their cheerleaders in the enemedia will demonize him just as much as they will any conservative. Looking at the electoral map from November, it is hard to imagine any conservative who would have done better than Romney. It is equally hard to imagine any one who could have done worse.”
Thank you. My feelings exactly.
Romney, for all his faults, did not hate America, the constitution and the roughly half of the people in this country who would not vote for him under any circumstances. The same cannot be said about BO.
We've reached the tipping point. I can no longer see a way that we can reverse this nation's problems through elections. It will require either outside forces beyond the control of any of us or a deterioration of conditions so bad that those outside forces arise.
For the first time since America was founded, we are no longer in control of our own destiny. Just a few short months ago, I was among the most cautiously optimistic that we could reverse this downward spiral. And it's not just how badly Romney got beat, it was senate seats we should easily have won in red states like Missouri, Montana, North Dakota and Indiana.