Scott Brown is More Liberal Than Olympia Snowe, and Now He’s Pivotal, Too:

+1 There is a lot riding on 2010 for both Parties.

Or it could be an awakening of sorts that the GOP and Tea Partiers see the benefit of not doing the sort of party line tests and push to the extreme that would have fielded an unwinnable candidate in MA and instead if they come back towards the middle they can win these seats.
Nah, I just know what the answers will be from reading them so many times in the HCR thread :P

Its going well, busy though. I represent workers in the healthcare industry

If only we had some other way to gauge what Obama's approval rating is in the rest of the country, instead of just extrapolating "53% in the People's Republic of MA (polling only those who showed up to vote yesterday), must be like 25% everywhere else!"

Maybe we could even run Barack Obama's name against hypothetical GOP nominees and see what Americans think.

Someday someone may consider doing this. Someday.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJEEQ...eature=related

Maybe its just me but when I hear someone start ranting about Chicago-Style politics and the Alinsky strategies I'm almost 99% sure they have no clue what those things actually mean.

Yeah, I saw that post minutes after I wrote the last comment. So, my impression certainly appears counter to Brown's record.

Still, I would not assume quickly that his behavior will stay the same in the US Senate (even though that is what the professor implies). I think it's true that Brown's campaign used a lot of conservative rhetoric. Moreover, it may turn out that he becomes comfortable with the role as liberal-killer, and new GOP star.

I think we'll find out his true ambitions fairly quickly.

As for his rhetoric and the campaign, the notion that he was some kind of conservative boiler pate red-meat throwing guy was way overblown, almost certainly trumped by the left to frighten MA Democratic voters to action.

He had offers from Palin and Huckabee come stump for him. He refused those and instead brought in Giuliani.

On the actual issues, he's pro-choice and didn't flip flop on it. Supports the 2006 "RomneyCare" bill that's a close approximation of the ObamaCare bill. A self-admitted strong supporter of METCO, which is a program that buses minority kids from the inner city into suburban schools. Says he personally opposes gay marriage, but opposes federal laws prohibiting gay marriage and thinks it's a states rights issue.

As for him becoming a rising GOP star, that's obviously kind of hard to do from MA and get reelected, especially when the election is against a Democrat with a pulse in a Presidential election year. From 538, re: his role as the new firebrand of the GOP:

Coakley is getting hammered on Hardball.

I agree with that part. My point was that GOP stardom and re-election were probably contradictory goals (at least for the next 2-4 years), but that if decided to opt for the former, then he may not be a moderating influence.

I didn't know his actual policies, though, so maybe he won't morph into a fire-breather after all.

He could morph into a firebreather. Anything's possible. I'm just pointing out what I think is the inverse correlation between his firebreathing and his ability to get re-elected; if he has no real survival instinct and doesn't care that much about being reelected in 2012, if he just wants to be President or run the RNC or get a gig on Fox or sell some books, or some combination of those, then maybe he turns into a firebreather.

The Democratic meme today is that he's the ManPalin, which I think is unfair, partly because the guy actually seems very articulate, is a successful lawyer, and seems perfectly un******ed. At the debate with Coakley, was asked some questions at the debate that he comfortably answered; was engaged the whole time, never looked lost. Comfortably had responses to contextual things, ie, Coakley would say X and then he would respond with something relevant. In the same vein, he gets asked questions in media interviews which he again comfortably answers. So he seems about a million miles ahead of Palin in that respect.

But he is like Palin in that he's a nice looking fellow with a strong jaw and looks good on the teevee, so he could totally parlay politics into a bankable gig as a TV talking head or whatever. Maybe becoming a right wing firebreather is what he's got planned to do that. I have no idea.

So I don't want to make any bets about what he will or won't morph into, just that morphing into a firebrand will have a big negative effect on his ability to get reelected.

When do they quit acting like a few pictures in COSMO was gay porn? I read about ******ed republican talking points but all I've heard on msnbc the last week is tea bagger, naked pictures, tea bagger, naked pictures, truck.

This meme has been used on pretty much every R everywhere

Just curious about something: do people think that there would have been any different reception for Brown had he been a woman, who posed in an "equally revealing" way?

I put quotations around "equally revealing" because I'm not sure what the equivalent photo would be for a woman, tbh.

This is modern politics imo. One time John Kerry got photographed windsurfing and the photo ran on Drudge from like July-October of 2004, then Bush made an ad, then it was grist for the right wing talk machines about how such a windsurfing effeminate nancy boy couldn't possibly Fight The Terrorists and Win Like Bush Did.

god, please stop calling the people that favor degenerating our society "progressives".

In fairness things can get progressively worse.

And a man who sent my darling Ayla to a 24k+/year high school.

Why aren't you in favorite of PROGRESS?

Don't movie stars do stuff like this all the time? I seem to remember Jennifer Aniston on the cover of rolling stone or vanity fair, naked but posed in a way to not show much. I don't think anyone called her a filthy whore. If she runs for office in 20 years I doubt it would be brought up once. Does anyone really care that this guy did some silly, totally innocent photo shoot for cosmo?

I'd settle for not using the term "conservative" to describe those who continually undermine our Constitution.

True for a number of dem senators imo as well.

idk what conservatism has to do with the constitution. But the idea works, eg, don't call those who favor undermining the constitution (known now as democrats and republicans) "constitutionalists". The double speak needs to stop, for real.

I remember that photo well, point taken. Still, it wasn't on O'Reiley every night leading up to the election. I don't mind the opposition bringing out something like that, in either case, but I'd swear I've heard about "naked pictures" 20 times on nbc since last night.

much prefer this one...



"oompa loompa doopity do"

this photo in and of itself should be disqualifying for higher office