Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA) Debate Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) – Brown Bests Warren in 2nd Debate – Warren Comes Across As Occupy-Partisan

Scott Brown, the former State Senator and now U.S. Senator has, in representing either the people of his district or the Commonwealth, been extremely independent minded. It is rare to hear Brown even smack of partisanship – one knows he is an independent simply because he is angering either straight Republicans or straight Democrats, and is not what, one would call, a consistent party-line vote.

Therefore, when Elizabeth Warren, College Professor from Harvard, and former Obama Administration Appointee, announced she was running for the Senate, it was with some surprise, considering that Brown is an extremely capable, competent and perhaps, the only independent-aisle-crossing-get things done, bi-partisan representative the people have, be it in Massachusetts or the rest of the nation. When Warren began her campaign it was evident that she was, for all intents and purposes, particularly partisan, in an almost anarchic “Occupy Wall Street” way – It’s all about Billionaires and the “rest of us” – a class warfare set-up that highlights both her ideology and her demagoguery when it comes to political thought. In her closing statement to defend hers candidacy last evening, she appeared all party-line, giving a hint of what would be should she go to Washington and cast straight-party-line votes. She thanked the moderator, and then went into a diatribe on how Scott Brown supports Billionaires! She sounded fresh out of college rather than a college professor. For starters, anyone who has followed the legislation of Scott Brown (R) knows that he is for the “little guy” rather than big business, unless supporting business brings jobs. In his first term in the Senate, Brown pointed out that Legislatures were allowed to do a little insider trading, something he found a bit underhanded, wrote the legislation and got it passed. Warren lost her opportunity to outline her plans, to put out her plea to the voters, instead haranguing Brown in her closing statements. It was evident that she is new to the political arena or the debate arena as she appeared to harp her way through the entire debate, sometimes appearing “coy” and using her femininity rather than displaying herself as a strong woman. This begs the question from a feminist point of view – When will any party in Massachusetts put up a strong, non-partisan woman to run for a higher office? Until then, the answer to the question of “Why hasn’t a woman been elected to the Governor’s office or the Senate in Massachusetts?” will continue to evade those moderators who ask ridiculous questions at debates.

On Brown’s part, he was straight-forward, typical Boston, take no prisoners, debate from the hip, rather than the lip, and that caught the independent, once again. Where Warren makes her error is in plain got her base, the 30% of the Democrat voters in MA, which, not unlike the 11-12% of Republican’s can get no-one elected. One has to be in the middle – squarely – and no one does that better than Brown.

The one clip that is being played as a “Mistake” on Brown’s part, is the answer to a question on Supreme Court Justices – Brown hesitated, saying they were all good, and began by listing Scalia, first, followed by Kennedy, Roberts and finally Sonia Sotomayor. Which is to say, he could not decide because he pointed out, they all are good justices. In Brown’s true format he chose from the right, the center and the left – an independent point of view. That said, Warren immediately chose Kagan, the justice that must recluse herself from most cases due to her partisanship.

Go figure.

The full debate is below via You Tube, and the next debate will take place in Western Massachusetts , on October 10th at Symphony call according to Masslive

Video - via You Tube



Note: If a woman were to run, say one former Senator and now Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, she would have the vote. This is because she proved herself to be a positive influence while in the Senate, and able to work across the aisle to actually accomplish much – As to admired women in public service, she is, perhaps the epitome of what younger woman should strive to emulate. Whether one agrees with her personal politics, or not, it is the way that she voted, her ideals and her unabashed straightforward method of dealing with situations that make her, or anyone who has even a hint of her persona, as a woman, a credible candidate. Unfortunately, those who would be choosing women to run for office in Massachusetts do not look towards what one might call the “Clinton Model” – they should – then, and only, then would one see a women elected in the Commonwealth. Which is why women in the Commonewealth won't vote for just "any woman" they have an ideal that can and should be met.

Coakley Appears to Lead Field of Democrats for Senate Seat - The Question Remains: Will Massachusetts Elect a Woman to the Senate? Analysis

Martha Coakely - Will Feminism Play a Role in the MA Senate Race? image speakout.com

The Assocatied Press, in reporting on the special election to fill Massachusetts vacant senate seat, headlined: “Insider, centerfold lead in race for Kennedy seat”. The “Insider” they refer to is State Attorney General, Martha Coakley, who, according to the last polls, maintains a 15 point lead (Rasmussen), over her male counterparts going into next Tuesdays primary. As to the “Centerfold”, Republican Scott Brown, had posed for Cosmopolitan Magazine over thirty years ago, in order to pay his way through law school . A match-up between the left-of-center Coakley (pro-abortion, pro-universal health care, and most likely to vote along party lines) and Republican Scott Brown (a moderate, who, is one of the few Republican State Senators in the Commonwealth) is considered a safe bet for Coakley. Or is it?

Enter the debate on Women and Feminism

Nancy Hopkins, a Biology Professor at MIT, wrote an article on Huffington Postwhich asked: “Will Women Vote for a Women”? That is the pivotal question Ms. Hopkins is asking, as she outlines the pros of a vote for Coakley: She’s pro-abortion.

That said, the feminist theory that a woman should vote for a woman based on gender alone, is ridiculous. Women should vote for the most qualified candidate, and it would be hoped that said candidate would be – a woman. That is not always the case. Hillary Clinton is an example, she was the most qualified candidate in the 2008 Democrat primary, and she, therefore, won the Massachusetts popular vote, so, in that respect women do vote for qualified candidates for public office.
Martha Coakley was also elected to office, the office of Attorney General. That said one has to take a harder look at Massachusetts in general, the bluest state, with the fewest women holding top jobs via the electorate. To date: not one woman, Republican or Democrat, has held the Governor’s Seat or a State Senate Seat by popular election. There is something hypocritical about this very liberal state: the make-up appears sexist.

Additionally, Ms. Hopkins is not factoring in political ideology and the makeup of the State’s electorate. Although most of the voting bloc in Massachusetts that is affiliated with a political party, are Democrats, that accounts for approximately thirty percent of the vote, Republican’s fare less well in this state, with approximately 11% of the electorate – the balance: unenrolleds or those choosing to belong to either party.

Should Coakley succeed on Tuesday in besting the three male contenders she faces; regardless of her valiant fund-raising efforts, she must, as a Democrat and a woman, in favor of abortion, cap and trade and health care reform (all three issues not as popular in Massachusetts as one would think)run against the fiscally conservative Scott Brown, whose opponent in the State Primary, Jack E. Robinson, has been running ads all over the Commonwealth accusing Scott Brown of being a Republican in Name Only. This message will resonate well with those unenrolled voters who are enthralled by moderates. (Note to Brown, don’t forget to send Robinson that “Thank You” card.)

Coakely will Face Republican Scott Brown in MA Senate Race - image: kennedyseat.com

Therefore, the outcome will be based on several factors, should Coakley sail through the primary, she will face sexism on the State Level, she is running as a Democrat at a time when the brand is somewhat damaged due to the economy. She will also face a charismatic, experienced and qualified Senator, and moderate Scott Brown, who has been identified by his opponent as being too moderate. Although one cannot pretend to have a crystal ball, one would hazard to guess that at this point, should this scenario play out, Coakley may end up being yet another woman who has been done wrong by the Massachusetts electorate.