| | Advanced Search

 

Central MA Up + Comer: Vision Advertising CEO Laura Briere—Meet Central MA's rising stars...

FlyORH: Vote for Worcester in JetBlue Contest—Supporting ORH and JetBlue....

Catch the Moscow Festival Ballet With Your WOO Card—Where will you be WOOing this weekend?

Acclaimed Author Leah Hager Cohen to Give Reading at Holy Cross—Will read from new novel 'No Book but…

NEW: Michael Graham Taking Conservative Talk Show to Atlanta—Headed for a warmer climate

NEW: Worcester’s Wormtown Brewery Wins Denver Int’l Beer Award—A major honor bestowed to a local brewery

Paul Giorgio: Elizabeth Warren is Right on Student Loans—MINDSETTER Paul Giorgio examines the student debt crisis

Central MA College Standout: Smith College’s Megan Baker—Spotlight on a bright student...

Organize + Energize: 7 Reasons to Hire a Professional Organizer—With a little help from your friends...

Rob Horowitz: The Civil Rights Act, 50 Years Later—Celebrating a milestone...

 
 

Brown Doing His Own Dirty Work: Stays on the Offensive

Tuesday, September 25, 2012

 

As Republican Senator Scott Brown launched another attack ad at Democratic challenger Elizabeth Warren on Monday, some observers said it seemed clear that the candidates were willing to go negative without the help of third-party groups in the highly-contested Massachusetts Senate race.

The Brown camp roleld out its latest 30-second television spot, titled "Who Knows?", featuring a medley of television reports discussing Warren's claims of Native American heritage.

The ad ends with a reporter asking Warren if any further revelations about her wil be forthcoming, to which the candidate replies, "I don't think so, but who knows?"

Warren's campaign responded with an ad of its own where the Democrat relates her family history and her Native American ties as it was told to her in stories as a child. Warren goes on to state, "Let me clear, I never asked for, never got any benefit because of my heritage."

Good Signs for People's Pledge

Red Mass Group's Rob Eno lauded Brown's ad for tackling the topic of Warren's heritage, which has been present below the surface for the past several months of the campaign.

"I think it continues to show that she's not being truthful with who she is," Eno said. "It's a truthful ad."

The conservative pundit also said the more aggressive ad was a good sign that the candidates are willing to fire the hard shots themselves and that the People's Pledge will hold.

"I think it's pretty strong evidence that there's not going to be any outside spending."

Under the "People's Pledge," Brown and Warren have agreed to penalize themselves if third-party groups run ads attacking their opponents.

Robert Boatright, an associate professor of Political Science at Clark University, had previously raised the question of whether or not the candidates' deal on outside television ad spending would hold for the duration of the contest.

But with most of the available airtime between now and November 6 already bought up, Boatright said the deal may make it through Election Day in one piece.

He did note, however, that the Crossroads SuperPAC has purchased a sizable chunk of Massachusetts television time to air presidential ads targeted at New Hampshire's voters.

"So they could still run some ads but I wouldn't count on it."

The Risks of Going Negative

UMass-Lowell Political Science professor Dennis "DJ" Deeb did not see any benefit accruing to either Brown or Warren under the pledge. If both candidates turn off voters with their negative attacks, they run the risk of alienating voters who may blank the Senate portion of their ballots this November.

"I think they have kind of backed themselves into a corner."

Deeb said Brown's campaign mailings, which play up the Republican Senator as an independent voice and highlight his support from Democrats across the state, are more effective at appealing to the independent and undecided voters Brown will need to sway this fall.

The campaign's most recent "On the Road with Scott Brown" ad featured the Senator sitting down with a single mother and talking about the difficulties she has faced in the current struggling economy, a spot Deeb found to be particularly effective by linking a personal appeal with a top campaign issue.

"I think that does more to boost his own character."

Brown may be facing a difficult balancing act as he tries to maintain his positive image while simultaneously going on the attack.

"I would caution him against running ads like that," Deeb said. "I think he's treading dangerous ground."

Other observers were less optimistic in their forecast for the Bay State Senate race.

"It is clear that negative attacks beget negative attacks," said Morgan Marietta, a professor Political Science at UMass-Lowell.

"Brown has the negative attack advantage, but clear or subtle, the attacks will continue."
 
 

 

Related Articles

 

Enjoy this post? Share it with others.

Comments:

Iron Mike Farquhar

Ted Kennedy made a career of lying to the voters, - Kerry has followed in his footsteps. We do NOT need another habitual liar in the US Senate.

Mz Warren should either produce the records of her 'Cherokee ancestor' – or the records proving she didn't 'check the box' for over 20 years to gain advantages as a 'minority hire'.

NOW we learn of a new ethical problem she has – using her Harvard office address for LEGAL WORK, - when she was never licensed to practice law in this state.

Add the Oklahoma house-flipping thing and you have a candidate with a life-long trail of lies. [Gee, the perfect Democratic candidate! All she needs now is a DUI!]

Harvey Beehive

So I guess according to this rag of a "paper", staying on the offensive is doing "dirty work". Scott Brown did not make up the Cherokee story. It was Lying Lizzie who did. And she used her fake heritage to her advantage over other people to open doors for herself. She's a fraud, and she'll lose big time...

Stephen Jacoby

"Iron Mike" (who can't even spell his last name right) and "Harvey Beehive" - two cowards hiding their identities behind made up names so they can voice their ignorance without facing the ridicule they both so richly deserve - are, like Brown, trying to make an issue where none exists. Time to face facts boys. Brown is the weaker candidate and is grasping at anything that will keep him in the Senate where he can continue to serve his corporate masters. Whatever happened to the general principle of innocent until proven guilty? Even if she had access to the so-called evidence, it's not up to Warren to supply records that, despite anything they might say to back up what she says, will never be good enough for the likes of you. If there WERE records or any evidence at all of wrongdoing, the Republican machine would have either exposed it, paid to have it exposed, or forged it by now. There will ALWAYS be scumbags that will insist that there must be something else being hidden. The two of you illustrate the very worst in party politics.

Stephen Quist

There is no "dirty work" when one is honestly talking about his opponents record.
Lizzy warren claims to be "for the working family" meanwhile she made $250,000 from the largest insurance company in the country denying Asbestosis claims from filed by injured workers exposed to asbestos.....
Lizzy warren claims to be "for our children to be able to afford a higher education" meanwhile warren is cashing in on $350,000 from Harvard U. for teaching 1 class......

Stephen Quist

Warren is not even liscensed to practice law in the State of Massachusetts.............she has been practicing law in our state and she is not even liscensed?
Serious credibility issues are swirling around lyin lizzy warrens campaign and it does not bode well for her chances of getting elected.

rene grasso

What a joke..and it's on you guys.! Brown runs around in a pick-up pretending to be one of you when he's worth 2 million, makes over 1/2 million a year, and, here's the real kicker-while Warren works for you, this fraud who has taken you in hook ,line, and sinker . He votes against your interests every time (FACT)..Do you enjoy being played? Because you better believe you are

Kristin Mayo

Stephen Quist:
For matters of federal law such as patent law, constitutional law, bankruptcy law etc, if you are licensed in one state, you may represent clients from any state. States do not have the power to restrict who practices law on federal matters before federal bodies. There are ample cases on this, including a very well-written NJ case involving patent law.

Kristin Mayo

" Do you enjoy being played? Because you better believe you are "
I agree and I believe that Karl Rove os orchestrating it behind the scenes.
Typical Karl Rove smears. This is Karl Rove’s technique--take a person’s biggest strength--Elizabeth’s Consumer Protection Act and her advocacy for the middle class -- and throw little bits of mud all over her. See if something sticks. Karl tries to muddy the water--and better still, he tries to make white look like black. We know that Scott was seen talking to Rove the one day Scott was at the Republican Conference--apparently that was his most important reason to be there.

Stephen Quist

thanks for your opinion Kristen - we are talking two very different subjects here..........
thank you also Rene......
your opinion is just that....thanks for sharing and we still have lyin lizzy warren running around lying to everyone.......
and the jokes on you and anyone else that wants to support a carpet bagger like warren who had to be convinced by Sen Harry Reid/NV to run for our US Senate seat.....
This after she was quoted by David Corn of Mother Jones Magazine stating "I WOULD RATHER BE STABBED IN MY EYES WITH A FORK RATHER THAN RUN FOR THE US SENATE SEAT FROM MASSACHUSETTS"
Hows that working out for you supporters of warren?

Harvey Beehive

Hey Jacoby...how do we know if that is YOUR real name. You are the fool. You support a candidate who is nothing more than a liar and who doesn't give a hoot about the people she claims to want to represent. Why don't you go fry a block of ice and stop making a fool of yourself..

Kristin Mayo

At least two of Scott 's staffters are the Indians at an event.

Scott Brown staffers do "Indian war whoop", "tomahawk chop" - YouTube
Scott Brown staffers do "Indian war whoop", "tomahawk chop" - YouTube.html

Stephen Jacoby

Hey, "Beehive".... I use my real name because I am not afraid of voicing my opinion in public forums. (If you don't believe me, ask around. Many of the people on both the Worcester Republican and Democratic committees know exactly who I am.) Unlike you and others who simply puke up the same lies and distortions over and over again - regardless of how many times it's been proven you are wrong - I actually investigate the issues and form my own opinions.

Stephen Quist: Please show me where you found that "fork in the eye" quote. I've searched for it extensively and the only place it exists is here on this website where you and others repeat it over and over again as if it were fact. If it were an actual quote, I'm pretty sure Brown would be running ads with that quote 24/7 - but he's not. The best he's got is the non-issue about her believing her mother about the family having Cherokee blood in their ancestry. Pathetic.

Harvey Beehive

Jacoby....I've forgotten more than you'll EVER know. You couldn't hold a candle to me. Go away...

Stephen Jacoby

Whatever makes you feel better there buddy. You just keep thinking you have a clue. I'm going nowhere.

Edward Saucier

It's obvious that "Slippery" Scott Brown is using Liz Warrens heritage as a diversion. He wants to keep as far away from his voting record as he can get. "I don't need Professor Warren talking or speaking or commenting on my votes." he said to a reporter who asked him about Liz picking on poor Scotty's lousy voting record.

Is that a stupid statement or what?

Brown talks the talk but doesn't walk the talk. He's a phoney, a flimflam man not good enough to be our Senator.

Stephen Quist

the only thing you got right in this blog jacoby is that you ARE not going anywhere neither are your posts...........well known my ass.....how do you ever get your head through the doorways jacoby?
The only vomit here is what you spew.......
The links have been up on this site and many others.......evidently you do no research and your posts prove that out..........do your own work puke head!

Stephen Quist

I will debate with Ed Saucier any day.........we don't always agree but at least he is respectful enough and decent enough to exchange ideas and thoughts.........the so called well known unknown jacoby is another matter entirely..........

Stephen Jacoby

Quist: Typical of you to distort what I said. You do it almost every time you post something, so why should this time be any different? I never claimed to be well-known. All I said (in response to two cowards hiding behind obvious psuedonyms, one of which questioned MY identity) was that many people in the city's political structure know my name and who I am. As for "vomit" I spew, I challenge you to point out one single syllable of anything I've ever posted here that isn't documented fact. You can't, because - unlike you - I am careful and diligent in researching and voicing my opinion based on the actual facts instead of the rhetoric and propaganda. Lastly, your "stab in the eye" quote is yet another distortion. I don't know if you're too lazy to check your sources or simply rely on others to tell you what to think and say, but both are equally pathetic. By asking you for your source, I was trying to give you the opportunity to correct yourself and give the ACTUAL quote given to the WSJ. Since you seem unable to get past your own hot air, let me tell you and anyone else foolish or naive enough to take you at your word exactly what she said. It was: "I hate Washington. There are days I wake up and I say 'OK, I could go to Washington or I could stab myself in the eye.'" Not a word about Massachusetts or not wanting to represent its people in the Senate. It was simply a commentary on the dysfunction present in Washington today.

btw.... "puke head"?? What are you a 12-year old girl? You might occasionally have a valid point to debate, but no one cares because you're too juvenile to express yourself without sounding like you're on a middle school playground. Grow up!




Write your comment...

You must be logged in to post comments.