Some young polling fellers just out of Suffolk U. pointed us to this post, which got us thinking again: Why is the MA Senate race so stable — and in a tie, at that? Why haven’t Scott Brown or Elizabeth Warren broken through yet? For instance, why have we seen Scott Brown flailing around, talking about a.) Cherokee stuff, b.) welfare, c.) taxes, and not jobs jobs jobs?
Alec MacGillis’s recent article in TNR may have some insight into this, though the emphasis is heavy on the old-school Dem establishment, instead of the more interesting question of why the Deval Patrick coalition has not coalesced around Warren (yet). We know it’s a myth that MA voters won’t go for a statewide Republican except under duress: 16 years of GOP governors ought to have cured anyone of that delusion. (OK, 1990 was under duress.)
My take:
- Massachusetts congressional delegation is a recent history of long legacies and political stability. The fact is that neitherBrown nor Warren are all that well known — not compared to Ted Kennedy or John Kerry or Barney Frank. Brown’s been in office for nearly two years, but there’s still a sense of getting-to-know-you. He’s trying to capitalize on a positive-but-fuzzy image with the Ray Flynn-et-al ads.
Warren is obviously a newcomer to electoral politics. She’s well known to the New York Times liberal set, but she’s not a name you’ve been hearing on WBZ-AM for years. Her daughter’s a public-interest lawyer, not an American Idol star. And she’s way behind in the who-you-know game, as MacGillis points out.
- Brown and Warren have been tending different gardens for most of their careers. Brown has been a local politician, and is fluent in local politicking and schmoozing. He has a Massachusetts accent when he wants (“Ayler”). He talks GoSox and GoPats. He often takes the local angle on issues, from the health care device tax and “defending Massachusetts” from the Affordable Care Act, to fishing to “protecting” Massachusetts banks from financial reform. He’s parochial – generally unhelpfully, in my opinion, but there it is.
Warren, on the other hand, has made her name on the national stage. She stresses big structural issues: Student loans, bank regulation, lobbyists, the social contract. These are connected to kitchen-table issues, but in many cases it requires an extra step of logic to connect that with what’s going on in your hometown or your bank account. Liberals who attend house parties understand those connections: That’s the language that we speak. Most folks, I suspect, aren’t primed to make that connection — and even so, the Massachusetts connection is yet to be made. I love this ad, but it could be even more MA-specific.
- Likeability: Brown is smooth, he likes sports, he’s local, he’s gentlemanly, and self-alleged to be bipartisan. Warren is a crusader, out to drive the money-interests and lobbyists out of the temple of democracy. That’s just who they are. In a sense, Massachusetts’ relative economic stability works for the incumbent Brown and against Warren. If things were worse locally, then more folks would be open to a crusader want to shake things up nationally. “Likeability” is relative, a matter of the right person for the job. (cf. Chris Christie or Barney Frank vs. Deval Patrick or Ronald Reagan.)
The upshot? If this is a race that turns on national issues, then I think Warren wins by six or seven points. Obama’s ground game and popularity — relative to Romney and the possibly-toxic Paul Ryan — will figure into that margin. If it turns on a basket of local/parochial issues — or trivialities, like Cherokee-gate and welfare — Brown could sneak by, by maybe 2-3 points.
(A truly baffling question: What the hell is Menino doing withholding his endorsement from Warren? Is he hedging because he thinks Brown is going to protect Boston’s interests vs. a potential Republican Senate majority? Are you kidding me? That’s not a good play.)
dcsohl says
Let’s not underestimate the media’s interest in having a (roughly) tied race. It is far more interesting, and sells more newspapers and eyeballs on the evening news, to have a competitive race than to have a blow-out. We have so far in this campaign seen the liberal Globe fawn over Scott Brown and we’ve seen the conservative Herald criticize him, when it suited them. When it brought the then-leader down to the level of the other candidate. When it sold more papers.
Steve Stein says
She’s got to go there. Often. As often as Scott Brown. No, she won’t be treated well, but that would not necessarily be a bad thing. She will win points for courage by the effort, and she’s not short of courage.
If you’re behind in the name-recognition game, you’ve got to start going wholesale, and in MA that starts with WBZ radio.
Charley on the MTA says
She can handle Rea.
Charley on the MTA says
she should do Howie’s show. Everything she can get her hands on. Just be nice and gracious to a fault, don’t get flustered ever.
oceandreams says
Look at the results of summer polls for the Democratic gubernatorial primary the first time Deval Patrick ran: Patrick didn’t break through the mid-30s in polls until after Labor Day, and he won the primary a short time later by 50%. Maybe casual political observers aren’t very engaged about researching their options until then, or maybe that’s the trajectory a grassroots-backed candidate is likely to take.
But the final question you ask about Menino is one I’ve been wondering for quite awhile now: Why is Menino not backing the Democrat in this race? Personal ties to Scott Brown? Belief Brown will be good for Boston? Warren hasn’t done enough in Menino’s eyes to court him? Warren isn’t part of the local old boys’ network? Menino is waiting because he thinks his endorsement will matter more after Labor Day? He’s trying to see which candidate will pledge the most for Boston? I’m baffled.
Christopher says
The most recent poll showing 40-38 are their respective absolute lowest either of them will get. The poll before that showing 46-46 is the likely outside low points. I still think this is going to be extremely close one way or the other. Whoever gets the narrow, and thus far inattentive, field of undecideds wins.
jconway says
If it stays tied through Sept-Oct she’s toast. The Warren camp is still making the Coakley gamble that liberals and Obama coattails will drive this race. It won’t. These numbers show it. In MA Obama is blowing Mitt away, but this remains a tie, showing a lot of voters are splitting tickets. We need to stop focusing on firing up the base and get unenrolled voters informed. Like Obama nationally, Warren has reached her ceiling, time to drag Brown through his floor. Stop focusing on complicated issues like financial reform that play well with the cocktail set at Harvard and focus on lunch bucket issues and every job killing vote he has taken. Call him a job killer and stop playing defense in the trivialities. Not only is Brown running
a terrible campaign but he is a terrible Senator-really don’t want her to lose to these guys. Sack the DSCC guys and Harvard interns and put Walsh in charge. If he can get working types to vote for Deval he can do it for Warren.
Christopher says
First of all, it’s usually incumbents who panic when there is a tie closer to the election. Second, EW’s last two commercials are about putting people to work and student loan debt, two issues that definitely speak to the middle class, though I wouldn’t mind ads taking Brown to task on his independent/bipartisan claims. Third, financial reform is THE key to all the other problems that are burdening the middle class right now, so it is exactly what needs to be discussed.
jconway says
We underestimate Brown and overestimate Warren at our own peril. And can you explain financial reform in a 30-60 second ad? I don’t think so. Their strategy seems to be “Warren is so awesome we can just introduce her to the voters and they will love her”. The numbers indicate this isn’t working.
We should be leading Brown particularly ina blue state in a presidential year and she is not sealing the deal with ticket splitters. I’d start hitting Brown for
his bad votes and hit him hard, the same way Obama is tying Romney to Bain nationally. Charley and I are right to be worried, being a good Democrat means you want Democrats to win and you criticize then when they arent. Obviously a lot if time to turn it around but make no mistake Brown is winning right now and pretending he isn’t helps it stay that way in November.
undercenter says
This is the kind of discourse I had come to appreciate about BMG, but seldom see amid what has become the all-time silliest of silly seasons. It’s refreshing to read observations from folks who can separate political strategy from ideology, while talking intelligently on both. Thanks Charlie, Chris & J
Christopher says
“Wall Street misbehaving caused you to lose your house! Financial reform will stop too-big-to-fail banks from gambling with your debt. Scott Brown stands with those who made this mess.”
Actually, I think that only takes 10 seconds to say out loud. There’s the nutshell, but like I said, her ads are talking student debt and jobs, so I’m not sure how much closer to the proverbial kitchen table you are asking her to come.
SomervilleTom says
The American dream of home ownership has also been the single largest investment of virtually ALL working- and middle-class Americans. Scott Brown’s friends on Wall Street wiped out that investment, and Scott Brown still works on their behalf.
Elizabeth Warren has been working to save the homes of Americans her entire life — while Scott Brown has been working to take them away.
I’m Elizabeth Warren and I approve this message.
jconway says
Good ads both Tom and Chris-now tell Warren!