Should Scott Brown Run for Governor?
A UMass Lowell/Boston Herald poll shows he is in a strong position to run in 2014.
Results of a UMass Lowell/Boston Herald poll this week show former Senator Scott Brown is more popular than he was when he lost his re-election bid last fall and is in a strong position to run for governor in 2014.
The independent, nonpartisan poll surveyed 600 Massachusetts registered voters between Saturday, March 2, and Tuesday, March 5.
With regard to Brown, the poll — which asked voters for their opinions on whether they would vote for Brown if he runs for governor — showed he has considerable bipartisan support, with 32.7 percent saying they are very likely to vote for him and 26 percent somewhat likely.
Results showed that Brown, who garnered support of 92.2 percent of Republicans polled and 36.7 percent of Democrats, had more name recognition than other possible candidates, including Charlie Baker (67.2 percent combined said they had no opinion/never heard of Baker), former Lt. Gov. Kerry Healey (58.4 percent combined no opinion/never heard of) and state Treasurer Steve Grossman (79.5 percent no opinion/never heard of).
Massachusetts, despite being among the bluest of blue states, has a history of electing Republican governors. From 1991 to 2007, a member of the GOP governed the Bay State.
So tell us, what do you think? Would you vote for Scott Brown for governor? Or is there another potential candidate out there who you think would be a better fit for the seat? Tell us in the comments below.
June Sparks
9:18 am on Saturday, March 9, 2013
My husband and I are both independents . . . and we would vote for Scott Brown for Governor in a heartbeat!
Cool Fusion
6:31 pm on Saturday, March 9, 2013
You can't hide a piece of Broccoli in a glass of milk and Scott Brown can't hide from his dismal record. He proved to be a huge disappointment to those that placed faith in his political rhetoric that was just fictious blabber. America can't afford another Democrat posing as a Republican. Listen up Brad Jones.. your the next inept RINO Republican about to be replaced by a real thoroughbred Republican or Libertarian candidate.
Johnny D
10:39 am on Saturday, March 9, 2013
Sure...it would make it easier for a demcrat to win again, so I am all for it!
Jo-Ann
11:07 am on Saturday, March 9, 2013
Absolutely not. His record is spotty and I personally do not think he is smart
Susan Sturgeon
1:43 pm on Saturday, March 9, 2013
Couldn't say it any better!
Alison
8:21 am on Sunday, March 10, 2013
Um, Jo-Ann? You have been repeating that allegation that he is not smart for years. You oddly ignore the fact that he graduated with high honors from the top rated Tufts University.
Warren did NOT graduate with ANY honors from the bottom of the barrel 189th ranked ranked commuter school, the University of Houston.
He also went to the top rated Boston College law school, while again Warren graduated from the much lower ranked Rutgers Law school.
Brown was also sexually molested by a man at camp and beaten by his step father. He did NOT have the best start in the world, so many admire him for making it so far in the world.
Anne Sweeney
11:10 am on Saturday, March 9, 2013
Whether Independent or not, Massachusetts is a one party state. Even the most progressive, ideological, pragmatists agree. A one party system is not healthy for any society.
S G
12:05 pm on Saturday, March 9, 2013
Yes. I would support Scott brown for Governor. Scott Brown was raised by a single mother. He went to Tufts University undergrad and received his Juris Doctorate from Boston College. He started his political career in town politics became a member of the Massachusetts House then State Senate then US Senate. All the while admittedly primary care giver of his two daughters and serving in the United States national guard for JAG. He served in Afghanistan. Scott Brown has humbly devoted his life to public service. He represents what is best about America.
Johnny D
12:26 pm on Saturday, March 9, 2013
How does any of that sentimental bs qualify him to be a good governor??? "He was the primary care giver for his two daughters".....whopp-di-doo! That should not even cross your mind while voting,....this is exactly how Bush became president!
Steve Marino
7:57 pm on Monday, March 11, 2013
Lets see, I bet you think that being a community organizer makes you qualified to be the leader of the free world?
I guess it's all about the party of the ignorant!
Jetson
12:08 pm on Saturday, March 9, 2013
My family and friends would support him.
S G
1:09 pm on Saturday, March 9, 2013
The strength of a person's character should always be considered when voting. Scott brown is a devoted husband, father, Public servant and Veteran.
Johnny D
1:49 pm on Saturday, March 9, 2013
None of which means he will be a good governor. Bill Clinton, although maybe not the best person, was an above average president. I guess his pathetic attempt to relate to the common man with his "pickup truck" and "working wife" commercials actually gained him some of votes. It really is sad that you feel for his emotional manipulation.
I take good care of my child too, but I don't look to exploit that fact for my own personal gain. I also don't parade my wife around in an effort to brainwash everyone into thinking I am such a great husband. You shouldn't get a medal for doing what you are SUPPOSED to do as a father and husband.
Sorry, he was a sub-par senator and his POLITICAL track record suggests he would be a terrible governor. I hope he does run...because I am a democrat (obviously) and think he will tip the scales in our favor!
Derek
1:38 pm on Saturday, March 9, 2013
Absolutely!!!
S G
4:04 pm on Saturday, March 9, 2013
Bill Clinton was an above average President because of his ability to work with Newt Gingrich for the good of the country. Scott Brown has the proven ability to work in a bi-partisan fashion.
Johnny D
4:24 pm on Saturday, March 9, 2013
Now there is a logical, mature reason to vote for someone. I knew that you couldn't be voting for him because you think he is a "devoted husband, father, Public servant and Veteran."
Nameless Conservative
6:38 pm on Monday, March 11, 2013
Which draws a very blatant contrast to Obama who refuses to negotiate with Boehner on any of Obama's tax and spend initiatives that will only drive our country further into debt. That while Harry Reid enters his 5th year refusing to allow a budget resolution to come to the floor of the Senate.
Clinton believed in a balanced budget making him the most conservative democrat president since Jack Kennedy IMO. For example, he signed off on a REDUCTION of welfare spending that included adding a phased-in mandatory work requirement.
But Obama eliminated the work requirement and is now demanding an increase to welfare beyond what he increased it in his first term. He definitely IS the welfare/food stamp president.
The difference ought to be clear to everybody, it isn't just the political party - IT'S THE LEVEL OF EXPERIENCE. Clinton had the prior experience of executive responsibility running state government as a governor while Obama had the prior experience of running his mouth campaigning for his short stays in his IL and US senate seats. He used thuggery to get himself elected to both of those positions then did virtually NOTHING during the time he was seated in them.
We're all paying for his egotistical attitude toward business that produces the economy (he thinks government does it!) and his total lack of leadership/ability in foreign affairs.
Steve Marino
7:33 pm on Monday, March 11, 2013
Mike, although I do agree with most of your comments, I think that Obama is a committed socialist and is hell bent on bankrupting this country on purpose to show the world that capitalist democracy does not work.
There could be no other explanation for the record breaking out of control spending that hundreds of economists warn will break this country.
This is the fastest way to complete socialism without looking like one, and Obama knows it!
No, I fear that he is not incompetent as most think, and is very calculated in his politics.
Nameless Conservative
12:24 am on Tuesday, March 12, 2013
Steve, I don't disagree that he's a real stinker but I'm not so convinced he's all that 'calculating'. Maybe the puppet masters behind the teleprompter are - but he himself doesn't seem to be very smart to me when they aren't around to help him. Fast and Furious, Benghazi .... blowing up in his face and Benghazi could still get him impeached with wide democrat support if the torture accusations are true. It ain't over...
Bob Samson
4:11 pm on Saturday, March 9, 2013
Want a slug then vote democrat
Johnny D
4:26 pm on Saturday, March 9, 2013
Typical conservative "if you don't think like me then I am going to resort to name-calling" response. You aren't making a very good case for converting to your party!
Buzz
6:57 pm on Saturday, March 9, 2013
He shouldn't bother. He is a bit of a joke, IMHO.
libertyfreedom
4:38 am on Sunday, March 10, 2013
Yes, we've known Scott Brown as our representative for fifteen yeas and would vote for him. He would at least TRY to represent us. Not like the Champagne Socialists being forced down our throats now.
Mike
3:05 pm on Sunday, March 10, 2013
If the Dems are socialists, then they are really doing a bad job of it:
http://neweconomicsinstitute.org/content/wealth-inequality-america
http://www.people.hbs.edu/mnorton/norton%20ariely%20in%20press.pdf
Probably just another person using a word for which they do not know the real meaning,
Nameless Conservative
10:47 am on Monday, March 11, 2013
Yeah, socialists are for "wealth equality" - for everyone but THEM! They are all about SLAVERY with them as a tiny group of wealthy elitists in permanent control of the masses who they have reduced to equal poverty. It's called communism comrade Mike. Just open your eyes to the all the 6 digit salaries in state government and consider that they produce virtually nothing while living on the backs of those who produce.
Nameless Conservative
10:58 am on Monday, March 11, 2013
Given his loss to a fraudulent poser with zero political experience representing anyone but herself it is clear that Scott is incapable of fighting on the basis of fundamental principles and specifics.
His repeated promise was always the nebulous, "We can do better." Well Scott, I now think that's true about you.
Steve Marino
7:09 pm on Monday, March 11, 2013
Now that Brown is not running for office and is working as a Fox News contributor, he is talking like a conservative and therefore becoming more popular. If he had talked like this when he was running for the senate instead of trying to convince everyone in the state that he was more of a democrat then his opponent, he may very well have won.
Most voters want a conservative with fiscal common sense, not a republican in name only.
If he runs for office again, and is not afraid to be a conservative, he should win even in this state! You can't do any worse then the democrats in this state, and in this country.
He, and all republicans, need to explain and show the contrast between those democrats that will spend every last dollar of the working class and put us in financial ruin. When republicans act like conservatives, they win elections!
Timothy Andrew Page
10:39 am on Sunday, May 5, 2013
Should Scott Brown Run for Governor?
Uhm. Err. Most definitely. Please do!