As I’ve made clear for a long time my preference in the NH GOP senate primary is someone other than Scott Brown (If I had a vote it would go to Senator Bob Smith) but this piece at Talking points memo is absolutely ridiculous.
Former Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA), now a U.S. Senate candidate in New Hampshire, said that his job isn’t to create jobs. That’s for other Americans.
Instead, he said, his job is to get the government out of the way.
Brown made the comments at a town hall in Hudson, New Hampshire on Wednesday. The comments were flagged by the opposition research shop American Bridge 21st Century. His comments were in response to a question about what he would to do bring jobs to New Hampshire.
“Here’s the thing, people say, what are you going to do to create jobs? I am not going to create one job, it is not my job to create jobs. It’s yours,” Brown said. “My job is to make sure that government stays out of your way so that you can actually grow and expand. Obamacare’s a great example. The number one job inhibitor is Obamacare.
While on Memeorandum this piece has gotten little interest… (Which begs the question how it made Memeorandum)
…MSNBC’s Morning Joe thought it significant enough to play the video
and as you can see it Barnicle treated as a gaffe and nobody called him on it.
Now as any person with any sense who knows even basic economics knows Brown is exactly right. It’s not the government who creates jobs. They can make policies that help or hinder the job growth but the only way the government “creates” a job is to take money away from the actual job creators or the wages of those they pay.
Yet the Democrats, even with a RCP avg showing Shaheen at nearly 50% in a Matchup vs Scott Brown
thinks so little of their base that they expect to win votes with this story.
If that’s not a reason for the sensible people of NH to abandon Shaheen, I’d like to know what is?
Exit question: If the GOP candidate isn’t polling better than 42% despite a big campaign chest & support from the national party, might it be a better idea to nominate a candidate that likewise knows the Government doesn’t create jobs but won’t cause the pro-life, pro-2nd Amendment base to stay home?
Sir Humphrey Appleby:So we trust you to make sure that your Minister does nothing incisive or divisive over the next few weeks.
Sir Arnold Robinson: Avoids anything controversial. Sir Humphrey Appleby: Expresses no firm opinion about anything at all. Now, is that quite clear? Bernard Woolley: Yes, well, I think that is probably what he was planning to do anyway.
Yes Minister Party Games 1984
Reporter #1 Was that a “Yes” or “No”?
Reporter #2 That was a possible “maybe”
The Best little Whorehouse in Texas 1982
Last year when Senator Scott Brown appeared in Nashua and a crowd of 2nd amendment people protested him I said he made a mistake by not engaging those voters directly, Brown is a reasonable man and as I recall when he was my senator always had time for his constituents no matter what their views.
Last week Senator Brown took my advice appearing in Hollis NH at the home of Granite Grok’s Mike Rogers with his lovely wife Gail to meet with a group of voters and make the case for him as the next Senator GOP senator from NH.
Mike regularly hosts candidates so people can meet and engage them and I’m often there to cover them. I missed this one but I commend Senator Brown for making the trip, but after reading the accounts of the event from Skip & Mike it seems that in giving said advice I left out an important point, something that is inherent to NH GOP politics that doesn’t come into play very often in Massachusetts.
In Massachusetts the GOP is so weak that conservatives are simply delighted to have a candidate contest a democrat in office. Furthermore Massachusetts is so left you have to go back to Henry Cabot Lodge in the 50’s to find a Massachusetts senator who occupied the seat Senator Brown did who was more conservative than he.
In other words in Massachusetts showing up, caucusing with the GOP and perhaps throwing them a vote now & then is enough to prove your GOP bonafides.
In NH it’s a different matter.
New Hampshire has a long strong GOP tradition. George Bush took the state in 2000, The GOP held the House and Senate just two years ago and if Scott Brown won the class two seat from Jeanne Shaheen not only would he be the most liberal Senator in that seat (other than Shaheen) since Democrat Thomas J. McIntyre in 1979 but with Kelly Ayotte in the Delegation he wouldn’t even be the most conservative senator serving the state.
To put in bluntly the New Hampshire GOP doesn’t need a savior. They have plenty of choices from Karen Testerman to Senator Bob Smith and Andy Martin to Senator Brown’s right to Jim Rubins to his left so being “not Jeanne Shaheen” doesn’t cut it. As Chip put it:
Note to Scott Brown: EVERY Republican is “the anti-Shaheen“. Yes, every candidate for US Senate this cycle is saying “I am the opposite of Shaheen”. Keep telling us that over and over will just lose its efficacy – and gets to be boring and eye-rolling. And again, it wasn’t just me that noticed (and this advice is worth every penny you paid). Stop being Captain Obvious over and over – it will help the stump speech.
All the questions went the same way -whether softball or hardball, they did not elicit any concrete statement of principle or philosophy, but just general platitudes about fixing broken Washington, and getting things done…
…After a few questions, I had a very uncomfortable feeling – like trying to look through a highly polished glass column to see the truth, or see inside a cloak of invisibility, or stand on a teflon floor in low gravity – in other words, it was impossible to get a grip on his positions on anything except “vote for me, I’m the lesser evil”.
Moreover if Senator Brown didn’t want to make a pitch for has candidacy based on deep held positions & principles for fear of trackers, he could have instead make the case for his candidacy pragmatically, to wit:
1. I am the person who can raise the most money, I can go dollar to dollar with Shaheen and force Democrats to spend money here that they would otherwise have available to defend house and senate seats elsewhere.
2. I have the highest name recognition on the GOP side thanks to years of coverage and the Boston Media. I could spend every cent of that superior war chest attacking Jeanne Shaheen rather than introducing or re-introducing myself to the electorate.
3. Since I served in the Senate at the same time as Senator Shaheen I can directly contrast my record to hers.
4. Senator Shaheen was the 60th vote for Obamacare As the person elected in Massachusetts as the 41st vote against Obamacare the ads practically write themselves.
5. Because I’m the most acceptable candidate to the national party I can draw national names and cash to the campaign that can not only help me but the GOP ticket all the way down.
6. Finally the Democrats are terrified of me. They will never get over me winning the “Ted Kennedy” seat in Massachusetts and inspiring candidates nationwide. They’re already spending money trying to define me and every dollar, every volunteer, every speaker and every phone call the party has to make to try to defend this Senate seat in NH is a dollar, a volunteer, a speaker and a phone call that is not being made to defend seats in Alaska, Louisiana, North Carolina, Arkansas etc etc etc.
Can someone explain why it it is left to a blogger who has endorsed Karen Testerman for the NH GOP Senate nomination to make this case when Senator Brown could have done the same in a house full of potential voters, contributors and campaign workers?
Maybe he figures an argument is not necessary. he’s a very pleasant man, with a good record in the Military, a nice family and a wife that is an incredible asset for a campaign. Combine that with the with money, name recognition and a divided GOP primary vote and I suspect expensive consultants who are chasing his big campaign chest might have advised him getting the nomination in an open primary state like NH is a fait accompli.
But what those consultants don’t seem to understand is even if they are right about the primary, it’s only half the battle. If he wins Senator Brown will need as many of those tea party conservatives as he can get come election day because the MSM is going to pull out all the stops to keep that NH seat a seat they figured on holding.
New Hampshire is not Massachusetts. and the Charles Durning dance simply won’t fly there.
The consultants who are telling Senator Brown to take no firm positions on issues are likely the same ones who asked him to run away from the base in 2012. Let me as a person who is not taking a penny of Senator Brown’s money (but will happily accept tip jar hits) say that if you actually want to win this election it’s better for you and the GOP both nationally and in NH if you actually stand for something. I’ll give the last word to Mark Steyn who said these words to NH republicans the day after Senator brown announced his exploratory committee….
We don’t want it to be like 2010, where it was a landmark election and nothing changed, and the way to prevent that is to move the meter from the public debate is. We are jeopardizing the future of United States by just stringing along in this way…You have to wait for a Tuesday in November to actually win the vote but you can win the argument every single day of the week, every month between now and election day.
Of course the NH GOP could just vote for Karen Testerman and win with her. Then GOP candidates running in NH House & Senate races throughout the state won’t have to explain away Brown’s positions that might keep the base they need home.
It’s Saturday. In 7 Hours I’ll be broadcasting live from the Nashoba Club Restaurant in Ayer Ma but no a less pleasant note with 19 hours left to the day we remain a full $222 away from meeting our weekly goal for the first time in nearly two months.
We need 9 tip jar hitters at $25 to end our losing streak and try to get us back on track, and it’s axiomatic that the establishment money isn’t going to come here and do it.
Let’s not start April in a hole, please hit DaTipJar below.
If 61 of you hit Subscribe at $20 a month subscribers this site will be able to cover its bills for a full year.
…but when it comes to the health care bill she is one of the few people on the left looking at the political consequences with open eyes:
The DCCC was very good at getting not-so-savvy poll analysts to try and discredit the SurveyUSA polling. (Those same pollsters, ironically, didn’t see anything weird in the Research 2000 polls they were quoting authoritatively at the time, which many now find suspect — though Jerome Armstrong spotted it). Somehow Democratic members of Congress engaged in magical thinking and believed Rahm’s BS about the popularity of the health care bill increasing if it passed.
Rather than focus on jobs creation in a country with climbing unemployment rates, Obama spent the better part of a year focused on passing a health care bill that looks like it will play no small part in the Democratic Party’s upcoming electoral woes.
Well, we warned you.
I’ll go one step farther. The Election of Scott Brown was the real breaking of the dam and the thing that made the Brown Election was the chance to stop the Healthcare bill. Forgetting everything else, the morale factor that the Election of Brown had for the tea parties and the GOP can’t be overestimated. Without the Brown victory you don’t have Miller in Alaska you don’t have the GOP establishment defeats in Utah & NC.
Brown’s election Made the Tea Party and the election climate that we have this fall, and the Healthcare Bill made Brown.
Democrats did this to themselves, Hamsher & Co tried to warn them.
I’m not buying that spin. It is true that Hamsher had some of the most devastating critiques of Obamacare. But when I wrote my Open Letter in January 2010 to Hamsher asking her to join us in defeating Obamacare, there was no response, either directly or indirectly, in words or in action. Instead, Hamsher and others were focused on improving (e.g. public option) not defeating the legislation, an ultimately futiile quest which required a level of subservience to the Democratic leadership in the hope they would come through for you. They didn’t.
I personally think it is a huge mistake but I’m already on the record saying that my 80% friend is not my 20% enemy so I’m willing to give him a pass for now. Others in the Tea party are less forgiving as 150 people in Worcester protested him today.
I remember the enthusiasm for Brown just six months ago running with no other democrat drawing partisans to the polls and he managed to win by 5. If this is the attitude among those willing to still vote for him then he has big trouble coming up if he keeps on this path.
House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Sander M. Levin (D-MI), a co-sponsor of the bill, said in a press release yesterday that
“Republicans in Congress are clearly more focused on their short-term political standing than the immediate economic security of millions of Americans who have lost their jobs through no fault of their own and are unable to find work.”
Interestingly enough if you look at the Globe today you find this:
Senator Scott Brown of Massachusetts is planning to introduce legislation today aimed at extending unemployment assistance for the long-term jobless, funding summer jobs, and providing more Medicaid funding to states.
His plan would pay for the additional spending using unspent stimulus funding, along with cuts in other areas.
“There are some programs in that legislation that are important to Massachusetts during this economic crisis,’’ Brown, a Republican, says in a video message he is planning to release this morning. “But we need to find a way to pay for them.’’
How about that actually paying for that extension. As someone in tight shape who could use that extension I understand that the money is coming not from the Government but from my fellow taxpayers. Once people forget this we become a society of dependence.
“I said right from the beginning, I’ll let my statements speak for themselves,” said Senator Brown. “I was disappointed and surprised that at the last minute, they put in assessment fees, taxes…really without letting us know, and I’ve always made it clear that I can’t support adding another $19 billion passed through taxes to individual consumers, especially in the middle of a two year recession.”
Gateway also notes that he has come out against Cap and Trade too. this will of course lead to more ads portraying him has pro Wall Street, Pro Big Oil against small kittens etc etc etc… but SISU notes that this is what the people want.
Scott Brown “has listened to his constituents,” an aide in our junior Senator’s office just told us, and will definitely vote “no” on the Dodd-Frank Financial Reform bill should it come to the floor.
This was the same thing mentioned at yesterday’sTwin City Tea Party Meeting, a member who called urging opposition to the bill was told that there was an overwhelming response from voters against both bills.
Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) joined Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA) this evening, putting herself back into the undecided column on Wall Street reform legislation, after House and Senate negotiators added new fees on banks to the final bill late last week.
“It was not part of either the House or Senate bill and was added in the wee hours of the morning. So I’m taking a look at the specifics of that and other provisions as well,” Collins told reporters this evening outside the Senate chamber.
I dislike the financial bill as much as the next guy. I don’t trust this administration at all and the attitude of trying to stifle business’ that actually provide jobs in idiotic, but listen when a senator makes a vote against you it doesn’t make him a “traitor”.
At normal times you will not get 100% on any particular issue from any person.. I’m certainly not going to throw Scott Brown out the window over one issue or even two.. The next election in Massachusetts is in 2012. If you want Martha Coakley in 2012 or a liberal just like her who will be soft on the war on terror, soft on immigration and not vote for the repeal of Obamacare in 2013 (Which is the absolute earliest time possible to repeal it) say so now but I don’t want to hear anyone complaining if the repeal effort fails by a single vote.
Let’s be blunt, against the worst candidate of any type I’ve ever seen, who had promised to advance a health care plan that even democrats that I talked to couldn’t stand he managed to get 52% of the vote. What do you think is going to happen in a general election against an effective candidate with a solid record and a bunch of other democrats on the ballot all needed to get themselves elected and/or re-elected?
Remember Mr. Brown is up for re-election in only two years. From everything that people I talked to said this type of vote will make a huge difference to them.
I’m figuring we will get him about 70-75% of the time, perhaps if we are lucky even 85%, if we can do that I’ll be satisfied, at least for now.
I think Massachusetts has the potential to change for the better this is not the last step but the first one, give us some time and amazing thing might happen all over the state.