The third debate between Elizabeth Warren and Scott Brown, candidates for the U.S. Senate in Massachusetts, accomplished something their two previous matches did not: it produced a winner. Professor Warren had her best night in the debate arena thus far, delivering a performance that was focused, confident and energetic. Although Senator Brown made no particular missteps, throughout most of this debate he found himself playing defense, stranded on his opponent's turf.
Scott Brown is an exceptionally smooth politician, with a gift for packaging his message in the form of personal appeals. He addresses himself directly to crowd, calls the voters "folks," reminds the audience that he's a native son of the Commonwealth, carpet-bombs the debate hall with local names and references. He exudes charisma, to a degree that most politicians would envy. And he looks like Richard Gere, only handsomer.
But Elizabeth Warren seems to have figured out an effective antidote to the potency of Brown's charms. Unable to match her opponent on charisma, she comes at him with intellect -- lots and lots of intellect. In the end, her ability to frame and sustain an argument reduces Brown's likability to a lesser asset, a shiny object that's all surface and no depth.
Throughout these debates, Warren's goal has been to tie Brown to the Republican Party from which he so strenuously distances himself. In this third match of the series, by repeatedly invoking the likes of Mitt Romney and Grover Norquist, Warren succeeded in plastering a scarlet "R" upon his back. Her previous steps in this direction were tentative and insufficient; this time, by keeping at it, she gave her argument a through-line that grew more apparent over the course of the hour.
Warren's strongest answer of the night came in response to a question about women's issues. Methodically dissecting Brown's voting record in this area, the challenger displayed some of the passion that has too often been absent from her campaign. "The women of Massachusetts need a senator they can count on not some of the time but all of the time," Warren said, in what will probably become the night's most-played sound bite. Referring to equal pay and birth control, she noted with exasperation, "These issues were resolved years ago, until the Republicans brought them back." Lest there be any doubt whom to she was referring, on the word "Republicans" Warren looked straight at Senator Brown.
As he did in their two earlier debates, Brown at times struck a needlessly petty tone with his rival. Once again he brought up Warren's salary and benefits package, as though her professional success is something she ought to be ashamed of. Brown also came across as more thin-skinned than his opponent, referring to "her constant criticisms of me" in a way that made him sound like a whiner. Responding to Warren's assertion that the middle class is getting hammered, Brown shot back with a line that was more nonsensical than effective: "Professor Warren, I suggest you put down the hammer." One of the clear contrasts between these two candidates is that she gets under his skin, but he doesn't get under hers.
According to the polls, this race remains neck and neck. The problem for Brown is that Warren is improving as a debater, while he remains stuck in place. It's probably good for the senator that only one more joint appearance looms on the horizon, scheduled exactly a week before Election Day. If Elizabeth Warren does as well in the last debate as she did in round three, she may finally break the logjam that has kept this race too close to call.
Follow Alan Schroeder on Twitter: www.twitter.com/ProfASchroeder
When your mouth spews ugliness, it doesn't make you look good. I would take an afternoon of being able to spend time with this very brilliant woman over anytime around this guy. His aura is not one of pleasantness. I love, so much, to listen to very intelligent people speak, but when it is a woman it is even greater.
Professor Elizabeth Warren for Congress/2012
2 days ago ... A new poll released Tuesday shows Sen. Scott Brown, R-Mass., receiving a
slight boost at the top of the ticket and pulling into a ...
http://hotlineoncall.nationaljournal.com/archives/2012/10/brown-leads-war.php
If you can't make your point in a single sentence with words that are no longer than 6 letters each, you're clearly not in touch with the average American.
Warren did get in a good shot on women's rights, but that's the only one she got. Brown was able to defend against her shots on the Norquist pledge by calling it part of his stance not to raise taxes on anyone, which is a hard position to make unpopular in this climate. He thankfully gave the Indian story a rest, although he still went a little heavy on touting his endorsements and speaking in soundbites. That said, the "put down the hammer" jab was received better than this article would lead one to believe. He went a bit out of his way to rip her on LTV, but that was a shot he had to take.
For her part, Warren layed on her class warfare rhetoric as heavily as she ever has, and if you took a shot for every utterance of "millionaires, billionaires, and big oil" from her you wouldn't last the full debate. Her win for the night was that she was able to go on the offensive for once, and she stayed there for most of the evening.
Were any undecideds swayed by this? I doubt it. Warren's best moment was on abortion, and anyone to whom that is a make-or-break issue is already in her corner. Brown defended his record well, but his veneer of likability has worn a bit.
You call that a "good defense"??
Throughout the whole debate Brown looked like he had two buttons that could be pushed to emit a response to any question:
"I have been working very hard...."
"I am bi-partisan and reach across the aisle"
Warren nailed him to the wall with her closing statements:
Every chance he had to vote against the Republicans, he voted no.
Sorry, Scottie... but your votes speak much louder than your words!
I don't like the idea of Scott Brown signing a pledge to an outside figure no matter what it is, and if the Democrats had picked a more palatable and less partisan candidate I'd have no problem voting their way. Still, his reasoning isn't outrageous to me. I think he convincingly made the pitch that businesses small and large would get hit hard by a Top 2% tax hike\cut expiration. Nobody I know who owns a business -and we're talking pizza joints and auto shops, not hedge funds- disagrees with him. Warren thinks that we can pull a recovery out of the pockets of the rich while jacking up spending at the same time, and I don't believe she's right.
The GOP relies on Secrecy and Unity. Unity is precisely why we are the "United" States of America. ...... That said, .... When President Obama says (and sincerely believes) ....... We aer Not Red or Blue America .... He forgets the GOP is Multi-National in its reach and motivations ...... It is Money-National First! ........ They.... Are Not "All American"!!!
_ Soooo, Elizabeth ... Please Pass This On, ........ Mr. President, be a leader United with your Constituency First. They need YOUR Voice .... The GOP has many voices from their Unified Money Pacts. They speak loudly ..... And, they are Not Americans All! ....... Ordinary Americans seek Unity behind You THEIR Leader ...... Beware of GOP "Friendly" Fires. ....... Mr. President please Strongly Fire Back. ..... Like You Did Elizabeth!
https://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/are-unions-fining-members-who-dont-support-warren_654203.html
http://www.examiner.com/article/coal-miners-forced-to-attend-romney-event-and-donate-to-campaign
CEO to workers: If Obama wins, you're fired
http://money.msn.com/politics/post.aspx?post=9c5331b5-72e8-4657-bccc-a3d84c72ff29