Poll: Do You Support Brown Or Warren For U.S. Senate?

  • Comments (37)
Democrat Elizabeth Warren and Republican Scott Brown will face off for Brown's U.S. Senate seat on Election Day.
Democrat Elizabeth Warren and Republican Scott Brown will face off for Brown's U.S. Senate seat on Election Day.

There's just one week to go before Massachusetts voters choose either current U.S. Sen. Scott Brown or Democrat Elizabeth Warren as their representative in the United States Senate.

Reader Results

Do you support Scott Brown or Elizabeth Warren for U.S. Senate?

  • Scott Brown

  • Elizabeth Warren

  • Undecided


Brown, 53, became the junior Massachusetts senator in 2010 after winning a special election to fill the seat once held by the late U.S. Sen. Edward Kennedy. The Wrentham Republican was a state representative in the 9th Norfolk District from 1998 to 2004, when he won election to the state Senate in the Norfolk, Bristol and Middlesex District. He is a colonel in the U.S. Army National Guard.

Warren, 63, has never had an elected office. A Harvard University Law School professor, she is an expert on American bankruptcy law and whose work led to the establishment of the U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

Both candidates have made frequent appearances in the area in recent months. Who will receive your vote on Election Day? Take our poll and comment below.

  • 37

Comments (37)

Lib: Congratulations! after 35 posts, you are the only one to mention "tea party". You just destroyed any possible shred of credibility you may have had. As for my record on the Planning Board. I stand behind my record 100%.

Maximus, I believe we already have laws on the books regarding discrimination in the workplace due to gender, race or sexual orientation. We have enough laws to accomplish equal pay. You like to play the us against them card and use the class war fair mantra which is bogus. Lastly as far as subsidies to oil companies it is a very distasteful thing. However it is a zero sum game because when we cut the government payments to them they will only raise the prices to us to make their profits match what they were before. So to think by removing the subsidies would be a majic bullet you are wrong because the government would still take my money and not provide the subsidy and then the oil companies would raise their prices to make up their loses. So in the end it will cost me more! No good decision one way or the other.

So as soon as you and the other liberals stop trying to scare everyone into voting for someone simply because they are a “D” we can have an adult discussion on how to fix the financial mess we as a country are in, thanks to all of the politicians that are entrenched in Washington from both parties.

You may agree or disagree with votes that have been taken by Scott Brown. The point is, those are his votes. That is his record. He is not the bipartisan, practically-a-Democrat that he has pretended in this campaign.

Lily Ledbetter would disagree with you that current anti-discrimination laws have sufficiently addressed the issue of paycheck fairness. If you agree with the Blunt Amendment and think the Romneys of the world are paying their fair share in taxes, go ahead, vote for Scott Brown.

We can't have that adult discussion as long as the Republican party doesn't believe in science, attempts to control the health care choices of women, filibusters every significant piece of legislation backed by the President (including jobs bills) and will not ask the richest amomg us to pay the tax rate they paid under Bill Clinton, which was the last time we had economic good times, by the way.

If the Republicans take the senate, you bet I'm scared. Look what they did in 2010 when they took state legislatures and governorships. Transvaginal ultrasounds? Personhood amendments? Union busting? Thought the Tea Party was supposed to be all about jobs?

Romney, with the vote of Scott Brown, should we be so unlucky, naming the next Supreme Court Justice? Remember, Scott's favorite is Scalia.

Be afraid. Be very afraid.

Elizabeth Warren has fought for the middle class and for fairness for the consumer during her entire public career. Wall St. and the Koch brothers and the billionaire donors are giving their money to Scott Brown. Which one do they expect to protect their interests?

Scott Brown has voted against jobs for Massachusetts. He voted twice against Paycheck Fairness. He voted for the Blunt Amendment. He has voted to keep billions in subsidies to Big Oil. He supports tax breaks to millionaires. He voted for the radical Paul Ryan budget proposal that would require cuts to Medicare and Social Security. That is his record.

If you believe in those things, knock yourself out and vote for him. If you don't believe in those things, Mr. "Bipartisan" will sell you out. If the senate becomes Republican the radical agenda described above is the goal. And Scott Brown has already voted for it.

Another alarming issue is the salary rate of Consumer Financial Protection Bureau employees. Pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act, the bureau's director may set and adjust employee pay to be comparable to the compensation and benefits provided by the Fed. This means the bureau's employees are paid outside of the traditional government scale.

A review of the bureau's salaries as of Aug. 28, 2012, reveals that approximately 60% of its 958 employees make more than $100,000 a year. Five percent of its employees are out-earning U.S. cabinet secretaries by raking in $200,000 or more annually. The director's secretary alone is paid $165,139 a year

Here is Elizabeth Warren spending your tax money. Just google her Consumer protection service and every article says they waste money without records.
"The Washington D.C. based legal watchdog group Judicial Watch announced on Wednesday that it obtained documents, through to two separate Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, showing that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau spent $479,354 for sign language translation services, that assisted two entry level staffers and a "Banking Law Fundamentals" class at George Washington University for the agency's top attorneys."
This is just on of many.

To me, it is clear that Scott Brown is the right choice. Unlike some of the posters, I do not vote party. I try to evaluate each candidate and issue based on their merits. Scott Brown seems to follow the same process prior to submitting his vote. He looks at the proposals in their entirety. I know several have pointed to a specific vote but do you know WHY he cast his vote. Do some research, there were other items that were being bundled into the proposed bills. This legislative behavior has cost the American public billions of dollars because of people bundling in special interest items. I feel Brown can best represent my interests. I entered this campaign with an open mind and considered both candidates. Elizabeth Warren has lost all credibility with me, the moment that she could not represent herself when questioned on her heritage. She literally stepped backwards and let Governor Patrick address the question posed to her. If she cannot represent herself, I feel she cannot represent my interests. She continually repeats her canned one sentence answers to questions, rather than listening to the question and responding appropriately. It is like the baby dolls that little girls have. Press the button and get the same line. The only thing that makes her a viable candidate is that she is running on a Democrat ticket in this state and people will blindly vote for a given party. She is trying to capitalize on that. I have voted for both parties in the past but it is clear to me that Scott Brown is the better candidate. I trly wish that more people would evaluate candidates on their capabilities and not their party.

I was going to comment in depth but you summarized my thoughts perfectly. Vote Brown!

If Warren wins it will be based solely on her gender. PERIOD!!

There is no war against women.

Only in their minds.

Democrats will not be caught "asleep at the wheel" again in November. And all the endorsements by washed up athletes, and phony Democrats for an even phonier Republican will not make a difference. Scott Brown does exactly what John Boehner tells him to do, except for a few measly crumbs he throws the Democrats way. I personally don’t care if Liz Warren says her ancestors were Martians. Her views on class separation, womens rights, student loan reform, corporate welfare, and her determination to fight for the middle class are far more in line with what I believe to be the mainstream majority here in MA, than some conservative boot licking, fence sitting, barncoat wearing, pickup truck driving, phony common man and former nude male model.

Her views on "Class Separation" (She is a 1 percenter who could really care less about you or anyone), "Women's Rights" (This is a made up war that Brown takes the same positions.) "Student Loan Reform" (She got rich of the backs of students who took the government loans. $400,000 for one class. She should be ashamed of herself.) "Corporate Welfare" (Again, hypocritical and disingenuous, She was a corporate lawyer who protected Travelers and Big Steel. And you buy her line that she is going to protect the middle class. She is going to ruin the middle class by killing jobs with over regulations. The most liberal people I know are not even going to vote for her. She is just using Mass to get back to Washington.

Ok Lib: Here is your chance! What positive thing has Elizabeth Warren actually done for the middle class? One thing, that's all you need.

1) Consumer Financial Protection Bureau - conceived, promoted, worked with the current admin to get it approved. You have to wonder why the Repubs are so, so against this...especially in the wake of the financial collaps.
2) Researched and published on the impact of contemporary financial structures on the Middle Class.

I just cannot see how anyone can vote for someone as morally bankrupt as Elizabeth Warren. She OBVIOUSLY used a trumped up story of family heritage, without any proof whatsoever, in order to further her academic career. She puts herself forward as the champion of the "little guy" when in fact she's been a hired gun for big corporations looking to stop the same "little guy" from getting pension benefits, medical benefits, etc..... You can't claim to be working for the victim when you are being paid by the defendant and the defendant is a huge miltimilliondollar corporation. When she lies and twists Scott Brown's record it bothers me. Since going to Washington 2 yrs ago, he made a pledge that he would be a bipartisan senator. He has kept his promise. He is the 2nd most bipartisan senator, after Olympia Snowe of ME. He reads the bills and decides what is good for the state and the nation before voting. He does not vote on party lines --- Republicans I know are upset by this!! He votes about 1/2 the time with the Democrats! These are not "measly crumbs" he throws their way. Elizabeth Warren says he is against women. What a joke! His wife and daughters would never let him get away with THAT! He's the son of a battered woman. He worked to get rid of "Don't Ask Don't Tell" and to expand women's roles in the military. He has passed several bills on his own --- including the STOCK Act. Send him back to Washington. We need some balance.

Being known as the 2nd most bi-partisan Senator, in the MOST partisan Senate, during the MOST partisan time in history, is like being the 2nd tallest midget. Who had the 2nd highest batting average on the Red Sox this year? Who cares? It still resulted in mediocrity and dysfunction.

Lib: You have to have a government funded patronage job.

No Alan, a Test Engineer in an Engineering services company, who sees clients downsizing and shipping jobs overseas every day because people like Mitt Romney and Scott Brown support policies that reward them for doing so. Liz Warren has created a consumer protection agency that is already returning $$$ back to the taxpaying middle class. What do you do other than attempt to stifle local businesses and become hysterical about the placement of dumpsters. For the good of everyone, extremist Tea Party candidates must simply go away.

Scott Brown voted for the Blunt Amendment. This would have allowed a woman's employer to deny her coverage for basic health care provisions -- including contraceptive care and preventive cancer screenings -- for effectively any reason.

Scott Brown has received an 80% anti-choice approval rating from the National Right to Life Committee, though he pretends to be pro-choice.

Scott Brown voted against Paycheck Fairness twice.

He can be the bestest hubby and daddy ever but he votes again and again to limit women's choices.

The charge that Elizabeth Warren worked against the asbestos victims are false. The asbestos victims and their families as well as fact checkers say so.

Do you have proof that Elizabeth Warren has no Native American ancestry? You know something her mother doesn't?

She doesn't have to twist his record. He voted with Democrats when Boehner allowed him to. The rest of the time he voted with the party of Wall St.

Come on, which candidate is getting the Wall St. and big donor money? If Elizabeth Warren were the corporate candidate, she would be getting the corporate money!

It's easy to vote to get rid of DADT when the tide of opinion in the country has clearly turned against it and you are running for the senate in Massachusetts. Expanding women's roles in the military? Oooh, that's another tough one.

He votes on party lines when it matters to his party. I'm glad he's nice to his daughters. Most people are. It's everyone else's daughters we need to worry about.

I believe the choice is an easy one.

My vote goes to Scott Brown because he stands up for what he believes and is probably one of the few senators who reads all the bills presented to him before he votes. Most have their staff review the bills and vote along party lines. Scott makes decisions that he thinks are best for MA and the country.

Warren may be intelligent but she was hand picked to run as a Democrat insider in Washington and she does not represent my views.

Until this campaign season I was pretty indifferent to Scott Brown. I didn't care for many of his policy points and I didn't vote for him in 2010, but personally other than on policy points I had no disagreement with him. His decision to go negative and in a hard way has turned me off to Scott Brown at a personal level. He had this "nice guy" persona which kept me from actively disliking him, but this campaign flipped me. He ran a really good and clean race in 2010 against Martha Cokaley and the best candidate won. No qualms abou tthat. But now he's running negative and I don't much care for that. He's behind in the polls just like Martha Coakley was in 2010 and he's responsding in the same way. In 2010 he criticized Coakley's tactics (and I agreed with him there), but now he's doing exactly what she did. He's simply not who he portrayed himself to be.

We don't need the heir apparent to Teddy Boy. If she wins, it will be like having Kennedy as Senator all over again for an eternity. We have a more than adequate supply of college elites making policy for us now. We do not need more theory on how economies should be run, we need people that have been in the real world, not ones pontificating in college classrooms.

Well, if you "don't need the heir apparent to Teddy Boy," then you must, by definition, be someone who:

a) inherited millions,
b) owns multiple homes with elevators for your cars,
c) will never depend on ANY government program such as Social Security, Medicare, or unemployment benefits,
d) is sterile and/or never reproduced,
e) lacks or barely achieved a high school diploma.

Does that describe you accurately? (I suspect the first four do not but I'd put money on the last one.)

Teddy Boy?

You mean the senator who stood almost alone in the senate against the fraudulent war in Iraq?

The senator who protected Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security?

The senator who fought tirelessly for those less fortunate in spite of his personal wealth, was a champion for health care reform, was the leading force behind passage of the Health Insurace Portability and Accountability Act,the Mental Health Parity Act,the State Chlidren's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP)?

The senator who was instrumental in passing laws addressing cancer research, apartheid, disability discrimination, AIDS care, civil rights...

THAT Teddy Boy?

Vote for Elizabeth Warren, a real Democrat who will carry on the great legacy of Senator Kennedy.

Oh and add murderer, philanderer, bootlegger, and traitor to the legacy of Teddy the Drunk!

You choice is the lawyer or the lawyer.
Romney has a MBA and a law degree from Harvard. Instead of serving his country in "Nam. He was in France, trying to convert people to his religion.
I understand he speaks French very nicely.

Brown's record is that he voted against fair paycheck legislation twice, voted against legislation that would have brought jobs to Massachusetts, voted for the Blunt Amendment, which would have given a woman's employer the right to decide her bith control choices or any healthcare choices the employer doesn't like, though she pays for her insurance plan.

That's a snippet of Scott Brown's record. He votes with Democrats only when Boehner doesn't need him. His pro-choice credentials are a fraud. He voted for the Blunt Amendment! He can't even be counted on for contraception.

Elizabeth Warren has not lied about her heritage unless you know something about it that her mother does not.

Her record of fighting for the consumer in the face of Wall St. power is second to none. Which candidate in the race does Wall St. support? How can anyone deny that it's Scott Brown?

Women should stop whining and complaining? Yes. Do let's go back to the time when women knew their place.

Right! Even Hillary said, "Stop Whining!!"

Warren was instrumental in creating the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau which just won a major victory against Capital One and credit card fraud that should ripple throughout the industry. She's smart, tough, and committed and will be a great Senator for Massachusetts. Brown is a false RHINO who helped bring the US to edge of default during the debt crisis by first being for the debt deal, but then opposing it when it really mattered. First he was for the Ryan Medicare voucher plan, now he claims to be against it. He's a shape-shifter like Romney, but we know what shape they will take if given the chance. His campaign has consisted of a series of shameful distortions. His second debate utterance that Scalia is his model Supreme Court Justice should be enough to make most people in the state run the other way.

As a mother and voter, I support Scott Brown as a positive candidate for women. I read an article in the Globe where Elizabeth Warren states how difficult and embarrassed she was when her mother entered the work force. I am a similar age of the professor. I had the same experience in the 60's. however, I feel my mother set an example for me as I have set for my daughters and Gail Huff has for her daughters. Women can be strong by example not by complaining.

How can anyone vote for someone that lies constantly about her record and heritage?

That's why Scott Brown has my vote! He is truthful and sincere as you would want as a US Senator!

The GOP reminds me of when I was 13.
Afraid of minorities, poor people are weird, women need to be controlled, and thump my chest for a bigger military.

John: I really feel sorry for you that your childhood was so difficult. When I was 13 we didn't know what minority was, poor people lived in other countries and we gave extra money in the basket for them (what little we had). Women were our moms, our teachers and the Nuns and their was no controlling them, unless you meant your school girl friends, and there was no controlling them either! Thump our chest for a big military..Yea I guess you might be right on that one. Hope all turned out for ya little fella!

I turned out great.
I have an open mind, great job, great wife, great kid, and I am part of the 0.6%.

But Michael you missed the point, by a wide margin. The people who vote for the GOP still have not grown up, that is why they remind me of small minded children.

No, your point was well understood and rather sad. Glad you moved on from your difficult childhood.

This is not an easy or enthusiastic vote for me. I campaigned hard for Scott in the winter of 2009-10, and have been disappointed that he so often votes with the Democrats.

BUT, Warren is a lifetime left-wing liar, hypocrite, and fraud. She would quickly become the Senate version of Barney Frank or Nancy Pelosi.

As an Obama handmaiden, the thought of her casting votes on national defense, on intelligence matters, on judges and ambassadors – is frightening!

Amen Iron Mike!!!