Sen. Scott Brown and challenger Elizabeth Warren met for their third debate on Wednesday night in Springfield, moderated by Jim Madigan.
Possibly Brown's biggest moment of the debate was when he cornered Warren over the issue of the rising costs of higher education. Warren, a professor at Harvard University, noted that Brown voted against a bill that sought to keep student loan interests low, because it would have closed a loophole for millionaires.
But Brown came back by saying the reason the costs of higher education are skyrocketing are because of administrative costs, like Warren's salary and benefits at Harvard.
"Professor Warren makes about $350,000 to teach one course," he said. "She got a zero interest loan from Harvard and gets free housing and other perks."
Another big moment in the debate was when the two candidates were asked about what they could do to help the middle class.
Warren started by saying the middle class has been "hammered" by an "army of lobbyists."
"When you talk about hammering the middle class, I suggest you put down the hammer beacuse it's your regulations and your policities that are hurting U.S. families," Brown said, calling Warren a "hired gun" who earned thousands of dollars for representing large companies in court.
Warren, without missing a beat, said she was glad Brown brought up regulations.
"I went to Washington to fight for a new consumer agency to fight to make sure people didn't get cheated on their mortgages, credit cards and student loans," she said. "And that baby agency has already returned more than half a billion dollars to consumers who have been cheated, and I'll continue to fight for that."
Warren had her biggest moment of the debate during a question about how each would stand up to protect women's issues. Warren said Brown's record showed that he's had exactly one chance to vote for equal pay for equal work and for health insurance coverage of birth control, and voted against them each time.
"Those are bad votes for women," she said. "The women of Massachusetts need a senator they can count on, not some of the time, but all of the time."
Did you watch the debate? Who do you think won? Tell us in the comments.
Ryan Seavey
11:19 pm on Wednesday, October 10, 2012
Your not gonna find out who won by reading the comments, your just gonna get everybody's over inflated opinions
Andrea Dunne Adrian
12:15 pm on Thursday, October 11, 2012
So funny and so true. Thanks for the honesty, it's very refreshing!
Colin Phoenix
11:26 pm on Wednesday, October 10, 2012
Warren won it for me. I am an independent un-enrolled Massachusetts voter who voted for Brown. I liked him in 2010 better than Coakley because he seemed more engaged and he promised to be an independent voice for Mass. However, from what I am hearing now Brown is just another Republican. He cares more about giving tax breaks to the wealthy then he does about helping people in Massachusetts. I think Warren will fight for struggling families. I wasn't too sure about her at first but now that I've seen her three times I feel that I can trust her. I think she won this debate and she definitely won my vote.
Rob Smith
11:34 pm on Wednesday, October 10, 2012
Stick with Brown, as an Independent, you get an Independent voice in Scott Brown.
With Warren you get 100% Liberal Democrat!
Pat Barden
11:35 pm on Wednesday, October 10, 2012
I think Warren scored more points than Brown. Brown always appears like he's going to eat somebody or hurl something at his opponent. His hatred for Warren is so evident, and he can't stand the fact that she teaches at Harvard. I think she's a better speaker than brown, too, because she can keep her emotions in check. His pompous attitude gets the best of him sometimes.
Colin Phoenix
1:00 am on Thursday, October 11, 2012
I don't think so anymore, Rob. I read that even though Brown claims to vote 50% with each party that number includes his votes for democratic party supported amendments to bills-amendments that he knew would not get passed. Seems a bit dishonest to include those votes and when you take them out his record is more like 74% Republican 26% Democrat. That includes votes against the president's Jobs Bill and The Dream Act. It just seems like he will always vote with Big Business Republicans on the important issues and I don't want Republicans to run both the House and the Senate. Maybe if John Kerry is selected as the next Secretary of State then I might give Brown another look if he runs again but I am pretty sure I am going with Warren this time.
window00
2:47 am on Thursday, October 11, 2012
Brown's most vomit-inducing moment was in his rebuttal to Warren's response about the CPFB -- after she said she set up the agency, Brown bragged that he was the deciding vote. Really? Out of 3 Republican 'yea' votes in a tally of 60-39, which one was he? Just remember, Elizabeth Warren set up the CPFB, but look at him, he voted for it. He wins a goldfish.
Scott Brown is great at self-promotion, if you haven't noticed the times he's patted himself on the back during the debates. The unfortunate thing is, he doesn't realize how obnoxious and frat-boy it makes him sound.
Patty
10:00 am on Thursday, October 11, 2012
I totally agree with you window00.
I will go on to say that I can’t stand to look at him. I am still angry that he let his ambition get in the way of assisting law enforcement take in the predator that molested him. By doing this he put children at risk and sacrificed them for his ambition!
He even had a nerve writing a book about it and making money. I wonder if he kept the profits or donated them to help the victims of that pedophile.
We need to end this plutocracy and get back to a democracy! Warren 2012
Ben Jackson
10:15 am on Thursday, October 11, 2012
Patty,
I'm very much a Warren supporter, and think Scott Brown deserves to lose based on his record.
I do think, however, his reaction to childhood sexual abuse should be off the table. Each individual has a different reaction to abuse, and to judge another for theirs is simply beyond the pale.
There's plenty of fodder in his shoddy record, and no need to resort to the deeply personal attacks that Brown and his ilk like to employ.
Chris L.
10:54 am on Thursday, October 11, 2012
"... that Brown and his ilk like to employ."
Ben, Ben, Ben, you were almost a whole sentence away from having a post that didn't drip with the derisive, falsely smug tone of the Left.
You could have just ended your statement with condemning the attacks on something that happened to Brown as a child.
And Patty, shame on you! Is the book about HIS life? Regardless of your opinion of what he did, or how he handled it...you have the nerve to criticize a victim of child sexual abuse? Remove Scott's name, remove his political status from it. Heck, even make the victim a woman.....
would you still be as upset? Take a look in the mirror.
Dave Lenane
5:28 am on Thursday, October 11, 2012
Didn't watch...this race is over for me! Brown hands down! Loved Howie Carr's column this morning!
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/columnists/view.bg?articleid=1061166810
Ben Jackson
9:26 am on Thursday, October 11, 2012
So you didn't watch, but Brown won hands down?
That makes sense.
Dave Lenane
12:58 pm on Thursday, October 11, 2012
Ben...please explain to me where I said Brown won the debate. Here's another problem with Democrats. They just can't read! I will now explain this to you so you might comprehend. I said the race is over for me...Brown hands down! Mr. Brown has my vote. I didn't need to watch. Next time before you insult someone, perhaps you should stop...take a second...and ask someone who can read to help you. Hooked on Phonics is out there Ben. It's not that expensive! Does that make sense???
Ben Jackson
1:00 pm on Friday, October 12, 2012
Well, Dave - thanks for your insightful and though-provoking contribution to the discussion.
Which, by the way, since you seem to be so hot on, you know, reading everything - was about who won the deabte. So, one might be forgiven for presuming YOU had read the topic and were responding to the topic when you said "Brown, hands down."
I'll be sure not to presume you've read the topic and are responding in kind in the future. It was, to be sure, silly of me to have expected so much of you.
Dave Lenane
1:08 pm on Friday, October 12, 2012
Well Ben....Seeing as how you always stick to topic...that means a lot! Hates to be called out on his failings. And always trying to get the last word in...especially when they know they are wrong!
Jim O'Connor
8:48 am on Thursday, October 11, 2012
The idea that Scott Brown is running as an Independent false. He is a Republican and has served as a Republican in the Massachusetts Legislature, and recently the U.S. Senate, for many years.
Jack Mahoney
9:18 am on Thursday, October 11, 2012
Brown is in the pocket of Big Business and he knows it!!!!
Jim Buba
1:02 pm on Thursday, October 11, 2012
Oh, so Warren in the pocket of Big Government -AND- Big Business is a two fer
Ben Jackson
9:26 am on Thursday, October 11, 2012
Elizabeth Warren was the clear victor.
Senator Brown resorts to half-truths at best to paint himself as "bipartisan," when he is clearly as Republican as the next guy. He does this simply to have a chance to win in Massachusetts. From Boston.com:
"A Congressional Quarterly analysis found that Brown voted with the Republican leadership 54 percent of the time. But that calculation included dozens of amendments that had no chance of passing.
As the Globe reported in May, on the most important, news-generating votes since he arrived in office in early 2010, Brown joined Republican leaders 76 percent of the time, according to an analysis by Project Vote Smart, a nonpartisan organization.
But Brown repeatedly points to the Congressional Quarterly study to assert that he is a truly bipartisan senator; Democrats meanwhile hold up the Vote Smart study to assert that, on matters of consequence, he is a more reliable Republican vote."
As a vet, I was disgusted by his shameless repeated discussion of his military status to try to gain votes.
Robin O'Neil
9:28 am on Thursday, October 11, 2012
Contact: Mathew Helman, Communications Director
E-mail: mathew@progressmass.org, Cell: 617-821-8004
BOSTON - A new study of Republican Scott Brown's voting record in the U.S. Senate by ProgressMass reveals that, when Brown had the opportunity to oppose Republican obstruction in the U.S. Senate and demonstrate bipartisan leadership, he voted overwhelmingly with his Republican colleagues. This finding runs directly counter to Republican Scott Brown's recent claims of bipartisanship. Brown voted with his Republican colleagues at a rate of over 75% (over 93% prior to Elizabeth Warren's entry into the Senate race) to block legislation that had the support of 50 or more Senators, measures that would have passed the U.S. Senate on a so-called "up-or-down vote," according to the ProgressMass review of Brown's Senate record.
>>the notable number here is 93% that he voted with Republicans prior to any known competition.. (see the entire article) >>My vote goes to ELIZABETH WARREN!
Chris L.
9:31 am on Thursday, October 11, 2012
Its tough to see someone living such a cushy life for a part time job and tell us she's on our side in the same breath.
Ben Jackson
9:36 am on Thursday, October 11, 2012
That's simply disingenuous. By that argument, nobody wealthy can act on behalf of anybody not wealthy - which is absolute baloney, and you know it.
Chris L.
10:21 am on Thursday, October 11, 2012
Seriously....so her "championing" of lower college education doesn't come off as a tad bit disingenuous?
Her comments would be met with less of a skeptical eye if perhaps she taught at Bay State CC for $50K/yr, watching single moms scrape what they can to get an AS.
Instead, she teaches ONE class for $350K, gets an interest-free loan and housing from Hahvuhd, a school where many kids' daddies and mummies donate a few million to the endowment so that their idiot kid can get in, and she expects us to believe she feels our pain?
At what point did Ms. Warren become detached from the realities of the middle class? And when did she decide she wanted to revisit them?
Jim O'Connor
9:41 am on Thursday, October 11, 2012
Did Brown really claim to be the Ranking Member of the Armed Services Committee? If so, this would be a false claim (and would come as news to John McCain). Brown serves as Ranking Member of one of the sub-committees. A far cry from Ranking Member of the main committee.
Also, Brown (like Sean Bielat and Mitt Romney) seems to support elimination of the mortgage interest deduction. Some friend of the middle class..
Patty
10:04 am on Thursday, October 11, 2012
Bravo Jim O'Connor!
Patty
11:02 am on Thursday, October 11, 2012
Ben Jackson, this is in regards for your response to my comment.
I am a victim and I can and will judge him. I will also bring that up everytime I can for other victims. In my view, If he was too much of a coward or ambitious at this stage in his life to divulge that information to law enforcement in order to help other and future victims, then he should have not written the book. For me, it speaks volumes about his character.
It takes a lot of courage to come forward with this information, I personally know this. It also takes a lot of courage to do what’s right for the citizens of Massachusetts and this country and I don’t see that he has that courage.
Warren 2012 For all women and children, all the time!
Chris L.
11:14 am on Thursday, October 11, 2012
The book was about his life as a whole, not just the particular incident. I think it served as a boost to other victims out there. It shows that they can rise above it and continue to be productive members of society. They don't have to remain victims their entire lives.
As a victim, you of all people should know that everyone handles it differently. So, to compare, Scott Brown told a story of sexual abuse after he was already established in his career and a US Senator. His story was about something that ACTUALLY HAPPENED TO HIM.
Liz Warren "self-identified" as something because of "family lore" well before she was an attorney or a Harvard professor, or the conveniently-timed owner of a hybrid SUV, or a candidate for Senate.
Whose story was for personal gain?
Betsy boggia
1:38 pm on Friday, October 12, 2012
Patty-as a victim also I could not agree more. He wasn't too traumatized to share this incident publicly in a book to be read by millions, but is too traumatized to make a private phone call to the DA"s office and share information about his abuser that might potentially protect and help others? It makes no sense to me and is a lapse to big to overlook.
Patty
11:41 am on Thursday, October 11, 2012
Chris L.
I think it was Browns story for personal gain. He did handle it differently by trying to garner sympathy for his molestation but not having the courage to turn in the molester.
I stand corrected, Brown should have left the molestation part out of the book because it made him look like a coward or too ambitious to let the work, emotions, and time involved in the capture of a molester get in his way, in my view.
You don’t have to tell me that victims handle molestation differently. I think it takes a strong person with courage to be in public office and I think Brown still needs to work on that.
Warren 2012 – For all women and children all the time!
Chris L.
11:45 am on Thursday, October 11, 2012
wait....so you're criticizing Brown for not putting in the work to catch a molestor. This isn't DateLine...its real life!!
Also, if that truly is Warren's Campaign Slogan(which I know its really not), I would certainly not vote for her. Does she only stand for women and children? what about men?
Patty
11:53 am on Thursday, October 11, 2012
Your arguments are breaking down Chris L.
Jim O'Connor
12:56 pm on Thursday, October 11, 2012
Chris L, Warren teaches at Harvard Law School. What is the basis for your argument that her salary at Harvard Law School has anything to do with undergraduate tuitions? Are you aware of anyone who was admiited to Harvard College for undergraduate studies, but couldn't attend due to lack of financial resources?
Chris L.
12:58 pm on Thursday, October 11, 2012
Harvard is a brand. An overpriced brand. She is as complicit in the inflation of a college education as a star athlete is for the proliferation of $200 sneakers that get made for pennies on the dollar in Asia and then cause American youth to get robbed and/or murdered for them.
Dave Lenane
1:03 pm on Thursday, October 11, 2012
Thank God Brown is winning....
Dave Lenane
1:05 pm on Thursday, October 11, 2012
Did Warren celebrate Indigenous Peoples Day on Monday????
J. Michael
1:06 pm on Thursday, October 11, 2012
warren looked stupid arguing high cost of education yet makes $350K annually for teaching 1 class and interest free loans. Meanwhile her students have to go into MASSIVE debt to take her class- doesn't matter what the interest rate is as they graduate with huge loans. How is that looking out for young people?
Jim Buba
1:09 pm on Thursday, October 11, 2012
I can't believe Warren's claim to have attended for $50 and believe she meant it was so cheap because of all the subsidies to higher Ed. Given her age and experience; age - lots, experience - not zero at least, she would have attended long before any subsidies were given for tuition reduction.
Then the fee itself. I paid $200/semester for Salem State College a few years before she was potty trained. Subsidies were generally reserved for qualified students with hardship, military and ex-military. They also came with strings attached for the military in terms of extra enlistment term per course.
Regardless, Warren did not pay only $50 and if she did, it was the activity fee charged for slinging BS as she would never qualify for any assistance by any formula on any planet.
J. Michael
1:09 pm on Thursday, October 11, 2012
You liberals in Taxxachusetts kill me- good luck when Obama and his band of ultra left liberals like Warren fully implement all the new government spending and entitlements they want and we are borrowing .80 on the dollar. This agenda can't just come from a 5% tax increase on the 1%- everyone knows this if they have a brain. There agenda will hit everyone hard with higher taxes and the middle class the most. Then we will see how many of you love Elizabeth Warren- unbelievable.....
Ed Bertorelli
1:23 pm on Thursday, October 11, 2012
Democracy at work is Mass
thought you might like to see this video.
Union workers being fined for not supporting Warren.
https://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/are-unions-fining-members-who-dont-support-warren_654203.html
Jim O'Connor
1:30 pm on Thursday, October 11, 2012
J. Michael, How do you know that Warren's students-at Harvard Law School- have to go into massive debt to take her class? Are you claiming that graduates of Harvard Law School are stuggling under the weight of their Harvard Law School debt? Really?
Chris L.
1:34 pm on Thursday, October 11, 2012
Taken directly from Harvard Law's website:
2012-2013 Expenses:
Tuition: $49,950
Estimated living expenses (standard single student budget including room, board, books, travel and personal ): $25,850
That's right....$75G/year. So when you add up whatever they paid for their undergrad degree with their postgrad work, you're easily approaching $500K.
No wonder Lizzie had to take a few odd jobs against the little guy in court......
PJT
1:35 pm on Thursday, October 11, 2012
Boston University has a higher tuition than Harvard. In fact, Harvard does not even come close to the top 10 in tuition for undergrad. Harvard accepts a great many need based students.
Using the arguments that Warren cannot represent Massachusetts because she is reaping the benefits of her hard work and success is funny considering how that is supposed to be Romney's strength
Patty
1:44 pm on Thursday, October 11, 2012
Good one! PJT
Dave Lenane
3:27 pm on Thursday, October 11, 2012
Hey PJT...care to guess where Hahvard ranks in receiving Federal Grant money???? No wonder they want to get Lieawatha to the Senate. Don't want to turn that faucet off now do we???
Joe Kane
4:25 pm on Thursday, October 11, 2012
The only thing that Elizabeth Warren won this night was the "Buzz Word Bingo" contest! As usual, lots of words that have been shoved into her head by handlers and no facts behind them. She constantly tried to tie Brown to votes that were brought up in the Senate by Harry Reid that did not deal with only the core issue, but had other partisan items thrown in so that when Brown and other Republicans voted against them, the votes could be used against them in their election races. And many of you that don't follow the news close enough have fallen for it.
Carlos
5:23 pm on Thursday, October 11, 2012
Well said Joe, democrats use class warfare, they try to scare the average person by saying, police, teachers and firemen will be laid off, women won't get the medical care they need. How many times did Warren parrot, millionaires, billionaires, and big oil, like they are some evil entities, but the loony MA. sheep eat it up.
Linda Worthy
5:59 pm on Thursday, October 11, 2012
"Warren, a Democrat, leads Brown, a Republican, 51 percent to 45 percent, according to the survey by Public Policy Polling. Warren has led Brown in six of the last nine public polls taken in the race. 52 percent of Massachusetts voters want Democrats in control of the Senate, compared to 35 percent who want to see the GOP in the majority. About 49 percent of voters have a favorable opinion of Brown, compared with 42 percent who hold an unfavorable opinion, a drop from the firm’s last poll in mid-September that found the senator with a 55 percent to 35 percent favorability rating. About 56 percent of voters support the assisted suicide referendum, compared with 30 percent who oppose the measure. Voters back the medical marijuana question by 57 percent to 31 percent. The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points."
http://bostonglobe.com/metro/2012/10/11/elizabeth-warren-leads-scott-brown-points-new-poll/52WwAuuKvFbLtjEHRf9cGO/story.html
Chris L.
6:04 pm on Thursday, October 11, 2012
and 2 days ago he was in the lead. polls are useless. because tomorrow Brown will be back up by 4 points, depending on who you ask. I bet he's leading the Herald's poll...
Josh
7:11 pm on Thursday, October 11, 2012
Wasn't Martha Coakley leading Brown by eleven points 5 days before their election, according to the Boston Globe Democrat