Scott Brown Calls Elizabeth Warren Ugly

Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.).<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/dr_television/4316554677/sizes/z/in/photostream/">Mark Sardella</a>/Flickr

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) doesn’t think anyone should have to see Elizabeth Warren naked.

At Tuesday night’s primary debate, Warren, the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination to challenge Brown, used a question about how she paid for tuition to take a jab at the freshman Senator. “I kept my clothes on,” Warren said, referring to Brown’s famed nude Cosmopolitan spread

Brown could have brushed off the attack, but instead, he decided on the worst possible course of action. According to Boston journalist Joe Battenfield, Brown said “Thank God,” in response to Warren’s jab. You can hear the audio of the comment at 3:30 here:

 

A Warren campaign spokesman declined to comment, but to state the obvious: By saying “Thank God,” Brown was implying that Warren is ugly. Brown’s comment might seem hilarious to your average bro, but elections aren’t won by bros alone. Attacking your female opponent for her looks won’t necessarily play well with women voters, and Brown can’t afford to lose much more ground than he already has: several polls have already shown Warren within striking distance of the incumbent.

Several media figures think Brown has made a serious mistake by attacking Warren’s looks. American Banker‘s Rob Blackwell has suggested this may be Brown’s “Macaca moment”—referring to when then-Sen. George Allen (R-Va.) used the word “Macaca” to address a dark-skinned employee of his opponent, James Webb. (Allen lost.) Slate‘s Dave Weigel also joked that (Brown’s previous opponent) Martha Coakley might be running Brown’s campaign, and TPM’s Josh Marshall called the comment “not smart.”

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest