Autopsy On State GOP: Republicans Failed To Learn The Lessons Of Scott Brown’s Victory

The wipeout of Republican candidates in Massachusetts was discouraging. But it’s also discouraging to read and hear defeatist comments from Republicans who condemn the voters as ignorant and blame all losses on an invincible Democratic turn-out “machine.”

My thesis is very different.

I believe that many of our state GOP candidates, consultants and campaign operatives did not draw the right lessons from Scott Brown’s Senate victory. Yes, his victory came out of a “perfect storm.” He was the right man in the right place at the right time with the right opponent. But his winning formula was still applicable for many Republican challenger candidates in this climate.

What was the winning formula for Brown that other GOP candidates failed to emulate?

INDEPENDENT. Brown emphasized in speeches and ads that he was an independent guy. He didn’t pretend he wasn’t a Republican, but he stressed that he was independent-minded and would try to represent the people in that spirit. Fifty-two percent of the state’s electorate is unenrolled. Yet some GOP candidates this election season ran as blatant partisans. For example, the night of his primary victory when he was delivering a speech televised widely, state Rep. Jeff Perry, running for Congress in the 10th district, excoriated the entire Democratic Party, saying it rejected the Constitution. How does that appeal to conservative Democrats and undecided independents? Despite winning, Perry sounded threatening. Brown never did that; he sounded conciliatory instead. For example, he stressed that he wanted to go to Washington and work in a bipartisan way to start all over on health care reform.

INTEGRITY. Brown came across as an honest guy who bluntly and candidly explained his positions on the issues. Even people who didn’t agree with some of those positions sensed that he was being genuine and they respected that. Some GOP candidates running this time had their integrity questioned because of past mistakes. Now, everyone is “flawed” and opponents naturally try to make every past mistake into a scandal. But the GOP paid a huge price for its leaders going along with former Gov. Mitt Romney in backing Perry in a primary when public records showed that he was complicit in a cover-up of an illegal strip search of two young teenage girls, as well as other scandals, like advertising a college degree from a diploma mill. Charlie Baker lost any hope for momentum when he went to a Perry rally right after the victim of a strip search went public against Perry. Voters want leaders to be trustworthy, above all else.

MODERATE CONSERVATIVE. Brown emphasized he was conservative on three major issues in that election — ObamaCare, trying terrorists in civilian courts and reckless spending. But he also neutralized some social issues with moderate positions. Now I’m not saying candidates should take positions they don’t believe in. I don’t think there’s a magic Weld/Cellucci/Malone/Romney/Brown ideological composite that always works in this state. But this ain’t Texas. Some GOP candidates ran as conservative-conservatives — like Bill Hudak, challenging Rep. John Tierney in the 6th, who couldn’t adequately explain why he once had a yard sign depicting President Obama as Osama bin Laden and why he earlier sounded like a birther. That’s not how Brown won 52 percent of the vote. Sean Bielat was most like Brown ideologically — conservative on most issues, but not a rigid ideologue. That’s why he kept Rep. Barney Frank under 55 percent of the vote in an overwhelmingly liberal Democratic district. If he had run in the 3rd, 5th or 6th districts, he would have won.

POPULIST. Brown didn’t just drive his own truck and wear a barn jacket, he campaigned like a populist in many ways. His TV ads had a homemade feel even though they were smartly professional. He was accessible and engaging. Supporters responded to his populist flair by making their own signs for him and making calls on their own. That was the opposite of Baker’s corporate campaign. Baker’s handlers kept him busy with fundraising, speaking to business groups, insulated from people who might be hostile. That kept him from learning how to talk in a non-bureaucrat way, and it reinforced his image as a CEO type, as someone who didn’t relate to people outside of corporate boardrooms.

CREATIVE. Brown knew that as an underdog, he had to take risks. So he did his TV spot with the footage of President Kennedy endorsing a tax cut. That helped launch him. Where was that creativity with Baker’s advertising? His ads were boring and bloodless. He had a TV spot that seemed like it would introduce his wife sitting next to him, only to crop her out of the picture. Where was the imagination, or even common sense, for that matter? And why didn’t the ad-makers for state auditor candidate Mary Z. Connaughton do something clever and memorable with her middle initial, Z — giving a boring auditor some zzzzip with a Zorro kind of signature?

CONFIDENCE. Brown realized, as an underdog, that he should risk interviews with hostile media. It turns out, even ardent liberals in the media usually treated him fairly and with respect. He understood he needed the free publicity. More than that, he realized that even controversy was good for him because it helped focus more attention on his issues. By contrast, some Republican candidates seemed afraid of the media. They wouldn’t return calls to some reporters. Yes, there’s some liberal bias, but if you believe in your issue positions, you should be daring and welcome debate. That’s why, by the end of Brown’s campaign, radio talk shows were like infomercials for him — with hosts and callers singing his praises. There was electricity among Republicans. By contrast, with Baker there was static electricity.

EXPERIENCE. Brown had one advantage that some GOP candidates didn’t. He was a seasoned campaigner, an experienced state legislator. As much as we might disdain “career politicians,” it helps to have campaigned before — learning what works and what doesn’t. Baker had been a selectman, but that hardly prepared him for the grueling statewide campaign he had to endure. Nonetheless, his handlers made a huge mistake in the early phase trying to keep him insulated, instead of learning how to talk with non-execs. Hopefully in the near future, some of our newly elected state representatives will run for higher office. I’m sure they will understand the lessons from early this year with Brown, and the lessons of what happened later in the year when candidates, consultants and operatives wrongly interpreted what that special election meant.

Brown’s win didn’t prove that any Republican challenger could win in Massachusetts. But it showed that many could win if they tried to follow a similar, winning formula.