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

Get your news from a source that’s not owned and controlled by oligarchs. Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily.

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.”

They want to control the story. Our readers don’t let them.

Powerful forces are working to control the narrative, rewrite history, and keep you in the dark. That’s why the Mother Jones newsroom is fiercely independent, not backed by billionaires or bending to political whims.

But we can’t do this work without you.

Our nonprofit newsroom is funded by our readers. Each donation helps strengthen our work, so we can continue to investigate and publish, no matter what an authoritarian-minded administration wants the media to say.

Stand with us. Make a gift today.

They want to control the story. Our readers don’t let them.

Powerful forces are working to control the narrative, rewrite history, and keep you in the dark. That’s why the Mother Jones newsroom is fiercely independent, not backed by billionaires or bending to political whims.

But we can’t do this work without you.

Our nonprofit newsroom is funded by our readers. Each donation helps strengthen our work, so we can continue to investigate and publish, no matter what an authoritarian-minded administration wants the media to say.

Stand with us. Make a gift today.

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate