Senator Brown should start to rebuild his tarnished image by being the bipartisan statesman he lays claim to and resigning as soon as possible , thus allowing governor Patrick to appont Mrs. Warren so she will be the most senior of the new Senators . It is done all the time in other states .

If Senator John Kerry is appointed as Secretary of State in President Obama's second term, Scott Brown should run for that open seat should it be available and if Senator Kerry is indeed appointed to the post. I think he should also explore the possibility of running for Governor of Massachusetts in 2014 if Senator Kerry decides to stay in his current job.

Go back to handling Bank closings as a lawyer - no more public sector jobs.....

He should run ads for the next six years screaming about Warren's heritage and calling the families of asbestos death victims "actors."

He should just give it up period. The people have spoken across the country and the Democrats.What is Gail to do now?He tried getting daughter a Gig in Nashville singing that did not work neither. Look what happened in Attleboro with new State Rep seat great job Paul Heroux.

Become a political science professor.

If he wants to stay in politics he should leave the GOP flat. The Republican Party is way too far right and people around here are not religious fanatics like they are in the mid-west. He had a good run but I think his 15 minutes of fame is up. The sound you here is the GOP looking for a leader and a direction.

He should strongly consider running for governor. The only Republican name that comes up over and over again is Charlie Baker. Mr. Baker has already proved he can't win.

I could see him taking on a larger role in the MA National Guard- but I think if Kerry's seat opens up, it would be interesting to see him and Warren as coworkers!

Develop consensus-building skills and work for an organization in DC dedicated to ending Congressional gridlock. Success in that endeavor would make him a more electable candidate in the future.

I don't understand where all the hate for Brown comes from in these comments. He was the second most bipartisan Senator in the Country. He did right by this state and all he got in return was a slap in the face. He called Warren on her lies and in return she bashed him. She used the Massachusetts Democrat machine and money to take him down. I would love to see Brown as our Governor but I wouldn't blame him one bit if he walked away from all the people that disrespected him yesterday.

lowertaxes - Sorry, you've been drinkin" the Brown kool-aid.............

Based upon the racist tenor of the campaign Senator Brown ran against Senator-elect Warren, he should offer her and the people of the Commonwealth a public apology. Then he should enjoy his well-earned retirement.

Someone asked why there is so much hate here. I don't hate the guy but I know his record and what he thinks is important. I think he should stay out of public service. I support environmental issues through sites like NRDC and The Sierra Club. The responses I got from Scott Brown to my letters were clear that he would "consider my views" on the issues, but if one followed his reasoning in his letters, one would find him in favor of continuing our use of fossil fuels by expanding domestic production of it. He was not a strong supporter of renewable energy resources and failed to see the urgency of transitioning to them. We need jobs ... and renewable resources offers that with the added benefit of a cleaner environment. Kerry has a superior record on environmental issues and Warren will enhance that in the Senate.

As it turned out, honorable and well qualified candidates Scott Brown, Mitt Romney, Sean Bilat, and Dan Murphy had absolutley no chance of winning in Massachusetts for one simple reason- the did not have (D) after their name. Senator Brown is as much a centrist as anyone could want, but apparently that mattered little to so many lock-step voters. How else does anyone explain Congressman Tierney getting re-elected even though his wife is a convicted fellon who lined that family's pockets with huge sums of cash?
The most unfortunate outcome of Tuesday's elections is that it will be some time before any decent Republican runs for public office in this state.

He should just go away. He was part of the Tea Party movement that has almost been forgotten. Ask Bieleat what happened. He was the odd man out. Scott Brown was at the right place at the right time and made NO difference for anyone except for the people who put him in office.

Keep up the good work Scott Brown. Some of us appreciate it. As to what your plans should be going forward, how about continue to do what you love to do. Play basketball, go for a run and take your bike rides.

Run for John Kerry's seat when he becomes secretary of state.

The simple fact is that the Republican Party appeals to an ever narrowing demographic and is in peril of joining the dinosaurs. Don't blame the Democrats.

We'll see in 4 years if everyone is happy with the Gvm't they have.

Scott can run for John Kerry's seat and this time get the NRA supporters to come back from his 2010 bid. Maybe between the NRA walking door to door and the paid sign holders from this past campaign, he can actually put up a ground game. Oh, also, note to Scott : ditch Fehrnstrom, that one is dead weight at best.

He should run for President in 2016. The Republicans will need someone to put out front and Scott is a good looking underwear model. He can run a nasty campaign against Hillary Clinton and every female and Spanish person in America will not vote for him again.

it is sad because he tried to be bipartisan which I think as Americans we all want. We want congress and senate to work together to get this nation back on its feet. Forget all the special interest groups. He voted what he thought was right as he was elected to do. Scott did just that and look where it got him.

If Scott was so great, why did he vote against every bill that would help the middle class worker? Job bills, unemployment benefits, how could he say he was for the middle class? He should head to Hollywood because he is a great actor!

All decent people including Scott Brown should get away from politics. Let the liberals in this country get what they want, endless entitlements and spending until we hit bankrupcy. At that point maybe reason and accountability will return to all Americans and this country will become great again.

Scott, to survive politically, HAS to become a Democrat!
and... I hated his lies about the asbestos family victims being actors!
Pretty LOW, even for a MA Republican!

I called Browns office to offer my opinion on an issue, to offer my support, and was treated very poorly by his staff. The staff member was abusive and derisive. It was quite shocking, actually. I would never support someone whose staff is allowed to act that way, even if I liked their politics.

When you elect people for a local post for national reasons, your eventually going to regret it... You should be voting for the person who can do the very best job, not the one who gives x vote to a majority in a national scene. Furthermore, its pretty obvious Scott is bi-partisan from his record and the simple fact he is a Republican in MA. He absolutely must be moderate or he never would have won the first time. He did not vote supporting the GOP everytime. How often do you think Elizabeth will break ranks? I'm betting never....

Scott Brown won in the 2010 special election, not because he was moderate (he isn't), but because (1) It was a special election, which has a small voter turnout. (2) Coakley ran a poor campaign.

Regarding Senator Brown's voting record, his supporters need to take a close look at that record. What they will find is that when he took a "moderate" vote, it did not decide an issue. The Republican leadership in the Senate understood that to be re-elected, he had to APPEAR moderate.

Perspective in a note in Wall Street Journal:
Democrat Elizabeth Warren unseated Republican Sen. Scott Brown and is a frontrunner to take a seat on the Senate Banking Committee.
Until 2008, Ms. Warren was a little-known, wonkish professor at Harvard who studied the economics of bankruptcy. But her appointment as a special Senate watchdog for the bank bailouts, her clashes with administration officials and the embrace of her Consumer Financial Protection Bureau catapulted her into the political limelight.
Mr. Brown, by contrast, was criticized for stalling and weakening key parts of the regulatory overhaul of Wall Street. It was an abrupt turnabout for a rising star in the party whose victory in a special election in early 2010 was a harbinger of the Republican surge to take the House later that year.
Now, in a nightmare scenario for Wall Street CEOs, Ms. Warren is a frontrunner to take a seat on the Senate Banking Committee.

Governor. People vote their pocketbook for Governor more so then Senate. Patrick is a lame duck losing interest. Health care expected to soar as percentage of state budget . Control of senate and supreme court not an issue.

Elizabeth warren can't fill Scott Browns shoes. She will do what ever is told to her by Obama and not think about what it means to business

Today is Nov 21, the election was over 2 weeks ago. We got what we got, time to move on. Whether you like the results or not, our govt still is better than what is in 2nd place. We're divided, it's time we, at least, try to heal things.
I'm not one in favor of the results, but, lets try to get together, stop the bickering. I'm going to try (won't be easy). I'm meeting with my State Rep (who I didn't vote for) this weekend to express some concerns I have regarding the next couple of years. Although I really don't expect much, I will be civil. One can't hope that he will listen if I'm not. Ranting & raving will get nowhere. Maybe, just maybe, one of my concerns will be addressed come January.
If we keep bickering until the next election, we will be pretty ornery and dysfunctional, I don't want to live that way. We all think we're correct on things. The real solution may be sitting down w/opponents and finding a compromise where the best of all sides is the correct solution. Digging one's heals in, not budging, isn't the solution. BOTH parties are guilty of this, not just one of them. Our leaders must be willing to swallow some "ideolgy", it's up to US to force them to. Call, meet with them. State your feelings. If we don't, they will do as they please. They work for us, not the other way around. I'm doing what I think is the correct process. It's not going to be easy, but, I have to try. Time will tell.

@Richard--Elizabeth could never please you no matter how she voted. She has not yet been sworn in and you are condemning her a priori. As for that socialist stuff, get real. I worked hard all of my life and don't mind at all helping people less fortunate than I. How can you subscribe to such a prejudiced, selfish, across-the-board judgmental point of view. Have a nice Thanksgiving, eat a lot and don't worry about the people going hungry and doing without.

Yeah ok - just wait until the government gets into our 401k - pensions etc to help dennis less fortunate

We all I hope help the less fortunate but it should be up to the individual not the government

Regulating Wall Street as well as small, medium and large business is preventing businesses their chance to grow, expand, and create jobs and put people back to work. Instead, more regulation and more business taxes are leading to a stagnant or an increase in the unemployment rate. Just saying....

I do believe Wall Street should be regulated as well as Frank - Dodd should have been - do you remember what they did?

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/sandy-ravaged-new-jersey-families-face-6933-tax-hike-fiscal-cliff-stalemate

Wall Street has plenty of regulations in place, Wall Street doesn't need more. Sarbanes-Oxley is an example of an effective regulation that has helped to prevent another Enron and cook the books scandal.

Regarding your CNS fake "news" fundraiser add--Get out of the echo chamber and into the real world.

@Richard: So you equate the regulation of Wall Street with all other regulations of businesses of various sizes? That appears simplistic. Why do you think there ae such regulations at all? Just asking.

Has anyone noticed the "CAP & GOWN PHOTO" is gone?

@Richard---First, Republicans in Congress have made it a priority to strangle regulation of Wall Street by defunding regulatory authorities--a good reason to oppose electing Republicans. Second, the argument that enforcing regulations in place should somehow preclude additional regulations is about as logical as saying that the police are too busy for us to pass any more criminal laws.

Dennis,
Overregulation such as what the Democrats advocate for will ruin the economy. Too much government control over Wall Street is bad. In my opinion, the government should never have stepped in and bailed out the banks. There is an economic theory that suggest that government's role is to enact monetary policy and then get out of the way and let the market do the rest which is to correct itself. Telling Goldman-Sachs what type of return on investment to pursue, or that they can't become the biggest bank in the world is an example of penalizing companies because they grow and become successful. With overregulation, the government is punishing companies and Wall Street because of their success, what this philosiphy suggests is that overregulation will hurt growth, and the chances of job creation.

Spoken like a true democrat @ Dennis Naughton. Always blaming the Republicans. Defunding of the left liberal leaning ideas works, then so be it. Learn to live within your own means, and pay for your liberal socialist ideas, with your own money. You haven't paid back the nearly $6 Trillion in new Obama debt in the past 4 years. And since elected for a 2nd term in office, the projected figures of additional Obama debt are expected to top over $20 Trillion in national debt figures.

That is exactly why the smart Republicans are defunding your ridiculous ideas and idealogy.

@Richard---I expect we will not be likely to agree on the role of government as a regulator. Your views appear to have their basis in the theoretical realm. My own derive from a more historical perspective. The excesses that led to the Great Depression and more recently, the Great Recession, have their genesis in the excessive application of laissez-faire. The mythical unseen hand of the market that is supposed to bring balance does not exist, and such quasi-religious beliefs have no place.

It's a contest between Naughton, Darcey, Barksdale, and Major as to who makes the least sense. It continues to be "a horse race" . . . . and their favorite right now is ol'
Horse Face Kerry. They all remind me of the other end of a horse.

LOL Alert! In breaking news on the Foxborough Patch Scott Brown says he won't run for Senate. LOL! John Kerry succeeds Hillary Clinton as US Secretary of State--two of the best secretaries of state in US HIstory. Trivia question: Who was the last Secretary of State from Massachusetts?

Yes Dennis the family of the Benghazzi victims might beg to differ, show your facts on that statement

@Emcee: When one revels in his ingnorance of history why should anyone take seriously anything he expresses about the present? It's fair to assume it has no basis other than personal prejudice.

Scott Brown should run for Governor, once Mini-Me Patrick high tails it out of town with all his scandals nipping at his heels.
But first, to be elected he must become a fake Indian like Lieawatha. That is the only way a Republican can make it in Moonbatville.

Deval Patrick just shoved taxes upon everyone...his last hoorah in politics here in Mass...anyone who'd vote for him after what he's done..literally killing off the middle class...deserves what they get

Dennis the state run media is not real news media my comrade - anybody who likes the way this country the direction this country is headed needs their head examined. Barry is not my father's democrat of anybody else democrat .

@Telling: Suggest your change your gutless disguise name to SourGrapes. LOL!

Dj what is your point? What does Warren's background bring to the table? And more importantly what does a junior senator from Chicago bring yo the table ? Scratch the second question - I already know the answer

@Telling: and your comments are more understandable in the context of your self-explained genetic inheritance.