Scott Brown launches New Hampshire Senate bid
Scott Brown, a former U.S. ambassador to New Zealand and Samoa who also served in the Senate representing Massachusetts, is launching a bid to challenge Rep. Chris Pappas (D-N.H.) for retiring Sen. Jeanne Shaheen's (D-N.H.) seat next year.
Brown used his first ad to tout his background, praise Trump and tie Pappas to former President Biden.
'New Hampshire is an amazing place to live, work and raise a family. We've been blessed by two great governors, Chris Sununu and Kelly Ayotte, but in Washington, we haven't been represented by the right people,' Brown said in the ad. 'For four years, Chris Pappas has stood with Joe Biden as he opened the border, drove up the cost of everything and made life just simply unaffordable.'
In a post on X, Pappas responded to Brown's entry into the race projecting confidence for his campaign.
'It's official: MAGA loyalist Scott Brown just announced he's running to flip this seat red,' Pappas said. 'New Hampshire rejected him before, and we can do it again.'
Brown's entry into the race was long expected and he's the most high-profile Republican to run for Shaheen's seat. Former Gov. Chris Sununu (R) has teased the idea of a potential run, later opting against it entirely despite being a formidable challenger for the party.
Brown represented Massachusetts in the Senate between 2010 and 2013, later losing reelection to Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) in 2012.
The former ambassador to New Zealand and Samoa later vied for Shaheen's seat in 2014 but was defeated by the state's senior senator by over 3 points that fall. Shaheen insinuated that Brown was a carpetbagger, noting his previous residency outside the Granite State.
Brown is likely to run into some of the same criticism again, though an open seat could offer an easier path for the Republican this time around.
The nonpartisan election handicapper Cook Political Report rates Shaheen's seat as 'lean Democrat.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
16 minutes ago
- CNN
GOP Rep on leaked DIA report: ‘I'll take Israeli intelligence over that document any time'
Republican Rep. Carlos Gimenez tells CNN's Wolf Blitzer and Pamela Brown why he thinks Israeli Intelligence about the damage to Iran's nuclear facilities is more reliable than an assessment from the US Defense Intelligence Agency.
The Intercept
17 minutes ago
- The Intercept
War Powers Resolution From House Democratic Leaders May Not Limit Trump's War Powers
As Democrats try to push forward legislation that would block further strikes on Iran, one measure advanced by House leadership could actually strengthen the Trump administration's justification for subsequent attacks, anti-war advocates warn. House progressives on Wednesday were trying to reach a compromise with Democratic leaders that would curb further U.S. military involvement in Iran while satisfying concerns from pro-Israel members about American support for Israel's missile defense. There are three different war powers resolutions in play in Washington. In the Senate, a resolution from Tim Kaine, D-Va., appears to be on track for a vote on Friday. In the House, however, Democrats remain sharply divided between two resolutions. 'There's no upside to advancing a competing War Powers Resolution. It's not just unnecessary — it's actively counterproductive,' Cavan Kharrazian, a senior policy adviser at Demand Progress, said in a statement. 'There's still time to reconcile this on the House side, and we hope an agreement can be reached to enable a strong vote with the best possible language.' The resolutions in both chambers face long odds, thanks to near-unanimous support from the majority Republicans for President Donald Trump's strikes. Congressional Democrats are responding to Trump's strikes by pursuing a vote under the War Powers Act, the Vietnam War-era law designed to limit presidents' ability to launch military action abroad without congressional approval. Kaine's initial resolution introduced last week directs Trump to halt hostilities against Iran, while making clear that the president can still defend the U.S. from imminent attack. Kaine's resolution has drawn support from Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. It is expected to come to a voter later this week. Amid concerns from pro-Israel Democrats, Kaine said Tuesday that he was co-sponsoring an amendment to his resolution with Sens. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., and Andy Kim, D-N.J. The amendment is intended to continue to allow the U.S. to participate in Israeli missile defense. Pentagon officials said last April that the U.S. — not Israel — shot down most Iranian drones and missiles during an Iranian attack. 'This amendment would leave no doubt that Senator Kaine's resolution would ensure that President Trump has to make the case to the American people for further action against Iran without constraining our ability to help defend the Israeli people from Iranian attacks,' Kim said in a statement. While most Senate Democrats appeared to have coalesced around Kaine's resolution, House Democrats remained split on Wednesday over how to respond to Trump's strikes. Advocates last week said they were frustrated that Democratic leaders were not moving forward with a resolution as Trump publicly mulled attacking Iran. Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., teamed up with Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., to introduce a resolution. After the strikes were launched, three House Democratic committee ranking members introduced an alternative resolution that its authors claim would also force Trump to cease hostilities with Iran. The sponsors are Reps. Jim Himes of Connecticut, Adam Smith of Washington, and Gregory Meeks of New York. Anti-war advocates worry that the House leadership measure could actually wind up strengthening Trump's justification for launching further strikes on Iran. In an apparent nod to Israel, the leaders' resolution would give the president the power to 'defend the United States or an ally or partner of the United States from imminent attack.' Trump has already justified his strike on Iran as an act of 'collective self-defense of our ally, Israel,' according to a letter he sent Congress, despite the assessment of U.S intelligence agencies that Iran was not building a nuclear weapon. Critics say the House Democratic leadership resolution mirrors the language of Trump's justification far too closely. 'We think if it passes, it would be worse than not having a war powers resolution.' 'We think if it passes, it would be worse than not having a war powers resolution,' said Yasmine Taeb, the legislative and political director for the Muslim advocacy group MPower Change. 'This war powers resolution gives the impression that the president has broad authority to be able to engage in military offensive action with respect to Iran — if Israel is asking us to.' Spokespersons for Himes, Meeks, and Smith's offices did not immediately comment. Khanna has said that his resolution is intended to preserve the U.S. military's ability to participate in Israeli missile defense. Advocates said they understood there were ongoing discussions about a compromise. The two sides have ample time: A vote on the measure is not expected to come to the floor before mid- to late-July. Whether or not the two sides come to an accord, however, the push to respond to Trump's strikes could face serious pushback from Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson. Johnson said Tuesday that he thought the War Powers Act itself was unconstitutional and signaled that he may use a procedural move to prevent it from coming to the floor. The War Powers Act states that resolutions brought under its auspices must be fast-tracked to the House floor within 15 working days. Johnson, however, could try to block the resolution from receiving such a 'privileged' status — although that would likely force a vote on the procedural maneuver itself. Massie's co-sponsorship of the resolution gave it bipartisan support, but it's unclear whether he will continue to push its passage in the face of intense pressure from the White House and the ceasefire announced by Trump on Monday. Massie has said he is taking a 'wait and see' approach. As a shaky ceasefire between Israel and Iran continued to hold Wednesday morning, progressives in the House said they were pursuing a vote on their preferred resolution despite the opposition from Johnson. Khanna said at a Capitol press conference that blocking the vote with a procedural maneuver would be an 'unprecedented abrogation of congressional power.' 'The fundamental point here is that we don't know what the strikes accomplished, but we do know a lot of the harm,' Khanna said. 'It has hardened the resolve in Iran to now race towards a nuclear weapon.'
CNN
23 minutes ago
- CNN
GOP Rep on leaked DIA report: ‘I'll take Israeli intelligence over that document any time'
Republican Rep. Carlos Gimenez tells CNN's Wolf Blitzer and Pamela Brown why he thinks Israeli Intelligence about the damage to Iran's nuclear facilities is more reliable than an assessment from the US Defense Intelligence Agency.
