In the past few days there have been leaks coming out from Washington as the Democrats prepare to protect Obama’s image, in the face of a Coakley loss, by placing the blame squarely on Coakley. The fact that Coakley began her campaign with an attitude that her win was a foregone conclusion began to campaign late with negative ads, the last thing that appeals to Massachusetts Independent Voters and made mistake after mistake, coming into the last weekend, is not lost on the populace of Massachusetts. That said, there is a bit of pride in the Bay State, and the Boston Globe, which is the only newspaper in the state to endorse Coakley, has already laid the groundwork to point the finger elsewhere – at Obama.
In an editorial published today by Jeff Jacoby, entitled “Blame Obama”, the fact that Obama’s run the administration counter to the campaign rhetoric, is used as reason enough for the Bay State voters to give Coakley the proverbial boot. Although Jacoby makes excellent points, the fact remains that Coakley is a flawed candidate, one which, given the current climate in the Bay State, will need a good deal of help from the dead, busloads of friends from Illinois, New Hampshire, Connecticut and New York, and a whole lot of shenanigans (basic corruption which Boston is infamous for), in order to pull within the currently projected 4 points of Scott Brown.
Although Democrats are calling the Bay State - they are being out-called, out door-to-doored and out-rallied by Brown Supporters - not one of them is paid, and no-one is campaigning for Brown on the public’s dime (i.e.: Obama). Speaking of the President, although scheduled to make an appearance in Massachusetts on Sunday, there has been some speculation as to whether or not the President will actually show. There are unconfirmed reports that Obama plans to hit the Bay State on Monday instead and head to Haiti on Sunday. This change in plans may have just as much to do with “appearances” (world view) as with the “appearance” of being greeted by a whole lot more Brown supporters than Coakley fans. Additionally, snow and ice are forecast for Monday, giving the President an excellent "out", just in case. Scott Brown begins a tour of the state tomorrow, shaking more hands and winning hearts and minds. A new poll by Public Policy Polling will be released Sunday night and that should, in all likelihood, remain at an approximate 5 plus point lead for Brown.
Saturday, January 16, 2010
Obama’s Trip to Massachusetts - No Hope for Coakley – Obama to Campaign on His Agenda - Desperation Sets In at Taxpayers Expense
From Springfield, Massachusetts’Republican, to Boston’s pro-Coakley, Globe, news of Barak Obama’s impending visit tomorrow has hit the airwaves of the Bay State. The resounding message from those commenting on the variety of articles and news reports does not exactly imply that his visit will be a success.
The President has made it clear through robo-calls (audio here) (Coakley is a “good Progressive”,) and advertisng released by the DCSC (video here)that Coakley is merely a side-note to the real issue: Don’t Let Scott Brown De-Rail Obama’s agenda. In other words, the message is Coakley will vote how she’s told. The negative advertising by Coakley and Company is running on every network in the Bay State, often three commercial spots at a time back to back. These are countered by Brown ads, which are a bit more uplifting. The problem with negative ad campaigns in Massachusetts is that they don’t’ work – Ask Republican Kerry Healy.
The problem with Brown (or Coakley’s problem to be more specific): he’ll vote on any issue put before him, as he has in the past, with an independence that has many diehard Republicans calling him a RINO (Republican in Name Only). Brown has managed to successfully run and win his state Senate seat, by a 20 point margin, in one of the few districts that is heavily Democrat – simply because of his independent streak. Coakley is in the last stages of her first term as Attorney General, running with Deval Patrick and Tim Cahill (who has since jumped ship to run as an Independent Candidate for Govenor) the aformention have tanked in polls.
Former President Bill Clinton made stops in Massachusetts on behalf of Coakley yesterday. Clinton, who has, in the past, seen crowds lining the streets, was treated to an enthusiastic crowd of approximately 1,000 – of note: the Brown rally taking place across the street, appeared to have a larger crowd.
Most telling: Obama’s official campaign website: Organizing for America has one blog on the Coakley subject, a special plea to get out and make calls for Coakley – you can sign in at you’re “My Barack Obama.com” site if you want to help from outside the state of Massachusetts. The blog has, as of Saturday morning, a stunning 384 responses.
How much weight does Obama carry in Massachusetts – It depends on the poll and the pollster, his popularity ranges from 60% (Suffolk University) to 44% (Public Policy Polling), being on the ground here, in the Bay State, one can safely assume it is closer to the later, based on comments made and the intense enthusiasm for Scott Brown by Democrats, let alone Independents. It remains to be seen, what type of crowds Obama will draw tomorrow, but if they should be crowds numbering under 10,000 (with Democratic activists coming from all neighboring states), then it will have been a wasted visit to the Bay State, at the taxpayers’ expense. Additionally, should Brown supporters make an appearance and counter-rally as they did when Clinton appeared, it will be an additional embarrassment for the President.
Of interest, a column in the Globe, this morning, speaking on Obama’s visit and Coakley’s shortcomings - The Globe: here tells all:
It is these articles, popping up in Massachusetts, which are bolstering those Democrats who are already campaigning for Scott Brown’s Massachusetts Senate Seat.
Finally, it has, for decades, been decided that Massachusetts somehow belongs to one political party, however, that is not the case, and with the insinuation by these ads, robocalls, and the like, that it is, will only further energizes the independent streak of all Massachusetts voters, regardless of political affiliation. Independents are already breaking for Brown 3 to 1 and should Libertarian Candidate, Kennedy’s people break for Brown, (in the last debate, Kennedy did send a message that Brown’s ideals most closely aligned with his own), that gives Brown an additional edge of 1 to 2 points.
The President has made it clear through robo-calls (audio here) (Coakley is a “good Progressive”,) and advertisng released by the DCSC (video here)that Coakley is merely a side-note to the real issue: Don’t Let Scott Brown De-Rail Obama’s agenda. In other words, the message is Coakley will vote how she’s told. The negative advertising by Coakley and Company is running on every network in the Bay State, often three commercial spots at a time back to back. These are countered by Brown ads, which are a bit more uplifting. The problem with negative ad campaigns in Massachusetts is that they don’t’ work – Ask Republican Kerry Healy.
The problem with Brown (or Coakley’s problem to be more specific): he’ll vote on any issue put before him, as he has in the past, with an independence that has many diehard Republicans calling him a RINO (Republican in Name Only). Brown has managed to successfully run and win his state Senate seat, by a 20 point margin, in one of the few districts that is heavily Democrat – simply because of his independent streak. Coakley is in the last stages of her first term as Attorney General, running with Deval Patrick and Tim Cahill (who has since jumped ship to run as an Independent Candidate for Govenor) the aformention have tanked in polls.
Former President Bill Clinton made stops in Massachusetts on behalf of Coakley yesterday. Clinton, who has, in the past, seen crowds lining the streets, was treated to an enthusiastic crowd of approximately 1,000 – of note: the Brown rally taking place across the street, appeared to have a larger crowd.
Most telling: Obama’s official campaign website: Organizing for America has one blog on the Coakley subject, a special plea to get out and make calls for Coakley – you can sign in at you’re “My Barack Obama.com” site if you want to help from outside the state of Massachusetts. The blog has, as of Saturday morning, a stunning 384 responses.
How much weight does Obama carry in Massachusetts – It depends on the poll and the pollster, his popularity ranges from 60% (Suffolk University) to 44% (Public Policy Polling), being on the ground here, in the Bay State, one can safely assume it is closer to the later, based on comments made and the intense enthusiasm for Scott Brown by Democrats, let alone Independents. It remains to be seen, what type of crowds Obama will draw tomorrow, but if they should be crowds numbering under 10,000 (with Democratic activists coming from all neighboring states), then it will have been a wasted visit to the Bay State, at the taxpayers’ expense. Additionally, should Brown supporters make an appearance and counter-rally as they did when Clinton appeared, it will be an additional embarrassment for the President.
Of interest, a column in the Globe, this morning, speaking on Obama’s visit and Coakley’s shortcomings - The Globe: here tells all:
We won’t know until Tuesday night whether bringing President Obama in to campaign was a good idea or a bad one. At first blush, though, it’s problematic. It reinforces the idea that Coakley can’t close the deal with voters by herself. And worse, it reinforces the idea that she is simply a product of a political machine.
Her response, at crunch time, is to rely on the White House and the Democratic National Committee - even as her opponent is imploring voters to vote for “me against the machine.’’
His message is resonating. Her strategy isn’t.
It is these articles, popping up in Massachusetts, which are bolstering those Democrats who are already campaigning for Scott Brown’s Massachusetts Senate Seat.
Finally, it has, for decades, been decided that Massachusetts somehow belongs to one political party, however, that is not the case, and with the insinuation by these ads, robocalls, and the like, that it is, will only further energizes the independent streak of all Massachusetts voters, regardless of political affiliation. Independents are already breaking for Brown 3 to 1 and should Libertarian Candidate, Kennedy’s people break for Brown, (in the last debate, Kennedy did send a message that Brown’s ideals most closely aligned with his own), that gives Brown an additional edge of 1 to 2 points.
Friday, January 15, 2010
Mass Senate Election Update – Scott Brown has 5 point lead over Coakley – Suffolk University/Boston Globe Poll
Image AD showing Brown and Coakely's Now Infamous Watching as Aid knocks down Reporter - image Hillbuzz.org, h/t Rocky
A newly released poll from Suffolk University shows Republican Scott Brown with a 5 point lead over Democrat Martha Coakley. The poll was released on January 14th. The poll marginals available here show some interesting statistics:
What the Suffolk Poll tells us, coming only 5 days before the special election is that a poll, skewed towards Democrats, shows Brown surging. Suggest reading the marginals and questions to get an idea of exactly how the poll was conducted and why it might lean Democrat.
This poll was taken after a barrage of negative ads by Coakley, Coakley leaning PAC’s and the Democrat Senatorial Committee began to run. Public Policy Polling suggested they may take another poll this weekend – watch to see how those stats compare with Suffolk’s. One can hazard to guess that the 5 point lead, may stay the same, or increase, as the weekend is sure to bring the negative advertising that sank Kerry Healy’s campaign. Joe Kennedy, the Libertarian candidate was factored into the last few polls and appears to be coming in at 3% of the vote that may or may not go higher as those independents break for Brown.
The last Republican elected to the Senate in Massachusetts, and also the first African American, elected was Edward Brook. The state of Massachusetts voted twice for Ronald Reagan: the first time against Jimmy Carter in 1980. Although considered a minority party in Commonwealth, the Governor’s office is most often held by a Republican – the last to hold the office was Mitt Romney.
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Mass Democrats Prepare – Two candidates eye Scott Brown’s MA Senate Seat. Coakley’s outside Aid Irks the Commonwealth Electorate. Analysis
A candidate from the Democrat Party, Peter Smulowitz, a physician from Needham, has already begun to campaign for the Massachusetts State Senate Seat that is currently held by Scott Brown. Today, the Boston Globe is reporting that Smulowitz will have competition from within his own party. State Rep. Linda Harkins, is also contemplating running for the seat.
Former front-runner for the vacant U.S. Senate Seat, Democrat Martha Coakley, has been either eclipsed or tied by Republican Scott Brown, in recent polls, and some sources suggest that the Democrat Internal polling is just as dismal. Brown, who has support by grassroots campaigning, speaks to all the citizens of the commonwealth as evidenced by the headline article in the paper that endorsed Coakley, the Globe. In an article today under Mass Senate Election 2010 entitled “Brown Pushes Far out beyond His GOP Base” a reporter for the Globe actually does a good job with a profile of Brown on the campaign trail. Brown’s fundraising has soared, with individuals contributing over 1 million dollars in a 24 hour period, while Coakley is relying on Washington Fundraisers to get up the funds to finish the campaign, using negative advertising.
It is apparent that the handwriting, if not on the wall, is in the minds of those savvy Massachusetts Democrats who eat, live and breathe for their hold over the Commonwealth, which is why, with Coakley’s popularity in serious doubt, they are prepared to go after a the 3rd term State Senators seat. This campaign has turned from an "us versus them" Political Party norm into a people of the Commonwealth versus the “machine”. With every negative ad, including the one in which Coakley’s staff misspelled “Massachusetts”, with every story about another Washington fundraiser, or help from outside sources, residents of the Bay state are standing up – it appears it is not so much about Brown or Coakley, for that matter, it is about the distaste for the sense of “entitlement” shown by one Party that feels they a)own a senate seat, and b)own the Commonwealth – Brown has become an icon for the Bay State.
Pundits and polls aside, it is a “call to arms” that has gone out to friends, relatives, and neighbors, to take back the State where the Nation was formed, it is the pride of the people of the Commonwealth that is going to make the difference in this election, regardless of political affiliation. Coakley has not lost the race yet, but with every letter that is passed around suggesting that the ‘dead will be voting” to emails from Organizing for America (Obama's Campaign), exhorting residents of neighboring states to “help” in the Massachusetts election, she is getting that much closer to finishing out her first and only term as the States Attorney General. Had she run on her own merits, the outcome may have been different, it is the “outside” aid including fundraising, and that is irking those inside the Commonwealth. It is, therefore, no surprise that Brown’s Senate Seat is seen as “soon to be” available.
Former front-runner for the vacant U.S. Senate Seat, Democrat Martha Coakley, has been either eclipsed or tied by Republican Scott Brown, in recent polls, and some sources suggest that the Democrat Internal polling is just as dismal. Brown, who has support by grassroots campaigning, speaks to all the citizens of the commonwealth as evidenced by the headline article in the paper that endorsed Coakley, the Globe. In an article today under Mass Senate Election 2010 entitled “Brown Pushes Far out beyond His GOP Base” a reporter for the Globe actually does a good job with a profile of Brown on the campaign trail. Brown’s fundraising has soared, with individuals contributing over 1 million dollars in a 24 hour period, while Coakley is relying on Washington Fundraisers to get up the funds to finish the campaign, using negative advertising.
It is apparent that the handwriting, if not on the wall, is in the minds of those savvy Massachusetts Democrats who eat, live and breathe for their hold over the Commonwealth, which is why, with Coakley’s popularity in serious doubt, they are prepared to go after a the 3rd term State Senators seat. This campaign has turned from an "us versus them" Political Party norm into a people of the Commonwealth versus the “machine”. With every negative ad, including the one in which Coakley’s staff misspelled “Massachusetts”, with every story about another Washington fundraiser, or help from outside sources, residents of the Bay state are standing up – it appears it is not so much about Brown or Coakley, for that matter, it is about the distaste for the sense of “entitlement” shown by one Party that feels they a)own a senate seat, and b)own the Commonwealth – Brown has become an icon for the Bay State.
Pundits and polls aside, it is a “call to arms” that has gone out to friends, relatives, and neighbors, to take back the State where the Nation was formed, it is the pride of the people of the Commonwealth that is going to make the difference in this election, regardless of political affiliation. Coakley has not lost the race yet, but with every letter that is passed around suggesting that the ‘dead will be voting” to emails from Organizing for America (Obama's Campaign), exhorting residents of neighboring states to “help” in the Massachusetts election, she is getting that much closer to finishing out her first and only term as the States Attorney General. Had she run on her own merits, the outcome may have been different, it is the “outside” aid including fundraising, and that is irking those inside the Commonwealth. It is, therefore, no surprise that Brown’s Senate Seat is seen as “soon to be” available.
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Vermont – 2010 finds 9 Candidates Who Support Secession
The Green Mountain Statehas 9 candidates on the ballot who are in favor of an Independent Vermont - as in the Country of Vermont. The AP article, posted on Boston.com here
Notes:
And the kicker:
Although long known as a bit farther to the left than their neighbor to the south, Massachusetts, (one feels caught n a 1960’s time-warp), it goes without saying that Vermonters have an independent streak, which just may support this move – after all, Vermonters have been calling for secession for years, yet have not fielded candidates or a party that would give them a platform. They have one now. It is, of course, according to those ever present talking heads and unnamed political analysts, a given that these candidates will find no success; that said, one has to wait for the proverbial dust to settle next November. Pundits and the like (including this blog) make assumptions based on patterns, some lace those assumptions with a hefty dose of political ideology (see the Boston Globe/New Hampshire U.S. Senate Poll article released earlier this week with subsequent analysis), but in the end, it really is the people’s choice, and nothing is making that more clear than the 2010 general and special elections.
Notes:
Their method is: Organizers say it's the first time since the Civil War that a secession movement has fielded a slate of candidates for statewide office, although individual pro-secession candidates have run before.
And the kicker:
Few political observers give them much hope of winning, even in a left-leaning state
Although long known as a bit farther to the left than their neighbor to the south, Massachusetts, (one feels caught n a 1960’s time-warp), it goes without saying that Vermonters have an independent streak, which just may support this move – after all, Vermonters have been calling for secession for years, yet have not fielded candidates or a party that would give them a platform. They have one now. It is, of course, according to those ever present talking heads and unnamed political analysts, a given that these candidates will find no success; that said, one has to wait for the proverbial dust to settle next November. Pundits and the like (including this blog) make assumptions based on patterns, some lace those assumptions with a hefty dose of political ideology (see the Boston Globe/New Hampshire U.S. Senate Poll article released earlier this week with subsequent analysis), but in the end, it really is the people’s choice, and nothing is making that more clear than the 2010 general and special elections.
Mass. U.S. Senate Race Poll, Rasmussen Night of Last Debate: Brown within 2 Points of Coakley – Rasmussen not weighing Independents.
Rasmussen Reportsreleased a second poll on the Massachusetts Special Election on January 19th to fill the vacant Massachusetts Senate Seat. Coakley leads Brown by 2 points in this latest poll, with a margin of error plus or minus 3. In viewing the crosstabs, Brown leads by 2 points with those committed to vote in the election. Rasmussen’s article notes that independents in Massachustts are breaking towards Brown by 71%, which represents 51% of the electorate. This poll did include Independent Libertarian candidate Joe Kennedy, who is at 3% of the vote according to the latest sample. The crosstabs do not indicate the political affiliation of those polled by percentage. It is more likely that Kennedy will pick up as much as 6% of the total vote, with Brown picking up the majority of Independent Voters, Republicans and some Democrats, with the balance going to Coakley – a tight race can be anticipated, as of today.
As the poll was taken immediately following the release of negative attack ads by Coakley groups, it will be interesting to see what impact that has on the overall tone of the race. Negative ads do not appear to do well with the Massachusetts electorate. Additional polls can be expected towards the end of the week, which one expects, depending on the pollster and how closely those polled match the actual makeup of the electorate, to see the impact from that aspect of this campaign.
Brown, who raised over one million dollars on the day of the debate, did so through individual contributions, most of which came through Massachusetts. Coakley was in Washington at a DNC fundraiser – making this a battle of the people versus the beltway – with Brown leading the charge.
Additional notes on the poll: the “strongly approves” on the Obama’s performance are at 37% and Deval Patrick picks up 16% of the “strongly approves”. Those on the “fence” or somewhat approving of both Obama and Patrick are at 20 and 24% respectively. The strongly disapproves, in this alleged Democrat stronghold are telling: Obama 31% and Patrick at 38%.
Although most pundits continue to play it “safe” and assume that Coakley will ultimately take the seat, one has to understand they are doing so based on the past performance of the state electorate. Given the fact that the last Republican to win in Massachusetts was Mitt Romney, whose opponent, Democrat Shannon Obrien, used similar tactics to Coakley – the exception – Brown’s favorables have been consistently higher than Romney’s, perhaps due to both the opposition candidate and the short length of time for both to camping. One can hazard to guess (as polls are all over the place) if it does come down to a 2 to 5 point margin, it will be in Brown’s favor. This given the history of similar elections and with a similar make-up – not taking into account the hot-button issues of Health Care Reform and the Economy which are also drive votes to Brown.
As the poll was taken immediately following the release of negative attack ads by Coakley groups, it will be interesting to see what impact that has on the overall tone of the race. Negative ads do not appear to do well with the Massachusetts electorate. Additional polls can be expected towards the end of the week, which one expects, depending on the pollster and how closely those polled match the actual makeup of the electorate, to see the impact from that aspect of this campaign.
Brown, who raised over one million dollars on the day of the debate, did so through individual contributions, most of which came through Massachusetts. Coakley was in Washington at a DNC fundraiser – making this a battle of the people versus the beltway – with Brown leading the charge.
Additional notes on the poll: the “strongly approves” on the Obama’s performance are at 37% and Deval Patrick picks up 16% of the “strongly approves”. Those on the “fence” or somewhat approving of both Obama and Patrick are at 20 and 24% respectively. The strongly disapproves, in this alleged Democrat stronghold are telling: Obama 31% and Patrick at 38%.
Although most pundits continue to play it “safe” and assume that Coakley will ultimately take the seat, one has to understand they are doing so based on the past performance of the state electorate. Given the fact that the last Republican to win in Massachusetts was Mitt Romney, whose opponent, Democrat Shannon Obrien, used similar tactics to Coakley – the exception – Brown’s favorables have been consistently higher than Romney’s, perhaps due to both the opposition candidate and the short length of time for both to camping. One can hazard to guess (as polls are all over the place) if it does come down to a 2 to 5 point margin, it will be in Brown’s favor. This given the history of similar elections and with a similar make-up – not taking into account the hot-button issues of Health Care Reform and the Economy which are also drive votes to Brown.
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Mass. Senate Race: Coakley resorts to Paid Rally Supporters
H/T to Fleming and Hayes
Prior to the final debate between the candidates to fill the vacant senate seat in Massachusetts, both Coakley and Brown had supporters on hand to welcome and support their candidates - apparently, Coakley's supporters we're paid union members - video below from Fleming and Hayes. Full coverage of the debate rally is on their website, it is worth reading.
Prior to the final debate between the candidates to fill the vacant senate seat in Massachusetts, both Coakley and Brown had supporters on hand to welcome and support their candidates - apparently, Coakley's supporters we're paid union members - video below from Fleming and Hayes. Full coverage of the debate rally is on their website, it is worth reading.
Scott Brown Advertising Response to Coakley's Attack Ad - Brilliant
Scott Brown U.S. Senate Candidate Response to Martha Coakley, U.S. Senate Candidate Attack Ad - MA. Senate Special Election, January 19th, 2010.
Democrats Bring in DNC to Aid Coakley - Coakley Leads with First Attack Ad – Will it Work in Massachusetts? Browns Fundraising Soars.
With just a week leftbefore the special election in Massachusetts, for the U.S. Senate Seat, the DNC has become significantly alarmed with Coakley's poor performance, that they have decided to come to her aid. The gist of the attack – tie Moderate Scott Brown to a Sarah Palin endorsement. Palin, who has not endorsed Scott Brown, has been busy – she has decided to take a position as a contributor to Fox News Network. Brown has, however, been endorsed by the State Police Assocaition of Massachusetts (Speaks Volumes re: Coakley as Attorney General). The tactic of using Palin, which may work with diehard progressives in the Commonwealth, will not fly with the majority of moderate Democrats, Unenrolleds (the majority) and Republicans.
Immediately following the final debate, Coakley made the pivotal mistake of airing the first “attack” ad. The ad which is “breaking news” over at the Globe was timed to precede the debate, in which Coakley took a shot at Brown for “denying women abortion” in a vote he took in the MA Senate. Brown, who voted against a bill that would have forced religious institutions to perform abortions, called Coakley out on her “error”. The ad starts out comparing Brown with George Bush and Dick Cheney, followed by photos of Rush Limbaugh as a “Republican” and follows with the usual, tax cuts for the wealthy, and ends with the false “Brown would deny emergency contraceptive to rape victims”. Finally, the ad solemnly states: “We cannot afford Republicans.” (Full Ad Shown Below)
The Commonwealth has seen a lot of Scott Brown over the past two months, and they’ve gotten to know his record, one which proves he is a moderate, not in lockstep with any political party, including his own. Brown is, as more than one Democrat put it, “an independent kind of guy”.
The last candidate for higher office in the State of Massachusetts, that happened to be a woman, Kerry Healey, ran attack ads that ultimately ran her campaign into the ground. The race was for the Governor’s office. Healey’s ads alienated the independent voters, and played no small part in pushing that vote towards Deval Patrick. They just don’t work and in the case of Martha Coakley, may do even more harm than in Healey’s case.
Martha favorability
In all polls taken (and there has been such as wide spread, with marginals of one poll (the Globe) heavily weighted Democrat to give Martha the 15 point lead), Coakley has some problems in areas of favorability – with Brown besting her, especially with the Unenrolled majority of voters. Add an attack ad to an already beleaguered Coakley, and you double the negatives.
Brown on the other hand raised over $1,000,000 dollars yesterday, the big push over $750,000 came immediately following the C-Span televised final debate. This type of donation comes directly from individuals, not PAC’s or special interest groups. There is no doubt that this race is going to be a tight one and that every vote counts – this spells an end to the era of “entitlement” for the DNC in Massachusetts. Granted, it may be a less than commanding candidate, in Coakley, that is part of the problem, and the addition of misleading statements coming on the heels of a debate where the context of the ad was torn apart before it even aired, will not bode well.
On the other hand, Brown’s ads have been more about substance, who Brown is, and what he believes in – not one word about Coakley. One group, an outside PAC did run a negative Coakley ad, which Brown immediately denounced – that ad is no longer running – He keeps insisting that the race should not be influenced by outside factors, and he is not “beholding” to anyone. This tone is what resonates with voters, specifically independent and moderate Democrats.
There will be additional polls released by the end of the week, at which time one can expect little change in movement, as in any special election it will come down to turnout and which candidate has the most enthusiastic followers. Although Public Policy Polling compared the tone of this race to that of the gubernatorial race in Virginia (where McDonnell bested the Democrat opponent by a stunning 17 points), it is more than like to be closer – at this point, no one has a crystal ball. That said, one can expect the race to be with 2 to 3 points, given Brown’s continually increasing momentum, he would be the favorite. In Massachusetts, where they raise the dead to vote, Coakley is guaranteed at the very least those votes, as well as those diehard progressives – unless she softens her tone, backs away from back away from the now defunct Bush Derangement Syndrome – because that doesn’t fly, even in Massachusetts.
Immediately following the final debate, Coakley made the pivotal mistake of airing the first “attack” ad. The ad which is “breaking news” over at the Globe was timed to precede the debate, in which Coakley took a shot at Brown for “denying women abortion” in a vote he took in the MA Senate. Brown, who voted against a bill that would have forced religious institutions to perform abortions, called Coakley out on her “error”. The ad starts out comparing Brown with George Bush and Dick Cheney, followed by photos of Rush Limbaugh as a “Republican” and follows with the usual, tax cuts for the wealthy, and ends with the false “Brown would deny emergency contraceptive to rape victims”. Finally, the ad solemnly states: “We cannot afford Republicans.” (Full Ad Shown Below)
The Commonwealth has seen a lot of Scott Brown over the past two months, and they’ve gotten to know his record, one which proves he is a moderate, not in lockstep with any political party, including his own. Brown is, as more than one Democrat put it, “an independent kind of guy”.
The last candidate for higher office in the State of Massachusetts, that happened to be a woman, Kerry Healey, ran attack ads that ultimately ran her campaign into the ground. The race was for the Governor’s office. Healey’s ads alienated the independent voters, and played no small part in pushing that vote towards Deval Patrick. They just don’t work and in the case of Martha Coakley, may do even more harm than in Healey’s case.
Martha favorability
In all polls taken (and there has been such as wide spread, with marginals of one poll (the Globe) heavily weighted Democrat to give Martha the 15 point lead), Coakley has some problems in areas of favorability – with Brown besting her, especially with the Unenrolled majority of voters. Add an attack ad to an already beleaguered Coakley, and you double the negatives.
Brown on the other hand raised over $1,000,000 dollars yesterday, the big push over $750,000 came immediately following the C-Span televised final debate. This type of donation comes directly from individuals, not PAC’s or special interest groups. There is no doubt that this race is going to be a tight one and that every vote counts – this spells an end to the era of “entitlement” for the DNC in Massachusetts. Granted, it may be a less than commanding candidate, in Coakley, that is part of the problem, and the addition of misleading statements coming on the heels of a debate where the context of the ad was torn apart before it even aired, will not bode well.
On the other hand, Brown’s ads have been more about substance, who Brown is, and what he believes in – not one word about Coakley. One group, an outside PAC did run a negative Coakley ad, which Brown immediately denounced – that ad is no longer running – He keeps insisting that the race should not be influenced by outside factors, and he is not “beholding” to anyone. This tone is what resonates with voters, specifically independent and moderate Democrats.
There will be additional polls released by the end of the week, at which time one can expect little change in movement, as in any special election it will come down to turnout and which candidate has the most enthusiastic followers. Although Public Policy Polling compared the tone of this race to that of the gubernatorial race in Virginia (where McDonnell bested the Democrat opponent by a stunning 17 points), it is more than like to be closer – at this point, no one has a crystal ball. That said, one can expect the race to be with 2 to 3 points, given Brown’s continually increasing momentum, he would be the favorite. In Massachusetts, where they raise the dead to vote, Coakley is guaranteed at the very least those votes, as well as those diehard progressives – unless she softens her tone, backs away from back away from the now defunct Bush Derangement Syndrome – because that doesn’t fly, even in Massachusetts.
Coakley Attack Ad – Shades of Kerry Healey’s Failed Campaign
Monday, January 11, 2010
Brown Coakley U.S. Senate Debate - Brown Clips Coakley in Final Debate
The final debate for the U.S. Senate was held this evening at UMass Boston. (The full debate is available hereat C-SPAN). A portion of the debate from NECN is shown below. David Gergan moderated, the debate style was not as engaging as the last debate held on WGBY Springfield, which was a bit more "free-wheeling". Brown stood fast to his independent stance, showcasing his knowledge of foreign policy, while Coakley harped about "Bush-Cheney". Best line of the debate: The opening when Gergan asked Brown an opening questions regarding "Ted Kennedy's seat" - Brown's reply was quick and to the point - (abridged) - This is not Ted Kennedy's seat, this seat belongs to the people of the State of Massachusetts.
Independent Candidate Joe Kennedy held his own, although Gergan mentioned 20 times that he was not related to "The Kennedy's", and gave him little to no opportunity to answer questions. On substance Brown won the debate handily. Both Brown, Coakley appeared tired.
The end result is not only one of ideology but of legislative experience: Coakley, elected in 2006, has served as the Commonwealth's Attorney General while Brown is on his 3rd term in the State Senate, having served previously as a State Representative. Brown is decidedly a moderate conservative, who will cross the aisle, while Coakley is a pronounced Progressive Democrat. Brown came off as the guy next door - Mr. Smith goes to Washington if you will. Coakely came off as a somewhat arrogant and at times, uninformed or intentionally misleading.
New England Cable News Debate Coverage
Independent Candidate Joe Kennedy held his own, although Gergan mentioned 20 times that he was not related to "The Kennedy's", and gave him little to no opportunity to answer questions. On substance Brown won the debate handily. Both Brown, Coakley appeared tired.
The end result is not only one of ideology but of legislative experience: Coakley, elected in 2006, has served as the Commonwealth's Attorney General while Brown is on his 3rd term in the State Senate, having served previously as a State Representative. Brown is decidedly a moderate conservative, who will cross the aisle, while Coakley is a pronounced Progressive Democrat. Brown came off as the guy next door - Mr. Smith goes to Washington if you will. Coakely came off as a somewhat arrogant and at times, uninformed or intentionally misleading.
New England Cable News Debate Coverage
MA Senate Race-Boston Globe Poll – Coakley+ 15 with Poll Marginal’s Showing Sample of Majority Democrats – How Much Trouble is Coakley Really In?
University of New Hampshire Marginals MA Senate Special Election Weighed Heavily Democrat
A Boston Globe Poll released over the weekend, touts a 15 point lead for Democrat Martha Coakley over Republican Scott Brown in the Massachusetts Special Election for U.S. Senate. The poll was released immediately following the release of polls by Rasmussen and Public Policy Polling , both showing the race within a 9 to 1 point margin (Rasmussen: Coakley plus 9 with 4.5 margin of error, Public Policy Polling: Brown plus 1, with a 3.6 margin of error). Both Rasmussen and Public Policy Polling’s marginal’s were close to the actual makeup of the Massachusetts electorate: Democrats 35%, Republicans’ 11% and Unenrolled 50 plus percent.
In viewing the marginal’s used by the University of New Hampshire – Boston Globe Poll, here one finds that the sample of likely voters (see poll photo above), was comprised of: 307 Democrats, 86 Independents (Unenrolled) and 151 Republicans. This in no wise accurately represents the electoral make-up of the state. Therefore, with the fact that the poll grossly over-represents the Democrat party, how much trouble is Coakley really in when a 15 point lead is all they come up with?
Note: In addition, the likelihood of additional polling by reputable national polling companies (see Public Policy Polling), is extremely probable within the next week. Public Policy Polling correctly called the New Jersey and Virginia Gubernatorial Races, yet missed on the New York Special Election. In the case of the later, Public Policy Polling Data was released and completed prior to the Republican dropping out of the race and endorsing the Democrat. The type of poll released by the Boston Globe does two things: gives more incentive to Brown Supporters and sends a message to those who would vote Coakley – leaving the impression that the Globe in taking Brown’s side in this race.
Sunday, January 10, 2010
Coakley - Brown Debate for CNN – Coakley Declines – Next Debate January 11th Kennedy Institute – Station Guide for Debate Coverage
For thosewho were looking forward to the January 10th Debate, also broadcast on CNN, don’t hold your breath. Coakley declined to attend the debate, as it would have not included the Libertarian Candidate, Joe Kennedy. Therefore, Coakley would have had to debate Scott Brown one-on-one, something she has studiously avoided since the special U.S. Senate election campaign began.
Although Kennedy’s input generally aligns with Coakley, he does agree with Brown on one or two issues. In demanding that Kennedy be brought into the debate process, Coakley did herself a disservice, which was not the original intent. Kennedy, in the last televised debate on WGBH Public Television Springfield, bested Coakley! It is unfortunate that Coakley or her handlers have deprived the nation, the opportunity to learn how those candidates who would be the next U.S. Senator think. More to the point - to hear her compare Scott Brown to Bush-Cheney, ad nausea, and, when cornered by facts, to point fingers scoldingly at both Brown and Kennedy (a real treat).
Massachusetts citizens get lucky - the last debate of this special election will take place at the Edward M. Kennedy Institute, on January 11th at 7pm, University of Massachusetts, Boston. The Debate will be televised on Boston’s, Channel 5, Channel 5, WGBH Boston, and WGBY Springfield.
Although Kennedy’s input generally aligns with Coakley, he does agree with Brown on one or two issues. In demanding that Kennedy be brought into the debate process, Coakley did herself a disservice, which was not the original intent. Kennedy, in the last televised debate on WGBH Public Television Springfield, bested Coakley! It is unfortunate that Coakley or her handlers have deprived the nation, the opportunity to learn how those candidates who would be the next U.S. Senator think. More to the point - to hear her compare Scott Brown to Bush-Cheney, ad nausea, and, when cornered by facts, to point fingers scoldingly at both Brown and Kennedy (a real treat).
Massachusetts citizens get lucky - the last debate of this special election will take place at the Edward M. Kennedy Institute, on January 11th at 7pm, University of Massachusetts, Boston. The Debate will be televised on Boston’s, Channel 5, Channel 5, WGBH Boston, and WGBY Springfield.
Poll Stunner - Obama Approval in Massachusetts Drops To 44%
Public Policy Polling Reveals Obama Approval in Mass. at 43%
A poll released yesterday by Public Policy Polling on the U.S. Senate Race in Massachusetts, revealed some interesting statistics on Massachusetts changing views. In reviewing the poll methodology one finds a sample of 744 likely voters using automated phone polling (see Rasmussen using same methodology). The Commonwealth’s voter registration is not in sync with the survey – for example: in indentifying voter affiliation: of those surveyed: 44% of the respondents: Democrat, 17% Republican and 39% independent/other. The makeup of the Bay State, based on the 2008 Election Results by the Massachusetts Secretary of State Democrats show party affiliation as follows: 36.95%, Republicans: 11.62%, Unenrolled (Independent) 50.75% and the balance (Green Party, Libertarian, etc.: .68% (less than 1%). Therefore, the poll by Public Policy was heavily weighted in Coakley’s favor, and in President Obama’s favor, given the same criteria.
The returns from the general election for the Bay State were “typical” Obama received 62% of the popular vote compared to McCain’s 36% Fast forward to the Mass. State Senate Poll: On the question of Approval from Bay State Voters: 44% Approve, 43% disapprove, with 13% “unsure”, on the question of Health Care Reform: 41% approve, 47% oppose, and 12% hold no opinion.
It is the common misconception that Massachusetts is in a virtual bubble when it comes to voting for the Democrat over a Republican or Independent Candidate, however, when one parses the actual electoral makeup one finds a group of voters who have become disenfranchised, increasingly conservative, and the majority reject the current administration and specifically the issue of Health Care Reform.
Yes, in Massachusetts.
Obama’s falling popularity is, in part, reflected in the numbers Brown is receiving, but only in part, as one has to look at Coakley favorabilitys. Also of interest, the DNC is sending former President Bill Clinton to “stump” for Martha Coakley. Clinton will be stopping in Boston to attempt to boost voter enthusiasm for Coakley. Although popular in the Bay State (at one time – no recent data), Clinton has his job cut out for him. The environment is decidedly not in favor of the Party in Power. This is not necessarily about Washington, although it plays a significant roll, it is also about the corruption on Beacon Hill, and a growing unease with the Democrat Party in general. If Obama’s approvals are this dismal in a state that he took by over 30%, what are the odds of Coakley pulling off, what now would be an “upset”?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
