2012 Is Massachusetts in Play for the GOP? Just for Giggles – Why Is MA being Polled for Obama? Why is the Warren Campaign Push Polling?

Elizabeth Warren and Barrack Obama - image ljworld

This is something to think about, in the 1980 and 1984 General Elections, Massachusetts, noted the most reliably blue state in the union - went deep red for Ronald Reagan. At that time (September 18, 1980) national polls had Carter and Reagan in a dead heat, in spite of a tanked economy and Carter’s major foreign policy fiasco with Iran (Milwaukee Journal Sentinel) and by mid-October Carter had placed Massachusetts in the safe column(Boston Globe).

In 1984, once again the Mondale Campaign consider Massachusetts a “maybe” or “leaning toward Mondale” along with 39 other states based on polling! (Waycross Journal Herald, 10/13/84)

Therefore, it is not without some shock that polling firms are measuring President Obama’s favorability in the Bay State – and neighbors are talking - those programmed calls are reported to go no further if one suggests an unfavorable opinion of the President’s job performance, one is then asked demographic (male-female, age) and summarily thanked and disconnected. Reportedly, if one selects approval (see operation chaos), one is allegedly given the option to enter voters preference. It is odd, is it not, that Massachusetts would be polled at all –

Then again, may be no.

Speaking of polling: reports of the Warren Campaign going negative has hit the bricks -(See Boston Globe – Warren Releases Negative Ad) - and that includes reports of push-polling. Push-polling are phone calls made to voters homes (mostly partisan, Democrats, Independents) and basically lie like crazy about the opposition. Warren is said to be push polling Massachusetts. Apparently not all Democrats and Independent minded folk (the majority) are enamored of Warren and prefer Senator Brown.

The Hill has reported that the Dems are being cautious on Mass Race despite Warren’s Lead”

Of course she has a lead; Martha Coakley had a lead too! Of course, those leads are easy to manufacture if the pollster is selective and samples disproportionate geographic and voter trends.

Of course, there’s always trolling for votes in nursing homes (Personal experience, whereby Democrat operative was aiding my mother, who was in the end stages of Alzheimer, to vote for Al Gore – my mother, an independent, generally voted against my devoutly Democrat father, as a Republican – Needless to say, there were words, and the operative left.) The dead, the dying, and the non-existent are reported to vote in Massachusetts, and yet, Brown won by 5 points in 2009. One has to ask to what lengths the Warren Campaign will go. If they are push-polling, perhaps there aren’t enough dead and missing voters in MA to cover the deficit she actually faces. Perhaps she has internal polls. On the national polling stage, perhaps the Commonwealth that elected him Governor, will side with history and economics and foreign policy and hand the Massachusetts electoral votes to Romney –that’s a big perhaps, considering that Massachusetts never votes for a Republican, and has always been reliability Democrat and all seats, regardless of import, are shown year after year after year as – “safe Democrat”.

On Romney’s 47% remarks on a local scale: Although the media (including the morning and evening local affiliate news) are hammering Romney for the 47% of Obama supporters being dependent on the government, (Romney was speaking of campaign strategy and whom he would focus on during his campaign, which, is not lost on “the masses” – neither is the sentiment that is being portrayed) Apparently, those watching the newscasts are somewhat disgusted with the fact that Romney’s right and their local CBS, NBC affiliates are to use a phrase (So blind they cannot see the forest through the trees). Of course, this is relying on word of mouth, neighbor to neighbor - retirees, the unemployed, the employed but noticing their dollar goes nowhere, regular working class folks in the Bluest corner of the bluest state. The point being the mood has not shifted since 2009, in fact the mood is one that is more urgent in its animosity towards all things that appear to be pushing an “agenda”. Granted this may be a pocket of conservative and conservative leaning Democrats and Independents, but then again, do the 33 to 36% of the Massachusetts electorate that are registered Democrats (the balance are 11-12% Republican, 51% Unenrolleds (i.e. Independent) really win elections 100% of the time in Massachusetts when there is a better choice on the ballot?

Obama Borrow Remarks on “You didn’t build it” from MA – again! From Duval Patrick (“Yes We Can”) to Elizabeth Warren (D-MA)(Candidate)

From: The Hawaii Reporter: Obama pushed his policy goals of infrastructure (aka stimulus) spending and "government research" as part of a collectivist utopia "doing things together." It's simply stunning that he would tell Americans, "If you've got a business—you didn't build that."
After all, could individuals be resourceful and hard-working enough to create whole new enterprises?
Obama said:
Look, if you've been successful, you didn't get there on your own. You didn't get there on your own. I'm always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart.”(Hawaii Reporter)

The President went on to say that (paraphrasing) someone built the roads…there was a teacher (who was responsible implied.)…But, the question is who said that first?
Elizabeth Warren, Candidate for Senate (D-MA)

From There is nobody in this country got rich on his own...” you hired workers the rest of us paid for, you used roads the rest of us paid for (paraphrased) and so on- this is from a video (below) from the Warren Campaign on “fair taxation”:



Elizabeth Warren is the “next great hope” of the Progressive Wing of the Democrat Party – the plan – install her as Senator from MA, bring her to the Democrat Convention in 2016, run her for president – sound familiar?

Of course, it is well known that the President has “borrowed” remarks by other Massachusetts notaries, specifically Governor Duval Patrick’s “Yes You Can”. Apparently, if something works in Massachusetts surely it can work nationwide.
Otherwise, how else would Scott Brown have been elected to the MA Senate? How else would one explain the historic gains in the House in 2010 – merely two years ago? It was a rejection of those very principles espoused by those who run on slogans rather than ideas, division instead of inclusions, and blame instead of giving credit where credit is due.

Warren is a prime example of a progressive academic, The President, although having had some experience in government with a term here and there in the State Legislature and then the Senate (Illinois) before running for President, also was and remains an academic. There is an old adage – “those that can’t do – teach”.
This is not to malign, in any way, the thousands upon thousands of credible teachers who exist solely to make a difference, to encourage individuality, and to ensure that each student understands they can achieve the American Dream of building one’s own business, becoming an astronaut (if we had a vibrant Space Program) a doctor – surely they are out there in private and public schools across the nation. Then there are those hard-line progressives who see the only way this country should be – is under Government control – with an elite group of academics and politico’s caring for the masses. If that isn’t a step backward, what is?

The rhetoric from this campaign is growing increasingly negative, lectures on wealth versus “the rest of us “have been the pivot (and in some cases “race”, but not as often as in the past election. (2008). What should be on the table – for both Obama and Romney is vision - how each candidate sees the future of this great nation and what they can do to improve the economy, education, security – and fair game is records and the defense of records. Perhaps the President would like to explain his record on job creative so that the American people can understand where he creative private sector jobs that fill the government coffers to enable them to continue to pay for the growth of government pogroms. For without taxpayers in private industry, there is no income for the Federal Government. One cannot count government employees, as they do pay taxes, true, but the taxpayer pays their wages – it’s a catch 22. Romney, to his credit, and in spite of the Obama Campaigns best efforts, did his best to create jobs in Massachusetts as Govenor, despite the Democrat Controlled Statehouse (both Legislature and Senate) doing their best to undercut every single thing he proposed when it came to increasing business development and jobs. One has to live in Massachusetts to fully understand the disparity between what is reality and fantasy – those who do understand – well, at least half of them.

Not unlike the balance of the nation, there is that deep divide between political party affiliation and ideology – one that has existed for eons, yet, never with so acrimony and blatantly untrue rhetoric – painting all with a broad brush so to speak. The days of politely agreeing to disagree are fast becoming a thing of the past. What this nation needs, now more than ever, is a leader who has an ideology that includes civility – especially when it comes to working with and treating those who have opposing views with respect, not derision. There is one candidate that meets that criterion, having not divided a government but worked with, to the best of his ability, to create jobs, balance a budget, all in the face of an opposition party that remained as relentless then as it does today.

Elizabeth Warren, (D) for Senate, Mass. – House Flipping History Does not Square with Stump Speeches – Hypocrite?

Elizabeth Warren, Dem for MA Senate, (Against Scott Brown), shown with house she "flipped" in OK - image Boston Herald)


Elizabeth Warren appears to have a bit more family history that might not square with her “persona” as a “champion for the middle class” – The Boston Heraldreported that Warren and her Husband made huge profits off foreclosed properties in Oklahoma, and lent money to family members at high interest rates to boot. The woman who is being groomed by the Democrats as the “Next Barack Obama” (NYTimes-Multiple source), apparently has more hypocrisy in her history besides claims to have begun the Occupy movement (Shades of Al Gore), and her fiasco of a claim that she was part Cherokee, to the extent that it appeared to have given her a job at Harvard. The list goes on and on – making her one of on the biggest shysters to come down the Massachusetts Turnpike (see Big Dig) in a long time.

The problem with Warren, is not so much her ideology , which as progressive as the President, and every college professor in Massachusetts (with few exceptions), Warren is the typical bongo drumming, down with capitalism, up with the people, taxes are great, share the wealth nonsense everyone in the Bay State is used to hearing – and for the most part ignoring. – Of course, not everyone buys into the Progressive Democrat ideology – with booksellers to bakers from the East Coast to the Western Hills, using the moniker for cities such as Amherst and the entire Bay State – as the “People’s Republic”. The difference between those die-hard, tie-died liberal progressive Democrats is that they are sincere in their belief structure, having of background of bongo drumming and the occasional protest against whatever strikes their fancy at the moment. Even criminal Speakers of the Massachusetts House are so transparent, that they are normally indicted – Massachusetts politicians maybe a lot of things, but for the most part, they are essentially honest and have a past, criminal or otherwise, to back that up.
However, the more we learn about Elizabeth Warren, the more it appears as if she’s taken advantage of the programs and the systems in a way that would make most EBT Fraudsters proud – and to top it off, has an excuse, or press release – handy whenever the next shoe bomb falls. All in all, the whole lying about being a Cherokee to get ahead, and get federal student loans, and into specific colleges, and into jobs, fairly commonplace – and not such a big deal, on the face of it – so Elizabeth Warren lack integrity. The fact that she’s flipped houses, for profit, and then goes on an “Occupy Wall Street Rant” – classic do as I say, not as I do elitist Progressive fare. However, she continues to offer these press releases stating that it’s overblown – seriously.

Warren who runs ads that do not tie her in any way to the Democrat Party, rather attempt to make her appear as independent as possible to Massachusetts voters – are so lacking in depth that no one east of the Boston Globe, the Herald and the Mass DNC knows who she is and what she is running for – a recent Democrat Convention held in Springfield, MA was underpublicized, except in a local daily, and a few blubs on local news – the bulk of all Warren stories, good or bad, are coming from out-of-state.

That strategy is not going to work for Massachusetts, assuming that one will get the vote simply because one has a “D” in front of their name, especially when the incumbent, even though a Republican, is one Scott Brown – popular. It’s rather hard to find anyone who doesn’t know who Brown is – but on the other hand, it’s difficult to find anyone who knows show Warren is – even down to the Cherokee Nation – and for Warren – she’s got too much fodder on the table now to try and play coy – she’s a carpetbagger from Oklahoma who has splaining' to do about her “dubious” past, and even that might not work. However, in order for the DNC plan of turning her into the next Barack Obama, so they can achieve another historic 1st (1st women President), they need a springboard, so they are using Massachusetts as a way to get Elizabeth some credence. They should back another horse, find another state, and go for it, leaving Warren to fare for her. It’s going to be a huge waste of money and comparable to the attempts of the SEIU and Wisconsin Democrats to topple Scott Walker in a recall.

Why? Brown broke the mold – not the mold as in now everyone who is a Republican will get elected (although there are a few house seats that are going to be extremely competitive and could give the Congress a few more Republicans), but the mold that puts people in a mindset of “vote Democrat if you’re a Democrat” - Independents, if one must be reminded are the majority “party” in MA, and they no longer care if someone is “a friend of Barack Obama’s” or “A Kennedy”. Therefore, stand up Elizabeth be proud of your hypocritical land-flipping, your claims of being on the “Trail of Tears” (sarcasm), and anything else that might come up – (the Herald is most likely saving the better skeletons for September and October) – and run for a statehouse seat. You could then get elected to the Speaker of the House (just as good a platform for a woman, historically, in Massachusetts, and just as lucrative a job opportunity!) If all else fails, after the indictments are handed down, Warren could enjoy a massive state pensions then take to the airwaves, as a talk show host – maybe grab a spot next to Carr’s on WRKO.

As a feminist, one must realize that not every woman who comes down the pike (Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, New York just to name a few turnpikes), is worth the vote. One must be discriminatory, when looking for someone who would represent not only the people, but women in general – as a first of anything, or as a Senator or elected official. It is imperative that the credentials be almost squeaky clean – maybe a blur, but not to the point of continued “revelations” of character flaws. Why? Women have a hard time being taken seriously, still earning less on a dollar despite multiple attempts dating from JFK forward to enact “Equal Pay Laws”, maligned for everything from biological to fashionable, women themselves eat their own (See Hillary Clinton, most qualified candidate in the past decade for President, thrown under the bus, by alleged “feminists”), so why would a flawed candidate believe for one minute that they would be qualified to not only take on the Senate, but stand for all American women? The danger in electing Warren isn’t that she’s incompetent, or that she stretches the truth, or that she’s a Progressive who sits at Obama’s right hand and has become his biggest Romney attack dog – the danger is that should she be elected, she’ll be the one all women are judged against, especially in Massachusetts – making it impossible or implausible that another woman running, even a competent woman would be able to make the grade. Is it Warren’s fault? Not entirely, it’s the DNC and their failure to completely vet; their arrogance in thinking that anyone they choose to be the Next Barack will just be so elite, no one would dare question their choice. (The DNC isn’t the only major party with that problem – See Scott Brown early election with the RNC stayed out of the race until it became glaringly apparent that here was a race and he had a snowballs chance in Hades that he just might win and make history.)

To recap, Warren is a lovely woman, grandmotherly, sweet, in her ads, but a tool none-the-less of the DNC, she has made at least one glaring hypocritical error, and of course, figured out how to best the system by being “American Indian” – perhaps thinking no one would buy her being another “minority”. Due to the benign ads, no one has a clue that she’s a Democrat – which might play in her favor, except she’s unknown and Brown is known – for doing a lot and working for the state. He may have those who disagree with him, especially within his own party, but that’s a non-starter. When name recognition is a problem, something is wrong – and for Warren to get her name out there, she’ll have to bring all the baggage with her – then the PAC ads will begin – and that will be the end of it.

Although polls show this to be a close race, one must recall the Massachusetts polls of the past, specifically with Scott Brown, where he was the underdog, by upwards to 15 points, 3 days before he won by 5. In Massachusetts, when one is known to be doing their job, Democrat or Republican, people remember, and instead of voting just because someone is of a certain prominent party, or in support of ObamaCare (the TAX), or in support of “middle class families, losing their homes”, while having flipped houses, one will vote for the Devil the know – rather that the Devil that they don’t.
It’s that simple.

Obama Fund-Raising Down in Massachusetts – Boston Globe cites Enthusiasm, Warren Campaign and Three Dem’s Fighting Hard for Seats

Barack Obama and Elizabeth Warren - Warren Contributions taking away from Obama in MA according to the Globe< - image: familysecuritymatters.org

The Boston Globe Headline: “Obama donors lagging in Mass. (sub) Far fewer give maximum as enthusiasm wanes”speaks to the woes of the Obama Campaign in Massachusetts, and how this Democrat “Cash Cow” state, has seen numbers dwindle since 2008. It appears there are several factors at play, according to the article, chief among them are House and Senate races, specifically the race for Scott Brown’s Seat, challenged by Elizabeth Warren, whose claim of Cherokee Heritage has everyone talking, and three hotly contested Democrat Congressional Seats: Tsongas, Tierney and Keating.

There is also a Kennedy who is running for the 4th Congressional District Seat vacated by Barney Frank, much gerrymandered to be more Conservative (yes in Massachusetts) and possibly unwinnable by even a Kennedy – given the new make-up and the competition, the fact that with a heavily Democrat favored district in 2010, Frank barely held on by Massachusetts standards, winning by 10 points, instead of 50 (as is the norm). The same was true for the aforementioned three in need of funds.

Giving money to Warren’s campaign, is akin to spitting into the wind at this point, although she is seen holding on in polls, or close to leading, Senator Scott Brown (R-MA) holds his own and then some with the largest voting bloc in the state, Unenrolleds, who make up over 50% of the electorate. Warren can count on the 35 to 36% of basic Democrat votes, (those who pull the lever, no matter who is running), and possibly 5 points in Unenrolled, dead voters, and those multiple voters, however, it is shaping up to be more of a Coakley-Brown Repeat, with Coakley merely stumbling and having no baggage.

Quotes from the Globe re: the aforementioned:

“Elizabeth Warren has sucked a lot of air out of the room,’’ said a 2008 Obama fund-raiser who asked not to be identified out of deference to the campaign. “She has supplanted Barack Obama as this year’s phenom. So with Obama without a primary opponent, it’s like, what’s the sense of urgency?’’

Many Bay State Democratic fund-raisers have also been energized by Joseph Kennedy’s congressional campaign, and some incumbent House Democrats, such as William Keating, Niki Tsongas, and John Tierney, are also fighting to hang on to their seats.

What is not discussed in depth, rather in passing is the economy. Massachusetts, although touted as improved, has its cash and unemployment woes, rising costs at the grocery store and the pump, just like the other 49 states – People simply do not have the money to donate to political campaigns in 2011 - 2012 that they had in 2007 – 2008. Not mentioned: the fact that there is a challenger (Mitt Romney) raising money in the same Commonwealth) – those donors may run in different circles, with the exception of the died in the wool Dem’s and Republican’s in the state, it’s the Independents again, that will pay the cash and the vote in MA.

A national snapshot follows via the FEC: From 2011-2012 – Individual donors nationwide have contributed $169,058,434, to President Obama’s campaign, with $98,170,540 Contributed to Romney’s campaign. In addition, Romney’s campaign has $0 debt, while Obama has debts owed of $1,200(FEC) Understanding that this does not include “bundlers”, or funds coming from political parties and/or Super Pac’s – those can be found here - where currently one can see the disparity for the President as to the PAC’s and national parties, special interest groups and PAC's against Obama outweigh those for Obama (both in number and in cash).

Although in almost every contest, one is told the Cash value of a candidate weighs in on his/or her future as an incumbent, however, in this race, at this time, it may be more of a clash of the Titans, (as far as cash is concerned, and an army of those who have had enough heading to the polls.

If any one indicator stands out on enthusiasm, it is the numbers coming in for the President in the Democrat Primaries:
In Massachusetts for Example: Obama received 89% of the primary votes with 11% showing no preference: total votes: 127,264 Obama, 16,239 No Preference. When compared to the Republican Party Primary: Romney received 79%, with Santorum 12%, Paul 10% and Gingrich 5%. In addition on the ballot were Bachmann, Huntsman, Perry and yes, No Preference. (Perry, Bachmann and Huntsman had pulled out of the race earlier). Total votes cast for Romney: 265,110, total votes cast in the Republican Primary: 340,264. No Preference: 1,860 votes cast.

What makes this interesting is that the Democrat Party in Massachusetts had a concerted “get out the vote” effort to show party superiority in that Primary, lest the Republican’s show more enthusiasm (obviously did not work) – in Primaries, the diehards vote, (i.e. political junkies), and those that have enthusiasm for a candidate. It could be argued that Romney did better than Obama purely because there was more hoopla about the Republican contest, however, again, this is Massachusetts.

Therefore, although shown as “Safe Democrat” again, and again, and again, ad naseum (including the Scott Brown special election of 2009), this time Massachusetts may, yet again, re-elect a Republican Governor, as President. There is clearly a lack of enthusiasm among the rank and file, both in opening their wallets and the party leadership getting their people to the polls.