TPMDC

Cook Political Report Now Calls MA SEN A 'Toss-Up'

Spread the word. Share this article on Facebook!

Share

MA Senate candidates Martha Coakley (D) and Scott Brown (R).

Share

Twitter Fark Reddit Send to a Friend

Send to a friend!

To email:    Your Name:    Your email:

The venerated Cook Political Report followed the Rothenberg Political Report in calling the Massachusetts special Senate election a "toss up" today. The move is based on what the staff at Cook write is "unbelievable intensity" among supporters of Scott Brown (R).

The publication sounds as surprised as anyone that the race to replace Ted Kennedy in the Senate has become such a tough one for Democrats, and though it's now listed as anyone's to win, Cook still says "at the end of the day it's unlikely" that Martha Coakley (D) "ends up losing" next week.

"After all, no Republican Senate candidate has won in the Bay State since 1972," Cook writes.

Coakley has squandered the traditionally safe base for Democratic Senate candidates in Massachusetts with an "an overly-cautious, somewhat clumsy campaign," Cook writes. The result is an electorate that still leans Democratic, but might just vote Republican Jan. 19.

"To the extent Coakley may still have a tiny advantage, it appears not to meet the normal standard we have for a 'lean' rating: a competitive race but one in which one party has a clear advantage," Cook writes. "We see no clear advantage."

Comments (17) | Join the Conversation!

Recommend Recommend (0)

January 14, 2010 5:27 PM   

Every race is a toss-up, until the votes are counted

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 5:42 PM   

That's Scott Brown (R), of course.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 6:07 PM   

An eight point lead is a "tiny advantage?"

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 10:34 PM    in reply to Stroszek

As much as I want Coakley to win, it might be a slap upside the head to all the asshole liberals if she lost. It's only taken a year for them to forget how bad things are with Republicans with all of their "the Democrats are just like the Republicans" crap. This might be the reminder they need to stop acting like a bunch of spoiled babies.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 6:29 PM   

Rumors have Coakley's internal polling showing her up 46-44. The big guns are coming in for a reason. Brown has painted himself as the plucky underdog fighting the big Massachusetts Democrat Machine. Folks pull for the underdog.

Turn out at the polls will be key. I think closer poll numbers are better for Coakley at this stage. Dems will take nothing for granted and will go out and vote and hopefully take their friends and family with them. If it was at 6-8% Dems might get comfortable and stay home.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 8:31 PM    in reply to Walter Mitty

Damn, Rumors? Really? That guy's never wrong.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 11:32 PM    in reply to Walter Mitty

"Liberals" didn't force your beloved Dem machine ward-heelers to back Coakley- a horrible candidate who took weeks off before she even bothered to start campaigning.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 11:32 PM    in reply to Steve LaBonne

That was supposed to be a reply to FreeRider- sorry.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 6:54 PM   

There is only one certainty in this race. If Coakley is narrowly defeated, it will be widely interpreted by the press as a bad sign for Democrat's prospect for next November. If she squeaks out a win, it will be widely interpreted by the press as a bad sign for Democrat's prospects for next November.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 9:16 PM   

After this election is over and all the votes are counted it will go down as yet the latest example of how wrong the polls and the media often can be and often are! Coakley will win by at least ten points! Dems out number Repubs by such a vast amount that even a fall off among Dems won't translate into a GOP win! Have we really forgotten how off the polls in the last election were?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 14, 2010 9:31 PM    in reply to celldumceen

i hope you're right.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 15, 2010 12:57 AM    in reply to celldumceen

Were the polls in fact off in the last election?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 15, 2010 4:15 AM    in reply to Subliminability

The Dem is either in a statistical tie or ahead in all the polls! She will win! It will be too close for comfort as far as most Dems are conserned but she will win!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 15, 2010 4:16 AM    in reply to Subliminability

The Dem is either in a statistical tie or ahead in all the polls! She will win! It will be too close for comfort as far as most Dems are conserned but she will win!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 15, 2010 4:23 AM   

Nate Silver rates it a tossup based on the Suffolk poll which incidentally had Coakley up 20+ in its previous Oct and Nov. iterations

All that Firedog Lake/KOS jibberjabber "Primary the bastards!" sure sounds ridiculous now doesn't it

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

January 15, 2010 7:07 PM   

There Will Be Lawsuits.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Leave a comment

Your response:

Follow us!

Most Popular

TPM Stories Now Surging on