TPMDC
Poll: MA-SEN Race Is A Toss-Up -- GOPer Brown Has One-Point Edge
MA Senate candidates Martha Coakley (D) and Scott Brown (R).
Share
Send to a friend!
The new survey of Massachusetts by Public Policy Polling (D) sends a very alarming message to Democrats: Due to a fall in interest by Democratic voters, the race for the late Ted Kennedy's Senate seat is a toss-up, and Republican Scott Brown even has a one-point edge over Democrat Martha Coakley.
The numbers: Brown 48%, Coakley 47%, with a ±3.6% margin of error. The election will be held on January 19. Independent candidate Joe Kennedy, a libertarian who is not related to the famous Kennedy family, was not included in the poll. If Brown were to pick up this seat in Democratic Massachusetts, it would surely spell the end of the health care bill -- Brown has made it very clear that he would use his power as the 41st Republican Senator to stop the bill.
The pollster's analysis notes that Republicans are far more enthusiastic about voting than Democrats are. "The Massachusetts Senate race is shaping up as a potential disaster for Democrats," said PPP president Dean Debnam, in the polling memo. "Martha Coakley's complacent campaign has put Scott Brown in a surprisingly strong position and she will need to step it up in the final week to win a victory once thought inevitable."
Comments (65) | Join the Conversation!
Leave a comment
Follow us!
Most Popular
TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com
TPM Top News
© 2010 TPM Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.
ericf
January 10, 2010 12:32 AM
Massachusetts Democrats, if this isn't enough to get you to volunteer for GOTV, I don't know what is. I assume you'll vote if you're reading this, but please don't take your voters for granted.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Sailormarlowe
January 11, 2010 5:30 AM in reply to ericf
Vote for Hope & Change in Democratic People's Republic of Massachusetts. Scott Brown, US Senate.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Maritza
January 10, 2010 12:47 AM
Actually it wouldn't mean the end of the health care bill because the House could just vote on the Senate bill to pass it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Stroszek
January 10, 2010 1:23 AM in reply to Maritza
Well, the winner isn't going to be sworn in immediately. Regardless of who wins this race, the bill will be passed before they're seated.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Big River Bandido
January 10, 2010 12:09 PM in reply to Stroszek
Both of you are wrong.
Only the preliminary healthcare bill has passed each house of Congress. To become law, both House and Senate must pass identical bills. Unless the Senate bill survives completely intact (highly unlikely), the Senate will have to vote on the final bill.
And because this is a special election, called to fill a seat left vacant, whoever wins the special election will take the seat immediately.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The BBQ Chicken Madness
January 10, 2010 12:49 PM in reply to Big River Bandido
Uh, I think you read Maritza's post wrong - because you said exactly what he said. And he's right.
If Brown wins, there's no way a HCR bill gets through the Senate again...if that were the case, the House would be left with the options of swallowing the Senate bill (with all it's flaws) or basically letting HCR die completely.
I can't imagine they would do that, after getting so close. And if they simply pass the Senate bill, then it never sees the Senate again and we get the Senate bill as HCR.
We could - and should - have done better...but if Brown wins, the ONLY options are a) House passes Senate bill and it's done or b) House doesn't pass Senate bill and HCR dies completely.
It seems highly unlikely that they would choose to kill it after coming this far. They would probably demand a promise from Obama to revisit the issue after the mid-terms or something...but I'd be shocked if they killed it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
RhodaA
January 10, 2010 1:23 PM in reply to The BBQ Chicken Madness
One More Way
'In U.S. politics, the "nuclear option" is an attempt by a majority of the United States Senate to end a filibuster by majority vote, as opposed to 60 senators voting to end a filibuster. Although it is not provided for in the formal rules of the Senate, the procedure is the subject of a 1957 parliamentary opinion and has been used on several occasions since.'
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jkenney
January 10, 2010 3:22 PM in reply to RhodaA
You are fooling yourself if you think there is any chance of the nuclear option happening. They don't have fifty votes for it, and it would be a PR disaster to do it after the rebuke to health care reform that a Brown win would be.
A Brown win would really just be a total disaster, politically. Let's hope it doesn't happen.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Mateo123
January 11, 2010 2:53 PM in reply to jkenney
Actually, I'm not so sure it would be a disaster.
That is, time and again, the Senate's parliamentary procedure has destroyed good pieces of legislation. Yet, the senate continues to insist on this procedural vote. So, we'll see.
Moreover, one thing is for certain: Lieberman and Lincoln have watered down this bill to the point where many feel it's merely a large handout to health insurers. Reid should have anticipated this and passed the key reform measures -- no preexisting condition restrictions, no more rescission -- first and then provided a public option alternative. He refused to proceed in this manner and we'll learn whether this is really fatal on Tuesday or not.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Stroszek
January 10, 2010 1:29 AM
PPP made a lot of these same predictions about turnout in predicting a +15 win by Hoffman in NY-23.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
L0ngT0m
January 10, 2010 3:28 AM
No act of political stupidity is beyond Democrats. Coakley is the only woman ever to win statewide office in MA, but her campaign stinks and she's a drip. Kennedy kept winning (and beat back a serious challenge by Romney in 1994) by taking every campaign seriously and working hard for every vote.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
vamonticello
January 10, 2010 4:19 AM
Boston Globe has Coakley up 53%-36%
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
BeeClone
January 10, 2010 4:43 PM in reply to vamonticello
If the Dems get out the vote.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JohnW1141
January 10, 2010 9:08 AM
If she loses in Mass. the Democratic Party needs to go the way of the dinosaurs.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
acf_ma
January 10, 2010 4:24 PM in reply to JohnW1141
Against Republicans who hold their legislative caucuses in a phone booth, and who put their entire membership on their leadership letterhead? Look, Coakley has run an uninspiring campaign. She is just not a firebreather, and speaks more like the fine print at the bottom of an insurance policy than sound like Billy Mays, the late pitchman.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
shooter242
January 10, 2010 10:33 AM
Not to worry. ACORN will emerge to steal the election for Coakley.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Stroszek
January 10, 2010 11:15 AM in reply to shooter242
Hey now, the UFOs may pull through for Brown. Don't give up hope, shooty.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JohnW1141
January 10, 2010 12:39 PM in reply to shooter242
shooter,
show me an election that ACORN stole.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Libertine
January 10, 2010 12:42 PM in reply to JohnW1141
Don't worry John he can't. Besides even if he could he is too busy wrapping all of his stuff in aluminum foil...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
31tudor
January 10, 2010 3:51 PM in reply to shooter242
I hope ACORN becomes a big political player, that would cause the Tea Party/Club for Growth and the GOP huge conniption fits.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Moloko+
January 10, 2010 4:46 PM in reply to shooter242
Shooter = Apartheid
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
BeeClone
January 10, 2010 4:48 PM in reply to shooter242
Yes, yes the all powerful ACORN,LOL
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
RhodaA
January 10, 2010 10:40 AM
If you want to help out in MA election:
YOU DON'T HAVE TO LIVE IN MA -
Just click:
http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/obamaforamerica/gGG5lp
or Google Organizing for America and you'll find the link to it quickly. The activity on the OFA website is called: "No matter where you live"
All you have to do is sign up with your email address and zip code and they'll send you a list of MA voters to call. YOU CAN CALL FROM ANYWHERE IN THE US; DON'T HAVE TO LIVE IN MA.
All the people I called were very nice and glad to get the call.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cjop
January 10, 2010 11:11 AM
At the risk of getting flamed perhaps the Democrats deserve to lose. They can't figure out how to govern when in the majority and their party leader decides he's too cool to really lead.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Stroszek
January 10, 2010 11:18 AM in reply to cjop
Perfectly logical. It's like if a busdriver misses your stop, he should obviously be replaced by a blind man with homicidal tendencies.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cjop
January 10, 2010 7:53 PM in reply to Stroszek
Well lets see. A bus driver works for his employer. He misses the stop. Should he be replaced by a blind man with homicidal tendencies? No. He should be replaced by someone willing to be responsible to the people that hired him. If the Democrats lose in 2010 it will be because the people that hired them lost faith in them. They have two ways to fire them. Vote against them or not vote at all.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
BeeClone
January 10, 2010 8:40 PM in reply to cjop
Like I asked before what did the republicans do for the American people in the last twenty years.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cjop
January 10, 2010 10:44 PM in reply to BeeClone
You're not getting it. We want our elected officials to represent us. The Democrats talk a good game prior to November then screw us once elected. I am not voting republican. But I'd like a choice that isn't just a republican by another name. I am not making the argument that the Republicans are better. I'm saying that the Democrats are great at pissing on the people that voted for them. Coalitions are great as long as you can get something done. But nothing has really changed other than the party in power. To those that say get the fuck out of the way I say we should stand in the way until we get our country back. I didn't expect a left wing nirvana. I expected the man to deliver, or at least try, on the those issues like the rule of law, limiting lobbyists and the other things that make a our democracy great and one of a kind. To those of you that think we haven't given it enough time I ask, "What are your expectations with the shift of power in DC?" More Wall Street bailouts? Keeping Gitmo open? A watered down, industry driven consumer protection bill? A health care bill that forces us to buy insurance from the very companies that have been screwing us. Get your heads out of your asses you "give him time" dreamers. I vote democrat and I'm tired of getting shit on.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
RhodaA
January 10, 2010 11:39 AM in reply to cjop
"At the risk of getting flamed," some bits of wisdom from Daily Kos today:
Daily Kos, 1/10/10 (slightly modified for length), by goblue 72
“ … for all you whiners about how Obama keeps "breaking promises," "selling us out," please, just get out of the way. The rest of us have a job to do. If you were so naive as to think a politician could get elected to the White House and usher in a left wing Nirvana of rainbow farting unicorns, I really would like the number of your dealer.
This is politics. There will never be perfect congress-critters and presidents. When in power, it’s about moving the ball forward - in any way you can, and in any increment you can. If you can get a yard, you take the yard. If it’s only inches, you take your inches. In a two-party system like ours, that generally means the party in control is a coalition of interests, some of are bought off in order to make any progress. Even more so in the Democratic Party which has been more of a coalition.
When the Republicans were in power with Bush, they did not have magical powers that allowed them to achieve whatever they wanted. They really only had two big legislative accomplishments before running aground - a huge tax cut and Medicare expansion. Tax cuts are easy - everybody loves them. Expanding Medicare - another sop to the electorate, especially the older voters who turn out.
Getting OUR legislative agenda passed is hard. We want to reform healthcare, enact carbon controls, make it easier to form a union, make life easier for gay folks, and put controls on Wall Street. And you seriously thought this was all going to happen? Or that even incremental success was going to be achieved without a lot of horse-trading?
How could anyone be that stupid (oh right, Nader type voters.)? I'm sorry, but I do not want to see the other team win - because they do truly suck ass. They completely ran this country into a shit hole when they were in charge."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cwnidog
January 10, 2010 1:23 PM in reply to RhodaA
OK, but don't come whining when the same people you're telling to fuck off now stay fucked off in 2010.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Tanjaoui
January 10, 2010 8:36 PM in reply to RhodaA
That's a gross mischaracterization and you're too intelligent not to know it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
RhodaA
January 15, 2010 10:58 AM in reply to Tanjaoui
It's not a matter of intelligence; but rather, wisdom.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Tralbry
January 10, 2010 11:36 PM in reply to RhodaA
>> please, just get out of the way. The rest of us have a job to do.
Knock yourself out. You're free to take up the slack for the hundreds of hours I put into Obama's campaign. You waste a lot of words on coalitions. Paid off Health Ins COs are corporations, not part of a legit coalition. And then even more wasted words that politics is hard and horsetrading is necessary. Yes, it's REALLY hard if you don't fight as Obama has demonstrated. He horsetraded away the his base's progressive aspects of the bill at the start to placate his known opponents. He started with teh Bachus committee, his preferred bill. The ONLY time he used pressure was to stifle the base, e.g. drug reimportation and the public option.
I have no idea why you think this KOS post was compelling. We've seen it and many like it on Huffpo and elsewhere and aren't impressed, especially since a lot of it is "he doesn't have a magic wand", "legislating is hard", "bush was worse" and "nader voters are stupid" attempts at "arguing".
I prefer Feingold's realistic assessment that this is the Bill O wanted - not one that he was forced to accept because of the oh so awfully hard work of negotiations process. He wasn't up to risking capital so you get the lowest common denominator.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
RhodaA
January 11, 2010 8:23 AM in reply to Tralbry
I am critical of proponents of what, in reality, devolves into destructive nihilism.
"I have learned through bitter experience the one supreme lesson to conserve my anger, and as heat conserved is transmitted into energy, even so our anger controlled can be transmitted into a power that can move the world." – Gandhi
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
January 11, 2010 9:29 AM in reply to RhodaA
I couldn't agree more with the Daily Kos post. I have been saying the same thing for a year.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jenesq
January 11, 2010 10:26 AM in reply to RhodaA
Well, tha's surprisingly insightful for a diarist on DKos, where the naive, whiny Naderites seem to have taken over the ship. People on the left who think that Barack Obama is a do-nothing sellout are as clueless and intellectually dishonest as any teabagger...and obviously never paid a lick of real attention during the campaign.
But these immature, instant-gratification-obsessed whiners had better not pull a 2000 on this country in 2010 or 2012, because we all know where their "not a dime's worth of difference between Bush and Gore" bullshit took us. Seriously, how many people died needlessly because of that POV?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cjop
January 12, 2010 1:16 PM in reply to RhodaA
See reply above Rhoda screed.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Viva!America!
January 10, 2010 11:45 AM in reply to cjop
No! Certain Democrats deserve to be replaced with other Democrats. Replacing a Dem with a Right Winger punishes Americans and halts progress.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
J.Parker
January 10, 2010 1:01 PM in reply to cjop
Democrats may need a few setbacks to realize they have to do more to keep their message in front of people. The tea party fears of large deficits, crushing taxes and death panels may be nonsensical, but they're moving into the mainstream. Democrats need to explain why the government has to spend, and how they're working to revive the economy. Lack of action on Wall Street and banking reform makes the Democrats seem complicit with the people who tanked the economy.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
brewmn61
January 11, 2010 10:44 AM in reply to J.Parker
"Democrats may need a few setbacks to realize they have to do more to keep their message in front of people. The tea party fears of large deficits, crushing taxes and death panels may be nonsensical, but they're moving into the mainstream."
Where have you been the last thirty years? Our entire Washington establishment is hard-wired into the notions that taxes are nothing but a heinous crime perpetrated against the American people, and that deficits matter, but only when there's a Democrat in the White House. Fear of taxes and Democratic deficits haas been the manistream opinion ever since Reagan won the national debate.
Many more setbacks for the Democrats, and we'll all be paying our taxes directly to ADM, Exxon/Mobil, and Blackwater. If you think we win long-term by losing now, you live in a fantasy world.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
YesAnd
January 10, 2010 11:33 AM
Martha Coakley is a well-liked, well-known politician who, as Attorney General, has had the benefit of playing good cop for years and years. Without breaking a sweat, she trounced her opposition in the primary, including a very likeable progressive and a Romney acolyte with piles of cash. Scott Brown is, for all intents and purposes, a nobody, and his TV ads are laughable. We have our share of stupid people in Massachusetts, but not nearly enough to elect the likes of Scott Brown.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
midnight rambler
January 10, 2010 2:57 PM in reply to YesAnd
"Well-liked"? You're kidding, right? Coakley is widely viewed as insipid, and disliked by a lot of people for some of her prosecutorial actions (e.g. Fells Acres). She slouched into the nomination because she started off with the highest name recognition and everyone else turned off the voters in the debates. I originally thought I might have preferred Capuano, but he showed himself to be kind of a jerk.
That's why nobody cares about this election, because nobody positively WANTS to vote for Coakley.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
YesAnd
January 10, 2010 5:31 PM in reply to midnight rambler
Quoting today's Boston Globe story's very first sentence:
"Democrat Martha Coakley, buoyed by her durable statewide popularity..."
I have no doubt that some view her negatively, and she may well be insipid, but still think the majority who see her as competent and sincere, which was my point. No doubt, being able to crow on the evening news about bringing various bad guys and gals to justice is the ultimate wellspring any positive impressions that people have of her, as well as her high name recognition. (I personally think that AGs have an unfair advantage in terms of ongoing media exposure.) Regardless, whatever her foibles, she's an extraordinarily attractive alternative to Scott Brown.
I did not watch every debate, but Capuano was clearly the superior player, and I wasn't turned off by his demeanor. I do realize that at that point all Coakley had to do was avoid a gaffe.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
midnight rambler
January 10, 2010 6:38 PM in reply to YesAnd
Yes, but the problem is that, as far as I can tell from all the coverage, nobody is really very enthusiastic about the prospect of Coakley as Senator. Everyone expects that she'll be a lot more like Kerry than Kennedy, and that's my impression too. That's why nobody is motivated to actually vote. It's the difference between people who will vote for you if they have to make a choice, and those who will go out in a snowstorm to do it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Sailormarlowe
January 10, 2010 12:06 PM
No Kennedy clones, please! And does the country really need death panels, gov't funded compulsory abortions, and killer taxes on the middle class? No way.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JohnMcCSF
January 10, 2010 12:51 PM in reply to Sailormarlowe
Death panels, baby killing panels AND ACORN reeducation camps all paid for by taxes on white people who watch Glenn Beck!
America love it or leave it baby
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CityGuy
January 10, 2010 1:14 PM in reply to JohnMcCSF
And don't forget presidents who are foreign muslim extremists!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cwnidog
January 10, 2010 1:21 PM in reply to JohnMcCSF
How convenient, and we can use the list of white people who watch and listen to Glenn Beck as our first list of people to round up for the re-education camps.
I just love it when we can great savings like this. And the Republicans keep saying that this Administration is fiscally irresponsible - HA!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JohnMcCSF
January 10, 2010 4:42 PM in reply to JohnMcCSF
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cwnidog
January 10, 2010 5:08 PM in reply to JohnMcCSF
Thanks, that makes it all so much simpler. Just remember a few simple phrases and you'll be OK.
But if you really want to move up to the next level, learn to master the false equivalency. For example, Obama likes dogs and little children. You know who else liked dogs and little children? HITLER, THAT'S WHO!!!
See, it's easy once you know how.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
BeeClone
January 10, 2010 5:18 PM in reply to Sailormarlowe
I'll ask you the same question Chris Matthews asked a Republican consultant " what the Republican party has done for this country in the last ten to 20 years."
he had no answer. The party of NO.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JohnMcCSF
January 10, 2010 12:49 PM
Yesterday I received a fundraising email from the DSCC and a phone bank invite from OFA
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Tralbry
January 10, 2010 11:39 PM in reply to JohnMcCSF
And?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
highplainslawyer
January 10, 2010 3:56 PM
Maybe the people of Massechusetts simply do not want to see a Romney/McCain health care bill imposed on the rest of the nation? After all, they have been living with Romney care for quite a while. And "Obamacare" is nothing but Romney care with McCain's middle class tax hike tossed in for good measure.
Jeez, if I favored this type of health care reform, I would have supported Romney and McCain.
This bill needs to die and the Democrats need to pay a high price for serving up this crap.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
acf_ma
January 10, 2010 4:29 PM in reply to highplainslawyer
Funny you should mention Romney. Brown's mouthpiece is the same one Romney has used since he started his political career. Brown is also somewhat of a protege of Romney, being the only one of Romney's candidates to win a race during his uninterested years as MA Governor.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
bill
January 10, 2010 4:34 PM
Let's face it, there are very few Democrats left in Congress. Most have simply become Republican-light. We voters might as well take a pass and hasten the nation's demise, as to continue the slow and painful torture of first voting for Democrats, then finding the Democrats we voted for are Republicans. Their election simply slows or briefly postpones the decline. Perpetual war, continuing shift of wealth from middle class families to corporations, failing to pass single payer health care, cutting taxes for corporations and the wealthy and cutting benefits for the middle class: these are Republican 'principles', but they're Democratic practices. The Democratic Party has 'moved to the right', but the American electorate has not. The American electorate is looking for candidates in the Democratic tradition of leading in the public interest. Unfortunately, there are few Democrats left in Congress and few Democratic candidates for Congress who act in the public interest.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
celldumceen
January 10, 2010 6:17 PM
Democrats need to calm down! According to the polls Obama had no chance of beating Hillary for the Democratic nomination for President! According to the polls the last Presidential election should have been a lot sloser than it turned out to be! Since Obama became President there have been 5 special elections and the Dems have won all of them! Just like they will win this one! Polls have a way of just being wrong!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
destor23
January 10, 2010 6:23 PM
Another problem: there's a libertarian named Joe Kennedy running. Normally the libertarian would siphon off Republican votes but in this case, given the name... in a close election it's a potential wild card.
This Joe Kennedy is no relation, of course but does everyone know that?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
midnight rambler
January 10, 2010 6:40 PM in reply to destor23
Yes; this idiot has been running in every statewide election for the last 20 years.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
M.L.H.
January 10, 2010 8:08 PM
PPP does robo-polls. Reputable news organizations should stop reporting their results, because they suffer from self-selection bias.
Google "literary digest poll of 1936" to see how bad a self-selected poll can be.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Icon
January 10, 2010 10:05 PM
PPP's polling isn't very reliable. Even Rasmussen, which most would claim has a pro-Republican bias, gives Coakley a comfortable lead.
I'd be really surprised if Brown wins, to be perfectly honest.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Tanjaoui
January 10, 2010 10:21 PM in reply to Icon
Ditto
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
USgreentech
January 11, 2010 7:08 AM
The Democrats put Republicans into a life threatening situation.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
January 11, 2010 9:27 AM
This is a bullshit poll. Coakley is going to win and why or why do we have to keep listening to Rasmussen? Josh, please????
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jenesq
January 11, 2010 10:29 AM in reply to lousgirl84
It's a PPP (D) poll, not a Rass poll. It's still based on an unlikely voter turnout model, but maybe it's the incentive needed to get people off their butts. One hopes MA is not full of what I call "the whiny left" who prefer to sit at home in a lather of poutrage over the purported failure of their largely fantasy-based agenda, because it seems that they would rather shoot themselves in the foot (and the rest of us in the back) than deal with the realities of attainable political progress.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?