When you login first time using a Social Login button, we collect your account public profile information shared by Social Login provider, based on your privacy settings. We also get your email address to automatically create an account for you in our website. Once your account is created, you'll be logged-in to this account.
DisagreeAgree
Connect with
I allow to create an account
When you login first time using a Social Login button, we collect your account public profile information shared by Social Login provider, based on your privacy settings. We also get your email address to automatically create an account for you in our website. Once your account is created, you'll be logged-in to this account.
DisagreeAgree
24 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
HadaAbeche
13 years ago
You need to check back with Rasmussen. Its now Coakley 49%, Brown 47% …….
Be sure to copy the RNC on your article. I don’t think they realize that Scott Brown is running.
URI
13 years ago
Remember when I was telling you about massive electoral fraud! Hellooooo….MA is a classical example.
How many ACORN and Union mobsters are illegally voting in MA? Even the dead are voting Democrat in MA. Probably Kennedy would be ‘voting’ too.
There is no way on earth that the radicals are going to let this election go into a Republican hand. I think Mr. Scott has to have a good set of lawyers to contest the election. People need to supervise every electoral supervisor in each precint, Remember how Al Franken got elected? Remember how Hoffman lost? There is a pattern here and Kerry moved in with his re-enforcements to stop the bleeding.
It is so naive of people to think the radicals are just going to hand us power? They are vicious and they will rather die than give up power.
I wish Mr. Scott my best and gave him money but inside of me, because I know the radicals so well, he is not going to win this election due to electoral fraud. Go prove it…Does Scott Brown have the money?
An interesting article by Rick Klein, from ABC’s “The Note” this morning:
Did Republicans already win in Massachusetts?
Not next Tuesday’s Senate election itself, of course — few observers really think that’s winnable even now, no matter how toxic the environment for Democrats these days.
But the fact that this is a race at all — or, at least, the fact that it’s being treated like a race over the final week — is itself a victory that tells important tales for both parties. A narrative for 2010 didn’t have to wait beyond the first month of the year to get written.
The pieces are there: the Kennedy seat, the fate of the health care bill, Tea Party fervor, an anti-establishment Republican, a Democrat clinging to a lead in the bluest of states.
Democrats are being forced to spend very real resources in a place they should not, by any calculation, have to worry about it. They’re being met by resources (perhaps a more renewable variety at this stage) that Republicans never dreamed would be worth spending.
And they’re being forced to combat the very real perception that if it can happen in the Hub, it can happen in Arkansas or Nevada or Virginia, too
…
At the very least: “Massachusetts state Sen. Scott Brown (R) has thrown a major scare into the Democratic establishment in his bid to win next Tuesday’s special Senate election over once heavily favored Attorney General Martha Coakley,” Dan Balz and Chris Cillizza write in The Washington Post. “A victory, or even a narrow loss, by Brown in the competition for the symbolically important seat would be interpreted as another sign that voters have turned away from the Democrats at the start of the midterm election year.”
Not just a win is potentially dangerous for Democrats: “Brown’s threat to health reform is in some ways larger. He’s showing how Republicans can run against reform — something sure to play out in other high-profile campaigns this fall, such as those of Reps. Frank Kratovil Jr. (D-Md.) and John Adler (D-N.J.), along with Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) and Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.),” Politico’s Chris Frates reports.
…
“A close race — within five points, or even ten — would generate significant panic among Democrats in other races presumed to be safe,” The Atlantic’s Marc Ambinder writes.
It’s hard for some Democrats to believe that the candidate running to replace Ted Kennedy is being attacked over health care reform — in one of the bluest states in the union, no less.
But Republican Scott Brown has got Democrats nervous — not just for his opponent Martha Coakley but about the fact that a loss in Massachusetts would be a body blow to Democratic reform efforts in Washington.
Oh, you want me to “get over” the fact that the GOP isn’t lifting a finger to support Scott Brown in this election?
No, I don’t believe I will get over it.
Missy
13 years ago
Krauthammer was saying last night that it would have been better had this race remained in the shadows, the Republicans could have quietly crossed the finish line. Shining a national light on it has awoken and inspired the democrats to get out and vote. I suppose all their other tactics will also be in force.
Croakley’s last couple of days haven’t been good and she’s only got herself to blame. Going to DC to hob nob with lobbiests with her hand out instead of staying home and manning her headquarters probably will knock out a few more undecideds. “No al Qaeda in Afghanistan” right after we lose CIA agents to al Qaeda certainly puts her in the ignorant catagory, there goes undecided dem patriots. And the thug tactics involving the reporter after last night’s event makes her look bad. No apology, she stood there, let it happen and walked on.
@John Cooper: I am not going to allow you to turn this discussion on Scott Brown into another of your “hate the GOP” screeds.
Do I wish the NRSCC would put the max amount into his campaign? Yes. I guess they figure after spending mover a $million for Weld and Romney’s failed senate bids they don’t want to throw more money away that they need in 2010 because folks like you won’t give them a dime.
But that isn’t the topic under consideration here.
Since all you are doing is complaining, it’s no wonder the NRSCC or any other GOP entity doesn’t listen to you or take you seriously.
@Missy: I saw Krauthammer’s take on it. And he too was worried Brown may peak too soon.
bulwark
13 years ago
I don’t think the polls account for the fleet of Chevys with trunk loads of “discovered ballots” ready to roll if dems feel the election of Brown is eminent
Joshua Lindsey
13 years ago
The latest Rasmussen Poll states this:
The results of this poll are not precisely comparable with last week’s results because this poll includes the independent candidate by name while the previous poll simply offered the choice of “some other candidate.” Additionally, the latest poll results include “leaners.”
Leaners are those who don’t initially have a preference for one of the major candidates but indicate that they are leaning in that direction. Without “leaners,” Brown was actually ahead by a single percentage point.
I think Martha has shown Massachusetts that she doesn’t do much at all. Now she wants even more power? She has shown nothing new just the same old downing of the other person. The only thing she hasn’t done yet is attack Brown’s family. Go Brown.
Dankery D.
13 years ago
if this guy wins, is everyone on this site going to continue calling Mass a pinko wonderland?
Missy
13 years ago
Do I wish the NRSCC would put the max amount into his campaign? Yes. I guess they figure after spending mover a $million for Weld and Romney’s failed senate bids they don’t want to throw more money away that they need in 2010 because folks like you won’t give them a dime.
How many have returned their mailings with messages such as, “No more money to the headquarters, will send money directly to conservative candidates?” We’ve seen many comments posted such as this in here and I’ve seen it on other sites I visit for a few years now.
Then when you look at the grassroots support Hoffman got in NY23, perhaps the NRSCC sat back and waited for it to happen again, and it did.
Paleologos said bellweather models show high numbers of independent voters turning out on election day, which benefits Brown, who has 65 percent of that bloc compared to Coakley’s 30 percent. Kennedy earns just 3 percent of the independent vote, and 1 percent are undecided.
Yet even in the bluest state, it appears Kennedy’s quest for universal health care has fallen out of favor, with 51 percent of voters saying they oppose the “national near-universal health-care package” and 61 percent saying they believe the government cannot afford to pay for it.
“….Brown leading all regions of the state except Suffolk County.
“Either Brown’s momentum accelerates and his lead widens, or this becomes a wake-up call for Coakley to become the ‘Comeback Kid’ this weekend,” Paleologos said.
And with 99 percent having made up their minds, voters may be hard to persuade.</blockquote>
While Brown has 91 percent of registered Republicans locked up, an astonishing 17 percent of Democrats report they’re jumping ship for Brown as well – likely a product of Coakley’s laser-focus on hard-core Dems, potentially at the exclusion of other Democrats whom she needed to win over, Paleologos said.
For Coakley, Brown’s surge may be as ominous as the fact that her campaign’s peril is not fully recognized, with 64 percent of voters still believing she’ll win – a perception that threatens to keep her supporters home.
Brown’s popularity is solid. He enjoys a 57 percent favorability rating compared to just 19 percent unfavorable. Coakley’s favorability is 49 percent; her unfavorability, 41 percent.
@Missy: I don’t blame the NRSCC. Look at the poll numbers from last year. Would you put the few dollars you have into a race where your candidate is 30 points behind?
I would be very surprised if they are not now pumping money up there big time.
It would be wonderful if they could pump the maximum amount ($540,000?) allowed by law into EVERY race in 2010. But are there 34 Senate races and since so many people are contributing directly to candidates (which I do not at all discourage) that leaves the GOP campaign committees short of cash:
Have we reached the point where it becomes counterproductive to demand that the NRSC fund every race to the max but at the same time we withhold contributions?
As for the new polling, don’t overlook the Blue Mass Group which gives the nod to Coakley:
I was supporting you Mike, guess I should have been clearer, but, holding back cash has been going on for quite some time. Supporting the wrong candidate in NY23 added to the problem. I also hope they send some cash his way, coming this close is sending a strong message, winning it would save the country.
I’m really worried about the purple goon squad being shipped in there right now, it’s going to take money to counter the over $600,000 plus grand they are bringing and vigilence to counter whatever else they plan on doing. He’s got momentum, but he has to have enough votes to get past the fraud.
@Missy: You’re always supportive and it’s much appreciated. But you did give me a chance to broaden the discussion. If we keep punishing the GOP committees how can we complain when they haven’t got the cash to send? Of course it doesn’t help when they drop so much down a rat hole like Scovofava or whatever her name is.
And yes, fraud is another potential problem. If the race is really close and Brown has the edge the Dems will be able to hold up certifying the election until they can ram the health bill through with the vote of the appointed, not elected, Senator who replaced Kennedy.
If Brown gets a safe and solid win Dems won’t have a leg to stand on to hold up his certification.
WASHINGTON – National GOP strategists say that the unexpected tightening in the Massachusetts Senate race has demonstrated the potency of the electorate’s antipathy for the Democratic health care legislation, and that Republican Scott Brown’s campaign could become a template for Republican challengers across the country in this year’s midterm elections.
“He’s making health care a front-and-center issue in the most liberal state in the country, and it’s working for him,’’ said Whit Ayres, who cofounded Resurgent Republic, a group of conservative pollsters and strategists formed to shape the national debate. “That’s the major message – that this bill is an albatross around the necks of the Democrats, and if it works this well in Massachusetts, just imagine how well it will work in less liberal states.’’
Brown has portrayed the Democratic health care bills as bloated, tax-stuffed mistakes that would do little to solve Massachusetts’ biggest health care challenge – controlling costs – while forcing its residents to sub sidize insurance for people in other states. He has called for Congress to “go back to the drawing board’’ and come up with a new plan. And he has capitalized on speculation about whether Democrats might try to delay his confirmation if he wins in order to ram the health bill through, stoking concerns about transparency and fairness raised by special deals Democratic leaders made last year to entice fence-sitters to vote for the bill.
“Threatening to ignore the results of a free election and steal this Senate vote from the people of Massachusetts takes their schemes to a whole new level,’’ the Brown campaign said in a recent statement, in a burst of rhetoric that has been typical of his camp. A spokesman for Brown declined to comment for this story.
…
Brown is tapping into a general dissatisfaction about the state of the country and what many view as the Democrats’ misplaced response to its problems, said Stuart Rothenberg, editor and publisher of the Rothenberg Political Report, a nonpartisan newsletter covering national politics and campaigns.
“I think the focus on health care has been so heavy for so long, and the public looks around at all these other problems and says, ‘Why the heck don’t you do something about jobs?’ ’’ he said. “It may not be Obama’s fault that the economy hasn’t rebounded, but politicians are held responsible for how people feel. I think you’ll see Republican candidates around the country just taking advantage of all this.’’
One lesson GOP challengers nationwide might take from the Brown campaign, analysts say, is to frame their complaints about the health care legislation in economic terms, rather than on health policy or ideological grounds. Brown has avoided the battle cries of last summer’s Tea Parties about a Canadian-style government takeover of health care or so-called death panels, which would probably not resonate as well in a traditionally liberal state like Massachusetts.
Instead, Brown has lumped the proposed tax increases in the health care bill together with Coakley’s support for other Democratic initiatives, such as allowing the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts to expire and the cap and trade bill, to assert Coakley supports $2 trillion in tax increases.
“The theme of taxes hurting middle-income people and the economic recovery is the big take,’’ said Robert Blendon, a professor of health policy and political analysis at Harvard University. He added that Brown has the benefit of running just as Democratic leaders in Washington are hotly debating how to raise the money to pay for the health care bill. “He’s arguing that in this economic climate, you just can’t do that.’’
Brown has also localized the health care issue, arguing it will effectively force Massachusetts taxpayers to subsidize health care in other states. Brown has a unique advantage in that Massachusetts already has near-universal health insurance, so Coakley has little opportunity to base her appeals for the bill on helping the uninsured in her home state.
At the same time, Brown has played up the “special deals’’ that Senate leaders doled out to win votes, such as guaranteeing additional Medicaid money for the home states of Senator Ben Nelson, Democrat of Nebraska, and Senator Mary Landrieu, Democrat of Louisiana. “It is broken,’’ Brown said in his final debate with Coakley. “The backroom deals in Nebraska and Louisiana we know all about.’’
Missy
13 years ago
Now we have William Jefferson Clinton rushing in:
U.N. Envoy to Haiti, Bill Clinton, Rushes to Disaster Site—Boston!
Most Americans have seen Bill Clinton on television, mobilizing worldwide humanitarian assistance in the wake of the earthquake that devastated Haiti.
But in the process of taking up his new portfolio as U.N. special envoy to Haiti, the 42nd President of the U.S. is also trying to shore up another potential disaster area closer to home: Massachusetts, where a Suffolk University poll released last night showed Democrat Martha Coakley trailing Republican Scott Brown by four percentage points statewide and only four days before they compete in the race for the late Ted Kennedy’s Senate seat.
So Clinton will appear in Boston this afternoon along with the Bay State’s other U.S. Senator, 2004 Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry, in a last-minute effort to rally Democrats in the state to rally behind Coakley for Tuesday’s special election.
You have to see this one, gotta be the botox, can’t make this stuff up. Must be where rich wheeler is getting his info:
Pelosi: Claims about GOP midterm momentum are ‘hype and hyperbole’
“Republicans are in full blown ‘spin mode’ attacking the President and claiming he has lost support,” she wrote. “But that is just hype and hyperbole. You and I know better — together we are moving America forward.”
We should win big to defeat the cheating we’ve already noticed. It’s not new but what on earth is new is that i am vigilant and are learning to sort it out now instead of a couple of months from now. will have them exposed for the cheaters there’re, just as their adverse campaigning has shown these people as liars and devoid that belongs to them ideas. Now is not some time to slow down but rather to pile the item on. It is enough time to leave no doubt regarding where the American men and women stand.
You need to check back with Rasmussen. Its now Coakley 49%, Brown 47% …….
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections2/election_2010/election_2010_senate_elections/massachusetts/election_2010_massachusetts_special_senate_election
Great post, linked at the Reaganite Republican-
SHOCK and AWE in Massachusetts! http://reaganiterepublicanresistance.blogspot.com/2010/01/shock-and-awe-in-massachusetts.html
Mike–
Be sure to copy the RNC on your article. I don’t think they realize that Scott Brown is running.
Remember when I was telling you about massive electoral fraud! Hellooooo….MA is a classical example.
How many ACORN and Union mobsters are illegally voting in MA? Even the dead are voting Democrat in MA. Probably Kennedy would be ‘voting’ too.
There is no way on earth that the radicals are going to let this election go into a Republican hand. I think Mr. Scott has to have a good set of lawyers to contest the election. People need to supervise every electoral supervisor in each precint, Remember how Al Franken got elected? Remember how Hoffman lost? There is a pattern here and Kerry moved in with his re-enforcements to stop the bleeding.
It is so naive of people to think the radicals are just going to hand us power? They are vicious and they will rather die than give up power.
I wish Mr. Scott my best and gave him money but inside of me, because I know the radicals so well, he is not going to win this election due to electoral fraud. Go prove it…Does Scott Brown have the money?
An interesting article by Rick Klein, from ABC’s “The Note” this morning:
and from Politico:
@URI: Vote fraud must be on everyone’s mind after what we saw in Minnesota. I hope our side is prepared for it.
@John Cooper: Get over it.
Oh, you want me to “get over” the fact that the GOP isn’t lifting a finger to support Scott Brown in this election?
No, I don’t believe I will get over it.
Krauthammer was saying last night that it would have been better had this race remained in the shadows, the Republicans could have quietly crossed the finish line. Shining a national light on it has awoken and inspired the democrats to get out and vote. I suppose all their other tactics will also be in force.
Croakley’s last couple of days haven’t been good and she’s only got herself to blame. Going to DC to hob nob with lobbiests with her hand out instead of staying home and manning her headquarters probably will knock out a few more undecideds. “No al Qaeda in Afghanistan” right after we lose CIA agents to al Qaeda certainly puts her in the ignorant catagory, there goes undecided dem patriots. And the thug tactics involving the reporter after last night’s event makes her look bad. No apology, she stood there, let it happen and walked on.
@John Cooper: I am not going to allow you to turn this discussion on Scott Brown into another of your “hate the GOP” screeds.
Do I wish the NRSCC would put the max amount into his campaign? Yes. I guess they figure after spending mover a $million for Weld and Romney’s failed senate bids they don’t want to throw more money away that they need in 2010 because folks like you won’t give them a dime.
But that isn’t the topic under consideration here.
Since all you are doing is complaining, it’s no wonder the NRSCC or any other GOP entity doesn’t listen to you or take you seriously.
@Missy: I saw Krauthammer’s take on it. And he too was worried Brown may peak too soon.
I don’t think the polls account for the fleet of Chevys with trunk loads of “discovered ballots” ready to roll if dems feel the election of Brown is eminent
The latest Rasmussen Poll states this:
Mike–
I sent Scott Brown a week’s pay. How much did you send?
@John Cooper: I’m glad you sent him money. Maybe that will help make up for the fact that you voted for JIMMY CARTER over REAGAN.
I’ve been giving to conservative candidates MY ENTIRE LIFE.
When you’ve volunteered, contributed and sacrificed for as many campaigns as I have, come and talk to me.
But again, John, the topic of this post isn’t you or me.
Wow, go, Scott, go!
Check out this new poll: http://www.wordstream.com/blog/ws/2010/01/14/ma-senate-race-poll-scott-brown-trounces-martha-coakley
(it’s Brown by a landslide)
I think Martha has shown Massachusetts that she doesn’t do much at all. Now she wants even more power? She has shown nothing new just the same old downing of the other person. The only thing she hasn’t done yet is attack Brown’s family. Go Brown.
if this guy wins, is everyone on this site going to continue calling Mass a pinko wonderland?
How many have returned their mailings with messages such as, “No more money to the headquarters, will send money directly to conservative candidates?” We’ve seen many comments posted such as this in here and I’ve seen it on other sites I visit for a few years now.
Then when you look at the grassroots support Hoffman got in NY23, perhaps the NRSCC sat back and waited for it to happen again, and it did.
@Larry Kim:
I saw that poll this morning, very interesting new way of polling, we will have to see how close it comes.
But, back to the old ways,
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/politics/view/20100114brown-out_poll_shows_scott_brown_trumping_martha_coakley/srvc=home&position=0
Still within the MOE, but he has the momentum.
Snippets from the article:
@Missy: I don’t blame the NRSCC. Look at the poll numbers from last year. Would you put the few dollars you have into a race where your candidate is 30 points behind?
I would be very surprised if they are not now pumping money up there big time.
It would be wonderful if they could pump the maximum amount ($540,000?) allowed by law into EVERY race in 2010. But are there 34 Senate races and since so many people are contributing directly to candidates (which I do not at all discourage) that leaves the GOP campaign committees short of cash:
http://blogs.usatoday.com/onpolitics/2009/12/democrats-have-more-cash-available-for-2010-battle.html
Have we reached the point where it becomes counterproductive to demand that the NRSC fund every race to the max but at the same time we withhold contributions?
As for the new polling, don’t overlook the Blue Mass Group which gives the nod to Coakley:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2010/senate/ma/massachusetts_senate_special_election-1144.html
Note that both the latest polls have a sample size which is HALF the Rasmussen sample size of 1000 likely voters.
But any way you want to look at it, there is no doubt the momentum is with Brown.
Even the Dem poll analyst Nate Silver admits the race is a toss up:
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/01/ok-its-toss-up.html
But his graph of recent polls shows the trend:
@Mike’s America:
I was supporting you Mike, guess I should have been clearer, but, holding back cash has been going on for quite some time. Supporting the wrong candidate in NY23 added to the problem. I also hope they send some cash his way, coming this close is sending a strong message, winning it would save the country.
I’m really worried about the purple goon squad being shipped in there right now, it’s going to take money to counter the over $600,000 plus grand they are bringing and vigilence to counter whatever else they plan on doing. He’s got momentum, but he has to have enough votes to get past the fraud.
@Missy: You’re always supportive and it’s much appreciated. But you did give me a chance to broaden the discussion. If we keep punishing the GOP committees how can we complain when they haven’t got the cash to send? Of course it doesn’t help when they drop so much down a rat hole like Scovofava or whatever her name is.
And yes, fraud is another potential problem. If the race is really close and Brown has the edge the Dems will be able to hold up certifying the election until they can ram the health bill through with the vote of the appointed, not elected, Senator who replaced Kennedy.
If Brown gets a safe and solid win Dems won’t have a leg to stand on to hold up his certification.
BROWN UPDATE: OBAMA TO CAMPAIGN FOR COAKLEY!
Amid stories that Coakley’s campaign is cratering:
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Massachusetts-Bottom-has-fallen-out-of-Coakleys-poll-numbers-Dems-prepare-to-explain-defeat-protect-Obama-81681862.html
Obama has announced he will go and campaign for the embattled Massachusetts Democrat:
http://realclearpolitics.blogs.time.com/2010/01/15/obama-to-mass/
Certainly the White House is aware of the risks of sending Obama to Massachusetts:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2010/01/president_obama_3.html
Meanwhile, Brown’s surge may be viewed as a model for other Senate races in 2010:
Now we have William Jefferson Clinton rushing in:
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=35213
You have to see this one, gotta be the botox, can’t make this stuff up. Must be where rich wheeler is getting his info:
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/76381-pelosi-claims-about-gop-momentum-are-hype-and-hyperbole
We should win big to defeat the cheating we’ve already noticed. It’s not new but what on earth is new is that i am vigilant and are learning to sort it out now instead of a couple of months from now. will have them exposed for the cheaters there’re, just as their adverse campaigning has shown these people as liars and devoid that belongs to them ideas. Now is not some time to slow down but rather to pile the item on. It is enough time to leave no doubt regarding where the American men and women stand.