Brown tells Obama to stay out of Massachusetts; Update: Rothenberg moves race to “toss-up”

posted at 1:36 pm on January 14, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

Barack Obama has been conspicuously absent from the Massachusetts special election that will replace Ted Kennedy in the Senate.  After Obama flopped at a Deval Patrick fundraiser in 2009, Martha Coakley may not be terribly anxious to have a similar embarrassment in an already-creaky campaign.  Scott Brown says he doesn’t want Obama campaigning in Massachusetts, either:

Surging GOP Senate candidate Scott Brown yesterday warned President Obama to “stay away” from the Bay State during his roiling race against Democratic rival Martha Coakley and not to interfere with their intensifying battle in the campaign’s final days.

“He should stay away and let Martha and I discuss the issues one on one,” Brown said. “The machine is coming out of the woodwork to get her elected. They’re bringing in outsiders, and we don’t need them.”

Coakley’s campaign showed signs of panic as they scrambled to get a last-minute appearance by Obama to bolster their effort before Tuesday’s election. …

Coakley said yesterday she hasn’t heard from the White House. “I welcome his support, but we’ve got a lot of support here in Massachusetts (and) I think he’s got a lot on his plate in Washington,” she said.

Obama press secretary Robert Gibbs said yesterday that the president had no plans to visit Massachusetts, even though he realizes “there’s a lot at stake in the election.”

There seems to be a bit of the briar-patch strategy in Brown’s statement.  Normally, one would want to limit the amount of support shown for one’s opposition as a matter of course — but despite Massachusetts’ deep-blue status, voters are not as enchanted with Obama as they were in 2008.  Obama couldn’t fill a Democratic fundraiser three months ago for Patrick, and he was more popular then than now.

If Obama came and stumped for Coakley, it would bolster his assertions that Coakley is nothing more than a pawn of the Democratic “machine,” Brown’s message this week.  Obama himself seems to understand this, and he has plenty of excuses for not showing up in Massachusetts.  If Obama doesn’t show, then the impression will be left that Obama doesn’t want to risk his standing with an explicit campaign effort only to lose — like he did in New Jersey.

Either way, the taunt works for Brown.  Via Jim Geraghty, here’s a more positive message that Brown is sending to voters this week. I think this is an unusually positive ad for the last week of a campaign:

Update: Political analyst Stuart Rothenberg moves the race to Toss-Up from Narrow Advantage to Incumbent:

Democratic desperation and other compelling evidence strongly suggest that Democrats may well lose the late Senator Edward Kennedy’s Senate seat in Tuesday’s special election. Because of this, we are moving our rating of the race from Narrow Advantage for the Incumbent Party to Toss-Up.

Whatever the shortcomings of the Coakley campaign (and they certainly exist), this race has become about change, President Obama and Democratic control of all of the levers of power in Washington, D.C. Brown has “won” the “free media” over the past few days, and if he continues to do so, he will win the election.

Note that Rothenberg isn’t saying that Democratic desperation will cause them to lose the race, but that their desperation gives a pretty good indication that they think they could lose the race.  He also discounts any boost for Coakley from late attack ads, saying that the obvious desperation will make those attacks much less credible.  And all of this is more good reason for Obama to steer clear of Massachusetts.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

In the Haitti thread, Dave actually stated that he knows what he’s talking about because his wife has a PHD. Which makes him a Progressive Arrogant Elitist Pr!ck… in marriage only.

ronnyraygun on January 14, 2010 at 4:32 PM

PHD = Piled High and Deep

Del Dolemonte on January 14, 2010 at 6:09 PM

PLEASE SEND SCOTT AS MUCH DOUGH YOU CAN SPARE!

OmahaConservative on January 14, 2010 at 6:14 PM

Barack Obama has been conspicuously absent from the Massachusetts special election that will replace Ted Kennedy in the Senate.

This one is not so much up to Coakley.

If he goes, and then loses, it will be mega-big.

Schadenfreude on January 14, 2010 at 6:33 PM

Just sent a hundred bucks in honor of hawkdriver and his company. Please feel free to do the same, or in honor of grandma whom ObamaCare wants to throw under the bus with pills.

OmahaConservative on January 14, 2010 at 7:03 PM

Del Dolemonte on January 14, 2010 at 6:09 PM

Oh, land, do we have to do this? Does this include Thomas Sowell and Walter Williams?

DrMagnolias on January 14, 2010 at 7:13 PM

Nice ad. And, as you said, it was very, very positive for this late in the campaign.

His victory will be _sweet_! :) :) :)

Theophile on January 14, 2010 at 7:23 PM

This one is not so much up to Coakley.

If he goes, and then loses, it will be mega-big.

Schadenfreude on January 14, 2010 at 6:33 PM

So it doesn’t get buried, Obama has now cut an ad for Coakley and Valerie Jarrett left it open that he might go there. Even if he doesn’t he will appear via the video in the ad.

KittyLowrey on January 14, 2010 at 7:27 PM

Go Brown , and I did not mean the Cleveland Browns.

bayview on January 14, 2010 at 7:34 PM

Nice ad…

Very effective!

Seven Percent Solution on January 14, 2010 at 7:35 PM

Scott is awesome and he will win because he is of the people, his accent tells it all.

tim c on January 14, 2010 at 7:37 PM

It would be a huge mistake for Obama to go to campaign for Coakley:

1.Will campaigning/fundraising for Oakley provide JOBS for the MILLIONS of unemployed?

2. Will campaigning/fundraising for Oakley help with National Security?

TN Mom on January 14, 2010 at 8:12 PM

The sad thing is his 41st vote on Health Care won’t matter. The bill has already passed the house, and the senate. When it comes out of conference committee or whatever method they are using it will be a simple up or down vote 51 to 49 will be enough. The only place to stop it is in the House where the vote was very close 218 to 215 to 2.

Dasher on January 14, 2010 at 8:49 PM

I like this guy. He’s got spunk! She may win, but she sure is looking desperate.

AnninCA on January 14, 2010 at 9:17 PM

Possible game-changer?

Don’t know if this has already been posted as I just arrive home.
http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/01/game-changer-martha-coakley-devout-catholics-probably-shouldnt-work-in-the-emergency-room-video/

redridinghood on January 14, 2010 at 9:36 PM

Possible game-changer?

Don’t know if this has already been posted as I just arrive home.
http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/01/game-changer-martha-coakley-devout-catholics-probably-shouldnt-work-in-the-emergency-room-video/

redridinghood on January 14, 2010 at 9:36 PM

I don’t think it has, but it should be. If you have any religious objections to medical procedures, Martha Coakley wants you “voluntarily” banned from the Emergency Room. It’s okay. I’m sure there are no Catholics living in MassachusettEs.

UnderstandingisPower on January 14, 2010 at 10:02 PM

I was just reading this on another site: If you’re a Mass. voter and the Coakley people call you, keep ‘em on the line for as long as possible, asking lots of questions, feigning great interest in their candidate. Suggest that you might be too busy to vote, that you’ve heard she’s going to lose anyway, and let them talk and talk. At the end, say you’re voting for Brown. That’ll be 10 or so fewer voters they can call while they’re talking to you.

I thought it was kind of satisfyingly subversive.

Rational Thought on January 14, 2010 at 10:08 PM

Dasher on January 14, 2010 at 8:49 PM

Don’t count out the domino effect…if he wins, everyone will see that their election is at risk.
Remember this is the most secure Senate seat in the U.S….for 57 years straight it has been a dem seat, and only 8 out of the last 76 years has it been Republican.
This is the most significant senate race in maybe 100 years….

right2bright on January 14, 2010 at 10:12 PM

The sad thing is his 41st vote on Health Care won’t matter……..whatever method they are using it will be a simple up or down vote 51 to 49 will be enough. The only place to stop it is in the House where the vote was very close 218 to 215 to 2.

Dasher on January 14, 2010 at 8:49 PM

I thought the Senate would STILL need 60 votes to cut off debate on the Conference Committe version, no?

Red State State of Mind on January 14, 2010 at 10:22 PM

stldave on January 14, 2010 at 10:14 PM

Paleologos calls MA races very acurately. His record for the last 10 years has been nearly perfect.

massrighty on January 14, 2010 at 10:32 PM

UnderstandingisPower on January 14, 2010 at 10:02 PM

You would think that this would make a lot of Catholics mad even Dem. Catholics.

redridinghood on January 14, 2010 at 10:35 PM

Best line: “It’s not TEDDY’S SEAT, it’s the PEOPLE’S seat.”

AnninCA on January 14, 2010 at 10:39 PM

Dasher on January 14, 2010 at 8:49 PM

Don’t count out the domino effect…if he wins, everyone will see that their election is at risk.
Remember this is the most secure Senate seat in the U.S….for 57 years straight it has been a dem seat, and only 8 out of the last 76 years has it been Republican.
This is the most significant senate race in maybe 100 years….

right2bright on January 14, 2010 at 10:12 PM

I do agree with that. It then depends on how strong ideology is driving HC takeover vs stupidity. It would be great if they just backed off but so far there has been no indication that they will do so. One election at a time.!

Dasher on January 14, 2010 at 11:14 PM

The sad thing is his 41st vote on Health Care won’t matter……..whatever method they are using it will be a simple up or down vote 51 to 49 will be enough. The only place to stop it is in the House where the vote was very close 218 to 215 to 2.

Dasher on January 14, 2010 at 8:49 PM

I thought the Senate would STILL need 60 votes to cut off debate on the Conference Committe version, no?

Red State State of Mind on January 14, 2010 at 10:22 PM

Once the bill comes back from conference committee there will be no more debate.. the bill can no longer be modified… otherwise it would ping-pong back and forth for ever… it is just an up down vote.

Dasher on January 14, 2010 at 11:19 PM

The original bill only passed the house by 220 : 215 so losing two votes could stop it.. Pressure should be in the house not the Senate.

Dasher on January 14, 2010 at 11:21 PM

“Update: Political analyst Stuart Rothenberg moves the race to Toss-Up from Narrow Advantage to Incumbent:”

Say what? There is no incumbent!! It is an open seat.

Dasher on January 14, 2010 at 11:48 PM

Even more LIBERAL HYPOCRISY!!!

Former President Clinton is the UN Special Envoy to HAITI.

Yet he is planning to spend tomorrow campaigning for Martha Coakley in Massachusetts.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Despite-earthquake-UN-Haiti-envoy-Bill-Clinton-to-stump-in-Massachusetts-81521657.html

If Bill Clinton dares to show up in Boston or Worcester to campaign tomorrow, would somebody please let him know about the earthquake in Haiti!

wren on January 15, 2010 at 12:34 AM

http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/Scott_Brown.htm

* Rep. Brown indicated he supports the following principles concerning gun issues:
* Require background checks on gun sales between private citizens at gun shows.
* Require a license for gun possession.

Source: Massachusetts State Legislative Election 2002 NPAT Nov 1, 2002

CINO.

“How a politician stands on the Second Amendment tells you how he or she views you as an individual… as a trustworthy and productive citizen, or as part of an unruly crowd that needs to be lorded over, controlled, supervised, and taken care of.” – Dr. Suzanna Hupp

CPL 310 on January 15, 2010 at 5:52 AM

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!

We WANT Obama to go to Masachusutz (Coakley spelling) to help her the same way he helped Deeds and Corzine.

Please, Obama, PUHLEEZE go to Misechusetz!!!!

(Say….isn’t it time for Obama to go to Copenhagen again to come up empty for something else?)

olesparkie on January 15, 2010 at 8:44 AM

A briar-patch strategy?

If no one’s said it yet

RAAAAAAACCCCIIIIISSSSSSTTTTT!!!!!!

- The Cat

MirCat on January 15, 2010 at 9:27 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3