Pollster.com: Brown has significant and growing lead

posted at 11:36 am on January 18, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

What are we to believe about all of the polling coming out of Massachusetts over the last week?  After all, no one would have predicted even a close race for Scott Brown at the end of December.  Are we to believe that he could ride almost out of nowhere and derail Democratic attempts to replace its “liberal lion,” Ted Kennedy?  According to Pollster.com, that’s the reality, regardless of which polls one chooses to believe:

So what might you believe about these data? You could refuse to cherry pick the polls. That has long been our view here at Pollster.com. Our job is to summarize the trends as best we can, without partisan favor. If you do that, we get a 8.8 point Brown lead.

Perhaps you only trust non-partisan polls. Then the Brown lead is 6.8 points.

Maybe you are a Dem, who doesn’t trust the Republican pollsters. Then Brown leads by 6.5 points.

Or you are a Dem who doesn’t trust the non-partisan pollsters either and who does believe in the leaks from the Coakley campaign. Then Brown’s lead is 3.8 points. (This is the only estimate that includes the leaks.)

Or you are a Rep who trusts GOP and nonpartisan polls only. Then Brown leads by 11.3. (There aren’t enough Rep polls to run a Rep only estimate to parallel the Dem only, but I’d think an 11 point lead would be satisfying enough for Reps.)

There may be other ways to cut these data (IVR vs conventional phone, pollsters you’ve heard of vs ones you haven’t) but it seems quite unlikely that any but the most selective reading of these data can find that the race remains a dead heat. Brown has a lead, as of Sunday night.

Charles Franklin does offer this warning, and the comparison to Douglas Hoffman’s supposed lead in NY-23:

Let’s also recall the NY-23 special election, which was not polling’s finest hour. The last three polls there had Hoffman up by 5, 5 and 17 points. Our final trend estimate based on all the polls had Hoffman up by 5,  41.8 to 36.8.

Polling special elections is hard. Tuesday we’ll see how hard, and who was good and/or lucky.

In this case, though, the turnout models will probably tell the difference.  Toss out the PPP poll, and the trend is still solidly Brown, even among polls with unrealistic turnout models for Democrats that put them at a +22 or a +23.5 advantage.  Toss out the IVR polls, and you still have ARG, PPP, and others showing Brown widening his lead.

Anything can happen; a coming snowstorm could cool enthusiasm for Brown and blunt the big turnout he needs from independents, for instance, although right now that would appear to be more of a danger to Coakley’s diffident voters.  But the broad range of polls all show Brown surging and Coakley stumbling.  We’ll see whether that becomes reality in tomorrow’s definitive poll of Massachusetts voters, and whether the seat belongs to the people or to Washington DC.

Update: Stuart Rothenberg’s now a believer:

While special elections often come down to turnout – and they therefore are more difficult to predict than normal elections – the combination of public and private survey research and anecdotal information now strongly suggests that Republican Scott Brown will defeat Democrat Martha Coakley in tomorrow’s race to fill the remainder of the late-Sen. Edward Kennedy’s seat.

Brown is running extremely well with Independents in the Bay State, and unless Democratic turnout exceeds everyone’s expectations, Brown is headed for a comfortable win. Move from Toss-Up to Lean Takeover.

Not just a win, but “a comfortable win.”

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

OmahaConservative on January 18, 2010 at 1:36 PM

Earlier, Rush was talking about Patrick Kennedy stumping for Coakly, and addressed here as Marsha! LOL Then he tried using a religous war to trounce on Brown. Saying *gasp* Brown is a protestant. So if Mass is almost 50% Catholic, that would make the other half protestant, Jewish, Islamic, etc… Even athiests. So either way, attacking one, over the other, would to me seem to devalue one half of those you want votes from? Is this moronic, or what???

capejasmine on January 18, 2010 at 2:03 PM

capejasmine on January 18, 2010 at 2:03 PM

LOL! Yup, I heard Rush saying that.

OmahaConservative on January 18, 2010 at 2:06 PM

You can’t have enough conscience watchers concern trolls.

Cindy Munford on January 18, 2010 at 1:42 PM
FIFY

OmahaConservative on January 18, 2010 at 2:02 PM

True
and very True

Red State State of Mind on January 18, 2010 at 2:06 PM

I want to believe… really, I do. But this is MASSACHUSETTS.

I still have a really bad feeling Coakley is going to win in a landslide. :( 55-41.

Enoxo on January 18, 2010 at 12:20 PM

One of the most reliable metrics we have is the absentee ballot count. Right? My understanding is:

1. Deadline for those ballot ended 2 days ago.
2. 9% of MA voters vote absentee.
3. Of these 9% Brown claimed a 16% margin over Marcia.

It is not fair to extrapolate linearly of course but…

What say you? The thing that concerns me is that your analysis and intuitions were so accurate in NY23 and NJ and VA.

What is guiding your skepticism aside from the reality that “this is is MASSACHUSETTS”?

Geochelone on January 18, 2010 at 2:06 PM

The latest polls for NY-23 did NOT reflect the successful shift of Dede’s voting block and her endorsement of Owens.

When I was in Watertown, NY and the news came in that Dede dropped out of the race, I saw “Oh sh*t” looks.

The reason was that Doug would have won the 3-way race.

Sure enough, not only did Dede drop out earlier than Doug and his campaign would have liked, she also, 3 days before the election ENDORSED the Dem candidate enough to throw probably 5-10% to Owens. Add to that the Watertown newspaper endorsing her and it was no surprise that Doug just missed by less than 2,000 votes.

Also, Brown is an experienced politician, not a rookie. He did not have to fight his OWN party.

I believe he will win if the election is not stolen. I am prepared to travel there and protest in the event it is clear the election was rigged like it was for Dinnerjacket.

This is MLK Day. We must be prepared to suffer for liberty.

Sapwolf on January 18, 2010 at 2:06 PM

Now this special election may put a stop to Barry, Harry, and dead Teddy’s radical agenda, because under the previous law, Marcia C would have been appointed by Devolve Patrick to vote lockstep with the rest of the Dems bayview on January 18, 2010 at 12:17 PM

Good point. Could there be any more irony here? T. Kennedy has the law changed so that there’s a special election for the vacated senate seat, and the very person voted in is going to derail Uncle Teddy’s Federal takeover of medicine. This is playing out like a Greek drama. What destroyed Coakley? Hubris. What’s destroying Obama? Hubris.

Schadenfreudeliscious.

Mojave Mark on January 18, 2010 at 2:09 PM

Kasich and Portman Ahead New Poll Shows
Ohio Right to Life Survey Measured Races for Governor and Senate

COLUMBUS – Gubernatorial candidate John Kasich and U.S. Senate candidate Rob Portman lead their respective opponents in a new poll released today by Ohio Right to Life Society. The Wenzel Strategies telephone survey of 1001 Ohio registered voters found Kasich holds a 10-point lead over Gov. Ted Strickland. Portman holds a six-point lead over both potential opponents Lt. Gov. Lee Fisher and Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner, the survey found. The results are similar to a Rasmussen Reports survey released last week.

“The 2010 election is critically important to the pro-life movement,” said Ohio Right to Life Executive Director Mike Gonidakis. “We are encouraged to see pro-life candidates lead in two of the most impactful races of the year. Ohio Right to Life will continue to monitor these races and inform the pro-life community as to where our candidates stand.”

In addition to measuring key statewide races, the survey also tested Gov. Strickland’s overall job approval rating. Respondents were generally displeased with the governor’s performance, with only 31 percent saying he is doing an excellent or good job.

The full breakdown of results is as follows:

Gubernatorial Race
Kasich…………….42.5
Strickland………..32.6
Other……………….7.8
Not Sure…………17.2

Governor Strickland’s Job Approval Rating
Excellent………….6.3
Good……………..24.6
Fair……………….38.2
Poor………………27
Not Sure………….4

U.S. Senate Race
Portman…………36.9
Fisher……………30.7
Other………………8.8
Not Sure………..23.7

Portman…………40.4
Brunner………….34.5
Other………………6.4
Not Sure…………18.8

“The results in these Ohio races reflect a significant change from just a few months ago, which mirrors the dramatic change in the political landscape this year,” said pollster Fritz Wenzel. “National issues have dominated, and the Democrats have seen a steep decline in the popularity of their leaders and their proposals. Democrats Strickland, Fisher and Brunner have the added difficulty of presiding over a state that has languished through a very tough economic time.”

Sapwolf on January 18, 2010 at 2:09 PM

As Jay Severin just said on the radio… “We have to beat them by more votes than they can steal.”

Onward to victory!!!!!

4Freedom on January 18, 2010 at 2:10 PM

. Look where the monstrous and incomprehensible 1000-page-plus bills have been created: in Congress and by Congress

Wrong. They are written by the Apollo Foundation, a leftist, Marxist “non-Profit,” then sent over to the Dems to not read and pass. The Democratic leadership is in lockstep with a radical statist agenda and they will pass anything any of Obama’s staffs’ former Marxist employers send their way. Obama is writing all of this legislation – through proxy organizations like this from where he culled his staff. See Van Jones and others.

PastorJon on January 18, 2010 at 2:11 PM

We know election theft occured in Franken’s case and in the Washington Governor’s race to name just two – so what? What was done about it? What were the consequences?

Dems ‘won’ anyway.

Infuriating.

And in Washington’s case the man convicted of mishandling votes in King County to favor the Democrat ended up working in state government again and then being appointed to a position in the Obama administration. . .

PastorJon on January 18, 2010 at 2:15 PM

The latest polls for NY-23 did NOT reflect the successful shift of Dede’s voting block and her endorsement of Owens.

Sapwolf on January 18, 2010 at 2:06 PM

Correct

Also, Brown is an experienced politician, not a rookie. He did not have to fight his OWN party.

Yes there are clear differences. Seems to me this outcome should be easier to predict; far less murky than NY23 with 3 components and the GOP in disarray with a confused message up there.

I believe he will win if the election is not stolen.

Therein lies the rub. How will we know? If Coakley wins that is enough for me to initiate a wholesale investigation of fraud.

I am prepared to travel there and protest in the event it is clear the election was rigged like it was for Dinnerjacket.

And that is why I admire your fortitude.

Geochelone on January 18, 2010 at 2:20 PM

“We have to beat them by more votes than they can steal.”

That is exactly what needs to happen tomorrow. If Brown is going to win in Mass. he has to win by so great a margin that the Democrats can’t steal it. However a bright side to this is that it is very likely that the Democrats do not have the machinery in place to steal the election (or at least it is not very good) as Brown’s surging numbers occurred recently enough to catch them flat-footed. The Dems probably never thought they would need to steal a Massachusetts election.

On the flip side this is the Democrats we are talking about and ACORN and SEIU are out in force. Damaged goods those organizations might be, but they don’t care about their reputation. Only the furtherance of the Dem agenda matters.

I don’t really know but the one thing that can not hurt is prayer and plenty of it. Those things that matter to us we can bring to God, even things that might seem inconsequential to Him (to us) like elections.

Shogun144 on January 18, 2010 at 2:26 PM

I like the direction this election seems to be taking but it isn’t over until the stake is actually in the vampire. I will not believe any of it until I see Martha Coakley concede and Scott Brown give a victory speech. If it does, the earthquake here in DC will be significant.

BTW, if it is any indicator, Obama’s last minute campaigning in Boston was essentially the same speech he gave for Creigh Deeds in the weekend before he lost in Virginia- Essentially telling people to go out there and vote for Coakley for Obama. That’s right, even when campaigning for others, it’s all about the filthy lying coward in the White House.

highhopes on January 18, 2010 at 4:03 PM

Earlier, Rush was talking about Patrick Kennedy stumping for Coakly, and addressed here as Marsha! LOL Then he tried using a religous war to trounce on Brown. Saying *gasp* Brown is a protestant. So if Mass is almost 50% Catholic, that would make the other half protestant, Jewish, Islamic, etc… Even athiests. So either way, attacking one, over the other, would to me seem to devalue one half of those you want votes from? Is this moronic, or what???

capejasmine on January 18, 2010 at 2:03 PM

After they call in to quit their jobs like Marcia told them too, all the Catholic health care workers can go to the polls to vote for her.

pedestrian on January 18, 2010 at 4:08 PM

Great video from the Brown campaign rally in Worcester yesterday: http://www.youtube.com/scottbrownma#p/a/u/0/CCcxxnBNwUM

It’s cheering to see that Brown supporters want fewer taxes and less intrusive government. What got the biggest cheer, though, was his rallying call for the use of our taxes for better national security and not to provide civil trials and Constitutional rights to protect our enemies.

Go, Scott Brown!

onlineanalyst on January 18, 2010 at 4:31 PM

Schadenfreudeliscious.

Mojave Mark on January 18, 2010 at 2:09 PM

I predict that will be the 2010 word of the year.

I love it.

Conservative Samizdat on January 18, 2010 at 4:46 PM

I believe in miracles :)

ginaswo on January 18, 2010 at 4:49 PM

Glen Beck opened his show today with a chalkboard expose’ of Martha Coakley.

The four bullet points on his green chalkboard of shame:

1.) Bullying the Press
2.) Religious Bigotry
3.) Financial Discrepancy
4.) Legal Incompetence
5.) Order More Popcorn for Tomorrow Night

Order more popcorn?! How did that get up there? Whups, that’s from MY grocery list. Strike the last item. Sorry.

ReagansRight on January 18, 2010 at 5:25 PM

Is anyone else thinking President Brown yet?

Lt. Col in the National Guard.

SAME amount of time in the Senate for 2012 as BHO.

DarthBrooks on January 18, 2010 at 5:31 PM

Teddy should not have left his seat. He was far more valuable as a Senator to the Dems than he will be as a voter in this election.

unclesmrgol on January 18, 2010 at 5:44 PM

Essentially telling people to go out there and vote for Coakley for Obama. That’s right, even when campaigning for others, it’s all about the filthy lying coward in the White House.

highhopes on January 18, 2010 at 4:03 PM

At least he’s being truthful…

unclesmrgol on January 18, 2010 at 5:46 PM

I’m going to be a nervous wreck tomorrow.

SouthernGent on January 18, 2010 at 11:39 AM

…and I’m going to be drinking tomorrow night!

ladyingray on January 18, 2010 at 11:42 AM
Hell, I’ve already started!

lovingmyUSA on January 18, 2010 at 5:50 PM

Hell, I’ve already started!

lovingmyUSA on January 18, 2010 at 5:50 PM

Cheers! *clink glass*

cmsinaz on January 18, 2010 at 5:57 PM

I betcha Republicans in MA have suffered over the years from the assumption of losing. Perhaps there is a significant number of conservative voters who will vote for the first time since they believe that they might actually win this time around.

mankai on January 18, 2010 at 6:07 PM

Martha Coakley Tomorrow night

MB4 on January 18, 2010 at 6:14 PM

Martha Coakley Tomorrow night

MB4 on January 18, 2010 at 6:14 PM

You are BAD! LOL
Are you sure that is not a photo of our senior citizens once they find themselves the beneficiaries of ObaMaoScare?

onlineanalyst on January 18, 2010 at 6:25 PM

Schadenfreudeliscious.

Mojave Mark on January 18, 2010 at 2:09 PM

Excellent!!! Put that word in the dictionary!!!

lovingmyUSA on January 18, 2010 at 6:28 PM

MB4 –you crack me up!

lovingmyUSA on January 18, 2010 at 6:29 PM

If we win, I’ll be 4 sheets to the wind. I’ll be so drunk my breath constitutes 1 alcoholic beverage.

Holger on January 18, 2010 at 6:43 PM

One thing with the comparison between this and NY-23 had me thinking, did the the polls leave Scofa in the data? People still went out and voted for her, thus giving a tiny skew to the numbers, granted not a 17 point one.

So who do I contact on Hotair to pay for my ulcer surgery after this race finishes tomorrow?

Rbastid on January 18, 2010 at 7:16 PM

Urgent Romney E-Mail – Help Scott Brown Counter the Machine: http://mittromneycentral.com/2010/01/17/urgent-romney-email-help-scott-brown-counter-the-machine/

dnlchisholm on January 18, 2010 at 7:28 PM

The outcome hinges on whether the independents vote. If their percentage turnout is similar to the Democrats, then Brown will win.

Basilsbest on January 18, 2010 at 7:39 PM

As Jay Severin just said on the radio… “We have to beat them by more votes than they can steal.”

Onward to victory!!!!!

4Freedom on January 18, 2010 at 2:10 PM

That’s what I’ve been trying to say for the last week! Well… some people have a way with words and some people… not have way.

ronnyraygun on January 18, 2010 at 7:58 PM

There is no middle ground. A vote for Martha Coakley is nothing short of a vote for continuing and consolidating the developing tyranny. A vote for Scott Brown is a direct statement rejecting it. A Brown win, or even a narrow loss in this most liberal of states, repudiates it. A Brown win by a large margin ends any pretense that the country supports the actions and policies of Obama, his government, and Congress.

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/brown-vs-coakley-liberty-vs-tyranny/2/

ted c on January 18, 2010 at 8:45 PM

I haven’t seen Keith Olberman since he quit doing sports, where his snarky humor was kind of funny.

Surfing through the channels I spotted his tortured face on msnbc. Holy sh*t, I’ve been making myself watch and he’s absolutely unhinged.

Can’t wait for the returns tomorrow. Go Scott, go!

misterdregs on January 18, 2010 at 9:00 PM

As Jay Severin just said on the radio… “We have to beat them by more votes than they can steal.”

Onward to victory!!!!!

4Freedom on January 18, 2010 at 2:10 PM

While that’s certainly possible, be warned that you’ll probably hear the Coakley crowd spewing conspiracy theories ’til doomsday. There’s still quite a crowd of tinfoil-hatters howling that Bush stole the 2000 election.

Dark-Star on January 18, 2010 at 9:01 PM

I guess the question now is, not will he win, but by how much? Puts a big smile on my face! I can’t wait for tomorrow, wheeee!

-Aslan’s Girl

Aslans Girl on January 18, 2010 at 9:08 PM

I hope that he wins, regardless though, this is just the beginning. Keep the ball rolling because there’s a long way to go.

Sam_I_Am on January 18, 2010 at 9:12 PM

A shmoe like Brown has made this a contest only because he’s running agains a shmoe like Coakley. It takes monumental incompatence to whizz away a double digit lead to an empty suit. Call in the Democrats!

Still, Coakley might pull it out.
Go ahead. Tow in the Exxon Valdez to poison the well if you’d like. The hysterical cries of “fix” will resound only in this echo chamber.
But for the fact that a Brown win will hobble Obama, I couldn’t give a toss about this race. If Coakly wins, however, I’ll be here to witness the wailing, whining and gnashing of teeth.
You people are such bad losers…

chumpThreads on January 18, 2010 at 9:29 PM

Let’s avoid complacency due to the polls… I’ll relax when the votes are counted – and Brown is declared the winner.

Remember, Minnesota is a screwy Blue state – after Coleman had won his Senate election – it was within 36 hours that the Democrats had found hundreds of “uncounted” ballots. Then, Soros’s Secretary of State in Minnesota helped guide the neverending recounts. Next thing we know – the dumba$$ clown was named the 60th Democrat senator.

Several years ago – didn’t a Republican win the race for Governor of the state of Washington? Again, after numerous shady recounts – go figure – the Democratic candidate won.

Let’s not get overconfident believing the polls. During the 2008 election – in Philadelphia – some dude was interviewed on CNN as having voted several times – with the CNN reporter just nervously giggling. Not a new idea for them – as Ed Shultz has said. With the SEIU and Acorn mobilized in MA – we need to remember that one has yet to match the Democrats with the ability to steal elections.

We need to be the way the Saints and Vikings were this weekend – relentless, and merciless, and keep piling it on.

Vote Brown Beanies!!! Then hold Acorn’s feet to the fire!

=====================
chumpThreads on January 18, 2010 at 9:29 PM

What are you talking about? If there is a “fix” to draw attention to – it will not be heard in the mainstream media because it is the propaganda arm of the DNC.

Danny on January 18, 2010 at 10:02 PM

The lieing liars on one of our local news channels say polls show the election to be “very close”.

All I can say is….

Massachusetts Voters – PLEASE:

On Tuesday, January 19th

Our Country’s Future Literally Hangs in the Balance

Tomorrow you can begin to

Reverse the Curse

of Chairman Maobama’s

Hope and Change

BEFORE IT’S TOO LATE!!!

Sweet_Thang on January 18, 2010 at 10:32 PM

Stuart Rothenberg has now got it right. Martha had a deeply flawed campaign strategy to begin with — an essentially passive, low key one in which she expected to coast to victory with a vastly superior base, fundraising and GOTV efforts. She never anticipated Brown’s appeal to, and ability to energize independents.

Thus, way too late in the game, Martha was forced to go back to energizing her base which culminated in the visit of Obama yesterday. That was a sign of real weakness, maybe even desperation by her campaign.

It wasn’t “gravy . . . she HAD to do it just to try and keep what she had, and gave her campaign the appearance of collapsing. There was blood in the water.

The dynamic throughout the past few weeks has simply been that, as she tried to appeal to her base on the left, she simultaneously participated in losing some and energizing other independents. She lost some she may have had, and actually helped energize new independents — voters who might otherwise not have voted — to get involved and decide to go out to vote — for the other guy!

Meanwhile, Scott Brown was also succeeding in energizing those new voters, and even providing a “home” for disaffected Democrats and “progressives” who hate that Senate bill. Both of their “efforts” were producing the same result — advantage Brown. And the national Ds were actually contributing with their “nuclear” and other threats!

As she tried to tack right (endorsement of the Senate bill in the debate) she further alienated those “progressives.”

Thus, Martha Coakley has been caught between a rock and a hard place for over a week now, and her campaign simply could not find a way for her to crawl out from under the rock. She looked frustrated and trapped, and therefore impotent.

In the meantime, she and her staff have publicly evidenced her personal, and her campaign’s frustrations, with a series of embarrassing gaffes, including the “shoving” incident. On the internet, she has been consequently and consistently derided, even ridiculed.

Coakley will lose the race by 6 – 8 points.

Trochilus on January 18, 2010 at 10:33 PM

Poll after poll shows Brown in the lead. Need further proof that Brown is, in fact, in the lead? Go to CNN and try to find an article on the main page about the MASS election. OH, but there is a poll there asking who will win in MASS – Brown or Coakley. I just voted and it’s Brown 55% (157060)- Coakley 45% (130662). While it’s unscientific, there have been a whole bunch of people voting.

Oink on January 18, 2010 at 11:17 PM

Don’t believe the polls….
Don’t get complacent!
Go VOTE VOTE VOTE tomorrow ……please. Remember NY dist 23? The polls were wrong there!

JeffVader on January 18, 2010 at 11:56 PM

Check http://www.intrade.com

It now costs 78 cents on the dollar to buy Brown. He’s been climbing all day. Coakley’s done.

Pythagoras on January 19, 2010 at 1:06 AM

You people are such bad losers…

chumpThreads on January 18, 2010 at 9:29 PM

You’re a very skilled loser.

Chuck Schick on January 19, 2010 at 1:12 AM

To those in Massachusetts, please go out and vote no matter how comfortable a lead you think Scott Brown has. Make this a statement on Obamacare that is impossible to ignore.

If we can see a 10% or bigger win by Scott the big message is clear enough even the Republicans could hear it.

{^_^}

herself on January 19, 2010 at 1:15 AM

Is it possible that Obama-nation is the cure for the Kool-Aid?
;-)

Slowburn on January 19, 2010 at 1:30 AM

It seems like if Coakley wins tomorrow, MA will turn into Iran.

It might turn into a police state or something.

B Man on January 19, 2010 at 1:33 AM

Is it possible that Obama-nation is the cure for the Kool-Aid?
;-)

Slowburn on January 19, 2010 at 1:30 AM

Indeed. If the Conservatives want a long-term solution to destroy Liberalism, let them give Obama another 4 years.

Obama represents everything that is wrong and evil about LIBERALISM AND GLOBAL COMMUNISM.

TheAlamos on January 19, 2010 at 3:41 AM

test

ted c on January 19, 2010 at 5:38 AM

People, let’s not get cocky before the dust settles. This is MassachusettEs after all. Marcia ain’t dead and buried yet. C’mon, MASS – WE CAN DO THIS!

Huckabye-Romney on January 19, 2010 at 6:28 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfBx3EvDTEI

‘nuf said…

winston on January 19, 2010 at 7:01 AM

The USA Coffee Company is very proud of their Sponsorship of Ed Schultz. His fat face takes-up a majority of their home page. You can also NOT buy some “Obama Java” there.

ronnyraygun on January 19, 2010 at 7:29 AM

chumpThreads on January 18, 2010 at 9:29 PM

chump

Heh…

Roy Rogers on January 19, 2010 at 7:35 AM

It’s snowing here. That will keep some people home as most MA residents seem to be absolutely terrified to drive in the snow.

Having moved here after spending nearly 50 years in CA, I still can’t figure it out. Nothing scares CA drivers. They never slow down for any reason and kill themselves by the dozens every time it sprinkles.

Rod on January 19, 2010 at 7:47 AM

Rod on January 19, 2010 at 7:47 AM

We’re rooting for you!!!

yoda on January 19, 2010 at 8:19 AM

What good is the “GOP” and what are they doing for Brown? I contributed directly to Brown and I’ve seen nothing from the Republican Party . . . but, perhaps I’ve just missed it.

rplat on January 19, 2010 at 8:27 AM

Rod on January 19, 2010 at 7:47 AM

We’re rooting for you!!!

yoda on January 19, 2010 at 8:19 AM

Tell me about it. I’ve heard from people out west that I haven’t seen in a decade – all telling me I’d better vote for Brown or else!

Rod on January 19, 2010 at 8:28 AM

My wife and I cast our votes for Brown first thing this morning.

MassVictim on January 19, 2010 at 8:31 AM

I just found this Look who supports Brown.
Hey, if they want to use the towers, I say we get to use Mary Jo.

Blacksmith8 on January 19, 2010 at 8:32 AM

My wife and I cast our votes for Brown first thing this morning.

MassVictim on January 19, 2010 at 8:31 AM

What was the crowd at the poll like?

My wife and I are heading out later today.

Rod on January 19, 2010 at 8:36 AM

The machine had registered about 220 votes in the first hour, which for our precinct/ward is on a level with a general statewide election for governor or senator. Certainly way ahead of primary voting.

MassVictim on January 19, 2010 at 8:39 AM

What good is the “GOP” and what are they doing for Brown? I contributed directly to Brown and I’ve seen nothing from the Republican Party . . . but, perhaps I’ve just missed it.

That’s what it’s come down to. I gave to McDonnell and before that to the Swiftboaters. You have to identify the deserving party because nationally you get interference by the establishment who you can’t distinguish from a democrat.

Haunches on January 19, 2010 at 8:42 AM

MassVictim on January 19, 2010 at 8:39 AM

Where are you? We’re in Pepperell.

Rod on January 19, 2010 at 8:42 AM

Where are you? We’re in Pepperell.

Rod on January 19, 2010 at 8:42 AM

Metrowest/Framingham area.
The snow is now tapering off here.

MassVictim on January 19, 2010 at 8:44 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3