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

Rational Thought on January 18, 2010 at 12:05 PM

Perfect.

OmahaConservative on January 18, 2010 at 12:10 PM

If we beat Obama, they’ll be a thousand more like him to follow.

SteveMG on January 18, 2010 at 12:00 PM

Maybe, but they will be driving on a very damaged road.

MB4 on January 18, 2010 at 12:10 PM

Kerry goes down in 2014.

BottomLine5 on January 18, 2010 at 12:10 PM

Brown will take over the people’s seat, Coakley will be trapped in Teddy’s Olsmobile.

Akzed on January 18, 2010 at 12:11 PM

The problem is that the dims have millions of voters who would ordinarilly sit out a special election.

How much are the dims willing to pay them to vote?

And how much will it take to not only get them to the polls, but to get them to pull the lever for Coakley?

notagool on January 18, 2010 at 12:11 PM

Speaking of that, I thought the digs about Sen. Brown’s truck was really stupid. My son lived in MA for a year and he said the number of pickups with scoops on the fronts was astounding and that they were needed for snow & ice removable because the no government could handle all that was needed on public and private property.

Cindy Munford on January 18, 2010 at 12:08 PM

Just more elitist crap – anyone who drives a truck is obviously unworthy of consideration by default!

Midas on January 18, 2010 at 12:11 PM

turfmann on January 18, 2010 at 12:06 PM

Hilarious.

Holger on January 18, 2010 at 12:11 PM

If the founding fathers listened to the Eeyores of their day, we would be a commonwealth with Drywall as President.

kingsjester on January 18, 2010 at 12:12 PM

Kerry goes down in 2014.

BottomLine5 on January 18, 2010 at 12:10 PM

lolol lets not get toooo optimistic

blatantblue on January 18, 2010 at 12:12 PM

What’s election law in Massachusetts regarding showing ID at polling places? Anyone know? There’s no same-day registration, right?

Rational Thought on January 18, 2010 at 12:07 PM

You do not have to produce identification but you are asked for your address first, then your name, which is checked against the rolls. The polling person will manually record that you have voted. After voting, you are similarly checked out.

There is no same-day registration in Massachusetts. There is a significant delay, I think its 20 days or so. I could easily be wrong on that last point.

turfmann on January 18, 2010 at 12:12 PM

BottomLine5 on January 18, 2010 at 12:10 PM

Curt Schilling for Senate. I think he realized he has a shot at taking Kerry and Brown didn’t.

Holger on January 18, 2010 at 12:12 PM

Ugh. I just looked it up. Massachusetts requires NO ID at all to vote. That really scares me. The dems are probably stuffing ballot boxes as we speak. In precinct after precinct — virtually all controlled by dems — they’ll be combing the registry for voters who haven’t voted in years, and be casting votes in their names. This really concerns me.

Rational Thought on January 18, 2010 at 12:13 PM

This morning, as I was brushing my teeth, I had fox on the tv. I know I heard correctly, when they said 17% of Dems in Mass. support Brown. So all hope is not lost…and prayer is a powerful tool.

I am already on pins, and needles. I’m praying hard!!!

capejasmine on January 18, 2010 at 12:13 PM

turfmann on January 18, 2010 at 12:12 PM

Two weeks I heard. Brown started surging within two weeks I believe.

Holger on January 18, 2010 at 12:13 PM

Cindy Munford on January 18, 2010 at 12:08 PM

Around these parts, we feel like our trucks are just getting broke-in at 200,000 miles.

OmahaConservative on January 18, 2010 at 12:14 PM

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

It has to be “comfortable” to overcome union and Acorn shenanigans tomorrow. Who do you think still runs most elections offices in the state? How many absentee ballots have already mysteriously disappeared? How many abandoned vehicles have they confiscated to store boxes of ballots in the trunk from precincts that they aren’t polling well in, like in Minnesota?

Brown needs a 7-8% margin at least to win by 1% or more. Otherwise the cheaters will change it.

PastorJon on January 18, 2010 at 12:15 PM

Rational Thought on January 18, 2010 at 12:13 PM

they can barely spell states right in their ads

dont worry too much

if they cant do simple things in MA, the dhims there cant organize a mass theft in less than 24 hours.

they may be sneaky, but they arent smart, and intelligence IS a prerequisite for theives that dont get busted

blatantblue on January 18, 2010 at 12:15 PM

Matthews Plays Religion Card: Reminds Voters Brown Protestant, Coakley Catholic

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mark-finkelstein/2010/01/18/matthews-plays-religion-card-reminds-voters-brown-protestant-coakl#ixzz0cz8zbH0p

OmahaConservative on January 18, 2010 at 12:16 PM

Karma can come back and bite you where it hurts !!
In 2004, when the Dems were salivating over the prospect of President Kerry, they were worried the then Gov Romney could appoint a republican to fill the vacated seat. At the urging of fat Ted, the MA State Legislature changed the law to require a special election instead of appointment by the sitting governor. 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

OmahaConservative on January 18, 2010 at 12:14 PM
Midas on January 18, 2010 at 12:11 PM

It sure seemed like a stupid move to me.

Cindy Munford on January 18, 2010 at 12:18 PM

Coakley Catholic

I’m sure we all knew that based on her pro-life stance
/s

JusDreamin on January 18, 2010 at 12:19 PM

What’s election law in Massachusetts regarding showing ID at polling places? Anyone know? There’s no same-day registration, right?

Rational Thought on January 18, 2010 at 12:07 PM

No same-day registration, thank goodness.

For contrast, Minnesota, home of Ballot-Box Stuffers for Franken, DOES have same-day registration.

Missy on January 18, 2010 at 12:20 PM

Other common this heard are:

“I have never voted for a Republican in my life but I’m voting for Scott Brown.”

“I am a lifelong Democrat and I am voting for Scott Brown.”

“I’ve never given money to a campaign in my life and I just donated to Scott Brown.”

“I’ve never volunteered for a candidate in my life and I just made calls for Scott Brown.”

Electrified indeed…

The State Dem machine has now shifted from attacking Scott to attacking talk radio stations. They are threatening to take them to court even though she is repeatedly been invited to appear and turns them down.

TheBigOldDog on January 18, 2010 at 12:20 PM

Speaking of that, I thought the digs about Sen. Brown’s truck was really stupid. My son lived in MA for a year and he said the number of pickups with scoops on the fronts was astounding and that they were needed for snow & ice removable because the no government could handle all that was needed on public and private property.

Cindy Munford on January 18, 2010 at 12:08 PM

Just more elitist crap – anyone who drives a truck is obviously unworthy of consideration by default!

Midas on January 18, 2010 at 12:11 PM

Unless the elitist needs to get somewhere after a blizzard. Then, they are indispensable for the immediate moment.

turfmann on January 18, 2010 at 12:20 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

they may be sneaky, but they arent smart, and intelligence IS a prerequisite for theives that dont get busted

blatantblue on January 18, 2010 at 12:15 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.

Midas on January 18, 2010 at 12:20 PM

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.

I’m not sure how many “diffident” Democrats there are as these practitioners of the Alinsky model don’t have a history of being shy about voicing their demands, but I betcha limosine rentals are up, as the O.F.A. offers cousin Pookie a chance to ride in style in a Cadillac to the polls.

Buy Danish on January 18, 2010 at 12:21 PM

JusDreamin on January 18, 2010 at 12:19 PM

Or saying religious people probably shouldn’t be working in Emergency Rooms. Yeah, she is about as Catholic as Nancy Pelosi.

Holger on January 18, 2010 at 12:21 PM

It sure seemed like a stupid move to me.

Cindy Munford on January 18, 2010 at 12:18 PM

To be sure.

Midas on January 18, 2010 at 12:21 PM

OmahaConservative on January 18, 2010 at 12:07 PM

Thanks, OC!

D2Boston on January 18, 2010 at 12:25 PM

Lets hope this isn’t more like the 2004 (I believe) election where you had news organizations trying to declare wins early to suppress turnout. Even if Brown is up 20 points tomorrow morning, they need to remind the people to vote, cause polls don’t account for anything.

Rbastid on January 18, 2010 at 12:26 PM

Is it too soon for me to start calling her Martha Chokely?

holygoat on January 18, 2010 at 12:27 PM

Early in pro-Brown areas. 2 hours later everywhere else.

UnderstandingisPower on January 18, 2010 at 12:05 PM

It’s funny because it’s true.

SouthernGent on January 18, 2010 at 12:27 PM

I’ve seen pictures of purple shirts campainging for Brown with signs proclaiming that they were NOT being paid $50 to show up.

This is hopeNchange we can all believe in. Now would someone please pass the popcorn?

Laura in Maryland on January 18, 2010 at 12:29 PM

If the founding fathers listened to the Eeyores of their day, we would be a commonwealth with Drywall as President.

kingsjester on January 18, 2010 at 12:12 PM

If Scott Brown listened to the Eeyores, he never would have run for Senate.

Missy on January 18, 2010 at 12:29 PM

I’m still concerned that there is more than a bit of NY-23 Hoffmania in the ethers.

eeyore on January 18, 2010 at 12:30 PM

If we beat Obama, they’ll be a thousand more like him to follow.

Obama isn’t the problem – it’s the statist left movement that’s the problem.

SteveMG on January 18, 2010 at 12:00 PM

I’m with Steve. Let’s lose tomorrow!

Chuck Schick on January 18, 2010 at 12:32 PM

Laura in Maryland on January 18, 2010 at 12:29 PM

Here ya go, m’lady. Enjoy the mass Linda Blair impersonation by the State-Run Media tomorrow night if Brown pulls this off.

kingsjester on January 18, 2010 at 12:32 PM

Obama neither crafts any legislation nor can he pass it himself. Look where the monstrous and incomprehensible 1000-page-plus bills have been created: in Congress and by Congress. We need to focus on taking out the statist voting block in Congress, which is largely composed of Dems. Scott Brown’s election to the Senate tomorrow will be the first step toward accomplishing the takedown in 2010. However, let’s not lose sight of having to do the same thing in 2012 and 2014 in order to rid the Senate of statists.

ya2daup on January 18, 2010 at 12:32 PM

I’m with Steve. Let’s lose tomorrow!
Chuck Schick on January 18, 2010 at 12:32 PM

Thank you, Ann. **LOL**

kingsjester on January 18, 2010 at 12:33 PM

Too Bad Pud Kennedy didn’t say Martha Moxley instead of Marcia.

OmahaConservative on January 18, 2010 at 12:33 PM

I’m still concerned that there is more than a bit of NY-23 Hoffmania in the ethers.

eeyore on January 18, 2010 at 12:30 PM

Me, too! Come on, people. Tell us again that this is for real. The polls are right. They can’t steal it. Right? I’m just gonna be so damn disappointed if I have to watch a bunch of smug democrats on Wednesday morning…

Rational Thought on January 18, 2010 at 12:34 PM

We should be appalled if the drinkers of “Eau de Eeyore” here are consuming it from plastic bottles. This greatly offends The Goreacle and makes polar bear babies fear for their very lives.

ya2daup on January 18, 2010 at 12:37 PM

Well, the field reports, for what they’re worth, are much, much stronger than they were from NY-23.

And though special elections are hard to poll, NY-23 was especially hard to poll given the shifts and the relatively strong level of support for all three candidates. This one is much more straightforward – even though technically it’s a three-way race, the third guy is way way down in the polls and always has been.

Missy on January 18, 2010 at 12:37 PM

All: This is what MA Election Law states regarding re-counts”

(In a state-wide election) “If the difference is one-half of one percent or less of the total vote cast, the Secretary of the Commonwealth must order the registrars of each city and town to proceed with the recount.”

Ostensibly, that should give very little “wiggle-room” for the Dems

alwyr on January 18, 2010 at 12:38 PM

If Scott Brown listened to the Eeyores, he never would have run for Senate.

Missy on January 18, 2010 at 12:29 PM

When Scott announced his candidacy in early September at a GOP fundraiser here in our small town, I signed his papers, shook his hand to wish him luck and thanked him for running. He said, “My wife thinks I’m crazy.”

I’m sure many people thought he was crazy and that he had no chance. We’ve come so far….I’m very nervous as I sit here on this gloomy (weather-wise) morning in Massachusetts, but I also have faith in the wisdom of the PEOPLE.

4Freedom on January 18, 2010 at 12:38 PM

Where are all the trolls?

hawkdriver on January 18, 2010 at 12:39 PM

Where are all the trolls?

hawkdriver on January 18, 2010 at 12:39 PM

Changing their diapers. crapping and pissing their pants.

OmahaConservative on January 18, 2010 at 12:40 PM

Where are all the trolls?
hawkdriver on January 18, 2010 at 12:39 PM

Bradky is the only one I’ve seen this morning. He got mad and left.

kingsjester on January 18, 2010 at 12:41 PM

kingsjester on January 18, 2010 at 12:32 PM

Thank you, that’s just delicious.

Laura in Maryland on January 18, 2010 at 12:42 PM

OmahaConservative-
OT, but wanted to mention….made my first ever political contribution in my 40yo life to Brown. I think you might have mentioned it a few times?!? Your message worked.
Felt good giving too…all the way from IL. If only we could turn things around in this state…

shades of red on January 18, 2010 at 12:43 PM

Too Bad Pud Kennedy didn’t say Martha Mary Jo Moxley instead of Marcia.

OmahaConservative on January 18, 2010 at 12:33 PM

Bunch of murdering basterds, the whole stinkin’ lot of em’……..

Jerome Horwitz on January 18, 2010 at 12:43 PM

this gloomy (weather-wise) morning in Massachusetts, …
4Freedom on January 18, 2010 at 12:38 PM

Will the weather be “bad” tomorrow in MA? How do you think that will affect turnout?

barnone on January 18, 2010 at 12:43 PM

Curt Schilling for Senate. I think he realized he has a shot at taking Kerry and Brown didn’t.

Holger on January 18, 2010 at 12:12 PM

Funny you mention this. I got a chance to talk to Schill for a second after the rally in Worcester yesterday. I told him he needed to take the other seat. He replied, “three years”. (I assume he meant that’s when the campaign would start, not the term)

emz35 on January 18, 2010 at 12:44 PM

Where are all the trolls?

hawkdriver on January 18, 2010 at 12:39 PM

Licking Soros’ boots and begging for leniency.

Laura in Maryland on January 18, 2010 at 12:44 PM

I’m with Steve. Let’s lose tomorrow!

I’m with Chuck. Let’s call Obama a Marxist monster and focus all of our attention on him.

Meanwhile, the left continues its assault on us while we’re attacking Obama and ignoring the bigger battle.

Yeah, that’ll work.

SteveMG on January 18, 2010 at 12:44 PM

When Scott announced his candidacy in early September at a GOP fundraiser here in our small town, I signed his papers, shook his hand to wish him luck and thanked him for running. He said, “My wife thinks I’m crazy.”

I’m sure many people thought he was crazy and that he had no chance. We’ve come so far….I’m very nervous as I sit here on this gloomy (weather-wise) morning in Massachusetts, but I also have faith in the wisdom of the PEOPLE.

4Freedom on January 18, 2010 at 12:38 PM

That’s a great story. One byproduct of this Massachusetts race, no matter what happens Tuesday, is that it will bring out some really good GOP challengers in other states who were likely thinking that the general political atmosphere was anti-GOP. Not only is it NOT anti-GOP, it is as anti-democrat as I’ve ever seen in my lifetime. On Wednesday morning, all those pundits who talk about the likelihood of the House and Senate flipping in 2010 are going to have to start over with a new “paradigm” as they like to say.

Rational Thought on January 18, 2010 at 12:46 PM

Brown’s been smart not to attack Obama. He goes after Obama’s agenda and not the man.

And because of that – in part – he’s going to win.

See how it’s done?

SteveMG on January 18, 2010 at 12:48 PM

Where are all the trolls?
hawkdriver on January 18, 2010 at 12:39 PM

They tend to lay low when they hear that Sikorsky whine.

eeyore on January 18, 2010 at 12:51 PM

Kiss my teabag Schmucky Schumer.

RobCon on January 18, 2010 at 12:51 PM

Obama neither crafts any legislation nor can he pass it himself. Look where the monstrous and incomprehensible 1000-page-plus bills have been created: in Congress and by Congress…
ya2daup on January 18, 2010 at 12:32 PM

The Stimulus package was written by the Apollo Alliance – Van “Communist Revolutionary” Brown’s outfit.

Buy Danish on January 18, 2010 at 12:52 PM

One byproduct of this Massachusetts race, no matter what happens Tuesday, is that it will bring out some really good GOP challengers in other states who were likely thinking that the general political atmosphere was anti-GOP

An excellent thought RT. Post of the day so far!

JusDreamin on January 18, 2010 at 12:52 PM

Oh no! I meant Van “Communist Revolutionary” Jones!!!

Buy Danish on January 18, 2010 at 12:53 PM

I’m very nervous as I sit here on this gloomy (weather-wise) morning in Massachusetts, but I also have faith in the wisdom of the PEOPLE.

4Freedom on January 18, 2010 at 12:38 PM

Good for you! I am wishing the best for all of us tomorrow, but especially for the folks in Mass. I can’t imagine what it’s like for you.

Missy on January 18, 2010 at 12:53 PM

Brown’s been smart not to attack Obama. He goes after Obama’s agenda and not the man.

And because of that – in part – he’s going to win.

See how it’s done?

SteveMG on January 18, 2010 at 12:48 PM

Are you suggesting we think Brown should call Obama names instead of attack his policies? Huh?

Chuck Schick on January 18, 2010 at 12:54 PM

I see a lot of us are blase about how the Democrats cheat and have stolen two elections, Washington and Minnesota, and hundreds more we aren’t even aware of. I think this is outrageous and if the RNC and RSCC won’t do anything about it then we the people have to. I plan to volunteer here because I know in my heart Barbara Boxer is going down!I hope Feinstein is right behind her.

CCRWM on January 18, 2010 at 12:57 PM

C(r)oakley’d

As for the Hoffman polling it was correct had it not been for the already submitted absentee ballots sent in earlier that had Scozzafava already picked before she decided to drop out due to GOP switching over to Hoffman late in the game. Had the GOP done this earlier enough and backed Hoffman then certainly things would’ve been different via the absentee votes.

Kokonut on January 18, 2010 at 12:57 PM

The victory (I hope) of Brown tomorrow and McDonnell this past year are models for Republicans to use to defeat this socialist/statist movement of the left.

Defeat their ideas, go after their philosophy, provide an alternative. No personal attacks, no ad hominem.

If you beat their ideas, Obama AND all of his successors will be defeated.

If you beat just Obama, another one will pop up tomorrow.

Yelling and screaming might make you feel good – but it doesn’t win elections.

I want to win, not feel good.

SteveMG on January 18, 2010 at 12:58 PM

Are you suggesting we think Brown should call Obama names instead of attack his policies? Huh?

Chuck Schick on January 18, 2010 at 12:54 PM

As usual, SteveMG is ceding ground to the left. He’s saying that the left’s personal attacks on the right (“teabagging morons”) are working because the right is personally attacking Obama. The only way for the right to win is to always take the high road. Even though McCain lost by doing this.

Maybe you can figure it out, I can’t.

Missy on January 18, 2010 at 12:58 PM

Are you suggesting we think Brown should call Obama names instead of attack his policies?

My post is directed at those who want to call Obama names and use harsh tactics against him instead of going after his policies and providing alternative programs.

Go after his harmful policies and leave the attacks out of it.

If you’re not in that group, then my point doesn’t apply to you.

SteveMG on January 18, 2010 at 1:01 PM

alwyr on January 18, 2010 at 12:38 PM

The only wiggle room they’d have in a ‘close but not close enough to recount’ election is with absentee ballots and Scott Brown’s campaign said they are ready.

If the Margin is 20,000 and there are 25,000 uncounted absentee ballots the loosing side has a case to forestall certification. But absentee ballots seem to be going over 50 percent for Brown so they’d have to create far more absentee ballots than were cast which any judge should throw out absentee ballots entirely and certify whoever won the most votes at the polls.

Holger on January 18, 2010 at 1:01 PM

The victory (I hope) of Brown tomorrow and McDonnell this past year are models for Republicans to use to defeat this socialist/statist movement of the left.

Defeat their ideas, go after their philosophy, provide an alternative. No personal attacks, no ad hominem.

If you beat their ideas, Obama AND all of his successors will be defeated.

If you beat just Obama, another one will pop up tomorrow.

Yelling and screaming might make you feel good – but it doesn’t win elections.

I want to win, not feel good.

SteveMG on January 18, 2010 at 12:58 PM

Of course the vast majority here agrees with this.

Just because we got a smile at the heckling of Obama yesterday doesn’t mean we want it to become a campaign strategy.

Chuck Schick on January 18, 2010 at 1:02 PM

He’s saying that the left’s personal attacks on the right (”teabagging morons”) are working because the right is personally attacking Obama

Sorry, I never even mentioned the tax protesters/tea partiers.

The personal attacks on the tax protesters by the left are clearly not working. They/we are winning. Polls show it.

And we shouldn’t do the same thing to Obama and the left because it won’t work either.

SteveMG on January 18, 2010 at 1:03 PM

DAN SCHNUR:

There’s no way that Martha Coakley can lose: Kennedy family members will personally carry Massachusetts voters to the polls to keep that from happening. More likely is that she wins by a relatively small margin of victory that will be written off as a status-quo outcome by a political community whose expectations for a huge upset were raised beyond all rational levels this past week.

But if Scott Brown actually does pull off an astonishing victory, first, the sun will swallow the moon, angels will weep and the Charles River will run red with blood.

Mr. Joe on January 18, 2010 at 1:03 PM

Just because we got a smile at the heckling of Obama yesterday doesn’t mean we want it to become a campaign strategy.

You’ve obviously haven’t been following the discussion here on how to defeat Obama.

A large number of posters – I’d say at least 1/3 or /12 – here focus all of their fury on Obama and miss the larger goal.

SteveMG on January 18, 2010 at 1:04 PM

SteveMG on January 18, 2010 at 1:03 PM

I used the teabagging thing as an example of what the left is doing. I think it is working for them to some extent – ymmv.

We are winning largely because the Dems are screwing up royally. Positive, high-road GOP campaigns are more effective when the voters are already pissed off at Dem incumbents, as in VA, NJ and now hopefully MA. Much more difficult in anti-GOP environments, as seen in 2006 and 2008.

I’m glad Brown ran a positive campaign. I’m just saying we should use what works, when it works. We are up against some really rotten people. I want to win and not just feel good, too.

Missy on January 18, 2010 at 1:07 PM

A large number of posters – I’d say at least 1/3 or /12 – here focus all of their fury on Obama and miss the larger goal.

SteveMG on January 18, 2010 at 1:04 PM

I’m sure it was normal venting you always see on an anonymous forum. I for one am alot more moderated when I speak to friends about politics.

People are very mad. I am too.

Chuck Schick on January 18, 2010 at 1:11 PM

As a mass resident I can tell you, I think there is a very high probability that Brown will not win. The amount of voter fraud, and the ease with which it will be perpetrated could well be astounding. ANYONE can walk in and vote if they have an address and name. It would not be hard for me to go to 15-20 precincts and vote in each one – who would ever figure it out? There\’s no ID check

WashingtonsWake on January 18, 2010 at 1:13 PM


OT, but wanted to mention….made my first ever political contribution in my 40yo life to Brown. I think you might have mentioned it a few times?!? Your message worked.
Felt good giving too…all the way from IL. If only we could turn things around in this state…

shades of red on January 18, 2010 at 12:43 PM

Thank you, and God Bless you and anyone/everyone who felt compelled to help because of my constant hammering. This may very well be the most important election of our lifetime.

PLEASE SEND SCOTT $$$$$$$$$$$$, He will need the help for the certification process.

OmahaConservative on January 18, 2010 at 1:16 PM

Holy fecal-matter Batman. I saw a Tea Party Express ad endorsing Scott Brown on Fox News. But I am in East Tennessee… I thought Fox News would only run that commercial in MA?

Holger on January 18, 2010 at 1:16 PM

There’s no way that Martha Coakley can lose: Kennedy family members will personally carry Massachusetts voters to the polls to keep that from happening.

Mr. Joe on January 18, 2010 at 1:03 PM

Can they do that if they’re drunk or in rehab?

Knucklehead on January 18, 2010 at 1:17 PM

Will the weather be “bad” tomorrow in MA? How do you think that will affect turnout?

barnone on January 18, 2010 at 12:43 PM

Good for you! I am wishing the best for all of us tomorrow, but especially for the folks in Mass. I can’t imagine what it’s like for you.

Missy on January 18, 2010 at 12:53 PM

That’s a great story. One byproduct of this Massachusetts race, no matter what happens Tuesday, is that it will bring out some really good GOP challengers in other states who were likely thinking that the general political atmosphere was anti-GOP. Not only is it NOT anti-GOP, it is as anti-democrat as I’ve ever seen in my lifetime. On Wednesday morning, all those pundits who talk about the likelihood of the House and Senate flipping in 2010 are going to have to start over with a new “paradigm” as they like to say.

Rational Thought on January 18, 2010 at 12:46 PM

This has been an amaing time to be a resident of the Bay State. My family and I have been here (from NY) for twenty-two years, and up till now I have been so disgusted with the politics of Massachusetts. Many “smart” people here, but so many kneejerk liberals. For the first time in my adult life (!) I am proud of my state, even if Scott doesn’t do it tomorrow, we have sent a real message which is going to resonate across the country. I don’t think the weather (not supposed to be too bad) will keep the Brown supporters from the polls….they’ll brave any weather to vote for Scott!!

4Freedom on January 18, 2010 at 1:21 PM

There’s no way that Martha Coakley can lose: Kennedy family members will personally carry Massachusetts voters to the polls to keep that from happening.

Mr. Joe on January 18, 2010 at 1:03 PM

If that’s so, then why aren’t they manning her phone banks today?

IrishEi on January 18, 2010 at 1:24 PM

There’s no way that Martha Coakley can lose: Kennedy family members will personally carry Massachusetts voters to the polls to keep that from happening.

Mr. Joe on January 18, 2010 at 1:03 PM

Well, they would have to carry them. People are pretty leary about getting in a car with them.

JusDreamin on January 18, 2010 at 1:24 PM

Brown will win. Don’t fret about it, folks.

And if Brown wins, we have Mitt Romney to thank for making sure that happened.

Conservative Samizdat on January 18, 2010 at 1:25 PM

WashingtonsWake on January 18, 2010 at 1:13 PM

I hope you’re just being pessimistic…but if you’re right, what would keep Conservatives from doing the exact same thing?? It seems like there is enough passion, I’d be surprised if there are not plenty of brawls and bonfires.

DanaSmiles on January 18, 2010 at 1:27 PM

Lol jusdreamin, I’ll have to remember that one.

DanaSmiles on January 18, 2010 at 1:28 PM

Don’t believe the polls…..go vote Tuesday. Don’t get complacent!!!!!

JeffVader on January 18, 2010 at 1:30 PM

I’ll believe it when he is seated.
I think a conservative has to have a 15 point lead to overcome all the Ed Shultz types.

TheSitRep on January 18, 2010 at 1:31 PM

I don’t care what the polls say – Brown will not win. When the voters vote, they will do what they habitually do in Mass. Vote Dem.

msflea on January 18, 2010 at 1:36 PM

* The Wall Street Journal

* BEST OF THE WEB TODAY
* JANUARY 18, 2010

Martha Goes Mad!
Can she win Massachusetts by attacking Catholics and Red Sox greats?

OmahaConservative on January 18, 2010 at 1:36 PM

People are very mad. I am too.

Chuck Schick on January 18, 2010 at 1:11 PM

Steve MG is our very own Jiminy Cricket here at HA. He can always be counted on to encourage us all to moderate our tone and ignore the fact that a blog isn’t life. You can’t have enough conscience watchers.

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

msflea on January 18, 2010 at 1:36 PM

How do you explain all those Republican governors?

Cindy Munford on January 18, 2010 at 1:44 PM

As a mass resident I can tell you, I think there is a very high probability that Brown will not win. The amount of voter fraud, and the ease with which it will be perpetrated could well be astounding. ANYONE can walk in and vote if they have an address and name. It would not be hard for me to go to 15-20 precincts and vote in each one – who would ever figure it out? There\’s no ID check

WashingtonsWake on January 18, 2010 at 1:13 PM

What kind of jacked up voting laws does MA have? Here in TX, I can only go to my designated polling place, which has my name and address already printed in the voter roll, and the poll workers have me sign by my name when I check in. Of course, I have to show ID first, which it sounds like you don’t have to do in MA.

Are you saying you can go to ANY polling place and claim that you live in the district and they will let you vote?

Dominion on January 18, 2010 at 1:57 PM

For as long as I have been voting in MA (22 years), the same is true as it is in TX. We go to a designated polling place where they have our name/address printed on a voter roll, and they check us off. However, it’s true that I have never had to show ID – I always thought that’s because ours is such a small town.

4Freedom on January 18, 2010 at 2:02 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

Comment pages: 1 2 3