Probably not, but this guy is making it closer than it should be. Scott Brown, the Republican nominee for the special election to finish Ted Kennedy's term. I like the cut of his jib, however. Check out this answer. David Gergen shows his true colors once again. [video=youtube;OJEEQHOnI2Q]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJEEQHOnI2Q&feature=player_embedded[/video] He tried to raise $500K today and has raised over $1.3MM. Impressive. Clearly the country is frustrated and some people are focusing their frustration on this race. http://www.brownforussenate.com/red-invades-blue
I think he bails on the race and lets his son run in his place. His unfavorables are too high and people's view of him is too fixed. He can't pull out of this tailspin. Of course, his opposition is a collection of clowns.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/o...-Massachusetts-race-a-dead-heat-81269792.html Rasmussen: Massachusetts race a dead heat By: Michael Barone Senior Political Analyst 01/12/10 5:33 PM EST Pollster Scott Rasmussen’s latest numbers on that special Senate election in Massachusetts: Democrat Martha Coakley 49%, Republican Scott Brown 47%, independent candidate Joe Kennedy (no relation to the Kennedys) 3%. Rasmussen points out that this is not precisely comparable with his survey last week, which showed Coakley ahead 50%-41%, since in that survey it offered the choice of “some other candidate” and in this one Kennedy (whose inclusion in debates Coakley insisted on) was named. Turnout matters: this most recent poll shows Brown 2% ahead among those absolutely certain to vote. Obviously all these results are within the statistical margin of error, which means that either candidate could win. Presumably this poll was taken last night, overlapping with the only televised debate of the campaign. It looks like Brown is picking up support as he becomes better known, while Coakley continues to hover right around the magic 50% mark, as she has done in all recent polls.
I would have loved to see Gergen's reaction to Brown's response. Can't quite place my finger on it, but Gergen appears to be kind of a putz in my mind.
Martha, Martha, Martha............. [video=youtube;OmNpcMHwOa8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmNpcMHwOa8[/video]
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/o...to-explain-defeat-protect-Obama-81681862.html Massachusetts: 'Bottom has fallen out' of Coakley's polls; Dems prepare to explain defeat, protect Obama By: Byron York Chief Political Correspondent 01/15/10 7:10 AM EST Here in Massachusetts, as well as in Washington, a growing sense of gloom is setting in among Democrats about the fortunes of Democratic Senate candidate Martha Coakley. "I have heard that in the last two days the bottom has fallen out of her poll numbers," says one well-connected Democratic strategist. In her own polling, Coakley is said to be around five points behind Republican Scott Brown. "If she's not six or eight ahead going into the election, all the intensity is on the other side in terms of turnout," the Democrat says. "So right now, she is destined to lose." Intensifying the gloom, the Democrat says, is the fact that the same polls showing Coakley falling behind also show President Obama with a healthy approval rating in the state. "With Obama at 60 percent in Massachusetts, this shouldn't be happening, but it is," the Democrat says. Given those numbers, some Democrats, eager to distance Obama from any electoral failure, are beginning to compare Coakley to Creigh Deeds, the losing Democratic candidate in the Virginia governor's race last year. Deeds ran such a lackluster campaign, Democrats say, that his defeat could be solely attributed to his own shortcomings, and should not be seen as a referendum on President Obama's policies or those of the national Democratic party. The same sort of thinking is emerging in Massachusetts. "This is a Creigh Deeds situation," the Democrat says. "I don't think it says that the Obama agenda is a problem. I think it says, 1) that she's a terrible candidate, 2) that she ran a terrible campaign, 3) that the climate is difficult but she should have been able to overcome it, and 4) that Democrats beware -- you better run good campaigns, or you're going to lose." With the election still four days away, Democrats are still hoping that "something could happen" to change the dynamics of the race. But until that thing happens, the situation as it exists today explains Barack Obama's decision not to travel to Massachusetts to campaign for Coakley. "If the White House thinks she can win, Obama will be there," the Democrat says. "If they don't think she can win, he won't be there." For national Democrats, the task is now to insulate Obama against any suggestion that a Coakley defeat would be a judgment on the president's agenda and performance in office. The private talk among Democrats is also reflected in some public polling on the race. Late Thursday, we learned the results of a Suffolk University poll showing Brown in the lead by four points, 50 percent to 46 percent. That poll showed Obama with a 55 percent approval rating. Also on Thursday, two of Washington's leading political analysts, Stuart Rothenberg and Charlie Cook, each changed their assessment of the Brown/Coakley race from a narrow advantage for Coakley to a toss-up.
http://www1.whdh.com/features/articles/hiller/BO133471/ The Hiller Instinct: Suffolk University Poll Scott Brown is riding a wave. It could break before it hits shore, or, it could crash through the Democratic seawall of state politics and send him all the way to the U.S. Senate. Our exclusive 7NEWS/Suffolk University Poll shows Brown, with 50%, in front of Coakley with 46%. Independent Joe Kennedy gets 3% and just 1% is still undecided. How quickly has this race turned around? In November, Coakley was beating Brown by 31 percentage points. Now, Brown is up by 4% -- a change of 35% in two months.
First, she insults those people who brave the cold to see the Bruins play the Flyers at Fenway, now this? Seriously, she has lost Southie.
So, what's this Kennedy guy going to do? I understand he's a Libertarian. I would think the Brown campaign would have a word with him--and perhaps even Ron Paul--and ask him to drop out of the race and support Brown. There's a real chance here to stop a slew of reckless legislation, or at least trim the worst parts from it. I can't imagine getting 3% of the vote is worth costing Brown the election.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...ssachusetts_senate_special_election-1144.html Politico/InAdv Brown(R) 52, Coakley(D) 43 Brown +9 PJM/CrossTarget(R) Brown 52, Coakley 42 Brown +10 PPP (D) Brown 51, Coakley 46 Brown +5 ARG Brown 52, Coakley 45 Brown +7 Daily Kos/R2000 Brown 48, Coakley 48 TIE InsideMedford/MRG Brown 51, Coakley 41 Brown +10
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub...ally_want_brown_to_win_34_pulling_for_coakley Interest High In Massachusetts Senate Race: 49% Nationally Want Brown To Win, 34% Pulling For Coakley Like fans cheering for their favorite football teams, voters nationwide are paying attention to the special U.S. Senate race in Massachusetts. Almost half of them are rooting for Republican candidate Scott Brown over his Democratic opponent, Martha Coakley. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 49% of likely voters nationwide want Brown to win, while 34% are cheering on Coakley. Seventeen percent (17%) are undecided. Given Massachusetts’ status as one of the most Democratic states in the country, it’s perhaps no surprise that the gap is somewhat narrower when voters are asked who they think will actually win the race. Forty-four percent (44%) predict Brown will be the winner, 35% say Coakley. Twenty-one percent (21%) aren’t sure.
It's both a referendum on the health care bill and on the democrats' agenda so far. The national poll numbers are stunning in the opposition to both.
