Google Ads


Site Stats

MA-Sen: Brown Posts Leads Big Enough to Drive a Truck-Shaped Prop Through

by: Crisitunity

Thu Apr 07, 2011 at 3:30 PM EDT


Suffolk (4/3-5, likely voters, no trendlines)

Deval Patrick (D): 37
Scott Brown (R-inc): 52
Undecided: 11

Mike Capuano (D): 26
Scott Brown (R-inc): 52
Undecided: 19

Tim Murray (D): 23
Scott Brown (R-inc): 51
Undecided: 22

Joe Kennedy (D): 40
Scott Brown (R-inc): 45
Undecided: 13

Setti Warren (D): 9
Scott Brown (R-inc): 52
Undecided: 32

Ed Markey (D): 26
Scott Brown (R-inc): 53
Undecided: 19

Vicki Kennedy (D): 30
Scott Brown (R-inc): 52
Undecided: 16
(MoE: ±4.4%)

Here's one more splash of cold water for anyone who thinks that Massachusetts, what with its dark blue hue, will be an easy Senate pickup in 2012. Local pollster Suffolk (who correctly predicted that Brown would win by 4 in the Jan. 2011 special election) find him leading by mostly large margins, ranging anywhere from 5 (against former Rep. Joe Kennedy, who hasn't expressed any interest in the race) to 43 (against currently unknown Newton mayor Setti Warren, who seems like the likeliest of these seven to actually run).

They aren't the first pollster to find these kinds of numbers lately, although these are the worst of the batch; for comparison's sake, PPP found Brown leading MA-08 Rep. Mike Capuano by 16 in December, while WNEC in March gave him a 13-point lead. (Today's poll has Capuano, the only Dem sampled in all three polls, down by 26.) That WNEC poll raised some eyebrows for its sample composition (34 D, 12 R, and 47 I, compared with 2008 exit poll numbers of 43 D, 17 R, 40 I), and today's Suffolk poll is in that same territory, with a breakdown of 37 D, 12 R, 48 I.

If there's good news to be found here, it's that the Democrats tested (with the exceptions of Gov. Deval Patrick, and the Kennedys, all of whom have said they won't run) are pretty poorly known, and their share of the vote is only likely to go up once somebody's actually in the race and making the case in the local media against Brown's mostly party-line voting record. In the meantime, though, through personal charisma (he has 58/22 favorables) and skill at building his brand as a moderate through frequent ritual invocations of his independence (based on the 56/24 'yes' response to the question of whether he has kept his promise to be an independent voice), Brown's starting in unexpectedly strong position. Add in the more-appealing possibility of another open seat in 2013 (if, as some expect, John Kerry resigns to become the next Secretary of State), and it's no wonder the DSCC is having recruitment problems with this seat.
Crisitunity :: MA-Sen: Brown Posts Leads Big Enough to Drive a Truck-Shaped Prop Through
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

MA-Sen: Brown Posts Leads Big Enough to Drive a Truck-Shaped Prop Through | 86 comments
OMG
Setti Warren only gets NINE?!?


21, Conservative Gay Democrat, NM-2 (Childhood) TX-10 (Home) TX-23 (School);   DKos: wwmiv.
I'm thinking there HAS to be a filter here...
Where people who profess not to know who a candidate is can't register their support for him. Either that, or it's a typo. There's just no way something about Mayor Warren's name upsets people that much or that he's that unpopular statewide.

20, center-left independent, Auckland Central resident, MD-05 voter, OR-01 native
[ Parent ]
Watch the right!
recently, the Tea Party isn't too happy with Scott Brown, so they might try to teabag him in a primary...if the Tea Party even exists in MA

Democrat, MD-08 (Home), MD-05 (School)
Some have said that
he's unlikely to get anyone serious to try to primary him--as in, no established politician or anything. There's always the chance for some nut from the outside to want to go after him, but would he gain any traction?  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
Don't speak like this is impossible
After O'Donnell Booted Castle's ass, I'm sure of nothing on the GOP side of things anymore.

20, Male, Democrat, CA-44 (home) CA-12 (college)
[ Parent ]
Oh, I think it's certainly possible.
But after reading a little more about it, especially the comments from some people here*, I think it's less of a possibility than it otherwise would be. I mean, there's certain elements of every party that will never be fully happy, but I would think the majority of the state party is happy with Brown. Plus, an activist type is probably going to find a tougher reception trying to get money from people, who rightly fear that if Brown were to go down in a primary, the Democrats would pick up that seat.

Don't get me wrong: I'd love for him to lose a primary. The chances of us holding the senate would greatly increase (and I don't think they are that bad now, for what it's worth), both because of the state's natural lean and because of the way it would allow us to shift resources into other races.

*More evidence for me being oblivious: what happened to notpjorourke? Was he banned? If so, why?  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
Is that a fellow Terp I spy?


20, center-left independent, Auckland Central resident, MD-05 voter, OR-01 native
[ Parent ]
Yep
 

Democrat, MD-08 (Home), MD-05 (School)
[ Parent ]
And from Rep. Bartlett's district!
I have a bunch of friends from Frederick County and a couple more from Washington County as well. I make sure to draw Frederick and Hagerstown into Rep. Van Hollen's district whenever I try to redistrict Maryland, because no one deserves Rep. Bartlett for a congressman.

Nice to meet you.

20, center-left independent, Auckland Central resident, MD-05 voter, OR-01 native

[ Parent ]
MD-08 is Van Hollen


21, dude, RI-01 (registered) IL-01 (college)
please help Japan. click "donate funds" in upper right and then "Japan Earthquake and Pacific Tsunami." http://www.redcross.org/
[ Parent ]
nice to met ya!
But, you've just insulted Chris Van Hollen lol,

MD-08 Is Chris Van Hollen
MD-06 is Bartlett

At a recent discussion on redistricting, one of the Delegates on the redistricting commission told us, they're going to give MD-06 to the Republicans, but take Frederick away. They don't feel like dealing with the issue of republican vote sinks in Northern and Western MD. The Eastern Shore has a slight blue trend and they're going to exploit it to the fullest. It's most noticeable in Kent Co (Obama won it) and Somerset Co (Gore won it)

from them. They're #1 target is Andy Harris, he's dead meat. Jokingly, he told us that if they felt really ambitious, they might bring Hagerstown into MD-08. Van Hollen wouldn't approve it, it makes his district.  

Democrat, MD-08 (Home), MD-05 (School)

[ Parent ]
Ugh, my bad
Glad you already live in Rep. Van Hollen's district, then. Dunno how that happened, haha.

That's great inside info, by the way. Sounds like a map I would draw.

20, center-left independent, Auckland Central resident, MD-05 voter, OR-01 native

[ Parent ]
Good luck with that
It's true that there is some discontent on his failure to become the second coming of Jesus Christ Ronald Reagan, but overall Massachusetts Republicans are thrilled with Brown.  Any challenger would need to get 10,000 signatures to get on the ballot, which needs good organization and/or money.  Even if they do cross that threshold, I just don't see them succeeding or even coming close.  I could be wrong, but that's how I see the "tea leaves"

28, Unenrolled, MA-08
[ Parent ]
One problem:
I don't think most people--hell, possibly anyone here--would argue it will be easy to defeat him. I personally think it's a helluva lot likelier than these polls indicate, but I wouldn't be surprised to see a close race either way. In fact, I would be surprised to see anything more than a six to eight-point spread. It's maddening, but at the same time, it makes for a very interesting race.

Anyway, what's the partisan breakdown as far as how each candidate does? Am I missing this somewhere?  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

Still say this is a result of a free pass
And that will change once he has an opponent that can increase their own name recognition while at the same time articulating why Brown should go. But gonna be really tough all the same.
^^^^^^This^^^^^^
Color me "still not worried"  
[ Parent ]
Lincoln Chafee
was leading by big margins at this point in the 2006 cycle. And he lost narrowly. I'm not saying that's going to happen here, but that Brown could be in a similar position.

And few people have said that this will be an easy pickup. But the idea that it's completely out of reach is unlikely. Democrats have the state partisanship behind them, with likely a lot of money going towards it. (Why do you think Scott Brown is trying to raise $25 million?)

And one thing is that Brown's ceiling is 52-53%. Obviously, that's enough for a win, but it does show that his appeal may never expand, and an improvement in the political climate for the Democrats may cause a narrow win.

Coleman, Dole and Smith in 2008 too
And Brown himself was losing by a greater margin less than two months before he won.
[ Parent ]
Brown's ceiling
Not to pick too much, but I think it might be a bit higher. Not that much higher, of course, but perhaps all the way up to 54 or 55 percent.

As a starting point, I always use a 40/20/40 partisan breakdown. In order to get to 50.1 percent of the vote, the Democratic candidate would have to get about 43.25 percent of the Independent vote, along with 81 percent of the Democratic vote and five percent of the Republican vote. Does that seem that hard? Coakley probably managed between 30 and 35 percent of the Independent vote, and she was a horrible candidate.


"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
my theory
I need to phrase this exactly right, or it will sound offensive.  here goes.  

Right now, it's possible that Brown's popularity is based upon non-issues or, if you prefer, nonpolicy or nonpolitical reasons.  Mainly, the sympathy from the sexual abuse revelations. all or most voters (and people) feel sympathetic (and rightly so) towards him. Nonpartisan or weakly partisan voters likely not only rate him positively, but plan to vote for him, since, this early in the cycle, why not?  It's just a poll, it's not binding to say you'll vote for him this early.

When the campaign starts and the attention shifts from non policy non-political issues, to policy and political ones (economy, immigration, FP, Mass issues, etc etc) people will still feel sympathetic towards Senator Brown, but it won't be enough for them to vote for him. their concerns will not be his childhood, but rather his time in office his policy positions.  As a MASS. Republican he will lose votes when attention shifts to policy.  It might not be enough to defeat brown, but his numbers will probably fall back to earth within a year.

Note, I'm not saying Brown revealed this to get votes, just that people feeling more sympathetic and willing to vote for him because of it, despite policy reasons is human nature.  

I hope I explained this in a quasi-succinct way without seeming like an ass.  

Top ten signs you're an SSPer #1: your favorite song is "Panic At Tedisco" and no one understands what you mean.

I think that is all within bounds
And reason.
[ Parent ]
But do most people know about the revelations?
Regardless, a number of people have said he's been getting non-stop good press in the state. That's bound to have a positive effect on his numbers.


"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
I also think people like
that he's a sexy guy and is kind of the epitome of a PILF.  (Politician I'd Like to Fuck.)  Doubt he'll do as well with the college vote with Obama at the top of the ticket, which makes Setti Warren seem more appealing as a ticket, despite the numbers.  Yup, after sitting on that, I'm rooting for Warren.  Would the POTUS cut an ad for a Senate candidate during their own re-election?  It seems unlikely but 30 minutes of sitting in a chair nailing lines would be worth a Senate seat.  
[ Parent ]
Why wouldn't the president
cut an ad for a candidate during his own reelection? I'm trying to think of examples of this happening, but while I can't, I also can't think of examples of it being avoided. Perhaps it isn't done, but for no good reason.

I kind of like the idea of Sonia Chang Diaz. She seems good on the issues in the same way Setti Warren might be, but while she grew up in Newton, she represents a more average/working class area of Boston in the state senate. Thus, she might avoid the stink of being from one of the richest areas in the state. Plus, if she were to win, she would probably camp out in that seat for a long, long time--basically, as long as she wants it. She's only 32, after all.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
I also like the idea of her, but
nothing has been said about her and the 2012 election. If someone were to start a draft campaign or write dairies on Kos her name might actualy get mentioned even if it doesn't pan out.

19, Self Appointed Chair of the SSP Gay Caucus (I claimed it first :p), male, Dem, IN-09 (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09)
[ Parent ]
Figured he'd be busy

[ Parent ]
How long would an ad take?
If it's going to give the Democratic senate candidate is going to get a boost from Obama creating an ad for him or her, I'd be amazed if it didn't happen.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
Brown
As Harry Reid proved, picking your opponent is half the battle.  Brown is doing his best to keep the stronger opponents away - both by raising huge sums and voting as a moderate.  All congressman are wary of even expressing much interest because they don't want their seat to be the one that gets redistricted away.  Others may be holding back, thinking that the Kerry seat might open up or perhaps hoping to run for Gov in 2014.
Someone will run against Brown and that person will certainly be a credible candidate.  But I'd be willing to bet that they will not be anyone's first choice.

43 - Male - GOP/Libertarian - FL 22
Is it possible for someone
like Sonia Chang Diaz to run for both her state senate seat and the U.S. senate seat at the same time?  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
Voting as a moderate?
he's certainly good at putting on airs, but that one is definitely not a settled fact.

21, dude, RI-01 (registered) IL-01 (college)
please help Japan. click "donate funds" in upper right and then "Japan Earthquake and Pacific Tsunami." http://www.redcross.org/
[ Parent ]
Yeah, I agree with you, I think that's exactly Brown's strategy, and it just might work......
He planted that nugget in the media about wanting to raise $25 million to scare off strong Democrats.  That he's raised $8.7 million helps do the same.  I know some Democrats said after his last haul report that he's "not on pace" for $25 million, but that doesn't really matter, it was an impressive enough haul.

And the political and personal posturing to stay likeable and popular all are part of the same thing.

All this stuff is important not only in its own right, but also to illustrate that he's politically smart and thus likely to run a good campaign.  He ran a good campaign in the first place, and he continues to play it smart, and those things in themselves further help scare off strong Democrats.

The big thing is, what serious climbers and stars want to risk tarnishing their careers by losing?  That's what it means to be "scared off."

Brown is doing everything right.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10

[ Parent ]
I'm not sure about that.
I see the logic, but I don't think this is the scenario that is playing out.  The MA Democratic Party is recruiting and don't want to mess it up this time.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!
[ Parent ]
I'm NOT saying game over, that Brown has already succeeded in scaring everyone off......
I agree that it's too soon to conclude anything about potential strong challengers, it's absurd to say they are scared off.

I'm just saying I think Zornoph is right that scaring off strong challengers a la Harry Reid is Brown's intent, and it's a good strategy that might work.  It sure worked for Reid, or else Dean Heller might be in the Senate today (and Berkeley, without Heller in the way, would have a clean shot as a clear frontrunner next year).

I do think some people are too anxious about strong challengers jumping in.  This is an internet-created disease, where everything has to move at the speed of lightning or we wonder what's taking so long!  A few years ago it would have been no big deal that Tim Kaine didn't declare until a few days ago.  But because we have the internet, his every idle comment is picked apart, and even smart campaign analysts like DavidNYC get frustrated that Kaine is dancing around, when he's doing no such thing.

Same thing might happen in Massachusetts.  Any of the Congressmen can jump in at any time without the money chase rushing them because they can just raise money as House members and transfer it all to a Senate campaign.  There's no reason to read anything into Patrick's refusal to challenge Brown, as there's never been any indication he's ever wanted to do anything but serve a couple terms as Governor and worry about his future later.  And some non-House members already are looking at it and might just jump in soon.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10

[ Parent ]
I think the money factor
is overrated. Nobody doubts Brown will have a lot of money to back him up, but it's not as if the Democrat won't be able to raise money. Perhaps he's at an advantage because he's the incumbent, but he is trying to raise a lot of money because he needs to.

I also think the scar of losing is less significant than you think. Suppose someone like Sonia Chang-Diaz runs but loses by four to six points. Is that really a career ender for her? Perhaps if she loses by ten or 15 points, but a small margin isn't the worst thing in the world.

I agree that Brown appears to be a smart politician who won't be easy to defeat, but it's certainly possible.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
The more I think about it
the more I want Chang-Diaz to run. She's young, doesn't seem to be tied to much to the machine, and is attractive (which seems to be important to the people of Massachusetts. I would imagine she would be a strong fundraiser just based on her race and gender, but would also receive tons of money from the DSCC and DNC. President Obama and the Kennedys would also come out in full force to take back the seat. She has so much going for her I wish she was being considered.



19, Self Appointed Chair of the SSP Gay Caucus (I claimed it first :p), male, Dem, IN-09 (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09)

[ Parent ]
Honestly, I do worry
that she won't be acceptable to a small but important segment of working class whites. I could be wildly overestimating how much a factor her mixed race will be for some people, of course, and I certainly hope I am. She says it isn't important to people. Maybe I am simply confusing class and race as the big split in Massachusetts. The voters there certainly didn't have a problem electing Deval Patrick, after all.


"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
Exactly.
If they can vote for a black man (scary to some white working class people. Then they can vote for a woman of mixed descent. I really think this needs to be taken a lot more seriously then it has been. I mean we are seriously looking at a newly elected mayor. There are better choices that haven't been discussed fully.

19, Self Appointed Chair of the SSP Gay Caucus (I claimed it first :p), male, Dem, IN-09 (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09)
[ Parent ]
Who are these better choices?
As I and others indicated, the knock against Warren isn't that he's new, but that he's from one of the richest towns in the state.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
Well that too. I do think
it's a valid knock against him from moving from one race to another. As far as good candidates obviously any Kennedy or possibly Alan Khazei. I'm on this Sonia kick right now. Oy vey.

19, Self Appointed Chair of the SSP Gay Caucus (I claimed it first :p), male, Dem, IN-09 (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09)
[ Parent ]
It won't be Khazei
He's just not in the good graces of the Massachusetts Democratic Party.

I think after the Kennedys and Gov. Patrick, Rep. Capuano probably has first right of refusal, with the rest of the candidates coming in some jumbled order of preference, with Rep. Lynch being least preferred among the "acceptable" candidates. Khazei and Massie are, I think, no-gos for the Democratic Party.

I like Sonia Chang-Diaz, but I think she might have more luck running for House, especially if Lynch or Capuano and she's in one of their districts.

20, center-left independent, Auckland Central resident, MD-05 voter, OR-01 native

[ Parent ]
Well right now she could
declare a run for the Senate, but if she doesn't gain traction then she could switch to a congressional run.

19, Self Appointed Chair of the SSP Gay Caucus (I claimed it first :p), male, Dem, IN-09 (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09)
[ Parent ]
Well, he was elected in 2009,
so he's not that new.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
Oh misread something awhile ago.
Yeah I guess that wouldn't be a problem. I still think she would have a better chance.

19, Self Appointed Chair of the SSP Gay Caucus (I claimed it first :p), male, Dem, IN-09 (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09)
[ Parent ]
Oh and
she is a former school teacher and catholic (helps with those same working class catholics).

19, Self Appointed Chair of the SSP Gay Caucus (I claimed it first :p), male, Dem, IN-09 (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09)
[ Parent ]
Top of ticket drag
I think much of what happens depends on who the GOP nominee for President is. I mean, once the primary is underway Brown may be forced to embrace or run from the nominee.

I remain completely surprised that none of our State Sens or Reps are looking at this race. They worked with STATE Sen. Brown and saw first hand how effective the most junior member of the minority party was... Sonia Chang-Diaz remains my TOP choice.

If Romney is the nominee then I give Brown better chances, but can you imagine the damage that the GOP brand will further suffer in MA as aspiring Presidents discuss their issues as they try to out-conservative eachother?

Wouldn't Romney be included
in that that last group? Perhaps he'd actually get to 40 percent, but I can't see him losing by anything less than, say, 19 points, and that's in a very, very good year for Republicans.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
I think that's absolutely correct

[ Parent ]
And that Kerry Seat
Is not viewed as a hundred percent safe. Senator Bruce Tarr is apparently very interested in it, and with the liklihood of another mess of a primary, and the election falling during the begining of second term doldrums for Obama(August 2010) it might be closer than people expect. Tarr is a whole lot more liberal than Brown is though, which may be both a benifit and a curse.

But a wounded Democratic nominee+unpopular second term Patrick+unpopular second term Obama+a popular Brown+ decent Republican could produce an interesting outcome.

26 Right-leaning, Euro-Conservative, Anti-Tea Party Independent

If
2012 turns into a scenario where are ready to throw out Obama, but because of the mediocrity on the GOP side, he scrapes by in the election the scenario you've listed above is possible. It depends, hopefully 2010 vented off enough of the anger towards Democrats it doesn't build up to such a degree where the party is annihilated in the 2014 midterms and the 2016 presidential election.

19, Male, Independent, CA-12
[ Parent ]
Its more of comment
On how terrible the Democratic bench is in MA. Any Democrat has an advantage, but given the natural selection that goes into being an elected GOP State Senator, the party actually has a decent number of candidates for lightning catching. They won't go too far if they don't catch lightning, but raising money and getting attention is a whole lot easier with Brown around, and if he wins comfortably next year it will be even easier.

I mean instead of starting with no money and down 57-29, someone like Tarr would probably start down 49-37 or so.

26 Right-leaning, Euro-Conservative, Anti-Tea Party Independent

[ Parent ]
With Kerry as the nominee?
I get your argument about the solidification of the Republican case in the state, but I have a hard time believing any competent Democrat is going to lose to a Republican in anything short of a bad year/time for Democrats, particularly an incumbent.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
Would Tarr survive a primary?


"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
2010 was an anomaly for Republicans
It would take another very unique set of circumstances for them to win the other Senate seat in Massachusetts. You're not going to see that sort of situation in most elections.

24, male, African-American, CA-24, Democrat. Chair of the SSP Black Caucus.
[ Parent ]
On that note,
I have to say that this is, in some ways, an indication that some are buying into the idea that Republicans are somehow usually safer than Democrats. I'd agree that most Democrats are more willing to pull the lever for a Republican than vice versa, but I keep seeing a sentiment that unless a Democrats wins with at least 60 percent of the vote, he or she isn't safe. If John Kerry, or Bob Casey or Sherrod Brown or Herb Kohl or Bill Nelson or anyone else, gets nothing less than 55 percent for the next few elections, is he really vulnerable? There's always going to be some group of people that votes for the other guy when the two big parties are running, and despite the fact that there's probably a slightly bigger conservative base in each state than there is a liberal base, I don't see how that is a danger to Democrats. I mean, if these guys are vulnerable, than any candidate is vulnerable.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
Why in the world are you projecting...
...Obama will win reelection and be again unpopular soon thereafter?

That's jumping the shark on ridiculousness, don't you think?

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10

[ Parent ]
not really
except for clinton, no president's 2nd midterm has gone well senatorial speaking since the ratification of the 17th amendment and clinton was extraordinary circumstances.

Top ten signs you're an SSPer #1: your favorite song is "Panic At Tedisco" and no one understands what you mean.
[ Parent ]
I have
a feeling Scott Brown is going to say one of these days that if he wins reelection to the senate and the GOP captures the senate in 2012, Massachusetts will have a seat in the table in the McConnell majority. Basically he'll argue that by having one senator from each party, Massachusetts won't be left completely out in the cold ever.

19, Male, Independent, CA-12
That'd be a weak argument, and risky
His better argument is just being a moderate, deal-making counterweight to liberal one-party rule in MA. Talking about his role in a likely GOP Senate majority and his ties to McConnell will be the Democrats' job. It's how they took out Chafee and numerous other moderate Republicans, and if Brown acknowledges it, he's just doing their job for them.
[ Parent ]
Agree, his argument should be he's an "independent" Senator who puts his state first......
He's broken from his party often enough, in votes and rhetorically, to keep swing voters happy, and that's by design.

The last thing he wants to do is talk up a potential Republican Senate majority in a state that is against that!  He would just be giving everyone a reason to vote against him!

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10

[ Parent ]
Talking up support McConnell would be bad for him
One of the main talking points of his opponent will be about him supporting McConnell for Majority Leader and it's an argument that can work with some voters. Not many in Massachusetts would be thrilled about elected a Senator who would support a Kentucky conservative running the agenda.

24, male, African-American, CA-24, Democrat. Chair of the SSP Black Caucus.
[ Parent ]
The goal of Democrats has to be to tie Brown to his voting record
and Senator McConnell every chance they get.  

CO-02 (college)/FL-15 (home).  
[ Parent ]
This polls shows the way to defeat Brown

Now it is more obvious still. The poll tell the people want Joe Kennedy II. If the DSCC give not to the people Joe Kennedy, many people get not interested in the change.

By one side I glad after this poll, because I see there is some chance. 40%-45% mean troubles for a Republican incumbent in a R+12 state.

By the other side it is sad because J Kennedy tell he is out. Despite that, I keep still a little hope because T Kaine tell not before, but now is running.

My conclussion is so obvious. The recruitment is very important here. The DSCC needs to hear to the people. Or J Kennedy change his mind about a bid (and the result of this poll should help) or the Democratic Party will have very low chance of win this race in 2012.

And this is a key race for the DSCC. The Democrats can keep the majority in 2012 despite lose here, but likely not in 2014. Surely is necessary to win MA-Sen in 2012 for keeping the majority in 2014.

Until now, to have J Bingaman and J Kennedy out are the worst failures since the point of the recruitment this cycle. For J Bingaman there is viable replacement running, but for J Kennedy we see not the same.

I think this poll put a lot of presure over J Kennedy. He is the hope. He fail in 2009-2010 running not. He will fail again? With him in the race I see easily a tie in the next poll for this race. If not, we will follow by the same way.

D+12

[ Parent ]
Does no harm to try and persuade him
I guess what it does show is that against somebody popular with high name recognition it is a true tossup. Again, a good campaign from somebody currently unknown can get into the same position.
[ Parent ]
I think it is necessary something more than high name recognition
The poll tell not every Democrat with high name recognition has the same chance. D Patrick appears as one of the best, but far of J Kennedy, and V Kennedy down if J Kennedy is in the poll.

After this poll we can tell the people want J Kennedy II consistently since the death of E Kennedy. Every poll where he appear he has a good result. Clearly over the avarage. Always the frontrunner. I write a ressume about this some time ago.

http://www.swingstateproject.c...

I think here is not a trouble that the Democrats can solve easily with a generic mid level Democratic candidate and a expensive campaign that give to the candidate high name recognition. It is possible but very difficult at this point. It is a risky bid. After spend a lot of money we can see the new candidate in the level of D Patrick or little better, and that would be a hard coup. It will be difficult to create the right environment for S Brown collapse without the candidate that the people want.

At this point MA-Sen race is going by the way of TN-Sen. In Tennessee if P Bredesen run not, we can forget the race. For MA-Sen the difference is not as extreme but is very high.

[ Parent ]
I think it is necessary something more than high name recognition
The poll tell not every Democrat with high name recognition has the same chance. D Patrick appears as one of the best, but far of J Kennedy, and V Kennedy down if J Kennedy is in the poll.

After this poll we can tell the people want J Kennedy II consistently since the death of E Kennedy. Every poll where he appear he has a good result. Clearly over the avarage. Always the frontrunner. I write a ressume about this some time ago.

http://www.swingstateproject.c...

I think here is not a trouble that the Democrats can solve easily with a generic mid level Democratic candidate and a expensive campaign that give to the candidate high name recognition. It is possible but very difficult at this point. It is a risky bid. After spend a lot of money we can see the new candidate in the level of D Patrick or little better, and that would be a hard coup. It will be difficult to create the right environment for S Brown collapse without the candidate that the people want.

At this point MA-Sen race is going by the way of TN-Sen. In Tennessee if P Bredesen run not, we can forget the race. For MA-Sen the difference is not as extreme but is very high.

[ Parent ]
I'm going all in on this race
This is my opinion, and I'm sticking to it all the way till November 2012.  It's a strong one, and pulls no punches.  Deep breath.  

Regardless of what any polls say, the fact is this.  Barack Obama is going to push over 60% in his re-election in Massachusetts.  Scott Brown will have to win roughly 20% of the Obama electorate while retaining all of the Republican nominee's votes in order to win.  

That...in this day and age of polarization...is impossible.  We saw this play out in reverse throughout the rural midwest and southeast last year when the Democrats got drilled.  It's the same principle here - no republican is going to win solidly democratic areas during a year with presidential turnout, in a year in which any one race could flip the Senate majority.  Ain't...gonna...happen.  Once all these democrats and democratic-leaning independents find out about every line item of Scott Brown's voting record, and about the potentially huge magnitude of this race, they're going to switch and vote democrat.  Period.

The Democratic nominee, whoever it is, assuming they campaign hard, raise money, debate, yada yada yada, and don't make ridiculous errors on the campaign trail, will piggyback behind Obama, who will carry them across the finish line to a victory.  End of subject.    


23, Male, Democrat, OH-13

Susan Collins pulled off the feat you call impossible......
Yes I realize Maine is less liberal than Massachusetts, but still Collins did 19 points better than McCain, and Tom Allen 19 points worse than Obama, on the same day.  That's 19% who split their tickets Obama-Collins.  (As an aside, "Obama-Collins" sounds like it should be the name of a strong drink.)

So it can be done.

Scott Brown is trying to be in Massachusetts what Snowe and Collins are in Maine.  And so far he's succeeding.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10

[ Parent ]
Scott Brown is no Susan Collins, at least
not yet. He won one special election. Collins is a long-serving incumbent that's actually liked more by Democrats and Independents, both strong parts of the Maine electorate, than her own party. Perhaps Brown could turn into her, but he's not there just yet.


"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
Are you really comparing ME to MA?
A light blue state to the darkest of the dark blue, aside from maybe VT or HI?  

Although I will admit that Collins' victory was impressive, I do think the fact that ME has a history of electing moderate Republicans to the Senate in recent years (hell Olympia Snowe was their other senator) probably played a large part of the result.  Massachusetts as far as I can tell, does not have such a history, at least not within the past 20 years, of sending R's of any kind to federal office.  And then there's the little fact that Massachusetts is WAY more democratic than Maine.

Again, if Obama gets 60-62% again, that's an awful lot of Obama voters that Brown has to win.  Again, these voters might say they'll vote for Brown now, in April 2011, but come election day, are they really going to pull the lever for him, knowing that by doing so they might be throwing control of the Senate to the Republicans?  I will believe that when I see it.

23, Male, Democrat, OH-13

[ Parent ]
And that's with Pawlenty
or someone similar as the nominee. If it's someone like Gingrich, Palin, or Bachmann, he'll probably win closer to 70 percent of the vote.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
Not only is Maine far less Democratic
But Brown has a voting record considerably to the right of both Snowe and Collins.
[ Parent ]
A textbook example of wishful thinking
Regardless of what any polls say, the fact is this.  Barack Obama is going to push over 60% in his re-election in Massachusetts.  Scott Brown will have to win roughly 20% of the Obama electorate while retaining all of the Republican nominee's votes in order to win.  

That...in this day and age of polarization...is impossible.  We saw this play out in reverse throughout the rural midwest and southeast last year when the Democrats got drilled.

No, it's not. Similar feats have been achieved time and time again by moderate off-party Senators and Reps. There seems to be somewhat more correlation with Presidential votes nowadays, but changes haven't been so drastic that it's impossible now. Even when people like Bobby Bright lost with the political winds against them, they still did much better than Obama did in 2008.

And it's also important to realise that Massachusetts itself is not highly polarised. It has a very high number of Independent voters who would have no problem splitting their tickets. It's sort of like Maine with more Democrats - so if someone like Snowe can win 60-70% in Maine, then someone like Brown could surely win over 50% in Massachusetts.

Once all these democrats and democratic-leaning independents find out about every line item of Scott Brown's voting record, and about the potentially huge magnitude of this race, they're going to switch and vote democrat.  Period.

You're thinking like a high-information liberal Democrat. Firstly, in thinking that that moderate Obama voters will be mortally offended by certain votes even if they are exposed. And secondly, that Brown's voting record will get much exposure in the first race. Consider how people like Kent Conrad were able to win landslides in ND despite having voting records that were quite liberal.  

[ Parent ]
FWIW, this was the ideological breakdown among Dems in the '08 primaries...
Liberal - 59%
Moderate - 34%
Conservative - 7%

If Brown garnered all of the conservaDems, a third of moderates and a tenth of liberals, he'd be at that 20 percent which is probably necessary. I suspect the Dems who voted for Brown over Coakley were probably well-aware of some of his conservative stances.  

For daily political commentary, visit me at http://polibeast.blogspot.com/ and http://twitter.com/polibeast

[ Parent ]
Bad comparison
ND is much more traditionally Democratic than MA is traditionally Republican. Remember, until 2011, ND had an all-Democratic congressional delegation, and I think it has a state-owned bank or something along those lines as well. Massachusetts hasn't even had a Republican congressman since, what, 1997?

21, dude, RI-01 (registered) IL-01 (college)
please help Japan. click "donate funds" in upper right and then "Japan Earthquake and Pacific Tsunami." http://www.redcross.org/
[ Parent ]
ND
ND is not traditionally Democratic. It's always had an overall Republican lean but with an extraordinary number of voters who are willing to vote split tickets. Its governors have mostly been Republicans, and its legislature has long been dominated by Republicans. It hasn't gone blue at the presidential level since 1964. Individual Dems can win there as long as they aren't much to the left of center, just as individual Reeps can win in MA as they aren't much to the right of center.  

41, Ind, CA-05
[ Parent ]
But
Before Berg and Hoeven in 2010, the last Republican elected in a federal race was Mark Andrews, who left the Senate in 1987 (and before that was in the House). That's 24 years without a Republican elected to federal office. The point is that the Democrats were not as weak in North Dakota as the Republicans are in Massachusetts.

21, dude, RI-01 (registered) IL-01 (college)
please help Japan. click "donate funds" in upper right and then "Japan Earthquake and Pacific Tsunami." http://www.redcross.org/
[ Parent ]
As I've said before, there was a time in the 1980s where Democrats did very well in ND. Conrad, Dorgan and Pomeroy were all vestiges of that era
If MA had something similar happen, perhaps we'd see some Republican strength. Also, Brown's seat was the first open Senate seat in MA since 1984.

We could cherry pick variables like this all day, though. All I will say is that there is a lot more historical evidence that off-party Senators can be re-elected than there is new evidence that off-party Senators are more or less doomed to their state's lean.


[ Parent ]
That's just proving my point, though...
that ND has a sturdier recent history with Dems than Mass does with Repubs. I don't think anyone, with a few exceptions, is calling Scott Brown "doomed," but certainly his conservative positions can be used against him.

21, dude, RI-01 (registered) IL-01 (college)
please help Japan. click "donate funds" in upper right and then "Japan Earthquake and Pacific Tsunami." http://www.redcross.org/
[ Parent ]
Conrad survived 1994, for what it's worth.
I won't deny that North Dakota has been friendly to Republicans as of late, but there's no aversion to Democrats. If we find an ideologically appropriate candidate and have him or her campaign hard, we probably have a much better shot that some people are letting on.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
Run hard...
And you can certainly beat a Republican in a deep-blue state during a presidential year.

Otherwise known as please keep Rep. Capuano away from this race.

20, center-left independent, Auckland Central resident, MD-05 voter, OR-01 native

Looks Lean R, though, to be fair, the D floor here is probably 43%
William Weld comparisons kicked to the curb (none of the Democrats here are even a fifth as strong as John Kerry '96), I can't really fathom Brown losing if he's above 55 percent approval. I mean, the D field here kinda blows. I'm not the biggest Brown fan in the world, but even I would probably vote for him over Capuano or especially Patrick. I suspect something like 53-46 here.

For daily political commentary, visit me at http://polibeast.blogspot.com/ and http://twitter.com/polibeast
I'm not sure the candidate really needs
to be anything other than acceptable and able to make the case that Brown is more conservative than he's letting on. I'm not sure any of them are that bad, just, as others have said, nothing special. But if none of the Reps. are good, there's Tim Murray, Alan Khaze, and Sonia Chang Diaz.

Also, what's wrong with with Patrick?  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
Do Not Screw This Up
18+ months out.

It looks like we're about to have a government shutdown. It remains to be seen exactly what share of the blame is going to go to whom, but I'm pretty confident that Massachusetts voters are going to be less likely to give the Republicans the benefit of any doubt going forward. That is more House than Senate, but the answer to that is "Imagine how much more damage the GOP could do if they had the Senate too."

Wisconsin and Ohio and Indiana are happening. A lot of swing voters in Massachusetts are union folks. They may not be especially liberal and a lot of them say or have said nice things about Brown. It shouldn't be THAT hard to persuade many of them that the entire Republican party has declared war on organized labor, and keeping Brown in the Senate gets them one step closer to a Senate run by implacable enemies, even if Brown somehow doesn't qualify as one himself.

Obama is going to carry Massachusetts, and the GOP nominee is probably not going to bother campaigning there. The 2008 vote was 62-36, and I can't picture the GOP nominee improving more than a point or two (Obama didn't overperform there like he did in many states) on that showing, leaving Brown to need to beat the national ticket on the same ballot by double digits. I don't see 14 points of ticket splitters in this political climate.

But the Massachusetts Democratic Party isn't used to competitive races and isn't very good at them.



36, M, Democrat, MD-03

I thought they did a decent job...
With MA-10 last year.

20, center-left independent, Auckland Central resident, MD-05 voter, OR-01 native
[ Parent ]
Yes.
And that's in situation where Perry was too conservative for the district, being tea party darling.. More moderate Republican would be electable there, at least - in 2010..
[ Parent ]
MA-Sen: Brown Posts Leads Big Enough to Drive a Truck-Shaped Prop Through | 86 comments

Copyright 2003-2010 Swing State Project LLC

Primary Sponsor

You're not running for second place. Is your website? See why Campaign Engine is ranked #1 in software and support among Progressive-only Internet firms. http://www.mediamezcla.com/

Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

About the Site

Publisher: DavidNYC

Senior Editor: James L.

Senior Editor: Crisitunity

Contributing Editor: Jeffmd

Search the SSP archives:

Sign up to receive a daily e-mail whenever the SSP is updated:

SSP Resources

Presidential Vote by CD

SSP Document Collection

Race Tracker Wiki

Dave's Redistricting App

Blogroll

Daily Kos Elections
DemConWatch
Five Thirty Eight
Governing
Hotline On Call
Political Wire
Pollster.com
Prop*50
Public Policy Polling
The Thicket
Powered by: SoapBlox