D-Day in Massachusetts tomorrow
For those living in a Taliban cave in Pakistan (just kidding) there is a special election tomorrow in Massachusetts. Up for grabs is the vacancy is the seat in the Senate from Massachusetts; what is "lovingly" referred to as the "Kennedy seat." (For Democrats, and for the record, it ain't his seat no matter how much money was used to buy it. Scott Brown was correct -- it's "the people's seat.") Polls have been jumping all over the place on this race, but the main point of recent polls is clear: IF we are to believe the nonpartisan polls, Brown has this one in the bag. This is a point that Captain Ed makes this morning:
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.
In short, regardless of the polls anyone pays attention to (unless you're a Coakley fan/supporter) things don't look good for Martha Coakley. She's looking to be on the receiving end of a very bad election result. She's looking at a loss that she can't explain, despite Barry's last minute push on Sunday,/li> for what would be, ultimately, his sixtieth vote in the Senate. Things don't even come close to looking good for Coakley given the last minute polling and the turnout models. Captain Ed points out that, aside from a freak snowstorm in Massachusetts (not an unheard of event; is Al Gore in town?) this should be a virtual cakewalk for Brown. And let's be honest here: When it comes to elections aside from the presidential elections, liberals don't turn out, and they sure as Hell don't turn out when the weather is bad.
This special election should, in all respects, go for Scott Brown. While many liberals claim that such a victory doesn't mean a damn thing, in the long and short of it it does mean a lot. A Republican winning the vaunted "Kennedy seat?" ((GASP)) God forbid! In the end no matter what liberals do, the people will turn out to take away that sixtieth vote for health care reform, for crap and tax, and for the ominous immigration reform looming on the horizon. In short, voters will turn out to deny the Democrats a sixtieth vote in the Senate on an out-of-control liberal/socialist agenda that doesn't jive with the founding principles of this nation.
What Barry and Democrats forget is that this nation is, inherently, conservative, and the majority of the nation stands beside its founding principles. Martha Coakley represents more of the liberal agenda that is 180 degrees contrary to those ideals, and that's why they should lose. Let's hope the polls and turnout models are correct tomorrow.
Publius II
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.
In short, regardless of the polls anyone pays attention to (unless you're a Coakley fan/supporter) things don't look good for Martha Coakley. She's looking to be on the receiving end of a very bad election result. She's looking at a loss that she can't explain, despite Barry's last minute push on Sunday,/li> for what would be, ultimately, his sixtieth vote in the Senate. Things don't even come close to looking good for Coakley given the last minute polling and the turnout models. Captain Ed points out that, aside from a freak snowstorm in Massachusetts (not an unheard of event; is Al Gore in town?) this should be a virtual cakewalk for Brown. And let's be honest here: When it comes to elections aside from the presidential elections, liberals don't turn out, and they sure as Hell don't turn out when the weather is bad.
This special election should, in all respects, go for Scott Brown. While many liberals claim that such a victory doesn't mean a damn thing, in the long and short of it it does mean a lot. A Republican winning the vaunted "Kennedy seat?" ((GASP)) God forbid! In the end no matter what liberals do, the people will turn out to take away that sixtieth vote for health care reform, for crap and tax, and for the ominous immigration reform looming on the horizon. In short, voters will turn out to deny the Democrats a sixtieth vote in the Senate on an out-of-control liberal/socialist agenda that doesn't jive with the founding principles of this nation.
What Barry and Democrats forget is that this nation is, inherently, conservative, and the majority of the nation stands beside its founding principles. Martha Coakley represents more of the liberal agenda that is 180 degrees contrary to those ideals, and that's why they should lose. Let's hope the polls and turnout models are correct tomorrow.
Publius II
posted by Syd And Vaughn | 9:56 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home