Sunday, January 10, 2010

Yes, Martha Coakley Is Going To Win A Week From Tuesday, But...

>


Many of the pollsters and pundits predicting a Republican win in Massachusetts' special election to replace Ted Kennedy have proven themselves absolutely worthless-- unless you use them as contrary indicators. Conservative operations like Rasmussen, GOP pollsters masquerading as nonpartisan, and clueless old Charlie Cook are among the most reliable contrary indicators in the profitable Inside the Beltway scam they're always working. One laughable poll-- by always-wrong-about-everything PPP-- even showed Scott Brown ahead of Coakley 48-47%. Their analysis:
Here are the major factors leading to this surprising state of affairs:

* As was the case in the Gubernatorial elections in New Jersey and Virginia last year, it looks like the electorate in Massachusetts will be considerably more conservative than the one that showed up in 2008. Obama took the state by 26 points then, but those planning to vote next week only report having voted for him by 16.

* Republicans are considerably more enthusiastic about turning out to vote than Democrats are. 66% of GOP voters say they are 'very excited' about casting their votes, while only 48% of Democrats express that sentiment-- and that's among the Democrats who are planning to vote in contrast to the many who are apparently not planning to do so at this point.

* Brown has eye popping numbers with independents, sporting a 70/16 favorability rating with them and holding a 63-31 lead in the horse race with Coakley. Health care may be hurting Democratic fortunes with that group, as only 27% of independents express support for Obama's plan with 59% opposed.

* In a trend that's going to cause Democrats trouble all year, voters disgusted with both parties are planning to vote for the one out of power. Perhaps the most remarkable thing about Brown's standing is that only 21% of Massachusetts voters have a favorable opinion of Congressional Republicans...but at the same time only 33% view Congressional Democrats favorably. And among voters who have a negative take on both parties, who account for more than 20% of the electorate, Brown leads 74-21.

* Because he's basically been untouched so far, Brown's favorability spread is a remarkable +32, at 57/25. For some perspective on how good those numbers are, Bob McDonnell was at a +20 spread with Virginia voters in our final poll there before going on to a 17 point victory.

If you're a betting man, I wouldn't rush out and put any wagers down on Brown winning on January 19th, not just yet. Though Republican bloggers and tweeters are already celebrating their victory on the Internet and delusional party hacks are already screeching that Democrats will prevent Brown from being sworn in until after the healthcare vote (the way the GOP blocked Al Franken for half a year), the most recent credible polling shows Coakley with a solid 15 point advantage over Brown. Perhaps Sarah Palin, some Bushes, Marco Rubio, the Club for Growth, Huckabee, former Governor Mitt, Karl Rove, Rudy Giuliani, Ann Coulter, Miss McConnell, Mike Pence, Michael Steele, Michael Savage, Michael Crapo, Michael row the boat ashore, Glenn Beck, and the whole panoply of Republican heavyweights can fly to Boston and swing the race. And by all means, bring GOP "It" boys John Thune and Paul Ryan along for the thumping.

I feel confident that Coakley will be sworn in as the next senator from Massachusetts, but this discussion shouldn't even be taking place. Obama beat McCain there last year 62-36%. And Coakley is very well liked and respected in Massachusetts. Why is it even looking close enough so that bad faith operators like Rasmussem and the NRSC can blow it up into a story for the slow and credulous? My friend Mike Stark hit the nail squarely on the head with the two massive problems Democrats are facing. If you spend any time listening to Fox or hate talk radio you already know that--

1) there's a government takeover of healthcare in the works;
2) going to your doctor will be like going to DMV;
3) our taxes will be increased to pay for deadbeats' Viagra and abortions;
4) those with health care will see their services rationed

As Mike Lux made clear in his brilliant book, The Progressive Revolution: How the Best in America Came to Be, progressives have faced that kind of bullshit from conservatives before and still managed to declare independence from England, win the Revolutionary War, enact universal suffrage, free the slaves, go forward with public education, regulate industries that were poisoning the population, pass Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, and so on.

In the above cases, progressives had solid and capable leadership. When Obama was given a clear and definitive mandate for Change last year-- winning 365 electoral votes to McCain's 173, primarily in the racist old slave holding states of the Deep South-- he responded by kissing up to conservatives and corporatists and stocking his administration with characters who could have just as easily worked for George Bush. Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, of course, did. And they must have thought Obama was talking about changing his underwear. That's sure what it looks like to voters.

You've probably read Ken and Noah and me going on and on about it ad nauseum, so let's put it in Mike Stark's poetic words:
Folks that voted for Democrats in 2008 have learned:

1) they made Joe Lieberman President;
2) they will be mandated to send money to a health insurance company that may or may not provide adequate care;
3) Obama's promises mean diddly; if you have decent health care, he wants to tax it;
4) the rich deserve everything Bush gave them and then some... the stimulus was 1/3 tax cuts...
5) Wall Street bankers deserve 7 digit bonuses on the taxpayers' dime;
6) war is awesome
7) torturers are pretty cool too... prosecutions smoshecutions!!
8) cap and trade? EFCA? financial reform? accountability of any sort? As far as Democrats are concerned, [Yawn... Whatevah...]

Last year we hoped against hope that Obama was going to turn out to be a new FDR. You don't hear anyone bringing that up anymore. Coakley's going to win, and the terribly compromised healthcare bill will probably pass-- although by only one vote in the House and one vote in the Senate-- but the midterm landslides in Congress that Democrats won in the face of hysterical GOP obstructionism after FDR's initial win in 1932 (after losing 101 House seats in 1932, Republicans lost 14 more in 1934, and 15 more in 1936, leaving them with just 88 members while the Senate low left the Republicans with just 17 seats) will not be duplicated this year. Instead, Obama's weak, ineffective and tepid leadership will see voters revert to form and punish Democrats for disappointing them. As we saw so clearly in Virginia and New Jersey, Democratic voters are let down and demotivated. What a tragedy, and what a lost opportunity!

Labels: , ,

18 Comments:

At 5:58 PM, Blogger Maggie said...

large number of supporters that are shown - like about 18 in total

 
At 6:22 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just another Dem party apperatchik.

 
At 6:24 PM, Blogger lawguy said...

That is a very good analysis of what is going on right now. I think, however, that Obama actually lied through his teeth about just about everything. I really do think that he thought he could get away with rhetoric and nothing else. Say one ting today and do the opposite tomorrow. And people will fall for it.

The only president I can think of who did something like this was Wilson who ran on the "He Kept Us Out of War" plank and then took us in a month after he was inaugurated the second time.

 
At 6:28 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes! Yes! This race is in the bag, Martha has already won, no need to turn out the vote. Stay home, spend time with your children. This is Massachusetts, no way a Republican could possibly win Ted Kennedy's old seat.

 
At 7:18 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just "Hope" DWT, and it'll become a reality!

Seeing how it has worked so far... Smashingly swell job.

As long as you don't consider, well, reality.

 
At 7:21 PM, Anonymous Tex Taylor said...

As Mike Lux made clear in his brilliant book, The Progressive Revolution: How the Best in America Came to Be, progressives have faced that kind of bullshit from conservatives before and still managed to declare independence from England, win the Revolutionary War, enact universal suffrage, free the slaves, go forward with public education, regulate industries that were poisoning the population, pass Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid and so on. In the above cases, progressives had solid and capable leadership.

Progressives granted independence? You mean the cowards that make up the Dimocratic party type now? They'd be sitting in King Obama, I mean George's lap about right now. LOL

Freed the slaves (abolitionists, general Christian and Lincoln Republican).

SS, Medicare, Medicaid wrought with fraud and bankrupt.

Public education in America? Rated worst per dollars spent in industrialized world.

Solid and capable leadership? Like Al Gore, John Kerry, San Fran Nan and Harry "Ain't no Negro" Reid?

Everything lefties touch turns to dung, most should be hung as traitors (you included) and you're going to get a reminder come November.

How many ecstasy tablets you take at one time sport? You're close to going under...

 
At 7:33 PM, Blogger Assistant Village Idiot said...

I guess if you consider Sinclair Lewis prophetic you can believe anything. I prefer Tom Wolfe's "intellectuals constantly see the specter of fascism descending on America. It always seems to land in Europe though'."

 
At 7:38 PM, Anonymous Raj Adams said...

Obama hasn't kept one of his campaign promises. Now we all get to be forced to give big bucks to the crappy insurance companies. I've had it - what happened to standing for what you believe in??

 
At 7:48 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh, the painful irony - your "progressives" who who freed the slaves were "wrapped in a flag and carried the cross".

Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord;
He is trampling out the vintage where the grapes of wrath are stored;
He hath loosed the fateful lightning of His terrible swift sword;
His truth is marching on.
Glory! Glory! Hallelujah! Glory! Glory! Hallelujah!
Glory! Glory! Hallelujah! His truth is marching on.

In the beauty of the lilies Christ was born across the sea,
With a glory in His bosom that transfigures you and me:
As He died to make men holy, let us die to make men free;
While God is marching on.
Glory! Glory! Hallelujah! Glory! Glory! Hallelujah!
Glory! Glory! Hallelujah! While God is marching on.

http://www.cyberhymnal.org/htm/b/h/bhymnotr.htm

 
At 7:50 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

In 1785, William Wilberforce underwent a conversion experience and became an evangelical Christian, resulting in major changes to his lifestyle and a lifelong concern for reform. In 1787, he came into contact with Thomas Clarkson and a group of anti-slave-trade activists, including Granville Sharp, Hannah More and Charles Middleton. They persuaded Wilberforce to take on the cause of abolition, and he soon became one of the leading English abolitionists. He headed the parliamentary campaign against the British slave trade for twenty-six years until the passage of the Slave Trade Act 1807.

 
At 8:14 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Rasmussen =republican operative? LOL.. only in your leftist fever swamp.

 
At 10:36 PM, Blogger Southern Man said...

I won't venture a guess as to who will win but I am certainly hoping it's Brown. As for the author I am convinced she lives in some alternate reality where history was written by a self deluded liberal progressive. Democrats freed the slaves? Interesting.

 
At 11:01 PM, Blogger docweasel said...

Not only did Dems NOT free the slaves, they opposed '60s Civil Rights reform in much larger percentages than Republicans. If not for Republican votes, Civil Rights reforms under LBJ would not have passed. The most disgusting and vile racism spouted during that time was out of the mouths of Democrats (Bilbo, Wallace, Lester Maddocks, to name a few). The Dems hold the dubious claim to fame that they are the only party to have seated former and current KKK members in their caucus, including current member Robert Byrd.

They constantly make demeaning and despicable comments like Reid and Biden and Bill Clinton's gaffes. In their hearts, they despise black people and see them only as a means to keep in power. They do nothing for the black community but condescend and patronize them, but offer nothing of substance.

Liberals are the first to attack any black conservative with the most ignorant and racist venom (see Michael Steele as "Simple Sambo", Colin Powell as "house n*****", Condi Rice as "Aunt Jemima" etc.)

Liberals project their own racism on the rest of the country. It's interesting Reid thinks the country won't warm to a dark skinned black person, when Michael Jordan, Bill Cosby, Wesley Snipes and countless other black entertainers and sports figures are dark complected and have been quite successful. And what prominent black politician DOES speak with "Negro dialect?".

Quite revealing. As well as Biden's remark that Obama is "clean", to which Sharpton replied that he "bathes regularly" himself, a rare moment when he showed some humor, but of course it was in response to a liberal's awkward remark. If that had been a Republican he'd have called for tar and feathers.

 
At 6:56 AM, Blogger DownWithTyranny said...

DocWeasel-- you are correct about Democrats not freeing the slaves and how there were so many southern Democrats fighting their party when it came to Civil Rights in the 60s. All those southern Democratic racists scum-- almost every single one of them-- joined the GOP, from Strom Thurmond, Phil Gramm, and Jesse Helms to Richard Shelby and Sonny Perdue. Parker Griffith is the latest of the breed. Suggested reading: http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/U.S._Republican_Party,_history

The false dichotomy here, however, is between "Democrats" and "Republicans." It should be between "progressives" and "conservatives." Progressives freed the slaves and conservatives opposed it. Progressives passed civil rights legislation and conservatives opposed it.

 
At 10:48 AM, Blogger lawguy said...

Wow, what did you do to bring out the rabid mouth breathing reactionaries?

 
At 5:50 PM, Blogger DownWithTyranny said...

Lawguy, they have worked themselves up into a delusional lather that their pathetic candidate has a vague shot in hell at winning. When you tell them otherwise they go insane(r). But... imagine how patriotic Americans would feel if there was a real chance to beat DeMint or win the open Senate seat in Texas.

 
At 7:27 AM, Blogger Karthik said...

Try this on for size:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964#By_party_and_region

In each region, Democrats supported the legislation more than Republicans did.

Yes, GOP votes were necessary for passage, but that doesn't mean they were happier to do it than the Democrats.

However, the Republicans DID free the slaves. I will give them that much.

 
At 4:31 PM, Anonymous me said...

"One laughable poll-- by always-wrong-about-everything PPP-- even showed Scott Brown ahead of Coakley 48-47%."

I'm not laughing.

No offense, but it looks like they were right and you were wrong.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home