Monday, January 18, 2010

Doug Goes Out On A Limb-- Predicts Coakley By 10 Points Tomorrow

>


-by Doug Kahn

“As expected, Coakley wins the Senate seat by more than 10%.” That would have paraphrased the lead paragraph of most Wednesday post-election news stories about the Massachusetts Senate election to permanently replace Ted Kennedy. Boring.
 
Why not make it fun, a close race, a man-bites-dog story? Not a problem when you have fraudulent Rasmussen polling to stir the pot, and the usual collection of idiot news anchors and political commentators. 

This is a good test of my thinking. Am I looking at politics and thinking about this election rationally, or am I just being an optimist, hoping that voters are still sensible people who won’t elect candidates from the Beavis and Batshit wing of the Republican Party? Okay, I’m going to take a deep breath, and say this: Coakley wins by 10%. The third party candidate gets 3%. Massachusetts is a Democratic state.
 
Really, no one who works in politics can predict an individual election with any degree of confidence, not an election where both candidates have wide recognition and have run credible campaigns, meaning they’ve reached most voters several times. I base this on a simple premise: anyone who actually could consistently predict these elections would be making their living betting on them, would be rich, and we wouldn’t be hearing from them on websites or on the news.
 
You can only know what usually happens, what is most likely to be true, what would be a practically unprecedented result. Don’t go searching through the evidence for secret portents or unique local factors. If you do, you’ll be a very smart person who ends up saying some very silly things. 

For instance, Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight.com said 2 weeks ago that Scott Brown’s chance of winning was about 5%. Then, after another one of those completely bogus Rasmussen polls of “likely voters” he tweeted that Scotty had a 15-25% chance of winning. But wait, the Boston Globe poll then said Coakley was going to be okay, and he changed his mind again.
 
I think it’s quite likely that Nate Silver’s reputation (deserved or not) as a Brainiac has caused some very dishonest pollsters to try and figure out how to affect his opinion. If they can get Nate to say the race is a toss-up it helps get resources for Scott Brown, and gives him more tv coverage, gets people to the polls.
 
Logically, you need some pretty firm evidence to outweigh the recent voting history of the Massachusetts electorate. Both Senators and all 10 House members are Democrats. And the governor, and both houses of the legislature. So Coakley, the Democrat, is heavily favored to win to begin with. In 2006 she was elected statewide to Attorney General, and got more votes than Ted Kennedy, who was at the top of the ballot. 

What’s the evidence against? Automated internet polling done of supposedly likely voters by provably biased organizations, namely Rasmussen, ARG, and the laughable Pajamas Media poll that has Scott Brown up by 15%. Follow the reasoning behind getting the morons in the media to believe Scott is winning: since Coakley was heavily favored, there must be a movement to the right in the country, people are really sick of Democrats, and so on and so forth.
 
How dishonest are they, actually? If you can figure this out, then you can figure out what the numbers really should be.  

ARG has Brown up by 3%, but they have him winning 20% of Democrats and Coakley winning 1% of Republicans. Brown also wins younger voters. None of this matches election results previously in Massachusetts or anywhere else in the United States. It’s very easy to skew polls of likely voters. Likely voters, obviously, should be people who almost always vote. It’s easy to figure out who these people are; you just get the list from the state. (Numerous companies make a good living selling software and data on voters.) ARG calls people and asks them if they’re definitely going to vote. This method is notoriously inaccurate, particularly in special elections, which people consider less important when election day actually rolls around. When they’re mad-as-hell tea-bag types on the phone with a polling firm, they just know they’re going to vote. Anyway, you get the point.  

Rasmussen had Coakley up by 2% on January 11th. In the Rasmussen voting universe, likely voters in Massachusetts give Obama a 57% approval rating, which is 10% more than they give him in the Rasmussen national polling. DailyKos polling has Obama’s approval broken down by region. His net Northeast approval is in the high 70s. Massachusetts being an extremely Blue state, this means the Rasmussen likely voter screen (and they won’t disclose their methodology, by the way) is off by 10% or 20%. If they actually do the polling; that is, if they don’t just pull the numbers out of their asses in order to drive the news cycle. I’m just saying.
 
One final thing about the polling. Research 2000, the DailyKos pollers, have Coakley up by 8%. Coakley’s internal polling numbers have been ‘leaked’ to the media on a daily basis. Supposedly they say it’s a toss-up, and that she might lose. Yes, depending on who shows up at the polls. Who can get turnout up for a Democrat in Massachusetts? Can you spell O-B-A-M-A? Now guess who went to Massachusetts to campaign for Coakley. Because it’s a toss-up, you know.

Labels: , , , ,

108 Comments:

At 2:21 PM, Anonymous me said...

By 10, huh? Yes, you're going out on a limb. I hope you're right.

But there's an extremely important, even critical, factor you did not mention: Electronic voting machines, particularly Diebold machines.

Did I say "extremely important, even critical"? That is an understatement. The only way we might be safe from that fraud this time is that it's just one election, a very important one, and there will presumably be some scrutiny.

Anyway, yes, I hope it's Coakley by 10, and I hope the repubs and Blue Dogs lose by 30+ in November.

 
At 3:55 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You Dems are all out of touch with reality and what people want. She will loose as a direct result of the Obama power movement.... Too much, too fast, and too out of touch.

I look forward to welcoming Mass to being in touch with the American public.

 
At 4:32 PM, Anonymous Dan said...

Research 2000 now is showing a 48% to 48% tie... In fact, the best poll Coakley has gotten over the past 2 weeks is a 2% lead in Rasmussen. I really really hope you are right, but all I'm hoping for at this point is a 1-vote victory by Coakley.

 
At 4:45 PM, Anonymous manapp99 said...

This is funny because in 2006 it was the Republicans saying the polls could not be trusted when they showed the Dems taking both the house and the senate.

 
At 5:18 PM, Anonymous ThatGuy said...

I'm an independent and an analyst, and you're dreaming. Look at the recent VA and NJ elections, extrapolate. Coakley is fighting for her life and losing.

 
At 5:26 PM, Anonymous Paul said...

It's the people's seat. Mass fires another shot heard 'round the world. Brown by 5.

 
At 5:28 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

If you go to 538, you will see that the ultra Lib, Nate Silver, rates Rasmussen as the 3d most accurate pollster. Stop the spin.

 
At 5:43 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The latest 8 polls have Brown up in between 5 and 10 points. The only one that has them tied is the daily kos which is THE most liberal blog on the interweb.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2010/senate/ma/massachusetts_senate_special_election-1144.html

 
At 5:48 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have seen batshit crazy, and it is Doug.

 
At 5:55 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The average of the 5 latest polls shows Brown leading by nearly 8 points. None show Coakley ahead. I suspect that in about 24 hours your "limb" will be inoperative.

 
At 6:06 PM, Blogger Unknown said...

LOL!!!!

 
At 6:20 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Doug, you sound grossly uninformed, not to mention hyperpartisan.

In a state where Obama's approval rating is under 50%, and ObamaCare is backed by 40%, and indies are flocking to the GOP in droves, one needn't rely on Rasmussen (as do Dems like Doug Schoen) to see that Brown's ahead.

 
At 7:15 PM, Blogger Kansas Scout said...

Dem's who drank the Kool-Aid don't seem able to snap out of it. It's pretty sad to see otherwise intelligent people lose their minds. It must be hard to see the dream die so soon. Hooray for Brown!

 
At 7:15 PM, Anonymous Bergie said...

1) How fast will the link to this blog be disabled tomorrow night?
2) Since you'll be eating crow tomorrow night, might I suggest a nice chardonnay, as the earthy tones go well with bird.
3) May I be the first to welcome the People's Democratic Republic of Massachussets to the United States? It's nice to have you along for one of the first times in your history.
WHAT'S NEXT.....GEORGE W. BUSH'S LIBRARY COMING TO MASSACHUSSETS??

 
At 7:20 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What's up with all the liberal hate towards Rasmussen? If you look at his predictions and the election outcomes it is easy to verify that he is one of the best pollsters.

 
At 7:25 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

dream on ... it's going to be 10 points, all right ... for Brown!

 
At 7:34 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You libs can take some comfort knowing that there will be enough of you at least to put together some decently-sized support groups when the Massachusettes-Gone-Red Derangement Syndrome sets in.

Enjoy the returns!

 
At 7:44 PM, Blogger Jim G. said...

People are pissed. You Dems are wacky as always.

Everything handed to you and whoops.

Don't you relish your freedom? Getting health care requires giving something.

come visit our political blog

politicsandmorningcoffee.blogspot.com

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

I'm afraid this prediction is nothing more than wishful thinking. If any candidate wins by 10, it'll be Scott Brown.

I'm expecting a victory by Brown of around 6 points. That will mean a swing of 30+ points away from the Dems in 2008. An amazing trend ... and one that could sweep the Dems out of power in the House of Representatives 10 short months from now.

That will be the quickest rejection of a political party since ... the 1992/94 cycle with Bill Clinton.

 
At 7:51 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You can pick up Coakley for about 20 cents on the dollar at intrade. If you believe your kool-aid, head over there and make a killing!

Assuming prediction markets are an accurate assessment of aggregate beliefs (even given these are small enough to be tampered with a bit), I would say Coakley +10 is an incredible longshot...

 
At 7:53 PM, Anonymous me said...

Anon, thank you for the corporate talking points. I don't think I'd heard them enough yet.

 
At 8:01 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Do not believe the right-wing propaganda and do not underestimate the power of the dead voter. Coakley wins, chicago style

 
At 8:03 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't know if your head is in the proverbial sand, or up your literal butt.

When sources within the Coakley campaign say they are behind in their own internal polling, you know they are in trouble.

 
At 8:17 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Fraudulent Rasmussen polling? Yeah, let's ignore the fact that Rasmussen has consistently been the most accurate polling model available in recent memory. Oh, and don't even bother mentioning that Coakley is behind in all the major polls by five to ten points. And let's not talk about the president's advisers telling him that a Brown win is all but inevitable.

This is why you whacked-out libs are constantly on the dodge from the American people. You have absolutely no grasp on reality.

 
At 8:29 PM, Blogger Bob Marsh said...

I've never been to this website before, but after seeing the headline at realclearpolitics.com that Coakley will win by 10 points, I checked it out. After reading the piece and the other comments, and assuming that you are all speaking the truth as you believe it, I have to say that I really feel bad for you people. You are so out of it. I know that it must have been people like you who followed "leaders" like Jim Jones and David Koresh and committed suicide at their request. Certainly this is why the charismatic Obama was elected and has spent a year trying to change America into a communist state. It's just so hard to believe that the wonderful American Revolution was started by your ancestors. What happened to you people? How did you go so astray?

 
At 8:32 PM, Anonymous Dan said...

Don't do what the right did in 2006 and 2008. They tried to dismiss Rasmussen's polling numbers that showed them about to get taken to the cleaners. You need to realize that those old Perot voters, the ones who are fiscal conservatives but socially liberal, are getting upset and getting involved. They can swing elections and they are about to swing this one for Scott Brown. Look to the Washington Post poll that showed 58% to 28% that Americans want smaller government with fewer services. This is why the Dems are getting beat.

In 2008 the voters were voting more against Bush than they were for Obama. Now the same thing is happening in reverse.

 
At 9:07 PM, Blogger Unknown said...

Virginia and New Jersey are what is going to happen. Vilify the Tea Party all you want! This is America speaking and ignore it to your own peril. God like Obama, Lord Reid, and Queen Nancy are next!

 
At 9:39 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Doug:

Pass around that huge joint you're smokin' dude! Rasmussen was the most accurate pollster in 2008, so what's changed? BTW, if the Democrats stall or fail to seat Senator Brown, I'm seeing a civil war on the horizon...

 
At 10:06 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Way to complain about "right wing" polls that indicate Coakley is behind, and then build your own case on the Daily Kos poll. Look in the mirror, and now slap yourself.

 
At 10:09 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mr. Kahn, what you’ve just written is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever seen. At no point in your rambling, incoherent article were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone on this forum is now dumber for having read to it. We all need remedial education to get back to the level of sea slugs.
Mental retards now feel better about themselves because you exist.
My dog read this and then went outside to excrete the memory of it into a specially dug hole.
I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.”

 
At 10:10 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

you've been watching MSNBC way too much.

 
At 10:15 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The rethuglican teabaggers following Lush Rimjob must've been directed here by his sidekick Glen "Mormon Racist" Beck of the Hitler Jugend. Everyone knows that the teabaggers are just astroturf planted by Faux Snooze and Karl "Plame affair" Rove. There is no real tea party movement and never will be. There will be universal healthcare, cap and trade, gun confiscation, taxes on the greedy capitalists and their running dog lackeys before President Obama's first term is up. You heard it here first...

 
At 10:32 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Logically, you need some pretty firm evidence to outweigh the recent voting history of the Massachusetts electorate."

Using this sort of logic you would have said that Republicans had no chance in '94 based upon what happened in '92. Things change. I'm sure Martha was thinking exactly what I quoted from you above - which is why she is in trouble and will most probably lose.

 
At 11:16 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You have no credibility - None!

 
At 11:41 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The corporations control both parties. This is a game of chicken, and you don't get that The corporatists are using the teabaggers and sarah palin as bogeys. Unfortunately you are buying into it. I'll get crazy to get the corporatists out of my party! Quit being a chickenshit!

 
At 11:41 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I took a screen shot of this entire page so I can save it for posterity. It will be funny to plaster it all over You Tube after Brown wins. Everyone needs to see what a fool you are.

 
At 11:57 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yep, Coakley by 10. America is a liberal, Muslim country. The Dems have nothing to be worried about at the 2010 mid-terms or 2012 general election. Heck, the Dems will pick up seats in both houses! And Obama? Let's just say that not only will he win a second term, the American people are so in love with him that they will overwhelmingly vote him President for Life. The GOP is in shambles, conservatives are toast, global warming deniers are clueless, and the progressive movement is going strong. One world gov't, baby! We're almost there!

 
At 1:15 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

As a Bostonian, why would I vote for Obama-Care. I already get it through the state? You are asking me to pay for someone in Omaha's health care.

Can't do it.

 
At 2:43 AM, Blogger Rick Mueller said...

Crazy way to run a country - about 20% of Massachusetts voters will be deciding HCR!

I'll be holding my nose and voting for Coakley (twice, three times?). Her conduct as DA during the Amirault witch trial was heinous.

 
At 5:23 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Can't wait for the day when the republicans take things over again....ah yes the theory of Bush and Cheney making all things right after Obama screwing things up so much.....man, I can hardly wait for prosperity again.

 
At 5:28 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Sinclair Lewis quote is no longer apropos in our secular, post-modern nation of world citizens.

Fascism will come wrapped in the promises of politicians.

Here's a better quote:

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
-C.S. Lewis

 
At 5:37 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"I must say I'm not very fond of oratory that's so full of energy it hasn't any room for facts."

-- Sinclair Lewis [presciently referring to Barack Obama and His Teleprompters].

 
At 6:12 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Brown Win.

Socialism is dead in America.

Zerocare and the rest of the Disaster-in-Cheifs agenda is DOA.

The One will be The One Termer.

 
At 6:18 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Your assumption on biased polling firms is just kind of silly. Sometimes they are very accurate, sometimes they are not. However, the ones who are trying to run a business selling their polling services have no reason to intentionally put out skewed polling numbers based on knowingly bad assumptions. That just makes them look bad and lose business when they are shown to not be reliable.

 
At 6:27 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I hope that jamming your head so far into the sand doesn't make your neck itchy...

 
At 6:28 AM, Blogger Lockestep said...

Rasmussen is a lying outlier? What does the PPP Brown+5 poll mean then?
Your blog post is somewhere between self-delusional and actively disingenuous. Here's hoping you man-up and write about the results tomorrow.

 
At 6:37 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You have a candidate who runs an ad misspelling the name of the state she wants to represent, who doesn't know that Curt Schilling pitched for the Red Sox (my grandmother knows that after the 2004 ALCS, and she doesn't follow baseball), who disdains going out in public and shaking hands, who runs an ad using the WTC as a backdrop, and it's the GOP candidate who cones from the "batshit" wing of his party? What's batshit is this post. She'll be lucky if she wins by 1%. Dismiss the polls and believe what you want to believe- much the same way that Dems have been handling the health care debate. Hope you've prepared some crow- should taste good around 11 tonight. Enjoy your meal, batshit.

 
At 6:48 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

If you're going to comment on politics, and elections in particular, at least learn the difference between 'points' and 'percentage'. You start by saying Coakley by 10 points but then say nothing but Coakley by 10%. Here's a primer for you: If someone wins 50 - 45, that's a 10% win. If they win 55 - 45, that's a 10 point win. Get it?

Seriously, if you can't do that basic math the rest of your analysis is meaningless - or should I say it makes it even more meaningless than the uninformed drivel that's just a 'throw one out there and I might get lucky' guess.

 
At 7:03 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh don't worry Liberals it is not a referendum on Obama and
Democrat control, remember you all won the special election in NY 23 all is well nothing to see hear folks move along...hahahahaha Son's of liberty rise.. get ready for revolution at the ballot box in 2010.

 
At 7:17 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Rasmussen on 1/11 picked Coakley by +2 and you pick Coakley by +10. Tomorrow we will know who is a partisan; Coakly by 6 and your equal, anything less and Doug you're the partisan hack.

 
At 7:38 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

If she loses by more than 10 will you take down your blog?

 
At 8:03 AM, Blogger Michael Redbourn said...

I saw the headline and expected a tongue in cheek article and became more and more amazed as I realized the writer (I suppose his slang style can be considered "writing") was actually being serious.

Real unemployment is now over 17.3% if people that have stopped looking for work are included; the majority of Americans are against the health bill and almost everything else that Obama stands for.

His foreign policy has been a disaster, as he's stabbed and alienated all our traditional allies and won no new friends ..

http://tiny.cc/foreignfailure

Obama is at the lowest point of any President in US history and more and more people are against his communist policies (and "yes" he was a member of the communist party just 13 years ago) - and like the rest of America, MA wants to protest.

 
At 8:10 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You commies are so clueless. by 10? lay off meth and crack. It's not good for you.

 
At 8:22 AM, Blogger Unknown said...

It is NOT that DWT is wrong wit Opinion the FACTS... it is that his FACTS are wrong

the ARG poll that had brown up by +3 is 6 days OLD and the last poll over the wekend had him up by +5

so instead of dealing with THOSE facts this idiot at DWT chooses to ignore them.


It is NOT politics it is a Character flaw

 
At 8:42 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

How typical of the irrational, unable to debate with facts, lib mindset. To build a site that says down with tyranny, and then be totally sold out to the leadership that only knows how to rule through backroom deals, corruption, thugs, et al.

I always kind of thought those things - trampling the will of the people, ignoring the desires of the voters, were representative of tyranny. Oh wait, I get it, tryanny is ok if you agree with it. What you really mean is down with everybody who is not in lock step with me, right?

Oh for the days when we had people who really knew how to think. Wait a second, look at all the polls indicating a revolt coming around the country. Maybe we do have some folks remaining who know how to think. I for one will still stand for freedom and the will of the people.

By the way how is that promise to keep things transparent, right out there on C-Span, working out for you? That whole "hopey changey" thing, you remember don't you?

To tag off of a phrase from Will Rogers. I am hear to talk about fools and liberals, but then I repeat myself...

 
At 8:42 AM, Blogger Paul Hogue said...

Coakley by 10!?

Quite the prankster...

 
At 9:02 AM, Blogger Doug Kahn said...

Love the comments. Thanks, all.

 
At 9:29 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hee, hee, hee... this is a great comedy blog. It's so easy to do a parody of liberals. You really have those loons down well though.

 
At 9:31 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Clever DK, absurdity gets a lot of attention.

And after the event, your blog will draw more attention from the throng who want to see you dine on crow.

Obviously, even self-enforced delusion can be put to advantage - among word peddlers.

 
At 9:41 AM, Blogger Unknown said...

Moron.

 
At 9:47 AM, Anonymous Michele said...

I read on your blog header you don't like fascism? Good! Then wake up to Obama's fascistic policies - card check, cap and trade, internet control and calling out of dissenters.

If you think this administration is about hope and change, you're living in a strange bubble wrapped world.

 
At 10:05 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Doug is a complete tool! Brown will win by double digits.

 
At 10:08 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Look on the bright side, Doug. While your credibility and intellect ae laid bare, you now have the freedom of complete incredibility. You are now free to say whatever you want, without the cumbersome restrictions imposed by reality.

 
At 10:12 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Your quote should read "When tyranny comes it will be staring into a telepromter carrying the Koran"

 
At 10:16 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I guess Doug does not read fivethirtyyeight.com very throughly since there is an article claiming Coakley has a little better than a 25% chance.

 
At 10:20 AM, Blogger Unknown said...

You're on some really good drugs; enjoy your hallucinatory dream. The only way Coakley wins at all is through massive fraud -- which several Massachusetts Democrats have publicly said they'd be willing to commit to ensure her victory.

You know, for years I've heard liberals complain about conservatives engaging in name-calling and straw-man logic, but it always seemed to me the shoe was on the other foot. I'm going to save this -- well, I can hardly call it an article -- ummm, this piece of ill-written propaganda so I can wave it in the face of the next person who tries to pull that one.

I also find it peculiar that you're already screaming fraud, especially since when Republicans made the same claims about the same machines and the same tactics, Democrats said they were all just petty and vindictive. (By the way, there's already video on the web of a Coakley supporter handing out blank absentee ballots and telling people how to vote for her.)

You are rude. You are ill-informed. (If you bothered to actually do research, you'd learn that Rasmussen is consistently ranked as one of the most accurate pollsters.) You're also not a very good writer.

And before you start whining that the mean Republicans are saying bad things to you -- I'm not one. I've also been a Party director at the county level, and have made a living as a strategist and analyst for about twenty years.

Let me put this as gently as I can -- political reporting and commentary aren't your forte. Find another job, preferably one you can do competently.

 
At 10:54 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Is this why Obama could only gather about 1,200 voters for Croakley, while at the exact same time, Scott Brown drew over 2,000 voters?

just asking.

 
At 10:57 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I love the image of lonely Dems, huddled in a dark corner, hugging their knees, slowly rocking back and forth, and muttering "it will be all right, it will be ok, it will be Coakley +10".

All that I ask is that you keep doing that until after midterms are over :)

 
At 10:59 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Nostalgia for the Bush administration is beginning. Obama lies with every breath... it was better when our President was only wrong occasionally, not everyday like Obama.

Brown will win. Congress will check the power of the Fascist in Chief.

America will soon be back to being American and not the the USSR.

 
At 11:03 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

In this type of election, it is about turnout and it is much more likely that the angry and upset turnout to vote than the content.

Brown has all the momentum and that likely will result in his victory. Even if Coakley wins a close contest, it says an awful lot about the policies of this administration and that the change that they are pushing is not the change that a majority of the country wants.

 
At 11:09 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

the only way Brown loses is by emptying the cemeteries and busing them to the polls,,, you all should be happy for Brown,,, he probably saves obamas presidency

 
At 11:42 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Nice try to get the Dems to not give up on voting. Coakley is toast! (And hopefully Obamacare, Cap & Trade and all the other BS the Dems are trying to feed us)

 
At 12:17 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Coakley by 10???? I live in Massachusetts on Cape Cod...Kennedy country in its purest form. The turnout here has been as heavy as during any general election I can remember. I took an informal poll at the local breakfast joint after I voted this morning. If it is anything close to accurate Brown will will by 10-15 points, and that is based on a poll in a community that traditionally votes more Democratic than Republican. Coakley shot herself in the foot with the vitriolic advertising and indifference to the voters up until after she seemed to lose the last debate. Based on her performance in days of late, I would have to say her political career in Massachusetts as well as on the national stage is dead.

 
At 12:36 PM, Anonymous Ed Butt said...

Have you ever thought of a career in weather forecasting?

Our people in Britain have it off so well they can lok out of thw window to tell you what it's doing now and still be wrong.

I don't know anything about Massecdhusetts politcs but our most left wing UK newspaper reported this electon was a much closer race than anyone had expected. All the polls they cited had it close and they did not refer to Rasmussen.

 
At 12:37 PM, Anonymous Jay said...

If you really believe what you say, you should just go to Intrade.com and bet a lot of money on Coakley. For every $1 that you bet on her, you will get back $6 if she wins.

But you won't bet money, because you are able to say things that you really don't believe. Like your hero Obama, lying comes easily to you.

 
At 12:38 PM, Blogger Truth Teller said...

Blog apparently is an acronym for:

Bloviated,
Loud,
Obnoxious
Garbage

Of course, the author can postulate anything he wants. It is not like he takes a risk - ANY RISK - with his prognostication. I would put more faith on this "prediction" if Doug actually demonstrated his belief in the outcome by announcing what he will do if he is grotesquely wrong - such as Brown winning the election.

Doug, there is still time. But I feel you will not actually put your prediction to the test. Of course, the rather absurd prediction had its intended result - getting a few more to read the BLOG.

 
At 12:44 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You say Rasmussen is off because its not in line with Kos? Basing your prediction on flawed information- thats some limb you are going out on.

First, Rasmussen most accurately predicted the last two presidential elections, and the recent governors elections in NJ and VA? Kos, who hasnt come within a standard deviation of any election, because their agenda clouds their sample?

And you think the NE is polling for Obama in the 70s? When?? Massachusetts voted for Obama with 57% - and you are going to claim now, in Jan 2010, when independents are running from Obama, that he is polling in the 70s. What a limb!

We will see about that 10%...

 
At 1:05 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

If your wrong will you promise to STFU? I spent some time reading your blog and it is apparent that you are retarded.

 
At 2:21 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The author is delusional. I get it, your politics is a substitute religion and people that disagree with you are unholy, stupid, and otherwise contemptible. Next time you mock the ever regrettable Pat Robertson, pause for a moment to ponder the fact that you're just as much a closed minded zealot.

This is a good example of the toxicity of national politics in this country.

 
At 2:24 PM, Blogger 333 said...

1) Massachusetts is not reforming Obama, just like VA did not. Mass. is reforming a moron who doesn't understand baseball or how to campaign. People do NOT like crap-campaigners.

2) You Republicans should get a grip.. ROMNEY CARE ROMNEY CARE ROMNEY CARE... REPUBLICAN CARE DOESN"T WORK!! REFERENDUM ON ROMNEY CARE!!! ROMNEY CARE REFORM ROMNEY CARE!! ROMNEY IS A REPUBLICAN REPUBLICAN!! What is it you illiterate fucks on the Republican Side can't read??! ! A REPUBLICAN DESTROYED HEALTH CARE IN MASS!! HELLOOO!!!!????

 
At 5:28 PM, Anonymous Balakirev said...

Whether Coakley pulls it out thanks to a large turnout or not, I can offer you a prediction that's 100% guaranteed: people on both sides of the aisle will be spinning and misunderstanding this as a reason to move to the right. Instead of realizing that Coakley mishandled her campaign, and Brown got a big pass from the usual mainstream media culprits on all his far right votes and connections.

Face it, folks, we live in a nation that will never dance, because it's got two right feet.

 
At 6:15 PM, Anonymous Leo Hansen said...

Doug At 9:15 PM Brown is up by 7% with 65% of vote counted. You are a fool

 
At 6:19 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

How does the Boiled Crow with Humiliation Sauce taste?

 
At 6:29 PM, Anonymous Balakirev said...

How does the Boiled Crow with Humiliation Sauce taste?

See? I told you the idiot mountain clan of Anonymous and all the others would be out in force to spin this right away. Not even finished yet, and all they can do is act like 5-year-olds. Speaking of which--Anon, and I speak as one who means well--do your parents know you're posting at a computer without parental supervision?

 
At 6:31 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Coakley has conceded the race. With 75% of the vote in she trails 53% to 46%.

Wow! You really called that one, genius!

You should promptly jump from that limb you crawled out on.

 
At 6:56 PM, Blogger cirrusclouds said...

You may have gone out on a limb, but you just got hit with a stupid stick.

 
At 7:54 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Marcia Coakley by 10 points. Great prediction, this is a great example of the disconnect of the extreme left from the public and from reality. The intensity of your particular political/religious ideology is your and yours alone. It is not shared by the vast majority of the rest of us. You confuse your own religious conviction to this ideology you serve with reality. That the majority of the rest of us do not share your convictions is not indicative of a lack of education, integrity, or wisdom on our part. What is instructive to unaffiliated voters like myself is how you characterize those of us who don't agree with your shrill world view. It's wholly pejorative and frankly insulting. All the while you wonder why the majority of the rest of us reject your ham handed attempts to convince us to share your Kool Aid.

 
At 8:08 PM, Anonymous Smiling said...

Don't dispair closet facists. Maybe you will do better in November? Coakley by 10, you rock. I laughed and laughed. I want you as the token insecure leftest at my next party.

 
At 8:27 PM, Anonymous Balakirev said...

Don't dispair closet facists

It's despair, and fascist, open idiot. ;) And in case you didn't notice, there was one guy here who made the prediction--but don't let that stop you from fantasizing. :D I *do* love watching a person without brains drool happily without reason. But then--I did pass along that whomever won, the fools would immediately start to spin this as "the country's gone to the right," didn't I?

 
At 9:52 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Must suck to be you right now.

 
At 10:43 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Don't feel too bad, Brown almost won by 10%. Oh wait, you said Coakley by 10 POINTS?

In that case you should feel like a total idiot.

Let me guess, you're predicting the Patriots by 10 this weekend. LOL.

 
At 1:16 AM, Blogger John Wysong said...

So...you're attempting to downplay your misreading of the electorate which culminated in this ridiculously terrible prediction by pointing out the grammatical errors and punctuation of others? Really? I guess that's one way to go. I was kinda hoping that you were going to be slightly introspective and discuss what guided you down the path to such a misguided prophecy. Instead, you've just continued to proclaim that the right-wing loons were going to spin the results. In reality, the comments haven't been so much spin as pointing out you missed your prediction by fifteen points. That's not spin. I look forward to your explanation of why you were so mistaken. I suspect that's where the real spin will be. But, hey, good luck with that...can't wait to see it. I'm sure it'll be just as magnificent as your prediction!

 
At 4:54 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

LOL @ Doug

 
At 6:01 AM, Blogger RB Glennie said...

quote: I *do* love watching a person without brains drool happily without reason. -30-

You must enjoy your image in the mirror, then.

`Doug goes out on limb... and the branch breaks.'

 
At 6:03 AM, Anonymous Balakirev said...

So...you're attempting to downplay your misreading of the electorate which culminated in this ridiculously terrible prediction by pointing out the grammatical errors and punctuation of others?

John, read for content. I only predicted that whomever won, the morons, cynics, and puffed-up fools would be immediately out to spin this as a reason everybody should think America is going more Conservative, and so should Democrats. But I'll gladly help out as well when some loon who confuses progressive values with fascism can't even spell two words in a four-word sentence. Call it kind-heartedness on my part. I don't like seeing wounded animals struggle.

But to get back to what I was saying: the real story here wasn't the various tropes about whether and why Massachusetts voters picked Brown. It was the repetitive gameplan the mainstream media and paid-for-nothing pundits pull all the time, ignoring important issues (like the candidates' historical records and past comments) to propagandize. In other words, it's another media fail, and it's going on right now.

 
At 6:56 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

you suck. In your face demofag

 
At 7:03 AM, Anonymous redwagyu said...

Balakirev said...
How does the Boiled Crow with Humiliation Sauce taste?

See? I told you the idiot mountain clan of Anonymous and all the others would be out in force to spin this right away. Not even finished yet, and all they can do is act like 5-year-olds. Speaking of which--Anon, and I speak as one who means well--do your parents know you're posting at a computer without parental supervision?


Boy, you want to see spinners acting like 5 year olds? Watch Olberman on MSNBC. He reminds me of Rosenberg of the Nazis, spewing hate and vitriol in the absence of anything meaningful. Not to mention his guest, Huffington, plagerizing Krauthammer last night!

 
At 7:31 AM, Anonymous Balakirev said...

Boy, you want to see spinners acting like 5 year olds? Watch Olberman on MSNBC. He reminds me of Rosenberg of the Nazis...

Lost me, guy. Anybody who starts using the "Nazis=Progressives" meme immediately gets tagged as either a cynical opportunist from Crazyland or a shill for one. Not sure which you are, but neither bodes well for intelligent conversation.

 
At 7:32 AM, Anonymous Murph said...

Nice call, doofus.

 
At 7:44 AM, Anonymous redwagyu said...

, Balakirev said...
Boy, you want to see spinners acting like 5 year olds? Watch Olberman on MSNBC. He reminds me of Rosenberg of the Nazis...

Lost me, guy. Anybody who starts using the "Nazis=Progressives" meme immediately gets tagged as either a cynical opportunist from Crazyland or a shill for one. Not sure which you are, but neither bodes well for intelligent conversation


Read that again a little slower....No where does it say Nazi=progressive; it merely states that Olbermann's slobberings last night seems similar to the effusions of Streicher in Der Sturmer. I am neither an opportunist or a shill, and as far as intelligence goes, I'm not the one who predicted a 10 point Coakley win.

 
At 8:16 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I understand the tendency to disparage the messanger who brings you bad news, but now that this particular election is past, and before the next one starts, it might be wise to spend a little bit of time understanding what Rasmussen is doing.

No poll is predictive: that is not what they are for.

But as a snapshot of where the electorate is at the time the poll is taken, they can provide useful data.

Honest and accurate attempts to identify likely voters gives BETTER data, and it is suicidal for any politician or political group to reject the best data just because the news is not good.

 
At 8:17 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm pretty sure Balakirev is actually Doug Kahn. Why else would someone try to defend this prediction - especially when it was touted as the test of his political theories?

BTW, if you don't like having Anonynous posts, take the down the option. Watching you cry like a pathetic whiner is growing old.

I heard they've started using this 'prediction' as the basis for a verb now, as in:

To Kahn: To make a prediction based on guess work, faulty theories, and hopes rather than any factual basis.

"I was in trouble at work for not being productive so I Khaned it and told my boss I was closing four big deals in the next week."

 
At 8:30 AM, Anonymous Balakirev said...

I'm pretty sure Balakirev is actually Doug Kahn. Why else would someone try to defend this prediction - especially when it was touted as the test of his political theories?

...and yet another member of the Anonymous mountain clan stumbles down from their hut to burble something before collapsing. Please, Latest Anonymous, show me where I ever defended such a ridiculous prediction. Oh, too bad: he's passed out. Probably brain fatigue.

Read that again a little slower....No where does it say Nazi=progressive; it merely states that Olbermann's slobberings last night seems similar to the effusions of Streicher in Der Sturmer. I am neither an opportunist or a shill, and as far as intelligence goes, I'm not the one who predicted a 10 point Coakley win.

Neither am I. But you *are* the one who brought Nazis into this, and that merits the Ignore Me, I'm Just Repeating the Idiot Pundit Remarks label.

Anyway, once again: the real story here isn't pundits playing at being racetrack touts, but the fact that the media in general completely missed on doing what they supposedly do best: reporting. The whole election was a pundit orgy, not an in-depth study of the views and votes of the two candidates. Yes, it is true (as some will say) that Olberman did reveal some of Brown's previous votes, but that's about it, and it hardly counts when looking at the media overall. They are an entertainment industry, or an arm of such human propaganda machines as billionaire Rupert Murdoch. So where do you go for news?

 
At 8:47 AM, Anonymous redwagyu said...

Yes, it is true (as some will say) that Olberman did reveal some of Brown's previous votes, but that's about it, and it hardly counts when looking at the media overall.


Since you castigated someone in an earlier post, its Olbermann, not Olberman, open idiot.

Olbermann=Ilya Ehrenburg.

There....does that make you feel better?

 
At 8:58 AM, Blogger John Wysong said...

My favorite line from this blog posting.

"Don’t go searching through the evidence for secret portents or unique local factors. If you do, you’ll be a very smart person who ends up saying some very silly things."

In retrospect, it was also the most correct.

 
At 9:34 AM, Anonymous Balakirev said...

Since you castigated someone in an earlier post, its Olbermann, not Olberman, open idiot.

Which only shows, ladies and gentlemen, that an idiot like redwagyu will completely miss the point every time. Does someone want to explain to him that messing up a proper name isn't quite the same as messing up two very common words in a four word sentence? No? Yeah, thought not.

But then, if a person's going to compare a newscaster to anything involving Hitler, Lenin, etc, you can't really expect much.

"Don’t go searching through the evidence for secret portents or unique local factors. If you do, you’ll be a very smart person who ends up saying some very silly things."

I think that can be simplified accurately enough to, "Don't go searching for portents." But the mainstream media is a circus; and I'm afraid that if someone were to show tomorrow that cat entrails came strangely close to predicting a dog catcher's race in Montana, we'd be forced to import tabbies by this time next year.

And Palin would be on every Sunday talking heads show blaming Obama for cat death squads, while Obama would be Very Seriously saying that he was studying the matter.

 
At 9:47 AM, Anonymous redwagyu said...

Which only shows, ladies and gentlemen, that an idiot like redwagyu will completely miss the point every time. Does someone want to explain to him that messing up a proper name isn't quite the same as messing up two very common words in a four word sentence? No? Yeah, thought not.


Actually, messing up a proper name is worse. Ask Coakely after her Democratic "helpers" didn't know her first name.

Furthermore, I didn't compare a "newscaster" to "anything" involving Hitler or Lenin; I compared him to a base propagandist, which he is.

Seriously, is one hour of therapy a week enough?

 
At 1:17 PM, Blogger Unknown said...

The Conservatives are coming!!!

 

Post a Comment

<< Home