Skip to main content

elizabeth-warren
Elizabeth Warren (D)
Public Policy Polling (pdf). 6/16-18. Massachusetts voters. MoE ±3.3%. (3/8-11 results):
Elizabeth Warren (D): 46 (46)
Scott Brown (R-inc): 46 (41)
Undecided: 8 (13)
Get used to seeing that same headline for the next four months: Democratic challenger Elizabeth Warren and Republican incumbent Scott Brown are embroiled in what seems like the nation's most tightly knotted Senate race. Case in point, Talking Points Memo's Polltracker average on the Massachusetts race currently gives Brown a 0.1 percent advantage over Warren: 45.1 to 45.0.

Warren's vote share has been remarkably consistent over the last few months, staying at 46 since Public Policy Polling's previous poll (in March), and hitting 45 and 47 in May polls from WNEU and Suffolk, respectively. Brown has bounced around more, but this month PPP catches him on a bit of an upward bounce, with his approvals significantly better than last time; he's at 51/38 approvals now, up from 45/42 last time. Unusually, it's a race between two candidates that people generally like. Warren's favorables are a similar 47/38, though that's down a bit from 46/33 last time. Considering that Warren spent much of the last few months on the defensive over allegations of overstating her Native American ancestry, that small decline suggests that that whole flap wasn't anywhere near the drag on her chances that the Beltway media made it out to be.

Probably the best set of numbers for Warren aren't the toplines, though, but the composition of the remaining undecideds. People who haven't decided on the Senate but who have decided on the presidential race break in favor of Barack Obama over Mitt Romney, 60-13. Sixty-two percent of those undecideds are independents, while 31 percent are Democrats and only 7 percent are Republicans. That, in itself, suggests that the majority of them will break in Warren's direction.

However, as PPP's Tom Jensen reminds us in his write-up, the undecideds feel favorably about Brown as well as Warren. Brown has 43/19 approvals from undecideds, not much different from Warren's 40/15 favorables among undecideds. Undecideds aren't choosing between the lesser of two evils, but between two candidates they claim to like, so Brown's skill at building a post-partisan brand for himself, smoke and mirrors as it may be, may still help him win over some of those Democratic-leaning undecideds. As blue as Massachusetts usually is, this one has all the signs of going down to the wire in November.

Originally posted to Daily Kos Elections on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 11:03 AM PDT.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  obama and warren (10+ / 0-)

    need to really air devestating ads of brown that will resonate with voters.

    brown's favorables should be much lower. that is the key.

    lastly, warren's campaign needs to step up. She should be going to the swing areas and blue collar areas that voted for hillary and brown.

    •  True (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY, TofG

      EW is keeping her guns in their holsters right now.  I think that's probably not a bad idea, though...save the good stuff for after Labor Day.

      I think Brown and Warren's situation in MA is similar to Obama and Romney's nationally.  In both cases, current polling indicates the race could go either way, but Obama and Warren seem to have more paths to 50.1% than do Brown and Romney.

  •  I have a hard time seeing... (13+ / 0-)

    How a group of undecideds that support President Obama by such an overwhelming margin ultimately break for Sen. Scott Brown, even if they do like him and Elizabeth Warren both.

    Keeper of the DKE glossary. Priceless: worth a lot; not for sale.

    by SaoMagnifico on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 11:11:50 AM PDT

  •  Warren by 5 points. (10+ / 0-)

    I saw what happened with our first black governor on the ballot in 2010. There was no Republican tidal wave here in MA. Far from it. And with Obama on the ballot this year, say hello to Senator Warren.

    Myth Romney - 2012 - If You Want Honesty, Vote For The Other Guy!

    by kitebro on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 11:15:46 AM PDT

  •  A tie now means Warren wins going away. 5+ edge. (8+ / 0-)
    •  Hope your're right (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      TofG, MichaelNY, JamieG from Md

      even with Obama carrying the state, a Brown win would be trumpeted by the media. I simply don't get how MA voters could be distracted by this Cherokee thing.

      "Valerie, why am I getting all these emails calling me a classless boor?"

      by TLS66 on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 05:56:35 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Warren and her team (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Sharoney, MichaelNY

        should have been on the ball with the Cherokee deal. She should have answered the charges immediately. She lost time and money with it and is paying a price with it. We Democrats WAY too often make the mistake of thinking that voters are rational. They aren't...even in true blue Massachusetts.

        •  Yup... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Sharoney, MichaelNY

          she was slow to answer, just like to other MA Dems, Michael Dukakis and John Kerry.  Clinton, on the other hand, was a rapid responder.  I think Gore was also a rapid responder (problem was, a generally hostile media generally buried Gore's responses deep within their papers and newscasts).

          "Valerie, why am I getting all these emails calling me a classless boor?"

          by TLS66 on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 06:44:06 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Cautiously optimistic here. (11+ / 0-)

    Certainly, Scott Brown has been working to make himself the kind of Republican that typically Dem voting Independents want to ticket-split for. However, Elizabeth Warren looks to be consolidating the Democratic vote well enough to make Brown's reelection incredibly difficult. There really just aren't enough Republicans to put Brown over the top, so there's nothing Mitt Romney can do to help him.

    •  I think you're right (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Cat Servant, MichaelNY

      If she can consolidate and ignite Democrats (including those from BAAAAAAH-ston) and run up the margin with Indies even if she loses them overall, then Scott Brown will have very few conceivable paths to victory.

      Like I said in an earlier post, he needs a "perfect storm" to win.  He got in 2010; let's make sure lightning doesn't strike twice.

  •  Partisanship will decide the race (6+ / 0-)

    His closeness in voting to the Republican leadership hasn't be put out here much. He votes 77% with Mitch McConnell, which isn't as high as some other GOP members of the Senate, but it's too high for someone representing Massachusetts.

    26, Male, CA-24 (new CA-26), DK Elections Black Caucus Chair.

    by DrPhillips on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 11:30:07 AM PDT

  •  What's wrong with Massachusetts? (10+ / 0-)

    This should not be close; Warren should win easily.

    I'm from the Elizabeth Warren and Darcy Burner Wing of the Democratic Party!

    by TomP on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 11:33:53 AM PDT

    •  Warren is a woman (6+ / 0-)

      Ma has an issue with woman politicians. They have never elected a woman statewide except for atty general as far as I know.

    •  brown (6+ / 0-)

      is projecting good enough image that he is an independent who votes with people

      lots of independents and conservative democrats (hillary) who hated coakley and need more convincing of warren.

      •  Yup... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY, Mike RinRI

        Rarely watch tv but the other day saw a sickly sweet awe shucks Senator Centerfold is such a wholesome family guy and manly husband to successful television newscaster ad....it ended with some still photo pictures of him and his wife, with the last image being one of her sitting on the couch leaning back and looking up at him who was standing behind it and over her kissing her...I gagged because he is such a fake and phoney and the fact they think this crap is what the election should be all about...image not substance...apparently trying to appealing to emotional (young female voters no doubt)...and never once in that ad was it mentioned that he is the RepubliCON candiate .(for Wall Street).

        Scott Brown is the Republicon Senator up for reelection in MA...yet he is afraid of that republicon label. Typical  style over substance hypocritical wannabe republicon hack..

        The Plutocratic States of America, the best government the top 1% and corporations can buy. We are the 99%-OWS.

        by emal on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 04:39:47 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  It's impossible to avoid (0+ / 0-)

          I rarely watch local channels (RI is part of most MA stations' coverage area and vice versa) but when I do I almost always encounter this same ad which lets us know that he let his wife have a career which makes him a special kind of guy.
          Maybe he should address the fact that thanks to his party's contributions it's no longer an option for one spouse not to work.

          •  Exactly Right (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            Especially on the policies they endorse.

            But another way to look at it is even more patronizing and condescending. It is, Scott is so special, because he let his wife have her successful career as a television reporter/anchor.  How belittling that is to women everywhere....as if women need permission from their spouses to keep their careers...but in the authortiarian republicon world, the attitude of the little wife needing/seeking permission from the husband is the predominant point of view.

            The Plutocratic States of America, the best government the top 1% and corporations can buy. We are the 99%-OWS.

            by emal on Thu Jun 28, 2012 at 11:26:03 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  Nothing. Brown is a hell of a politician. (6+ / 0-)

      As I said last year:

      I'm all for it...BUT (38+ / 0-)
      a Senate campaign is a different sort of animal. Being a modern politician is not something that comes naturally. Scott Brown has been running for office for 20 years and he's good at it.

      I hope she gets a good crack political team behind her.

      Yo.

      by brooklynbadboy on Thu Aug 11, 2011 at 06:03:29 PM EDT

    •  MAs largest religion (0+ / 0-)

      Catholic.   The Warren-Brown race will be close because the Liberal MA myth is not true across the entire range of issues.  Where I work, Brown is much more popular in a largely Catholic, rural town.

  •  Cherchez le femmes & younger voters too (6+ / 0-)

    Poll is 49% women, 51% men.  Actual turnout almost never has more men than women.

    More importantly, PPP's no-cellphones practice really shows here.  Only 9% of the sample is under 30.  Actual 2008 turnout of under 30s was 17%.  (In contrast the sample is 20% over 65s, while 2008 turnout was 15% for over 65s.)

    Add the undecided breakdown to the certainty that turnout will be younger than this sample, and Warren is clearly in the driver seat.

    Mr. Gorbachev, establish an Electoral College!

    by tommypaine on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 12:04:35 PM PDT

  •  Here on the ground (11+ / 0-)

    I can tell you, the people we're talking to on the phone and while canvassing are saying things like, they don't like her ads, they think she's "whiny", they're bothered by the silly heritage issue and they still believe Brown is truly "independent." Yeah, right. And these are Dems and Dem-leaning Indys we're talking to! So, we're working hard, trying to educate the folks here but damn, Dems here are a strange bunch.

  •  PPP Represents the WORSE Case For Democrats So (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    raster44, TofG, MichaelNY, pademocrat

    I wouldn't get too upset about this poll. After all, according to PPP:

    PPP is a Democratic polling company, but polling expert Nate Silver of the New York Times found that its surveys in 2010 actually exhibited a slight bias toward Republican candidates.
    This poll also has a slight bias towards "Republican" when compared to the demographics of the 2008 election. This poll's sample is: "Whiter" 85% - 79%; Older, Over 65 20% - 15%; and Less Democratic 39% - 43%.

    If PPP used a 2008 "screen", I'm sure the results would be more favorable for Warren.

    And just as PPP represents the worse case for Democrats, Ras represents the best case for Repubs. And lately, Ras isn't looking too good for (R)money.

    I am not now, nor have I ever been, a member of the Republican Party.

    by OnlyWords on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 12:21:45 PM PDT

    •  well, two things (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY, hifly15

      1) PPP now has an Dem House effect and was Dem leaning both in AZ-8 and in Wisconsin.

      2) A 2008 screen would be absurd; unless you think 2012 is shaping up to be a dem wave.

      19, D, new CA-18 (home) new CA-13 (college). Economic liberal, social libertarian, fiscal conservative. -.5.38, -3.23 Check out my blog at politicohen.com

      by jncca on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 03:27:03 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  special elections are a tricky thing to poll (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY, JBraden

        I wouldn't read too much into PPP being a bit off in AZ-08 and the Wisconsin recall.  As far as I know, nobody else even attempted a poll of AZ-08, so I can't tell if PPP would have been off from the polling consensus.

        Though it may be unsatisfying for election junkies such as ourselves, I don't think we can assign a bias towards PPP with any real certainty until after the general election, and we see how their polls stack up in a much larger sample.

        •  Good point (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY

          I don't think it's sensible to deduce a "house effect" from a couple of volatile special elections.

          Frankly, I was surprised that at least one other pollster didn't test the waters of AZ-8, considering that--on paper at least--it's a highly competitive district in its current form.  I think Barber was always considered the frontrunner out of respect for Gabby Giffords, though.

      •  PPP has no Dem house effect (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        Using two specials as an example is not sensible.

        PPP has a consistent GOP bias, which is easy to see in this poll.

        It's absurd to use anything else besides 2008 numbers.  No need to use any screen, but if you do, 2008 is a better guide than anything else, unless you think all the folks who voted in 2008 all died or something.

        They same approximate electorate will vote in 2012 as 2008.  The Republicans will win if they change the minds of those voters, like they did in 2010, but turnout will be in the same ballpark.

        Mr. Gorbachev, establish an Electoral College!

        by tommypaine on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 05:19:20 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Based on these results, Warren will win. (6+ / 0-)

    Why do I think that? She's right within striking distance of where she should be, despite being down. PPP has the partisan breakdown at 39/13/48, which I think is way too skewed towards Independents. It was 43/17/40 in 2008. Let's split the difference between these and go with 41/18/41. if Warren is able to get 82 percent of Democrats, three percent of Republicans, and 40 percent of Independents, she wins with 50.56 percent. Or should could get 78 percent of Democrats, three percent of Republicans, and 45 percent of Independents under a 41/18/41 split, getting 50.97 percent of the vote. She can essentially lose as many Democrats as she's losing now, but sharply cut down on Brown's margins with Independents while still losing them overall, or she can increase her margin with Democrats a little and increase her margin with Independents, while still doing worse than she might otherwise do. Needless to say, if she hits 85 of Democrats overall or at least 50 percent of Independents, the seat is hers.

    You can go back and forth with different scenarios, but I think it's fairly easy to envision a scenario where she does something like I described above and wins, at least just barely.

    If nothing else, the DSCC and the DNC should be working like dogs to drive out every last vote in the state.

    Jack Donaghy: "We're nipping this in the bud. Jenna's going to issue a formal apology tomorrow on "Hardball"....you do know what that is, don't you?" Jenna Maroney: "Yes. Should I prepare a song?"

    by bjssp on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 02:57:31 PM PDT

  •  The way I see it (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY

    tied polls don't mean this is a tossup.  In the same way, if Bob Kerrey and Deb Fischer were tied in the polls of the Nebraska Senate race (they're not, this is just for example) I would still give the edge to Fischer just based on the likely partisan leanings of undecided voters.  Kerrey would have to be clearly polling ahead for me to think he would win, and in the same way I think Warren wins unless Sen. Brown is polling ahead by 5+ points come election day.

    •  Has the worst already come for Warren? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY, Mike RinRI

      In another month, if she's still tied, or behind, I might be a little more concerned, but now, I am inclined to agree with you.

      Jack Donaghy: "We're nipping this in the bud. Jenna's going to issue a formal apology tomorrow on "Hardball"....you do know what that is, don't you?" Jenna Maroney: "Yes. Should I prepare a song?"

      by bjssp on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 04:55:26 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  She'll pull it out, this election (0+ / 0-)

    If he goes for a series of debates - Pull it off.

    That race is all about the ad-buys. And an inebriated electorate. No. hypnotized.

    To hell with Hypnotherapy and Hypnotoad.

    I'm calling this race for Liz=bet.

    Wanna bet? "Gaming" is the new taxes in State legislatures this week.

    I want a living planet, not just a living room.

    by Anthony Page aka SecondComing on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 04:41:16 PM PDT

  •  warren supporters should know limbaugh (and (0+ / 0-)

    other national blowhards, probably) does regular attacks on warren. RW radio played a big part in getting scott brown in.

    if there are no efforts to in MA to monitor and respond to RW radio's attacks on warren then the pro warren supporters cannot collectively say they are getting her back.

    tveyes.com provides a service to companies and orgs that allows them to search the transcripts of many tv and radio shows. i don't know what is available re RW radio but it needs to be checked out by the Warren campaign. if that isn't worthwhile the campaign should dedicate a few computers with transcript software to compile daily transcripts for in house searches so that when the lies and distortions appear the campaign can react BEFORE the lie becomes truth. and with those transcripts the media will have to react.

    This is a list of 76 universities for Rush Limbaugh that endorse global warming denial, racism, sexism, and partisan lying by broadcasting sports on Limbaugh radio stations.

    by certainot on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 04:45:40 PM PDT

    •  RW radio isn't so big a deal in Mass. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      You've got Michael Graham with that horribly grating voice, Jay Severin is gone, Rush isn't a factor here.  

      Brow just ran a better campaign.  

      •  Rush helped his fund-raising. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        certainot, MichaelNY

        He promoted a hate-site running money bombs for Brown. That will not help him now, so of course he will have forgotten about the Tea Party Groups he addressed.

      •  RW radio is the only reason a joke like brown (0+ / 0-)

        could become a senator. I don't remember who was in his primary but the tea party is all talk radio.

        RW radio steers and intimidates media and the way both candidates are treated.

        This is a list of 76 universities for Rush Limbaugh that endorse global warming denial, racism, sexism, and partisan lying by broadcasting sports on Limbaugh radio stations.

        by certainot on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 06:33:08 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Jay Severin is still around (0+ / 0-)

        There was a billboard advertising his show a block from my house until a couple weeks ago.

        27, Male, MA-08 (hometown MI-06)

        by bumiputera on Wed Jun 27, 2012 at 06:30:50 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  What about that slimy jerk (0+ / 0-)

        Howie Carr?

        "Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." -Theodore Seuss Geisel

        by KingofSpades on Wed Jun 27, 2012 at 10:41:24 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Minor characters (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          KingofSpades

          Carr is on AM radio which few people listen to.  Severin was fired about 6 months ago.  

          Rush raised a lot of money for Brown, and money will be an issue in this campaign.   But people influenced by RW radio wingnuts?   It's different here.   I spend a lot of time in Maine and you can barely find a station that isn't a combination of fundamental Christian with a mega RW agenda or plain old RW wing nuts.  You really notice the difference as you enter Maine.    As an aside, several of these stations are new this year.

  •  It just kind of makes you wonder, however (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY
    Probably the best set of numbers for Warren aren't the toplines, though, but the composition of the remaining undecideds. People who haven't decided on the Senate but who have decided on the presidential race break in favor of Barack Obama over Mitt Romney, 60-13. Sixty-two percent of those undecideds are independents, while 31 percent are Democrats and only 7 percent are Republicans. That, in itself, suggests that the majority of them will break in Warren's direction.
    I know that puts a smiley face on the results in this poll, but it has to make you wonder why these folks didn't just come out now and say who they're for.  Polls change and people's minds change so this still looks, to me, to be a very close race.  A lot of things look like they favor Warren here, but let's remember, Brown got there for some reason.

    The truth is sometimes very inconvenient.

    by commonsensically on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 04:48:25 PM PDT

  •  isn't conventional wisdom that (0+ / 0-)

    late undecideds tend to favor the challenger, since those folks have had a long time to make up their minds in favor of the incumbent? If so, that means that a challenger being tied with an incumbent senator should have a good shot at picking up a majority of the undecideds (assuming the campaign has an effective strategy for appealing to those undecided voters).

    •  Conventional wisdom is neither wise nor true (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jncca

      This particular bit was disproven by Nate Silver.

      What is more relevant is the partisan lean of the state.

      Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

      by MichaelNY on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 05:06:53 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  conventional wisdom is not always (0+ / 0-)

        wise nor true...you're right...but...it sometimes is.

        Regardless of whether you like that phrase or not, it seems to me that the fact that a challenger is tied with an incumbent with 13 percent undecided means the challenger is in good shape, assuming she runs a good campaign.

        •  Did you miss my points? (0+ / 0-)

          (1) Late deciders don't tend to disproportionately favor the challenger.
          (2) What's more relevant is the partisan lean of Massachusetts, which is highly Democratic.

          Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

          by MichaelNY on Wed Jun 27, 2012 at 02:25:25 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  your points were read by me... (0+ / 0-)

            and understood. It seems to me that in such a highly charged, high-visibility election such as this one, where Brown is virtually a household word and a virtual icon to many for having given the Republicans Ted Kennedy's old Senate seat...that anyone who is undecided on this race at this point is ripe for a little push (i.e. the right message) from Elizabeth Warren.

  •  Isn't Massachusetts a holy Blue State? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY

    I mean, damn, really?  Tied?

    At least down here in Texas we got born and bred stupid as an excuse.

    NOW SHOWING
    Progressive Candidate Obama (now - Nov 6, 2012)
    Bipartisan Obama returns (Nov 7, 2012)

    by The Dead Man on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 04:57:24 PM PDT

  •  It was the Cherokee thing (0+ / 0-)

    that stopped Warren's momentum.  I hate to admit it, but Brown's oppo research people did their job.

    "Valerie, why am I getting all these emails calling me a classless boor?"

    by TLS66 on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 05:51:51 PM PDT

    •  Not really (0+ / 0-)

      It's already blowing over, and polling has shown that most MA voters say it won't make a difference in who they pick in November anyway.

      The only people still howling about it are people who were never going to vote for EW in the first place.

  •  Interesting (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JBraden

    with the race supposedly a dead heat, I don't see how Scott Brown can avoid debates. And if he chooses to debate, I think he loses, both the debate and the election. Plus I think Warren will gain adherents as people start paying attention. With schools out and families traveling hither and yon around the country, one wonders exactly who's at home manning the phones when the pollsters come a-calling.

  •  The idea that MA is a unique brainy, liberal state (3+ / 0-)

    is as fraudulent as the notion that Scott Brown is truly independent. These poll numbers show that MA voters—including Dems—are just as ignorant and gullible as voters—including Dems—in other states such as Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin. Martha Coakley was indeed a hack and a miserable candidate, but a Senator Coakley wouldn't have voted with Mitch McConnell 77% of the time, either.

    •  And if Martha Coakley had bothered to (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      JBraden, MichaelNY, bumiputera

      campaign like she was truly interested, she might be in the Senate now. Thankfully, Warren isn't making the same mistakes.

      Jack Donaghy: "We're nipping this in the bud. Jenna's going to issue a formal apology tomorrow on "Hardball"....you do know what that is, don't you?" Jenna Maroney: "Yes. Should I prepare a song?"

      by bjssp on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 06:07:12 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  So many stupid people (0+ / 0-)

    in MA, that Brown is even with Warren?  How disappointing.

    •  If Brown gets re-elected . . . (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Cat Servant

      . . . I propose that the state henceforth be renamed "Dumbassachusetts."

      29, chick, Jewish, solid progressive, NY-14 currently, FL-22 native, went to school in IL-01. Mitt Romney: the Kama Sutra candidate. There's no position he hasn't tried!

      by The Caped Composer on Tue Jun 26, 2012 at 07:23:04 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The "uneducated community" (0+ / 0-)

        gives votes to both Brown and Warren.
        I guess it really depends what part of the state you come from.
        Have any of the polls shown votes based on education levels for this race? Does PPP do that?

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site