******LIVE THREAD******* Election Results

[cali]

Polls close in just a few minutes.

Here's a link to boston.com. I believe they'll be posting the results as they come in. Other links would be great.

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/2010/senate_race/

also:

http://spreadsheets.google.com/lv?key=tfQ3SmMT3pqoAUVvYgbXKtw&toomany=true

and:

http://www.sec.state.ma.us/ele/elespeif/speifidx.htm

[dave29]

1. thanks, cali.

:)

[Bleacher Creature]

2. This race is OVER.

In 7 minutes.

:rofl::rofl:

[Betty Karlson]

99. Bad news

The results from Danvers are in.

Danvers is one of those Northern suburbs where Coakley was not even supposed to beat Brown.

6,347 (Brown) to 3,651 votes

And this from a bellweather town.

[Betty Karlson]

107. MORE bad news:

Another bellweather just reported:

The western town of Agawam. Again, one of those towns where Ms. Coakley was not supposed to win (or barely).

6,726 (Brown) to 3,660 votes.

[Drunken Irishman]

3. I have a feeling we'll get a call within the first half hour. And not for our guy (gal).

[cali]

5. sad to say, I agree and yeah, I don't think it'll be a long night. hope I'm wrong.

[yellowcanine]

125. Well it has been 1 hour and no call so I guess not.

[ddeclue]

4. Prediction: Brown wins by 5%. nt

[cali]

8. I think that's just about right.

[Betty Karlson]

6. Other links:

http://spreadsheets.google.com/lv?key=tfQ3SmMT3pqoAUVvYgbXKtw&toomany=true

and here's something to compare them with:

http://www.swingstateproject.com/diary/6234/masen-town-benchmarks

[cali]

11. thanks, put the google one in the op.

[smalll]

15. Thanks - that Google spreadsheet looks interesting. Thanks for the town-by-town link as well! /nt

[NYC_SKP]

7. kick.

I was gonna post the link, but I see you got it!

:toast:

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/2010/senate_race/

[LLStarks]

9. Official result page from the Massachusetts government

http://www.sec.state.ma.us/ele/elespeif/speifidx.htm

[cali]

12. thanks, I'll add it to the op

[WolverineDG]

10. Good luck, Massachusetts! nt

[apocalypsehow]

13. Kick. n/t.

:kick:

[Drunken Irishman]

14. Well polls have closed.

[Arkana]

16. Not expecting a good result.

I had almost forgot what the crappy end of election night feels like--I guess being a Democrat, you never COMPLETELY forget.

[NYC_SKP]

17. Another link, live starting at 8:15, from City of Boston...

http://www.cityofboston.gov/elections/currentelections/

:patriot:

[cali]

18. thanks.

[Politicub]

19. I may have to eat my hat, but I haven't lost hope

n/t

[cali]

20. good. can I borrow some of yours?

[Politicub]

21. Of course! I have enough hope to go around

and it's infectious

:hi:

[smalll]

22. 8:10 pm -- any numbers anywhere? Conversely, any reports of lines at the polls

that could delay poll closings? Although I understand there has beeen high turnout, the fact that there is just this ONE race on the ballot makes it less likely that lines will develop.

[Robb]

23. WAPO "The Fix" dude is (rather, will be) tweeting results

Lord, I hate Twitter. But anyhow: http://twitter.com/TheHyperFix

[Robb]

27. 1% reporting, Brown 54, Coakley 45. nt

[Salmonslayer]

24. Zogby has Coakley winning by less than 1%

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/01/19/zogby-coakley-will-win-by-less-than-a-point/

Listen to the video

[SemiCharmedQuark]

64. Zogby is the World's Worst Pollster.

So...

[LLStarks]

25. First numbers up for the Boston website nt

[WeDidIt]

29. And Coakley doing better tha expected in those areas. n/t

[jpak]

26. Early precinct reports: Brown 62%, Coakley 37%, Kennedy 1% -

These from NECN (live coverage)

[cali]

28. ugh.

[hlthe2b]

30. Please post updates on this thread as traffic is affecting the links

[jpak]

31. Latest NECN: Brown 50%, Coakley 49%, Kennedy 1% - 1% reporting

n/t

[8 track mind]

32. msnbc says 54/45 brown's favor, can't get to any other website, too much traffic

[GCP]

33. Crap - my town went for Brown

I can't fucking believe it :grr:

[apocalypsehow]

34. The one night I'm away from Cable TeeVee! Thanks to everyone keep posting updates.

Don't like the sound of the results so far, thought.

:kick:

[SemiCharmedQuark]

35. Boston.com 52/47 Brown

[dave29]

36. 52/47 4% reporting

.

[Phoonzang]

37. Annndddd.....game over. nt

[WeDidIt]

38. Compare the Boston.com results to the Swingstate Map!!! COAKLEY DOING BETTER THAN NEEDED!!!

compare the reporting so far here:

http://www.boston.com/news/special/politics/2010/senate/results.html

To how things need to be here for a Coaley win:

http://www.swingstateproject.com/diary/6234/masen-town-benchmarks

She's hitting the required numbers to win!

[WeDidIt]

40. BROWN LEAD SHRINKS TO 5 POINTS IN EARLY RETURNS!!!!

This looks good so far!!!

[smalll]

43. I'm doing that with the Swingstate map and the New York Times map --

I had noticed that too - it seems somehow that she is doing well in a few "red" towns in that 1996 election.

I'm not taking anything from this yet though.

(Also, the New York times results and map - I'm finding the boston.com link hard to get to: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/01/19/us/politics/massachusetts-election-map.html )

[jpak]

39. NECN: Brown 52% Coakley 47%, Kennedy 1% - 4% reporting

n/t

[yellowcanine]

41. NO returns from Boston or Worcestor as yet. These are very early returns.

and the numbers are not that bad for Coakley considering that the biggest blue areas have not weighed in.

[jpak]

42. NECN: Brown 52%, Coakley 47%, Kennedy 1% - 5% reporting

n/t

[LLStarks]

51/48 Brown 7% nt

[Motown_Johnny]

45. not bad, assuming these are rural areas reporting first

[8 track mind]

47. c'mon you can do it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! n/t

[WI_DEM]

48. anyone know where the votes are coming from?

[SemiCharmedQuark]

52. Here:

Abington 0 of 4 0 0 0
Acton 0 of 6 0 0 0
Acushnet 0 of 3 0 0 0
Adams 0 of 5 0 0 0
Agawam 0 of 8 0 0 0
Alford 0 of 1 0 0 0
Amesbury 0 of 6 0 0 0
Amherst 0 of 10 0 0 0
Andover 0 of 9 0 0 0
Arlington 0 of 21 0 0 0
Ashburnham 0 of 1 0 0 0
Ashby 0 of 1 0 0 0
Ashfield 0 of 1 0 0 0
Ashland 4 of 4 61% 3,467 2,897 60
Athol 0 of 3 0 0 0
Attleboro 0 of 12 0 0 0
Auburn 0 of 5 0 0 0
Avon 0 of 1 0 0 0
Ayer 0 of 2 0 0 0
Barnstable 0 of 13 0 0 0
Barre 0 of 2 0 0 0
Becket 0 of 1 0 0 0
Bedford 0 of 4 0 0 0
Belchertown 0 of 4 0 0 0
Bellingham 0 of 5 0 0 0
Belmont 1 of 8 769 778 13
Berkley 0 of 1 0 0 0
Berlin 0 of 1 0 0 0
Bernardston 1 of 1 54% 378 445 19
Beverly 0 of 12 0 0 0
Billerica 0 of 11 0 0 0
Blackstone 0 of 3 0 0 0
Blandford 0 of 1 0 0 0
Bolton 1 of 1 74% 1,362 995 18
Boston 0 of 254 0 0 0
Bourne 0 of 6 0 0 0
Boxborough 0 of 1 0 0 0
Boxford 0 of 3 0 0 0
Boylston 0 of 1 0 0 0
Braintree 0 of 12 0 0 0
Brewster 0 of 3 0 0 0
Bridgewater 0 of 7 0 0 0
Brimfield 0 of 1 0 0 0
Brockton 0 of 28 0 0 0
Brookfield 0 of 1 0 0 0
Brookline 0 of 16 0 0 0
Buckland 0 of 1 0 0 0
Burlington 2 of 6 1,865 1,179 21
Cambridge 1 of 33 139 1,067 13
Canton 0 of 6 0 0 0
Carlisle 0 of 1 0 0 0
Carver 0 of 3 0 0 0
Charlemont 0 of 1 0 0 0
Charlton 0 of 3 0 0 0
Chatham 0 of 2 0 0 0
Chelmsford 0 of 9 0 0 0
Chelsea 0 of 16 0 0 0
Cheshire 0 of 1 0 0 0
Chester 0 of 1 0 0 0
Chesterfield 0 of 1 0 0 0
Chicopee 0 of 26 0 0 0
Chilmark 0 of 1 0 0 0
Clarksburg 0 of 1 0 0 0
Clinton 0 of 4 0 0 0
Cohasset 0 of 2 0 0 0
Colrain 0 of 1 0 0 0
Concord 5 of 5 72% 3,271 5,445 52
Conway 0 of 1 0 0 0
Cummington 0 of 1 0 0 0
Dalton 0 of 2 0 0 0
Danvers 0 of 8 0 0 0
Dartmouth 0 of 10 0 0 0
Dedham 0 of 7 0 0 0
Deerfield 0 of 1 0 0 0
Dennis 0 of 5 0 0 0
Dighton 0 of 1 0 0 0
Douglas 0 of 2 0 0 0
Dover 0 of 1 0 0 0
Dracut 0 of 10 0 0 0
Dudley 1 of 4 534 255 11
Dunstable 0 of 1 0 0 0
Duxbury 0 of 6 0 0 0
East Bridgewater 0 of 4 0 0 0
East Brookfield 0 of 1 0 0 0
Eastham 0 of 1 0 0 0
Easthampton 0 of 5 0 0 0
East Longmeadow 0 of 4 0 0 0
Easton 0 of 6 0 0 0
Edgartown 0 of 1 0 0 0
Egremont 0 of 1 0 0 0
Erving 0 of 1 0 0 0
Essex 0 of 1 0 0 0
Everett 5 of 18 964 1,149 33
Fairhaven 0 of 6 0 0 0
Fall River 0 of 30 0 0 0
Falmouth 1 of 9 640 1,126 17
Fitchburg 0 of 12 0 0 0
Florida 0 of 1 0 0 0
Foxborough 0 of 5 0 0 0
Framingham 8 of 18 2,155 2,938 54
Franklin 0 of 8 0 0 0
Freetown 0 of 3 0 0 0
Gardner 0 of 11 0 0 0
Aquinnah 0 of 1 0 0 0
Georgetown 0 of 2 0 0 0
Gill 0 of 1 0 0 0
Gloucester 0 of 10 0 0 0
Goshen 0 of 1 0 0 0
Gosnold 1 of 1 34% 29 18 0
Grafton 0 of 4 0 0 0
Granby 0 of 1 0 0 0
Granville 0 of 1 0 0 0
Great Barrington 0 of 4 0 0 0
Greenfield 0 of 9 0 0 0
Groton 0 of 3 0 0 0
Groveland 0 of 1 0 0 0
Hadley 0 of 1 0 0 0
Halifax 0 of 2 0 0 0
Hamilton 0 of 3 0 0 0
Hampden 0 of 1 0 0 0
Hancock 0 of 1 0 0 0
Hanover 0 of 4 0 0 0
Hanson 0 of 3 0 0 0
Hardwick 0 of 1 0 0 0
Harvard 0 of 1 0 0 0
Harwich 0 of 4 0 0 0
Hatfield 0 of 1 0 0 0
Haverhill 1 of 22 241 308 19
Hawley 0 of 1 0 0 0
Heath 0 of 1 0 0 0
Hingham 0 of 7 0 0 0
Hinsdale 0 of 1 0 0 0
Holbrook 0 of 4 0 0 0
Holden 0 of 5 0 0 0
Holland 1 of 1 51% 631 299 8
Holliston 0 of 4 0 0 0
Holyoke 6 of 14 1,953 2,195 74
Hopedale 0 of 1 0 0 0
Hopkinton 4 of 4 71% 4,123 2,600 35
Hubbardston 0 of 1 0 0 0
Hudson 0 of 7 0 0 0
Hull 0 of 3 0 0 0
Huntington 0 of 1 0 0 0
Ipswich 0 of 4 0 0 0
Kingston 0 of 4 0 0 0
Lakeville 0 of 3 0 0 0
Lancaster 0 of 2 0 0 0
Lanesborough 0 of 1 0 0 0
Lawrence 0 of 24 0 0 0
Lee 0 of 6 0 0 0
Leicester 4 of 4 56% 2,682 1,320 53
Lenox 0 of 1 0 0 0
Leominster 0 of 15 0 0 0
Leverett 0 of 1 0 0 0
Lexington 4 of 9 2,303 4,203 39
Leyden 0 of 1 0 0 0
Lincoln 0 of 3 0 0 0
Littleton 0 of 3 0 0 0
Longmeadow 0 of 5 0 0 0
Lowell 31 of 33 138 331 12
Ludlow 0 of 6 0 0 0
Lunenburg 0 of 4 0 0 0
Lynn 1 of 28 51 199 5
Lynnfield 0 of 4 0 0 0
Malden 0 of 16 0 0 0
Manchester 0 of 1 0 0 0
Mansfield 0 of 6 0 0 0
Marblehead 0 of 7 0 0 0
Marion 0 of 1 0 0 0
Marlborough 2 of 14 858 689 19
Marshfield 0 of 7 0 0 0
Mashpee 0 of 5 0 0 0
Mattapoisett 0 of 2 0 0 0
Maynard 0 of 4 0 0 0
Medfield 0 of 4 0 0 0
Medford 0 of 16 0 0 0
Medway 0 of 4 0 0 0
Melrose 1 of 14 345 343 10
Mendon 1 of 1 62% 1,750 792 19
Merrimac 0 of 1 0 0 0
Methuen 0 of 12 0 0 0
Middleborough 0 of 6 0 0 0
Middlefield 0 of 1 0 0 0
Middleton 2 of 2 64% 2,412 1,081 23
Milford 0 of 7 0 0 0
Millbury 0 of 4 0 0 0
Millis 0 of 3 0 0 0
Millville 0 of 1 0 0 0
Milton 0 of 11 0 0 0
Monroe 1 of 1 56% 19 20 1
Monson 0 of 3 0 0 0
Montague 0 of 6 0 0 0
Monterey 0 of 1 0 0 0
Montgomery 0 of 1 0 0 0
Mount Washington 0 of 1 0 0 0
Nahant 0 of 1 0 0 0
Nantucket 0 of 1 0 0 0
Natick 0 of 10 0 0 0
Needham 0 of 10 0 0 0
New Ashford 0 of 1 0 0 0
New Bedford 0 of 42 0 0 0
New Braintree 0 of 1 0 0 0
Newbury 0 of 2 0 0 0
Newburyport 0 of 7 0 0 0
New Marlborough 0 of 1 0 0 0
New Salem 0 of 1 0 0 0
Newton 10 of 31 3,666 8,457 56
Norfolk 0 of 4 0 0 0
North Adams 0 of 5 0 0 0
Northampton 0 of 14 0 0 0
North Andover 8 of 8 60% 7,018 3,826 80
North Attleborough 0 of 9 0 0 0
Northborough 0 of 4 0 0 0
Northbridge 0 of 4 0 0 0
North Brookfield 0 of 1 0 0 0
Northfield 0 of 1 0 0 0
North Reading 0 of 4 0 0 0
Norton 0 of 5 0 0 0
Norwell 0 of 3 0 0 0
Norwood 0 of 9 0 0 0
Oak Bluffs 0 of 1 0 0 0
Oakham 0 of 1 0 0 0
Orange 0 of 2 0 0 0
Orleans 2 of 2 68% 1,961 1,705 26
Otis 0 of 1 0 0 0
Oxford 4 of 4 54% 3,151 1,439 61
Palmer 0 of 4 0 0 0
Paxton 0 of 1 0 0 0
Peabody 0 of 19 0 0 0
Pelham 0 of 1 0 0 0
Pembroke 0 of 5 0 0 0
Pepperell 0 of 3 0 0 0
Peru 0 of 1 0 0 0
Petersham 0 of 1 0 0 0
Phillipston 0 of 1 0 0 0
Pittsfield 0 of 14 0 0 0
Plainfield 0 of 1 0 0 0
Plainville 0 of 2 0 0 0
Plymouth 2 of 14 1,303 949 29
Plympton 0 of 1 0 0 0
Princeton 1 of 1 68% 1,165 681 16
Provincetown 0 of 1 0 0 0
Quincy 0 of 30 0 0 0
Randolph 0 of 8 0 0 0
Raynham 0 of 3 0 0 0
Reading 0 of 8 0 0 0
Rehoboth 0 of 3 0 0 0
Revere 0 of 21 0 0 0
Richmond 1 of 1 63% 220 499 8
Rochester 0 of 1 0 0 0
Rockland 0 of 6 0 0 0
Rockport 0 of 3 0 0 0
Rowe 0 of 1 0 0 0
Rowley 0 of 1 0 0 0
Royalston 0 of 2 0 0 0
Russell 0 of 1 0 0 0
Rutland 0 of 2 0 0 0
Salem 0 of 14 0 0 0
Salisbury 0 of 2 0 0 0
Sandisfield 0 of 1 0 0 0
Sandwich 0 of 7 0 0 0
Saugus 0 of 10 0 0 0
Savoy 0 of 1 0 0 0
Scituate 0 of 6 0 0 0
Seekonk 0 of 4 0 0 0
Sharon 0 of 5 0 0 0
Sheffield 0 of 1 0 0 0
Shelburne 0 of 1 0 0 0
Sherborn 0 of 1 0 0 0
Shirley 0 of 1 0 0 0
Shrewsbury 9 of 9 60% 7,867 5,242 104
Shutesbury 0 of 1 0 0 0
Somerset 0 of 5 0 0 0
Somerville 0 of 21 0 0 0
Southampton 1 of 1 65% 1,533 1,052 34
Southborough 0 of 3 0 0 0
Southbridge 2 of 5 578 483 30
South Hadley 0 of 5 0 0 0
Southwick 0 of 3 0 0 0
Spencer 0 of 4 0 0 0
Springfield 1 of 64 36 150 1
Sterling 0 of 2 0 0 0
Stockbridge 0 of 1 0 0 0
Stoneham 0 of 7 0 0 0
Stoughton 0 of 8 0 0 0
Stow 0 of 1 0 0 0
Sturbridge 0 of 2 0 0 0
Sudbury 5 of 5 71% 4,078 4,291 41
Sunderland 1 of 1 53% 410 842 12
Sutton 0 of 3 0 0 0
Swampscott 0 of 6 0 0 0
Swansea 0 of 5 0 0 0
Taunton 0 of 16 0 0 0
Templeton 0 of 2 0 0 0
Tewksbury 0 of 8 0 0 0
Tisbury 1 of 1 58% 579 1,172 19
Tolland 0 of 1 0 0 0
Topsfield 0 of 1 0 0 0
Townsend 0 of 3 0 0 0
Truro 0 of 1 0 0 0
Tyngsborough 1 of 4 722 344 13
Tyringham 0 of 1 0 0 0
Upton 0 of 1 0 0 0
Uxbridge 0 of 4 0 0 0
Wakefield 0 of 7 0 0 0
Wales 1 of 1 55% 441 244 15
Walpole 0 of 8 0 0 0
Waltham 0 of 18 0 0 0
Ware 0 of 3 0 0 0
Wareham 0 of 6 0 0 0
Warren 0 of 1 0 0 0
Warwick 0 of 1 0 0 0
Washington 0 of 1 0 0 0
Watertown 0 of 12 0 0 0
Wayland 0 of 4 0 0 0
Webster 0 of 5 0 0 0
Wellesley 0 of 7 0 0 0
Wellfleet 0 of 1 0 0 0
Wendell 0 of 1 0 0 0
Wenham 0 of 1 0 0 0
Westborough 0 of 5 0 0 0
West Boylston 0 of 2 0 0 0
West Bridgewater 0 of 2 0 0 0
West Brookfield 0 of 1 0 0 0
Westfield 0 of 12 0 0 0
Westford 0 of 6 0 0 0
Westhampton 0 of 1 0 0 0
Westminster 0 of 2 0 0 0
West Newbury 1 of 1 68% 1,281 906 12
Weston 0 of 4 0 0 0
Westport 0 of 5 0 0 0
West Springfield 0 of 8 0 0 0
West Stockbridge 0 of 1 0 0 0
West Tisbury 0 of 1 0 0 0
Westwood 0 of 4 0 0 0
Weymouth 0 of 18 0 0 0
Whately 0 of 1 0 0 0
Whitman 0 of 4 0 0 0
Wilbraham 0 of 4 0 0 0
Williamsburg 0 of 1 0 0 0
Williamstown 0 of 3 0 0 0
Wilmington 0 of 6 0 0 0
Winchendon 0 of 3 0 0 0
Winchester 0 of 8 0 0 0
Windsor 0 of 1 0 0 0
Winthrop 0 of 6 0 0 0
Woburn 1 of 14 473 365 9
Worcester 1 of 50 66 214 5
Worthington 0 of 1 0 0 0
Wrentham 0 of 3 0 0 0
Yarmouth 0 of 7 0 0 0
Total 143 of 2,168 69,627 65,533 1,199

[Betty Karlson]

71. This is not good news:

Concord is a bellweather town. It is relatively well-to-do, and should with a turnout of 72 %, go for Coakley out of "appreciation of technocracy" (not my words!).

EDIT: It seems she lost a similar town (Belmont) in a similar fashion.

Let's hope for some compensation coming from the East-Coast.

EDIT: But by reverse, we are hearing reports that she "blew" Mr Brown out of the water in Cambridge.

[MrsCorleone]

116. If you have an updated list, would you post it? Thanks! nt

[Motown_Johnny]

57. here is a link, but not a great one

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/2010/senate_race/

[dave29]

44. race tightening 51/48 Brown 7% in

.

[jpak]

46. NECN: Brown 51%, Coakley 49%, Kennedy 1% - 7% reporting

n/t

[Danger Mouse]

49. this is going to be CLOSE either way.

[WeDidIt]

53. Nope.

I predict it will be called for Coakley by 11:43 PM EST.

[Danger Mouse]

56. I hope you're right.

:toast:

[scheming daemons]

59. Easy there.... Don't confuse your hopes with your expectations

I hope you are right... but I see nothing that leads me to that belief... yet.


I'm encouraged that she is only down 5% when Boston hasn't chimed in yet...

[tmyers09]

50. IT'S CUT TO 51/48!

[GreatCaesarsGhost]

51. What time do the servers go down?

[undeterred]

55. When the Dem pulls within 1%

[GreatCaesarsGhost]

65. Thanks. I'll check back later.

[yellowcanine]

58. I can't get into the Boston.com site.

[8 track mind]

54. necn link? n/t

[jpak]

63. NECN: New England Cable News - all me numbers are off me teevee screen

:hi:

[jtrockville]

73. NECN Link:

http://www.necn.com/Boston/Politics/2010/01/19/LIVE-RIGHT-NOW-NECN-Senate/1263945435.html

[jpak]

60. NECN: Brown 52%, Coakley 47%, Kennedy 1% - 9% reporting

n/t

[LLStarks]

62. 53/46 Brown 13% Boston numbers coming in! nt

[GOTV]

61. 52% 47% with 8% reporting

[cali]

66. 11% in. Brown 53% Coakley 46%

I'm afraid it's looking bad.

http://twitter.com/TheHyperFix

[jpak]

67. NECN: Brown 53% Coakley 46%, Kennedy 1% - 13% reporting

:(

[GOTV]

68. 53% 46% 13% reporting

[smalll]

69. 13% in, 53.3 Brown, 45.8 Coakley, first results from Boston - 2% of Boston precincts -

Coakley 50.0, Brown 49.3.

[Drunken Irishman]

75. She's doing horrible in Boston.

[jpak]

70. NECN: Brown 52%, Coakley 47%, Kennedy 1% - 18% reporting

n/t

[jtrockville]

72. NECN: 18% in: Brown 52%; Coakley 47%

[LLStarks]

74. 53/46 21% nt

[Motown_Johnny]

52/47 23%

[jpak]

76. NECN: Brown 52% ,Coakley 47%, Kennedy 1% - 23% reporting

n/t

[jpak]

81. Brown doing well in Worster and Essex Counties, Coakley ahead in Suffok County

Sorry for the misspells!

[Emit]

77. Brown's margin seems to have increased with every update

shit

[scheming daemons]

79. Nah... it just decreased again.... only 13 of 254 boston precincts reporting so far

[Arkana]

78. Coakley winning Boston by 13 points--her lead went from 3 to 7 to 13 in a very short time.

[LLStarks]

80. 52/47 25%

[WeDidIt]

82. I'm thinking Indiana in 2008 GE

Remember waiting for Gary to report?

[Motown_Johnny]

83. if that keeps up I could become a Red Sox Fan!!!

[weezie1317]

84. This is bad news. She need to cream Brown in Boston to have a chance. ()

[scheming daemons]

85. Only 20 of 254 Boston precincts have reported so far

[Arkana]

86. Only 9% in--give it some time.

She jumped out to a sizable lead quickly--it could possibly grow.

[jpak]

87. NECN: Brown 53%, Coakley 47%, Kennedy 1% - 29% reporting

n/t

[Arkana]

88. How...is that possible?

[Motown_Johnny]

93. rural precincts reporting first?

[SemiCharmedQuark]

96. I think he means that 53+47+1 is 101%

[jtrockville]

The unrounded numbers at 29% in: 52.50% + 46.57% + 0.93%

[MineralMan]

89. City of Boston

MARTHA COAKLEY DEM 6550 55.92%
SCOTT P. BROWN REP 5022 42.87%

9.1% of precincts.

[blitzburgh55]

90. She's up 20% in Boston

MARTHA COAKLEY DEM 11938 59.35%
SCOTT P. BROWN REP 7940 39.47%

http://www.cityofboston.gov/elections/currentelections/default.asp

[scheming daemons]

98. And there's still a couple hundred thousands votes outstanding from Boston

People are being premature.

[democrat2thecore]

130. Should be up 30-35 - am I correct Bostonians? -nt

[Arkana]

91. That lead is now 20 points with 14% in.

[WeDidIt]

92. Time to start worring.

30% in and it's not really moving.

[LLStarks]

94. 52/47 36%

[scheming daemons]

95. Less than 10% of Boston is in so far, and Coakley's lead there is 13%

This ain't over yet.

[MineralMan]

100. Holding at 60/40 with 17% in in Boston.

[MineralMan]

104. Boston: 60/40 Coakley at 26% precincts

[cali]

101. that's not near enough.

[scheming daemons]

102. There's still 200,000+ votes outstanding from Boston.. .at 60-40, that's a 40,000 gain

Just wait...


You're panicking too early.

[LLStarks]

110. need more!

[Salmonslayer]

114. 30% in with 45000 votes = 150K total Boston Votes n/t

[jpak]

97. NECN: Brown 52%, Coakley 47%, Kennedy 1% - 37% reporting

n/t

[Motown_Johnny]

103. This Is Maddening... so much for so many depending on so few

[Muttocracy]

106. I agree. nt

[MineralMan]

108. Still holding in Boston at 60/40 with 28% of precincts.

[adapa]

112. the few who have health care are denying it to millions

[LLStarks]

105. 53/46 40%

[weezie1317]

109. My town is going 67% for Martha with 25% report.

[jpak]

111. NECN: Brown 52%, Coakley 47%, Kennedy 1% - 44% reporting

:(

[jpak]

113. ~46,000 vote spread between Brown and Coakley

n/t

[CBR]

118. Too many... I think it is over. nt

[Motown_Johnny]

119. pretty steady 5% deficit for over half an hour now

[LLStarks]

115. 52/47 52%

[WeDidIt]

117. Boston's 58-40 Coakley with 21% reporting

Not enough.

Looks like the GOP will win.

:(

[MineralMan]

120. Boston: 60/38 with 34% of precincts

[MineralMan]

123. Boston: 61/37 with 37%

[MineralMan]

126. Boston: 62/36 with 40% of precincts.

[MineralMan]

127. Boston 63/35 with 44 % of precincts

[scheming daemons]

133. Where are you getting this info, mineralman?

[MineralMan]

136. From;

http://www.cityofboston.gov/elections/currentelections/default.asp

[MineralMan]

140. 64/35 with 47% in Boston

The gap is rising in Boston

[MineralMan]

144. Boston: 65/33 Coakely with 51% of precincts

[Betty Karlson]

157. To win, she ought to have north of 67 %,

or to have Brown below the 30 %. This is hurtfull.

[Salmonslayer]

128. Coakely by 22% with 35% in Boston

SENATOR IN CONGRESS
Total
Number of Precincts 254
Precincts Reporting 88 34.6 %
Total Votes 49582
Number of Uncast Votes 5
MARTHA COAKLEY DEM 30039 60.58%
SCOTT P. BROWN REP 18993 38.31%
JOSEPH L. KENNEDY LIB 480 0.97%
Write-in Votes 70 0.14%

[MineralMan]

134. Old news.

[democrat2thecore]

121. Socially liberal Repubs (but fiscally conservative) are a threat to us. WARNING SHOT tonight. -nt

[MSchreader]

122. Brookline, Amherst not reporting on Boston.com yet

Aren't those big D areas? Isn't their absence from the totals so far a big factor?

[Muttocracy]

135. do they have enough population?

might not counter the votes coming in on the NH border

[jpak]

124. NECN: Brown 53%, Coakley 46%, Kennedy 1% - 59% reporting

:(

[WeDidIt]

132. Pretty much the game

She's not leading by near enough in Boston.

FUCK!

I'm done with politics completely for the next six months. I can't take this shit any more.

[democrat2thecore]

141. Wow. This is Massachusetts, not Nebraska. Just wow. -nt

[Odin2005]

129. F**K, F**K, F**K, F**K, F**K!!!

:cry:

[weezie1317]

131. Remember that the % reporting is for % of precincts, not the % of people

[Motown_Johnny]

138. hopefully a large Boston turnout will turn this around late

but it isn't looking good ATM

[democrat2thecore]

145. Delete - I misread the post title -nt

[jpak]

137. NECN: Brown 53% Coakley 46%, Kennedy 1% - 62% reporting

game over

[jtrockville]

143. AP still hasn't called it... but it sure doesn't look good.

[KingFlorez]

139. Damn

Pardon my language, I'm cussing far too much tonight.

[Muttocracy]

142. Someone on WBZ radio called it for Brown

I'm listening to livestream on and off so I'm not sure who it was.

They say 60% in, 87,000 lead for Brown

[Motown_Johnny]

146. is it his cousin?

[Betty Karlson]

154. They may be crying too soon:

The bellweather town of Andover is just in: Brown falls short of his estimated minimum here to win.

[jillan]

147. It's beginning to look like a butt kicking. :(

[democrat2thecore]

148. In Massachusetts of all places, that's what I can't get over. I'm shocked, really. -nt

[Danger Mouse]

151. Keep in mind they elected Mittens to governor. I'm not surprised at all.

[Motown_Johnny]

150. yep, 90,000 vote deficit now

[Muttocracy]

153. Looks like not enough in Worcester and Boston left :(

(hi by the way)

[jpak]

149. Breaking: DOUG FLUTIE CALLS IT FOR BROWN!!111

:woohoo:

:puke:

[Motown_Johnny]

152. voting on what color a football should be?

[jpak]

155. NECN: Brown 52% Coakley 47%, Kennedy 1% - 67% reporting

hmmm

[Brother Buzz]

156. What a revolting development this is

[Muttocracy]

158. WBZ said they got news from the Globe that Coakley conceded.

[Muttocracy]

161. yep, finally got the Globe page to load

http://boston.com/

[democrat2thecore]

162. Listen to WBZ Election Coverage LIVE Here

http://www.wbz.com/

[8 track mind]

159. proves a hard point

You have to fight these mother fuckers on every goddamn corner. You cannot take your eyes off the GOP for one damn second. these fuckers fight dirty, and you have to get on their level. That is the ONLY way you are gonna beat these bastards

[MrsCorleone]

167. Agreed! nt

[Salmonslayer]

168. Huh!

Republicans win in BLUE Mass and you blame the lose on Repub's fighting dirty? Such denial!!

I have seen rougher campaigns.

This race was the Democrat's to lose and they lost because they took their eye off the ball. This is one of the all time greatest blunders in political history.

Now it is time to analyze and adjust for 2012 or you will see a repeat of tonight many times over in my opinion.

[8 track mind]

169. you miss my point

If you want to beat a fucking republican, you have to fight them. Coakly didn't do that. She was fucking complacent and figured it was going to be a cake walk. Republicans as a whole fight dirty, right out of the Lee Atwater playbook. You have to stay on top of your game when dealing with these people.

[apocalypsehow]

160. Though it's not looking good right now, I want to again thank everyone this thread for the updates.

I'm away from cable tv tonight, and am getting my info from DU in general and this thread in particular. Thank you.

[One of Many]

165. NY Times reporting

Coakley concedes.

[smalll]

163. To think she was 30% ahead in the polls not so long ago. Martha "Coakley"?

No - Martha Chokely!

[LLStarks]

164. AP calls it

[One of Many]

166. Coakley concedes

according to NY Times