MA-Sen: Rasmussen Sees Coakley Leading Brown by 9

[ccharles000]

Rasmussen (1/4, likely voters):

Martha Coakley (D): 50
Scott Brown (R): 41
Some other: 1
Not sure: 7
(MoE: ±4.5%)

Rasmussen Reports sees a nine-point race in the special election contest between Democratic AG Martha Coakley and Republican state Sen. Scott Brown to replace Ted Kennedy. At first glance, that may seem closer than expected, since people are generally used to Democrats winning federal races in Massachusetts with at least 65% of the vote. Frankly, I'm not especially surprised, though, given that a) it's Rasmussen, whose likely voter model seems tailored to project the Dems' worst case scenario, b) there were pervasive rumors yesterday of an unreleased private poll that had a Coakley lead of 50-39, and c) this is the first Senate race in, well, more than a decade where the Republicans have bothered fielding an appealing, somewhat-well-known candidate instead of the usual unknown sacrificial lamb. Recall that while Ted Kennedy and John Kerry won their last elections against nobodies 69-31 and 66-31, respectively, Kennedy beat Mitt Romney 58-41 in 1994 and Kerry beat William Weld 52-45 in 1996. If Rasmussen's numbers project out to, say, a 54-45 Coakley win, then, well, that certainly fits within the scope of those latter races.

Needless to say, this poll has led to a fair amount of press hyperventilating today, wondering if Brown could somehow pull it off. Chris Cillizza remains highly skeptical, saying that Coakley's name rec and fundraising advantages are "close to determinative." Coakley was, as of Nov. 18, sitting on $1.9 million (after raising $4.2 million) compared to Brown's $258K, which will certainly set the tempo for the last few weeks' worth of TV advertising, especially since Brown seems unlikely to receive any NRSC financial help (which would have arrived long ago if they had the data to support the idea that there was a competitive race here). Cillizza also cites Democratic sources saying that their own polling hasn't seen Brown emerge out of the mid-30s.

Nate Silver is also skeptical, if mostly of Rasmussen's sample composition; it's heavy on conservatives, compared with exit polls, and light on registered independents, who make up a big chunk of the Massachusetts electorate. In the end, he throws up his hands, though, saying that in a super-low-turnout election (as this one is poised to be), almost anything is possible, from a Coakley landslide to a nailbiter.

http://www.swingstateproject.com/diary/6132/masen-rasmussen-sees-coakley-leading-brown-by-9

[bluestateguy]

1. Then she's ahead by +14

Rule of Rasmussen: always add 5 for the Democrat.

[Forkboy]

8. I thought it was 10.

Rasmussen extra sucks. :)

[johnaries]

19. I follow that same rule! They weight heavily towards Repubs.

[Xipe Totec]

2. I saw the first Scott Brown sign on the way home today

No mention of the fact that he is the Republican candidate.

Almost as if that would embarrass the candidate...

[rockymountaindem]

3. Well that happens in Colorado Springs too

The Democrats who run here or statewide try to play down their party affiliation.

[jenmito]

4. Isn't he the one who has an ad comparing himself to JFK? n/t

[Xipe Totec]

5. He did that? What an ass!

Until I saw the little lawn sign for him, I didn't know he was running.

The fact that he did not mention party affiliation told me he must be the Republican candidate.

[jenmito]

6. Yup:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CdlccDRuWYw

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[karynnj]

14. Dem -till - end yet you are against the health care bill and are against

trying terrorists here??? and you think Scott Brown the better man? Can you list - say 5 positions of his you agree with?

[Dem-till-end]

16. Sure kary n nj, 5 points of Scott Brown I agree with.

Being from MA and residing in Ma I am very familiar with both candidates. Don't delete my post and then twist my written view to support yours.
I do think Scott Brown is the better man in this race. It is my right to become informed and vote as I see, be it blue, red, green, or other.
I agree with his views in the following areas on; terrorists, health care, schools, education, & immigration.

1) We share the view that anyone who performs an act (or acts) of terror against the US, on US soil or abroad, deserve to be treated as an enemy of the U.S.A. and not as a "US citizen." He supports this as my earlier post stated. Do you as Martha believes it is necessary to bring Bin Laden to the US for a trial? He is a sworn admitted enemy of the USA. 9/11 ring a bell or has it been forgotten? I haven't! Martha needs to rethink her position on this.
2) He supports that "All Americans deserve health care coverage" and yes he as I oppose the health care bill as proposed.
3) I support his thoughts for improving the quality of our public schools with choice.
4) He supports choice through charter schools of which my son attends and daughter soon will. Google "Ma charter school"
5) My grandfather and grandmother were LEGAL immigrants from Ireland. My sister in law was here LEGALLY from Brazil on a visa when she and my brother met and ultimately married. He recognizes that our strength as a nation is built on the immigrant. He welcomes legal immigration to this country.
6) He as do I oppose the current health care legislation. Again I have already made my position clear on this along with 52% of the nations voters.
It's time for a system of checks and balances even in MA. God bless Ted Kennedy but in the words of our president "Time for CHANGE"
8) I opposed the sales tax increase to 6.25% in Ma I know he voted AGAINST raising the Sales Tax.
9) He wrote the law that sets up a check-off box on tax forms, to locate returning veterans, so that they can be notified of the benefits and services to which they’re entitled. Our men and women are still serving our commander and chief and protecting America and her citizens for this they deserve our support.
10) He believes in helped those with developmental disabilities. He has been recognized for his efforts in providing mental health counseling services to area schools.

Please don't think I am ill informed! I am not and the above items I have stated as you asked effect me directly. I think it is going to take actual views and beliefs and more then just the Ma sacred "Democrat name plate" to win this one.

[ShadowLiberal]

7. Wonder why Rasmussen only polled 500, polls usually ask 1000 people

Would have given them a smaller margin of error, and most polls are about 1000 respondents.

I did find one number odd though that Nate pointed out, that percentagewise more republicans (24%) then independents (21%) will vote for Coakley. Umm... yeah right, when does that ever happen in a 2 person race.

[Dem-till-end]

11. Maybe they were calling the subburbs between 9-5?

When people are at work. With about a 9% unemployment rate and 11% willfully unemployed, 10% of which most likely screen their calls and don't answer, they most likely made approximately 5000 calls to obtain 500 answers. I'd say that was a fair attempt.

[Mass]

17. Where she wins by 10. Brown is going to be defeated as he deserves for his view on social issues

the economy, and war.

[karynnj]

15. Nice catch - that is weird

[Arkana]

9. If the NRSC thought they had ANY shot at winning the race,

the airwaves would be blanketed with Scott Brown's face.

Rasmussen's a fraud and this should prove it.

[Mass]

10. This poll has independents voting for Brown 6 to 3. Not very realist.

Quite a few independents in MA are from the left. Either the sample is skewed to the right or some people are crazy, given Brown's politics (he is not Charlie Baker or Weld, far from it).

[jefferson_dem]

12. Besides, those independents probably won't turn out.

Die-hards only in these special elections.

[Forkboy]

18. Looks like I'm a die hard.

Because I'll be voting for her. :)