Elizabeth Warren Leading Scott Brown In Two New Polls

[CoolBlue71]

So now the topic is topic is apparently the percentage of Native American Elizabeth Warren is and not the original post of she's leading in the polls against Scott Brown.

Poll Shows Elizabeth Warren Leading Massachusetts Senate Race

United States Senate special election in Massachusetts, 2010 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

2010 U.S. SENATE (special): MASSACHUSETTS
✓ Scott Brown 1,168,178 51.83% (pickup; +107,317; R+4.76)
◊ Martha Coakley 1,060,861 47.07%​

From the article: "Older voters and women also favor Warren by a wide margin…"

Four age groups: 18–29; 30–44; 45–64; and 65+. Way it tends to play is this: The youngest voting-age group is Democratic and the oldest group is Republican. The ones in between are most instrumental in deciding an election race. For the 2008 presidency, John McCain nationally won the oldest group while Barack Obama won the other three. In 2004, George W. Bush won the oldest group and the two in between while John Kerry carried the support of the youngest group.

If a Democrat were to win the oldest voting-age group … it would be one election race where the results (margin) will not be close.

As for women, fine, because Democrats win women first and then men. (Republicans do the opposite.) But if Elizabeth Warren unseats Scott Brown, and actually carries the oldest group, it's going to be hard to see how Brown could hang on with the male vote. (Unless we see exit polls, from Election Day, that deviate from the norm, particularly with the voting-age groups. The article says Brown leads with 30 to 49, but not by how much. And if she's leading 65+, or they may want to say 60+, then I don't believe the election vote would be a deviation.)

To unseat Brown, Warren will have to shift 53,659 raw votes (from that special election of 2010) in her direction. More than 3 million votes were cast in the state of Massachusetts for the U.S. presidential election of 2008. If Warren will be the next U.S. Senator from Mass., this will not be a problem.

 

[BostonPirate]

United States Senate special election in Massachusetts, 2010 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

2010 U.S. SENATE (special): MASSACHUSETTS
✓ Scott Brown 1,168,178 51.83% (pickup; +107,317; R+4.76)
◊ Martha Coakley 1,060,861 47.07%​

From the article: "Older voters and women also favor Warren by a wide margin…"

Four age groups: 18–29; 30–44; 45–64; and 65+. Way it tends to play is this: The youngest voting-age group is Democratic and the oldest group is Republican. The ones in between are most instrumental in deciding an election race. For the 2008 presidency, John McCain nationally won the oldest group while Barack Obama won the other three. In 2004, George W. Bush won the oldest group and the two in between while John Kerry carried the support of the youngest group.

If a Democrat were to win the oldest voting-age group … it would be one election race where the results (margin) will not be close.

As for women, fine, because Democrats win women first and then men. (Republicans do the opposite.) But if Elizabeth Warren unseats Scott Brown, and actually carries the oldest group, it's going to be hard to see how Brown could hang on with the male vote. (Unless we see exit polls, from Election Day, that deviate from the norm, particularly with the voting-age groups. The article says Brown leads with 30 to 49, but not by how much. And if she's leading 65+, or they may want to say 60+, then I don't believe the election vote would be a deviation.)

To unseat Brown, Warren will have to shift 53,659 raw votes (from that special election of 2010) in her direction. More than 3 million votes were cast in the state of Massachusetts for the U.S. presidential election of 2008. If Warren will be the next U.S. Senator from Mass., this will not be a problem.

unprecedented low attendance at the polls in MY HOME STATE gave that seat to Brown. The Dems and indies were annoyed with Obama for not closing down Guantanamo.

Trust me, the party faithful will come out to defeat Romney, and that puts brown in a bad place. What state are you from Cool Blue? just so wo know where we all geographically and politically stand on the spectrum. In Texas, a Massachusetts progressive is called a communist.

All states have their own internal tickers politically.

 

[rareboy]

Vote for Warren.

She's better for the near and long term future.

 

[CoolBlue71]

unprecedented low attendance at the polls in MY HOME STATE gave that seat to Brown. The Dems and indies were annoyed with Obama for not closing down Guantanamo.

Trust me, the party faithful will come out to defeat Romney, and that puts brown in a bad place. What state are you from Cool Blue? just so wo know where we all geographically and politically stand on the spectrum. In Texas, a Massachusetts progressive is called a communist.

All states have their own internal tickers politically.

I'm from Michigan. Which votes like Pennsylvania in presidential elections. It was a base state for the Republicans when the Republicans had the South. In 1992, the north/northeast made the official adjustment, and now Mich. and Pa. are base states for the Democratic Party. I'm in Wayne County (county seat: Detroit), which voted 75% for President Obama after John Kerry received 70% here in 2004. (Last Republican to carry Wayne County: 1928 Herbert Hoover. Franklin Roosevelt, with unseating Hoover in 1932, flipped Wayne County to the Democratic side for what has been a longterm and, perhaps, permanent realignment.) My state carried for Obama by D+16.44, a good 9.18 higher than his defeat of John McCain by D+7.26.

Any election that is not a presidential election is not comparable when it comes to representing the full voting electorate a given state; meaning that the base of either side will likely determine the outcome for a special or midterm election. Look at all these gubernatorials in midterm elections and see that the winning party is opposite the sitting president. A big deal was made when the governorships of Mich., Pa., New Mexico, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Wyoming etc. went Republican in 2010 with the second year of Democratic president Barack Obama. But they all went Democratic in 2002 with the second year of Republican president George W. Bush. Not many mentions of that … back then.

 

[BostonPirate]

Brown concerns me because he voted to lower pell grant funding and voted to let school loans interest rates double. That is bad news for the state that earns so much from higher education.

I am not a single issue voter, but this is one of my biggest sticking points for him to get my vote. Warren is a good woman. Salt of the earth. She is a classic yankee bitch that people love so much up here, even if they don't like her party.

 

[BostonPirate]

Ok the long game. Are you sure that Brown will represent your views in eventual committee leadership rolls or if he stays with a republican party that is quickly running away from normal thought will you endorse what you do not want? Think about what republicans did after BHO won in 2008. they ran hard right and eviscerated their own who were more moderate and not toting the line. Will Brown stick to his guns or stay in with the party that funds him?

I missed this one earlier...

I guess my take on Brown, based on what his own campaign people say, is that he is actually more conservative than his votes reflect and he only straddles the fence because he must do so to keep his office.

So what if he decides to throw in the towel.

Ehh.. I don't know. IT will most likely be Brown. I hate to see senate seniority go out the window, even two and a half weeks, but I am personally also more likely to get his ear than Warrens if I ever wanted to.

It's not like warren wont be seated anyway. I just think Kennedy's seat should go to a real liberal, and not the waffling brown.

 

[maxpowr9]

I think that kennedy changed the state law before he died to be an appointment seat. IF it's an election, then warren has the war chest and the name recognition, and with brown out of the way, she will have an easy win.

Warren is in either way.

My dilemma is whether I prefer a Brown or a Ted Kennedy Jr.

Are you high? Why the fuck did we have a special election for Ted Kennedy's seat then after he die and elected Scott Brown? You see, back in 2004, Massachusetts thought Kerry was going to win the White House and didn't want then Governor Romney to elect a Republican to the senate. So the legislature changed the rules to a special election in the case when a senate or congress seat become vacant prior to the end of their term.

Jon Stewart did an excellent expose on that...

 

[BostonPirate]

Are you high? Why the fuck did we have a special election for Ted Kennedy's seat then after he die and elected Scott Brown? You see, back in 2004, Massachusetts thought Kerry was going to win the White House and didn't want then Governor Romney to elect a Republican to the senate. So the legislature changed the rules to a special election in the case when a senate or congress seat become vacant prior to the end of their term.

Jon Stewart did an excellent expose on that...

ahh so the change was in the other direction.

and yes.. of course I'm high.

What a silly question. Do you think it's easy to not make sense like this?

That assumes we define high in the same way. Does Booze, pills, and Pot qualify?

 

[maxpowr9]

^I will just assume it is a cocktail of "fun".

 

[BostonPirate]

^I will just assume it is a cocktail of "fun".

HA

as long as you keep repeating cock and tail in the same sentence. That is fun.

Ok so wasn't there talk of changing it back again when Deval Patrick got in office? I really do remember that. I guess that would have been too obvious even in the Commonwealth as fixing the seat.

 

[maxpowr9]

HA

as long as you keep repeating cock and tail in the same sentence. That is fun.

Ok so wasn't there talk of changing it back again when Deval Patrick got in office? I really do remember that. I guess that would have been too obvious even in the Commonwealth as fixing the seat.

Playing fast and loose with laws is a surefire way to get the courts involved. Course our MA courts are legislating from the bench which leads to a whole other mess I have no desire to get into.

 

[BostonPirate]

Max are you going with Brown or Warren? At this point anyway.. still time to change your mind.

 

[maxpowr9]

Actually there is a debate on WBZ tomorrow @ 7pm which I will watch. Other people interested may watch it on the WBZ website or 1030AM-Boston radio if that is your thing.

I personally hate Jon Keller and his inflections while speaking but it is what it is. Polls do show Brown ahead of Warren but within the margin of error; course the Boston Herald is like a Rasmussen poll.

 

[BostonPirate]

Brown may cancel that. Keller's son works for the GOP, BTW.

 

[maxpowr9]

C-SPAN also reported that the debate may be televised on their channel also tonight @ 7pm EST pending "senate schedule".

 

[BostonPirate]

C-SPAN also reported that the debate may be televised on their channel also tonight @ 7pm EST pending "senate schedule".

She released a picture earlier today.....

her comment on it was....

I've got a special helper for my debate prep!

what a wonk.

I hear that Brown is feeling good about tonight, and is "on".

It's going to be a good old Boston Barn Burner! I will DVR it and watch it tomorrow morning. Tonight is Project runway. Does that make me obviously gay? LOL!

 

[Jack Springer]

Polls change . . . now Brown leads.

The GOP incumbent is beating Warren by a 50-44 percent margin among registered Bay State voters, a turnaround from the last University of Massachusetts Lowell/Herald poll nine months ago that had the Democratic challenger leading by seven points. Among likely voters, Brown is leading the Harvard Law professor by a 49-45 percent margin, just within the poll’s 5.5 percent margin of error.

http://bostonherald.com/news/politi..._pulling_ahead_of_warren/srvc=home&position=0

 

[BostonPirate]

You still haven't told me anything positive about Brown or Warren, Springer, and I have specifically asked all of you to present me with both of their positive contributions to the commonwealth, because I am still undecided.

Boston voters are different than what passes for informed voting, apparently. We take this stuff seriously and do not discount candidates easily.

BTW?

Convincing someone from Boston that a poll is good from the BostonHerald is like trying to get the queen of England to wear a dog turd encrusted dress.

Both our papers are slanted, and we generally seek other sources for unbiased input, or read both and ballance the two. We never trust either the Herald or the Globe to be unbiased.

Just so you know... pussycat

 

[maxpowr9]

Retail politics and debates are huge part of MA's history. It was former MA Congressman and Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill that said: "all politics is local".

Yes and as I explain to non-MA people, if you want a good idea of how "diverse" our state is, take a look at the 2008 presidential election map of the state and then the 2010 special election and notice the stark contrast between the two.

 

[kayman23]

Oh! I forgot all about that!

We had a GOP sheriff around here who was posing naked on gay websites, and somehow he thought no one would find his pictures!

Hilarious!

Speaking of what is that sheriff of Pinal County, Paul Babeu, doing these days? After his own sister snatched the rug from under him about being a destructive, self-serving individual always looking for this next victim. I'll be surprised if he is reelected after all what came out about how he treated his ex-boyfriend.