Posted on 01/10/2010 2:37:37 AM PST by Zakeet
Democrat Martha Coakley, buoyed by her durable statewide popularity, enjoys a solid, 15-percentage-point lead over Republican rival Scott Brown as the race for US Senate enters the homestretch, according to a new Boston Globe poll of likely voters.
Half of voters surveyed said they would pick Coakley, the attorney general, if the election were held today, compared with 35 percent who would pick Brown. Nine percent were undecided, and a third candidate in the race, independent Joseph L. Kennedy, received 5 percent.
Coakley’s lead grows to 17 points - 53 percent to 36 percent - when undecideds leaning toward a candidate are included in the tally. The results indicate that Brown has a steep hill to climb to pull off an upset in the Jan. 19 election. Indeed, the poll indicated that nearly two-thirds of Brown’s supporters believe Coakley will win.
“She’s simply better known and better liked than Brown,’’ said Andrew E. Smith, director of the University of New Hampshire Survey Center, which conducted the poll for the Globe.
“If there ever was a time for a Republican to win here, now is the time,’’ Smith added. “The problem is you’ve got a special election and a relatively unknown Republican going up against a well-liked Demo crat.’’
The poll, conducted Jan. 2 to 6, sampled the views of 554 randomly selected likely voters. The poll has a margin of error of 4.2 percentage points.
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
On the other hand: The Peoples Republic of Massachusetts has a penchant for sending absolute idiots such as Teddy, Kerry and Bawney to Dee Cee. And Rats will be counting the votes. And Acorn will be running buses to the slums.
Conclusion: Despite what other polls say, and no matter how people actually vote, my money is still on the Rat.
Mine, too, but I’d like to see a comparison between the widely differing polls, the methodology, the number of those polled.
The polls are all over the place but again its Mass, so money is definitely on the Dim.
PPP surveyed 744 likely Massachusetts voters from January 7th to 9th. The margin of error is +/-3.6%.
The Globe poll:
The poll, conducted Jan. 2 to 6, sampled the views of 554 randomly selected likely voters. The poll has a margin of error of 4.2 percentage points.
The Brown poll is more recent, with a larger sampling, and a smaller margin of error.
Hmmmm...
I can't wait to vote. I live in a lib neighborhood and will be wearing a Scott Brown button when I go to the polling place. :D
Coakley is "well-liked"? First I've heard of it!
In any case, all those Coakley fans who read the Globe (must be all of them) can rest easy and not worry about getting to the polls, since she's such a shoo-in! ;-)
“Sample Size: 554 randomly selected Massachusetts adults
The data have been weighted by the number of adults in a household and the number of telephone numbers at
which a household can be reached in order to equalize the chances of an individual MA adult being selected.
The data have also been weighted by the sex and race of the respondent and the region of the state based on
the American Community Survey conducted by the US Census.”
Exactly, even crazy people in Tennessee are giving money to Brown’s campaign.
Not according to this Democrat Poll.
According to this group it is a tie with Brown slightly ahead.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/scorecard/0110/Poll_Scott_Brown_leading_Coakley_4847.html
Republicans have a very real chance at orchestrating a Massachusetts miracle in this month’s special Senate election to determine Ted Kennedy’s successor, at least according to a new Democratic poll out tonight.
The shocking poll from Public Policy Polling shows Republican state senator Scott Brown leading Democratic Attorney General Martha Coakley by one point, 48 to 47 percent, which would mean the race is effectively tied.
Among independents, who make up 51 percent of the electorate in the Bay State, Brown leads Coakley 63 percent to 31 percent.
Just 50 percent of voters view Coakley favorably, while 42 percent viewing her unfavorably.
Brown, who began an advertising blitz this month, sports a strong 57 percent favorability rating, with just 25 percent viewing him unfavorably – very strong numbers for a Republican in the heavily Democratic state.
On the issue of health care, which Brown has emphasized that he would be the deciding vote against, 47 percent said they opposed the plan in Congress while 41 percent supported it.
A Rasmussen Reports survey from earlier this week had showed Coakley’s lead down to 9 points, and in last night’s debate she had questioned the accuracy of those numbers, suggesting her margin of victory would in fact be larger.
The survey of 744 likely voters was conducted January 7-9 and had a margin of error of 3.6 percent.
In his analysis, pollster Tom Jensen noted that Coakley is suffering from a less-than excited Democratic electorate, a dynamic similar to the gubernatorial contests in New Jersey and Virginia that Democrats lost last year .
“The Massachusetts Senate race is shaping up as a potential disaster for Democrats,” said PPP pollster Dean Debnam.. “Martha Coakley’s complacent campaign has put Scott Brown in a surprisingly strong position and she will need to step it up in the final week to win a victory once thought inevitable.”
Jan 6 poll announced 4 days later?
Poll might be good, but very small sample size and how has the track record been of University of New Hampshire Survey Center, doing polls in Mass? Why go to NH, no polling places in MA?
I’m not saying I disagree with poll. The newer poll showing a dead heat may have caught some last minute movement especially from folks who only started to make up their minds after the holidays. Also, the newer poll seemed to be attentive to expected turnout while this NH pollster may have kept the same turnout figures as presidential election.
Another selection from article:
And there are other glimmers of hope for the Republican: Roughly a quarter of those surveyed have not yet made up their minds, and Brown matches Coakley - both were at 47 percent - among the roughly 1 in 4 respondents who said they were “extremely interested’’ in the race.
Clinton is involved? When was the last time his support helped win?
Alas, we know the bias of the average poli sci prof/university. One thing I note is the UNH poll says it is of ‘likely’ voters, yet it includes those who simply say they ‘may’ vote, only excludes who outright say they won’t.
On the other hand, the PPP poll doesn’t say that it rotates the order of names, instead always listing Brown first, and it doesn’t identify the independent candidate by name at all.
I’d almost say each poll is reaching for its relative result.
From the article: “Roughly a quarter of those surveyed have not yet made up their minds, and Brown matches Coakley - both were at 47 percent - among the roughly 1 in 4 respondents who said they were “extremely interested’’ in the race.”
Some of the results reported simply do not seem internally consistent. And other results, including what I quote immediately above, surely indicate that the Dems’ support is as soft in MA as it is nationwide. Even the article concedes that turnout will be low — no higher than 35% compared to 50% in a general election.
The pollster comes across as supremely confident that Coakley has an insurmountable lead. Even taken at face value, the evidence simply does NOT point to that. Ergo, the pollster has been misrepresented by the article’s author or is a hack. Anyone worth his salt would be hedging his bets a lot more than this guy has done.
I am not at all dissuaded from my own bullish sense, now weeks-old, that Brown has a real shot at taking this election. Perhaps not 50-50. But likely not all that much worse.
One other thing ... If this state is such a blue stronghold, why is such a HUGE fraction of the state’s electorate ... INDEPENDENT? Especially if the only game in the state is Democratic, wouldn’t one think that everyone would want to be registered as such?
There’s a lot I just don’t buy about the conventional wisdom that MA is overwhelmingly blue. A fair chunk of it just does NOT add up.
More on this poll shows that “likely voters” was self selected. They simply asked. Gallup article says that is not enough:
The simplest example of such a “likely voter” question is the most straightforward: “Are you going to vote on Election Day?” A pollster could simply accept the respondents at their own word, and include in the final likely voter sample those who say yes, and eliminate those who say no. The major problem with this procedure is the natural inclination of the majority of registered voters who are interviewed before an election to say that they are going to vote — without giving it much thought. In fact, Gallup research indicates that, on a routine basis, about 90% of registered voters will tell an interviewer that they are very likely to vote on Election Day.
But, variants on the idea of asking individuals questions in order to determine their probability of falling into the sample of likely Election Day voters can be quite effective. Over the years, Gallup has developed a series of questions that provide a good prediction of the probability that an individual will end up voting. These questions include asking whether or not the individual knows the location of his or her voting place, whether or not the individual voted in the past election, how closely the person is following the election, and so forth.
Based on more than 65 years of experience predicting “likely voters,” Gallup’s analysts have developed computer programs which give each person interviewed a score based on how they answer these questions. Those with the highest score have the highest probability of voting. These people have voted in the past, know where to vote, and have a high degree of interest in the election. Those with low scores have a low probability of voting. Despite what they say they are going to do, they don’t know where to vote, they hadn’t voted in the past, and they have a lower level of interest in the election. Thus, the computer program judges them to have a lower probability of actually voting.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/4636/how-define-likely-voters.aspx
this, sadly, seems more realistic. Massachusetts has been sending Ds to Washington for decades. Like diarrhea in Mexico water, so is idiot federal voting in the Bsy State.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.