MA-Sen: Brown Leads Coakley by 5 in Final PPP Poll

Public Policy Polling (PDF) (1/16-17, likely voters, 1/7-9 in parens):

Martha Coakley (D): 46 (47)

Scott Brown (R): 51 (48)

Undecided: 4 (6)

(MoE: ±2.8%)

Some observations from Tom Jensen:

-Brown is up 64-32 with independents and is winning 20% of the vote from people who supported Barack Obama in 2008 while Coakley is getting just 4% of the McCain vote.

-Brown’s voters continue to be much more enthusiastic than Coakley’s. 80% of his say they’re ‘very excited’ about voting Tuesday while only 60% of hers express that sentiment. But the likely electorate now reports having voted for Barack Obama by 19 points, up from 16 a week ago, and a much smaller drop from his 26 point victory in the state than was seen in Virginia.

-Those planning to turn out continue to be skeptical of the Democratic health care plan, saying they oppose it by a 48/40 margin.

-Coakley’s favorability dropped from 50% to 44% after a week filled with perceived missteps. Brown’s negatives went up a lot but his positives only actually went from 57% to 56%, an indication that attacks against him may have been most effective with voters already planning to support Coakley but ambivalent toward Brown.

231 thoughts on “MA-Sen: Brown Leads Coakley by 5 in Final PPP Poll”

  1. I read this, I wanted to fucking cry, throw up and scream at the same time. This is what we’re dealing with? Even in Massachusetts?!?!

    http://andrewsullivan.theatlan

     

    I was a very early supporter of Obama. I was living in New Hampshire two years ago. I signed up to go door-to-door to talk to people about his candidacy and in contrast to Hilary. I trudged through feet of snow in the week before the primary. I entered homes and had great discussions with my fellow residents. I went to Claremont, NH and shook Obama’s hand. I rallied the night before the primary in Concord. He lost the state but I knew we were on the right side of history.

       I’m with you in thinking that Obama is the best thing the Democrats have going for them right now. But I also think that in having the supermajority, they actually undercut him. They don’t have to compromise and so they don’t try to. Instead, what passes as legislation is a horrid mismash of corporate interests and traditional, not progressive, balms of the Democratic Party. I know this country can do much, much better. And I think Obama needs a less powerful Democratic party to make it happen, like Clinton did.

       For all the reasons you cite about Coakley, I’m voting for Brown. But let me add a few more.

       I’m a split-the-ballot kind of guy. I don’t think the dominance of the political system by one party is ever good for the country. Too much changes too quickly and without the necessary compromises to slow the pace and make it more realistic. We all agree that the GOP is a mess. But we also all agree that we need a stronger GOP. And despite the rhetoric, I can’t think of a better candidate to help than Scott Brown. He’s not perfect, but if he thinks he can go along with the national GOP and keep the seat in the next election, he’s going to be out of a job. In voting for him, I hope he’ll moderate that party. And that’s what’s funny to me about the rush of support he’s getting from the Right. If a Republican from Massachusetts isn’t a RINO to them, I don’t know who is. It also helps that Brown has already voted for a health care plan with a public option. So to someone like Malkin who was ready to toss away a Congressional seat in NY for “purity”, I now laugh at their support of Brown

       My only hesitation in voting for Brown is how that vote will be spun by the mediots in the Beltway. Let me say emphatically that my vote for Brown isn’t a vote against Obama. It’s a vote against the Democratic Party, and hacks like Coakley, but also a vote to help moderate the GOP. One more New England Republican is necessary. Of all the places the GOP might find it’s path again I hope it’s from where it was born.

    you know what? Fine America! Your fucking funeral.  

  2. I’m extremely worried about this race. I’ve read many people’s comments on Blue Mass who believe that the Brown surge is mostly hot air biased on the phone calls they’ve made and alot of outsiders in the state supporting Brown while pretending to be from Mass (including one person with an extreme Southern accent and other with out of state license plates). But still, I am extremely worried about this race. If we lose then I believe we’re done with an major progressive progress since the GOP will filibuster everything.      

  3. Brown has surged in the past week, and every single poll has reflected it. The only question is whether the likely voter screens they are all using will hold up in what is expected to be an unusually high-turnout special election. If they do (and I unfortunately believe they probably will), say hello to United States Senator Scott Brown. If not, it will be because the Democratic turn-out machine was working overtime to get unenthused and inactive Dems out to vote for Coakley – that, at this point, is the only thing that possibly saves her.

  4. PPP hinted that their first night of surveys was extremely close. The final poll has a five point spread. That means their second night of surveys most likely has an even wider spread than that to balance it out.

  5. I have not given up on this race yet but it is not looking good. Losing in Massachusettes would suck but honestly shit like this happens sometimes even in dark blue states. The last couple of cycles the Republicans lost several seats they had no bussiness losing, now it looks like it is the Democrats turn.

  6. If we lose this seat (which I pray to God we don’t) I’m honestly going to blame Obama rather than Coakley. Sure Coakley’s campaign went dark for a month and left Brown undefined, but if Obama hadn’t messed up in the health care debate so badly then maybe we could have pulled out a Mass. Dem. landslide victory. Obama was on a high from being able to gain the support of Snowe, Specter, and Collins on the stimulus package that he decided to do the same for the Health care bill. He went to Snowe, Collins, Enzi, and Grassley for their support even they they 99.99% had no intent to vote for it in the end. This is Obama’s fault not Coakley’s. He should have dealt with fixing the economy this year and either after the midterms or in his second term should have dealth with health care.    

  7. Coakley trails in her own internals. Yes, we’ll get this seat back in 2012 but Obama will have to kiss Mitch McConnell’s ass to get anything passed in the Senate. What a waste.

  8. As I have said in the past there are a lot similarities between Brown and current incarnation of the Canadian Conservate Party(a long story but conservative parties have very limited history of being in power in Canada. The current one is somewhat of a new party and is not quite a direct descendent of previous conservative parties that have been in power in the past). In 2006 no one thought this current Conservative party would ever come to power in Canada. Everyone thought they were too right wing for left leaning Canada, the Center-leftish(notice the lowercase l) Liberals had been in power for almost 13 years with a fairly good economic record notwithstanding some patronage and pork scandals of which the dollar amounts were not significant. Many Liberals(in Canada the party members) thought they had a better party machine/GOTV and while they would never say it the TV networks were biased towards there side.

    The Conservatives focused heavily on slogons such as a “Common Sense Revolution” a lot like “The People’s Seat” and railed at Liberal(the party again) supposed corruption.

    While the Liberals had a large amount a negative material to use for attack ads they waited until basically less than a week before election after the Conservative leader Stephen Harper had built high favorability ratings due to positive media coverage the Liberals did not expect he would get. Thus by the time the released their negative ads it was too late to pull Harper’s ratings down. About exactly this time of year four years ago Harper became Prime Minister of Canada a position he still holds and the rest is history

  9. I would love to come here and read this, but I know I’ll get excited and start posting, and that will lead to trouble. So, I’ll just say it now: I am really enjoying the hell outta this! See ya’ll Wednesday!

  10. I’m getting pretty tired of this defeatist mentality that is being professed in the comments. People that usually have very insightful analysis on this site are now only declaring this race over, and are even starting to play the blame game.

    According to Nate Silver, the race is a tossup, and should be considered as such. Like all special elections, the race will be completely based on turnout. Remember, the media anointed Doug Hoffman the winner of NY-23. All the polls suggested he would win. Yet, as win most special elections, polls were inaccurate. Remember when Niki Tsongas was supposed to lose in 2007?

    So, stop it. I still have faith in this election, and I know Massachusetts voters are smart enough to reject the obstructionist Brown. We just need to continue making phone calls to GOTV. I’m really getting tired of this 2004 we-give-up mentality.

  11. Charlotte Mayoral election 2009

    Final PPP Poll

    46% Foxx

    50% Lassiter

    Actual Result

    52% Foxx

    48% Lassiter

    Not to mention Corzine being down by 6 and only loosing by 3. Special Election pollls are volatile and Nate Silver says this race is a still a tossup despite the PPP poll.

    GOTV can still crank out a Coakley win if people just continue making calls. PHONEBANK PHONEBANK PHONEBANK

  12. From the PPP poll

    Q: Do you think that Congressional Democrats

    are :

    Too Liberal……………………………………………… 53%

    Too Conservative…………………………………….. 14%

    About Right …………………………………………….. 33% “

  13. Some of this shows the absolute split personality of the electorate.

    Do you approve or disapprove of the work Ted Kennedy did during his time in the U.S. Senate?

    Approve 63%

    Disapprove 24%

    Not Sure 13%

    But then…

    Would you like to see the next Senator from Massachusetts carry on Ted Kennedy’s legacy?

    Yes 47%

    No 41%

    Not Sure 12%

    HUGE drop-off there.

    It also shows that while Congressional Democrats have only a 30% approval rating, Congressional Republicans are even worse, with a 22% approval rating.

    And coincidentally, 53% think both that the Dems are too liberal and the Repubs are too conservative.  A majority of moderates feel this way for both parties.  

    And PPP closed it out with yet another quirky question.

    Do you think that ACORN will try to steal the election for Martha Coakley?

    Yes 25%

    No 38%

    Not Sure 37%

    Um… only 38% are willing to laugh that question off as a nutjob conspiracy theory?  And amazingly, 16% of MA Democrats said “yes”.

    Now remember, this is NOT a snapshot of Massachusetts residents or registered voters.  It’s supposed to be a snapshot of who will actually show up on Tuesday to vote.  If those who actually vote really do approve of Obama by only a slim 44%-43% margin, then yeah, Coakley can easily lose this thing.  But if it’s more in line with the overall mood of the state, then Coakley can win this.

    So… again, it all comes down to GOTV.

  14. I couldn’t vote for someone like Coakley after how she handled the tail end of the Fells Acre case.  And Scott Brown doesn’t fill me with much hope.  Maybe I’d vote for Joe Kennedy and pretend he’s the other Joe Kennedy?

    But I’m still surprised.  I thought Coakley being a stiff suburbanite would go down for all the same reasons they often do go down in the primary.  That the ethnic urban Democrats would come out for Capuano.  Those being the swing voters who make and break Democratic nominees.

    I assume once she managed to get through that she wouldn’t be another Harshbarger and wouldn’t blow the thing.  That those voters must’ve seen something in her and were goign to stick with her.

    Shannon O’Brien had a rough primary and a dad who wouldn’t shut up and kept getting her into trouble in 2002.  If she goes down what is Coakley’s excuse?

    However this is a special.  And we have no idea who is going to show.  Bad polling numbers don’t help.  But a good get out the vote operation by Coakley could snatch victory from the jaws of defeat for her.

  15. Frankly speaking – even if Democrats somehow manage to win this one – they must consider this campaign as a very strong warning. No one expects Coackley to win big, so this victory will have semblance to “pyrrhic victory” in any case, but if proper conclusions will not be drawn – it will BECOME “pyrrhic victory”.

    There is no unity in broad coalition of vast majority of democrats, strong majority of Independendents and even some anti-Bush Republicans, which elected Obama slightly more then a year ago. For “base progressives” Obama is too timid and “insufficiently liberal”, for moderate Independents — vice versa, and so on. Conservatives are united, because they have very little to lose (they lost almost everything already in 2006 and 2008), while liberals and moderates are quarelling. Democratic party bit much larger piece of cake in 2006 and 2008 then it can chew – who, really, expected Democratic victories in ID-1, MS-1 or AL-2 in 2005? That was achieved by running “tailor-made” (for this and many other districts) candidates, but exactly because of that it was only natural that victorious candidates in this districts would be substantially more conservative then “normal”. But THAT. in turn, caused not only alienation, but pure “hatred” from part of the “base”, which want very liberal legislation “finally” enacted. There is clear conflivct between “self-preservation instincts” of many freshmen, which drive them to vote rather conservatively, and netroots. And so on…

    And all that bodes rather ill for November. The Democratic party must decide the same issue as Republican – what does it want? To win as many elections as possible or be ideologically “pure”. If first – maximum toleration to all factions of party (including DLC, “Blue Dogs” and so on) and candidates that fit a district (liberal in CA-8, moderate in, say, MN-1, and, yes, conservative in AL-2 (who will vote with a party only 40-60% of all time, but still more then Republicans)) is needed, if second – well, then all “deviants” must be primaried, but supporters of such approach, probably, must forget about majority and governing for many years (i tried that many times, but i don’t see 218 districts which could elect “progressives”). IMHO – all is THAT simple.

  16. This must be a sick joke right? Maybe not. This has been happening since Nixon – the electorate gives Republicans carte blanche to do whatever they want for at least five years before they sit up and take notice. Then they give Democrats a year before they jump up and down like a small child. I despair.

  17. Keep making calls and we can win this. Rothenberg predicted an Obama blowout in Massachusetts in the Dem primary. We all know how that worked out. Why listen to him now!

  18. according to this poll, those planning to vote are 23/54/22 L/M/C. But if turnout really does get as high as some are predicting, perhaps the electorate will look more like 2008, which was 31/49/19. If you take PPP’s numbers and reweight them based on the ideology of the 2008 electorate, you get Coakley 50%, Brown 46%. Not a blowout but she is on top. So keep getting out the vote!

Comments are closed.