Tag: Polls

Believe it or not, the world continues to turn today, even outside Massachusetts…

• Site News: A minor site change: We’ve had to disable HTML on user bio pages (like this one). We apologize if this winds up killing your links or spewing ugly HTML characters in your bio, so you may want to edit yours if so. You can still post links – they just won’t be HTML-ized. The reason we did this is because spammers have been exploiting the bio pages to post links to their own sites. It’s easy for us to catch them when they post comments or diaries, but harder to stop them from creating new accounts. This takes away their incentive. Suck on it, spammer scum! (D)

• NV-Sen: I don’t know what you envision when you see “probe” and “John Ensign” in the same sentence, but this is rich: the FBI is getting involved in the investigation, indicating this may go beyond the Senate Ethics Committee, headed in the direction of a criminal inquiry. The Feds have been contacting former aides about the Hampton affair.

• NY-Sen-B: Ex-Rep. Harold Ford Jr. just seems to be digging his self-inflicted hole deeper, as he runs damage control from the NYT profile that portrayed him as a helicopter-riding, pedicure-getting richie-rich. For his new interview with the Daily News, he insisted that it be limited to his rationale for running, not “issues” (issues, of course, are for the little people). Still, that contrasts with his defense of the pedicure thing, about which he said: “This race isn’t about feet, it’s about issues.” Meanwhile, observers are wondering if Al Sharpton (who has endorsed Kirsten Gillibrand) is telegraphing a potential switch in sides.

• IA-Gov: Ex-Gov. Terry Branstad is out with an internal poll showing him in commanding position in the Republican primary as he seeks to regain his old job, despite the discomfort some social conservatives have with him. Branstad polls at 62%, followed by Bob Vander Plaats lagging at 18%, with Christopher Rants at 4 and Rod Roberts at 2.

• IL-Gov: Next door in Illinois, though, where things don’t seem quite as settled in the Republican primary, three different candidates are citing polls that claim to have them in the lead. State Sen. Kirk Dillard has an internal that has him leading at 22, with state party chair Andy McKenna at 14 and ex-AG Jim Ryan at 10 – which is odd, since the Chicago Tribune’s poll several weeks ago gave Ryan a substantial lead and saw Dillard in fourth place. McKenna also claims to have a poll with him in the lead, although he didn’t even bother giving any details. Dillard seems to be the “moderate” horse in the GOP race, with endorsements from ex-Gov. Jim Edgar, Rep. Judy Biggert, and even the Illinois Education Association (hopefully only as far as the primary goes).

• TX-Gov: Rasmussen is out with fresh polls of the Texas governor’s race, and this time, they’re even doing the general, now that it got competitive, with the entry of Democratic Houston mayor Bill White. As one might expect, both incumbent Rick Perry and GOP primary rival Kay Bailey Hutchison lead White, and KBH overperforms Perry. Hutchison leads White 52-37, while Perry leads 50-40. (In the unlikely event White faces off against Paulist activist Debra Medina, he wins 44-38.) More interestingly, Medina seems to be getting a serious foothold in the GOP primary, which seems like it has the potential to push the Perry/Hutchison battle to a runoff, keeping Perry below 50%. Perry leads Hutchison and Medina 43-33-12.

• MI-Gov, MI-13: The amazingly brief gubernatorial campaign of state Sen. Hansen Clarke ended yesterday, after about one week in existence. It seems like party insiders steered him in a different direction, saying that he’s been offered big financial support if he takes on vulnerable (in a primary) Rep. Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick instead, and he says he’s strongly considering that race now. Kilpatrick (mother of embattled former mayor Kwame Kilpatrick) nearly lost a 3-way primary in 2008.

• AZ-03: One aspiring House Republican didn’t wait long to announce her run to fill the recently-vacated seat of Rep. John Shadegg. State Sen. Pamela Gorman announced her campaign.

• MI-07: One more race that hasn’t drawn much scrutiny yet but where it looks like Dems will have to play hard defense is in the 7th. Freshman Rep. Mark Schauer faces a rematch with ex-Rep. Tim Walberg, who is now promoting his own internal poll showing him with 46-37 edge over Schauer. There’s been some establishment skepticism over whether the polarizing Walberg is “electable” enough, which may really be the point of the poll: it also shows attorney Brian Rooney, the supposedly more palatable (but currently less-known) GOPer, trailing Schauer 39-31.

• PA-04: Republicans are banking on former US Attorneys to get them back a few House seats in the Keystone State, and they got one of their desired recruits. Mary Beth Buchanan, one of the chief enforcers among the “loyal Bushies,” has apparently decided that she’ll take on Rep. Jason Altmire in the GOP-leaning 4th in Pittsburgh’s suburbs, and may announce her candidacy later this week.

• WV-01: The NRCC had hoped to put a scare into longtime Democratic incumbent Alan Mollohan, frequently drum-beating his name as a potential retirement. Unfortunately for them, Mollohan has filed his paperwork to seek a 15th term in Congress. (J)

• OH-Lt. Gov: Ted Strickland announced today that he’s tapping ex-Franklin Co. Judge Yvette McGee Brown to be his running mate. Brown is the president of the Center for Child and Family Advocacy, a Columbus organization based at the Nationwide Children’s Hospital. (J)

• Mayors: Another election to keep an eye on is a runoff for Birmingahm’s next mayor. The seat became vacant in October upon the conviction of Larry Langford on corruption charges. Langford and other insiders have endorsed William Bell (who currently holds Langford’s former seat on the county conmission). Naturally, Patrick Cooper is running against Bell on a change platform. The campaign has been full of nasty accusations and innuendo with many glad it’s coming to an end. (T)

• Polltopia: Mark Blumenthal looks at the rapidly reducing cost of polling, and only sees even more of a proliferation of it in the near future as robo-calling gets within the reaches of the masses, even the crazy bloggers. Even Rasmussen is getting into the act, with plans to spin off a new service that will allow anyone to poll on anything for a fee of $600. That leaves Blumenthal wondering how to screen in the future for proper quality and against abuse of time-honored standards.

The county baselines post has become a game day staple at Swing State Project for advanced elections-returns-watchers, and today’s no different. The basic idea here: find the bare minimum percentage in each major county that’s necessary to get the Democratic candidate over the hump at 50%. (That, of course, is predicated on all the counties moving the same direction as the presidential election the benchmarks are based on, which doesn’t actually happen in real life, but it’s a rough estimate.) As election returns come in, compare the benchmarks to the actual returns to see if we’re on track to win.

There’s one small problem here, which most of you are probably already familiar with: Massachusetts, and the other New England states, don’t report election results by county, but rather by town. With hundreds and hundreds of little towns, that’s a lot of ground to cover, so we’ll just look at the biggest, plus some towns in what seem to be the key areas to watch in this race.

In fact, let’s take a look at the state’s town-by-town map, created by our own DavidNYC (you can click on the map to see a full-size version):

This map is based on the relatively close 1996 Senate election between John Kerry and William Weld (a better choice here, because a map of the 2008 Presidential race would be almost entirely blue, and the 2002 gubernatorial race would be almost entirely red, with Romney winning the vast majority of towns). But it gives the general lay of the land in the state: the Democratic votes are heavily concentrated in Boston and its immediately surrounding cities. (There’s also a lot of low-density blue out in the college towns and arty enclaves of the Berkshires and Pioneer Valley in the west.) The red on the map is mostly rural and low-density too, so the real areas that we’re focused on today are the purplish and pinkish suburban turf to the north, west, and south of Boston.

Rather than just one model, I’m using two different models: one based on the high-turnout, high-Democratic-intensity 2008 presidential election (won by Barack Obama, 62-36), and the low-turnout, low-intensity 2002 gubernatorial election (won by Republican Mitt Romney, 50-45) — more generally, a best-case scenario for Dems and a worst-case scenario for Dems. With turnout projections high but not as high as yesterday (SoS William Galvin is predicting 40%), and weather mediocre, we’re probably looking at something somewhere in between, so consider these the bookends. Nevertheless, after making the necessary adjustments, both models, in most towns, point to very similar benchmarks.

Let’s start with the largest cities in Massachusetts (the ones that provide more than 1% of the state’s votes each). These aren’t really the places to watch, as they’re heavily Democratic (with the sort-of exception of Quincy) and the real question with them is whether turnout is keeping pace proportionately with the rest of the state.

Democratic performance in most of the state, as you can see above, stayed fairly consistent with the rise in the tide from 2002 to 2008. Statewide, Democratic performance went from 45% to 62% (a 17% gain), and, for example, Boston followed that closely, going from 61% to 79% (an 18% gain). Many other towns tracked that, too; for instance, the most conservative parts of the state (like Falmouth and Sandwich on Cape Cod, or the suburbs around Lowell) also moved about 16 to 18% in the Dems’ direction.

The interesting areas are the ones where the movement was much greater — these tend to be the wealthier areas in the state, fancy Middlesex Co. suburbs like Wellesley or North Shore towns in Essex Co., consistent with Obama’s overperformance nationwide among high-income voters — and where the movement was much less — mostly in blue-collar towns of the South Shore, as well as other blue-collar outposts in the state’s west. To me, these seem to be the swingy areas, and the ones most worth watching, especially since the trends may (or may not) continue to accelerate today — upper-middle-class voters may be attracted to Coakley’s technocratic image (especially those in Middlesex Co., where she was DA) or they may revert to liking the fiscal conservatism that they saw in Romney, while blue-collar voters seem likely to respond to Brown’s regular-guy shtick but may also be motivated by their ancestral Democratic loyalties and union or local machine GOTVing.

Let’s start with some well-to-do suburbs west of Boston:

And here are North Shore suburbs. (Lawrence is a little out of place here, as it’s working-class with a large Hispanic population, but it had the same large 02 to 08 shift that its wealthier neighbors did.)

Now turning to the more blue-collar locales where the trend seemed less favorable to Democrats, starting with the South Shore towns. (Looking up to the biggest towns list above, you can see that same trend happened not only in Quincy, but especially in Fall River and New Bedford, which are strongly Democratic but barely moved at all from O’Brien to Obama. In their cases, I’m not sure if that’s indifference to Obama, or particularly strong local machines good at keep turnout consistent.)

And finally, a mix of western mill towns and blue-collar suburbs around Springfield:

Now for the bad news… Suffolk polled several bellwether towns over the weekend, and found that Coakley is polling well below the level she needs to meet the benchmarks, in fact slightly below even Shannon O’Brien levels from 2002. They found a 41/55 race in Fitchburg (see the western mill towns chart), and a 40/57 race in Peabody (see the North Shore chart). I have no idea about the sample size or any of the other innards, but this suggests that for Coakley to pull this out — as has been more broadly evident for several days — the only way is for the pollsters to have been missing large swaths of heretofore unactivated voters who just got transformed into Democratic likely voters in the last few days.

Blue Mass Group has an interesting post that lists some other bellwether towns that you might want to keep an eye on. UPDATE: (And Cook’s Dave Wasserman has made available a Google spreadsheet doing more or less the same thing for every single freakin’ town in the state, albeit only for the 2008 model. Check it out.)

Mason-Dixon for the Honolulu Star-Bulletin/KITV (1/8-12, registered voters):

Neil Abercrombie (D): 43

Duke Aiona (R): 34

Undecided: 23

Mufi Hannemann (D): 41

Duke Aiona (R): 35

Undecided: 24

(MoE: ±3.5%)

I expected Abercrombie to be a bit more formidable than this, although these are by no means bad numbers. Aiona, however, has stockpiled a lot money for this race, and he’s pretty well-liked: his favorable rating is 41-19, quite a bit higher than Abercrombie’s 36-29 and a shade better than Hannemann’s 38-22.

The Democratic primary, too, looks like it will be a very competitive affair:

Neil Abercrombie (D): 37

Mufi Hannemann (D): 34

Undecided: 29

(MoE: ±4.5%)

I wonder if Abercrombie expected to face such a stiff fight — but in any case, I’m sure he’s relieved to be done with all the plane rides to and from DC. SSP currently rates this race as Lean Democratic.

Now, for some good news (and bad news) from the 1st District race to fill Abercrombie’s seat:

Ed Case (D): 37

Colleen Hanabusa (D): 25

Charles Djou (R): 17

Undecided: 21

(MoE: ±5%)

The good news, of course, is that the highly-touted Charles Djou is lagging in third place in a race against not one, but two Democrats (Hawaii has a pretty strange special election situation, where everyone runs against everyone with no runoffs). The bad news, of course, is that the extremely unacceptable Ed Case has the early lead. It’s too bad we can’t see crosstabs, here, because I would love to see how many Republicans and independents Case is taking away from Djou. I’m suspecting that Case is sucking up a lot of oxygen on the right-leaning side of the political equation here.

RaceTracker Wiki: HI-Gov | HI-01

InsiderAdvantage for the Politico (1/17, likely voters):

Martha Coakley (D): 43

Scott Brown (R): 52

Joe Kennedy (I) 2

(MoE: ±4%)

You know, we’ve picked these polls apart enough already, so how about we all take a page from trowaman and ask: If Scott Brown takes this race tomorrow, who should Democrats run against him in 2012? Not that we’re predicting that he’ll win, but it’s never too early to think through the hypotheticals. Tell us who you think should run in the comments.

Research 2000 for Daily Kos (1/11-13, likely voters):

Richard Blumenthal (D): 54

Rob Simmons (R): 35

Undecided: 11

Richard Blumenthal (D): 56

Linda McMahon (R): 34

Undecided: 10

Richard Blumenthal (D): 56

Peter Schiff (R): 33

Undecided: 11

(MoE: ±4%)

While Blumenthal isn’t producing margins similar to the utter insanity of the latest Quinnipiac poll, I think we can all be happy with where we’re at here.

R2K also polled the gubernatorial race, including match-ups with Danbury Mayor Mark Boughton, who may or may not run:

Susan Bysiewicz (D): 52

Michael Fidele (R): 33

Undecided: 15

Susan Bysiewicz (D): 51

Tom Foley (R): 35

Undecided: 14

Susan Bysiewicz (D): 52

Mark Boughton (R): 32

Undecided: 16

Ned Lamont (D): 46

Michael Fidele (R): 36

Undecided: 18

Ned Lamont (D): 46

Tom Foley (R): 37

Undecided: 17

Ned Lamont (D): 46

Mark Boughton (R): 32

Undecided: 20

Dan Malloy (D): 44

Michael Fidele (R): 35

Undecided: 21

Dan Malloy (D): 43

Tom Foley (R): 37

Undecided: 20

Dan Malloy (D): 44

Mark Boughton (R): 34

Undecided: 22

Unfortunately, Susan Bysiewicz, the Secretary of State, has decided to pull out of her gubernatorial campaign in favor of a run for Attorney General. However, as we noted in today’s digest, the legality of her candidacy is an open question. If the legal hurdles prove too challenging to clear for Bysiewicz, reversing course and running for Governor again would probably look foolish (though maybe not fatal), but if she’s just looking for another place to bide her time before she makes a run against Joe Lieberman in 2012 (as some have speculated), perhaps she’ll just end up running for re-election.

And finally, the 2012 Senate picture:

Chris Murphy (D): 25

Jodi Rell (R): 47

Joe Lieberman (I-inc): 23

Chris Murphy (D): 45

Joe Lieberman (I-inc): 26

I kinda doubt that Rell would pull the trigger on a run like this, but you never know.

Research 2000 for the Daily Kos (1/11-13, likely voters):

John Hickenlooper (D): 43

Scott McInnis (R): 43

Undecided: 14

Ken Salazar (D): 42

Scott McInnis (R): 44

Undecided: 14

Andrew Romanoff (D): 40

Scott McInnis (R): 45

Undecided: 15

Ed Perlmutter (D): 38

Scott McInnis (R): 46

Undecided: 16

(MoE: ±4%)

Most of those match-ups are moot at this point, as the path for the Democratic nomination seems secure for Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper. Sure, Andrew Romanoff may or may not bail on his Senate primary to take a crack at the gube race, but he’d have an even harder time in that race than he would against the newbie Bennet. Effectively, this resolves any potential doubt that Hickenlooper begins the race in the best starting position than any other Democrat out there — even Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, who was briefly (and bizarrely, in my opinion) touted as the heir apparent for retiring Gov. Bill Ritter.

If anything, though, this poll also reaffirms that, while Hickenlooper probably would have won an ’06 race with ease, he won’t be able to rest on his laurels this year. This should be one hell of a race.

And for the Senate side of the equation:

Michael Bennet (D-inc): 40

Jane Norton (R): 39

Undecided: 21

Michael Bennet (D-inc): 42

Tom Wiens (R): 38

Undecided: 20

Michael Bennet (D-inc): 41

Ken Buck (R): 38

Undecided: 21

Andrew Romanoff (D): 39

Jane Norton (R): 41

Undecided: 20

Andrew Romanoff (D): 41

Tom Wiens (R): 39

Undecided: 20

Andrew Romanoff (D): 40

Ken Buck (R): 39

Undecided: 21

(MoE: ±4%)

This poll is actually the most optimistic portrait of the Senate race that we’ve seen lately. Over the weekend, Rasmussen gave us their take, which consisted of huge leads for Jane Norton and smaller leads for the other Republican pretenders. The Bennet campaign responded with their own poll, which showed Norton ahead by “only” three points. Whether or not R2K’s likely voter sample is reasonable is up in the air. The poll purports to have a sample of 38% Republicans, 30% Democrats, and 32% independents. That’s doesn’t seem wild-eyed for a state with a slight Democratic voter registration advantage, but if you take a closer look at the “N” for each sub-sample, the math doesn’t add up — numerically, there are more Democratic voters listed as poll participants than Republicans. (In fact, if you recalculate, this might be a 40D-38R-22I poll.) Bennet’s internal poll had a Republican advantage of about five points, so this is a pretty crucial issue to be resolved.

A transcription error is probably to blame here, but we’ll let you know if we find out anything more definitive.

UPDATE: Research 2000 guru Del Ali writes to us to tell us that the actual sample of the poll is 40% Democratic, 37% Republican, and 23% independent. Somehow, I suspect that that may be an optimistic view of the 2010 electorate.

RaceTracker Wiki: CO-Gov | CO-Sen

• CA-Sen: Rasmussen popped up late Friday with a California Senate poll, taken to reflect the recent entry of ex-Rep. Tom Campbell to the race. Although a Campbell internal showed him dominating the primary field, he isn’t particularly polling better or worse than the rest of the field against three-term Dem incumbent Barbara Boxer. Campbell trails her 46-42, while Carly Fiorina trails 46-43 and Assemblyman Chuck DeVore trails 46-40. Note that this is probably the closest that Rasmussen has had this race, which other pollsters (especially the Field Poll) have always had in double digits for Boxer.

• IL-Sen: In the Democratic Senate primary, Alexi Giannoulias got an endorsement from one of the state’s few well-liked politicians, long-time SoS Jesse White. His long-shot rival David Hoffman got an endorsement that comes with a lot of voters and organizational firepower behind it, though: the Illinois Education Association, the state’s major teacher’s union.

• NY-Sen-B, NY-Gov(pdf): Siena, following Marist from late last week, has gotten in the act, of polling a Kirsten Gillibrand/Harold Ford Jr. Democratic primary. Siena’s numbers pretty closely match Marist: they find Gillibrand with a 41-17 lead over Ford (with 5 for Jonathan Tasini), where Marist gave her a 43-24 lead. Where Siena breaks with Marist is in seeing how a hypothetical Gillibrand matchup with ex-Gov. George Pataki goes; they see Pataki leading 51-38 (and Ford doing even worse, 54-32). Also a bit ominous: Gillibrand’s negatives are creeping up, as she’s currently with a 30/32 favorable. Pataki, however, still is showing no signs of interest, and it’s getting late if he’s going to make a move.

No real surprises in the Governor’s race, according to Siena: Paterson’s popularity, while still awful, is ticking up a little, with a 38/52 approval. Paterson ties Republican ex-Rep. Rick Lazio 42-42 and Erie Co. Exec Chris Collins 40-40, but he’s very unlikely to survive the primary: he loses to Andrew Cuomo 59-21, with potential new entrant Suffolk Co. Exec Steve Levy pulling in 6. Cuomo stomps Lazio 66-24 and Collins 65-23, while Levy leads the Republicans too, beating Lazio 40-33 and Collins 42-26.

• CT-Gov, CT-AG: I’m labeling this as potentially “CT-Gov” even though SoS Susan Bysiewicz announced last week that she wasn’t going to run for Governor (despite having command of the polls), in order to run for AG and, based on her coy responses to the question of whether she’d serve a full term, then run against Joe Lieberman in 2012. There’s been some discussion of whether she even qualifies to run for AG, as one requirement is ten years of legal practice in Connecticut. She practiced for six years before becoming SoS, so the central question here is whether serving as SoS counts as the practice of law or not. This may need to be resolved by the courts – and given the timetable on running a campaign and that she may not be able to wait for a decision, she may have to swallow her disappointment and settle for having to be Governor instead.

• MI-Gov, MI-01: The DCCC may be sighing with relief at this: Rep. Bart Stupak (who holds down an R+3 district) is now sounding unlikely to run for the Democratic gubernatorial nomination in Michigan, despite some interest last week. He tells Politico that it’s “hard for [him] to envision” a campaign, as he’s still bogged down with health care reform in the House and would be starting behind the 8-ball on fundraising and organization.

• NM-Gov: That was a strangely fast exploratory period: never-before-elected attorney Pete Domenici Jr. is officially launching his candidacy, after his name bubbled up from nowhere just last week. He has a lot of name recognition thanks to his ex-Senator dad, but it’s still a question whether he has the chops to make it out of the GOP primary, let alone how he’d fare in November against the seeming juggernaut that is Lt. Gov. Diane Denish.

• PA-Gov: I didn’t even know there were any “celebrity pathologists,” but not only is there one, but he’s planning to run a long-shot campaign for the Democratic gubernatorial nod in Pennsylvania. The “colorful” Cyril Wecht, Allegheny County Coroner for 20 years and a county commissioner for four more, is interested in the race. Wecht has drawn a lot of attention over the years for his skepticism over the Kennedy assassination, but his entry here is newsworthy because of his potential to split the Pittsburgh-area votes (already split between Allegheny Co. Exec Dan Onorato and state Auditor Jack Wagner). In fact, there’s speculation he’s running mostly because of his grudge against Allegheny Co. DA Stephen Zappala, and, by extension, Onorato.

• AZ-08: Here’s another recruiting step-up for the Republicans in a potentially competitive race. They finally found a state Senator, Jonathan Paton, willing to take on Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and her sizable war chest. The GOP’s best bet here previously had been 28-year-old veteran Jesse Kelly, who’d at least gotten some traction on the fundraising front.

• GA-09: If there’s one open seat race I have trouble summoning up any interest in, it’s the GOP primary in the 9th, where there are half a dozen indistinguishable wingnuts trying to out-wingnut each other to replace wingnut Nathan Deal in one of the nation’s darkest-red districts. The field shrunk a bit today, with the dropout of the state’s former Transportation Director, Mike Evans, despite his prior status in the field’s top tier.

• NJ-12: A rich guy apparently with $250K burning a hole in his wallet has Rep. Rush Holt in his sights: Prinecton-area investment banker Scott Sipprelle has decided to take on Holt, and started his campaign with a jolt of self-funding.

• OK-01: I don’t think Republican Rep. John Sullivan has actually voted the wrong way on anything, so I’m wondering if he did something behind the scenes to tick off the local establishment, or if it’s just random teabaggery. Either way, there’s a movement underway in Tulsa’s right-wing circles to draft Dave Rader, who was the University of Tulsa’s football coach in the 1990s, for a primary run against Sullivan.

• PA-06: Rep. Jim Gerlach seems to be retaining most of his establishment support as he reconnects with his district after pulling the plug on his gubernatorial campaign. For instance, he got the support of the Montgomery County GOP chair, Bob Kerns. Gerlach also won a straw poll among GOP leaders in Chester County, although Steven Welch made enough of a dent there (pulling in 40%) that he might be tempted to stick around.

• UT-02: Former state Rep. and current Salt Lake County GOP vice-chair Morgan Philpot has resigned his role in the party, giving rise to speculation that he’s going to challenge Democratic Rep. Jim Matheson in this Republican-leaning seat. (Interesting trivia: the youngish Philpot is a graduate of Ave Maria Law School, the Domino’s Pizza empire’s attempt to branch out into legal education.)

• VA-05: With a substantial percentage of the losers of 2006 and 2008 now considering rematches, here’s one more name who had earlier ruled out a bit but just won’t stop sniffing around his old seat: Rep. Virgil Goode. He may be sensing an opening in the primary by being able to unify the squabbling factions in the GOP primary field in the 5th, torn between establishment fave state Sen. Robert Hurt and various teabagging insurgents.

• Census: One more state is getting into the act, of spending state dollars to make sure that state residents participate in the fast-approaching Census. Florida is starting a marketing blitz to make sure that hard-to-count groups (Hispanics especially, but also college students and farmworkers) respond. With the stakes including not only millions of dollars in federal grant money but also one or two more House seats, Florida certainly has incentive here.

Research 2000 for Daily Kos (1/15-17, likely voters, 1/12-13 in parens):

Martha Coakley (D): 48 (49)

Scott Brown (R): 48 (41)

Joe Kennedy (L) 3 (5)

Undecided: 1 (6)

(MoE: ±2.8%)

First the bad news: R2K gives us a trendline pointed steeply down… an R2K poll conducted earlier in the week (paid for by Blue Mass Group rather than Daily Kos, but seeing as how that shouldn’t change the numbers, we’ll accept that as a trend) gave an eight-point lead to Democratic AG Martha Coakley, and this one sees a tie. On the other hand, that’s the best result that rolled in over the last few days: not only are there the Suffolk (-4) and PPP (-5) numbers, but also ARG (which sees a 48-45 Scott Brown lead)… and the Merriman River Group, whoever they are, who found a 51-41 lead for Brown in a poll that was apparently taken over the space of four hours and found no undecideds, so take that for what it’s worth.

So, should we be pleased or not? Does this mean that Coakley’s bungee-jump downward over the last week got arrested right before she hit the bottom of the canyon? There are a few other positive indications; the constantly-leaked Coakley internals, for what they’re worth, seem to have stabilized over the weekend (which saw Barack Obama and Bill Clinton appearances, and maybe some backlash over the “curling iron” incident), to the extent that they reportedly show Coakley up 2, according to the Boston Herald. (Nate Silver has a helpful graph of all poll trendlines that includes leaked Coakley internals, which brings a lot more datapoints to bear.)

One other indication is that state officials are suddenly looking at extremely high turnout, at near-presidential levels, with everyone suddenly focused on the election — with estimates of up to 70% turnout, based on absentee ballot requests. Turnout, as you know, most likely helps the Democrats here — and the pollsters that have been giving pro-Brown results may be basing their likely voter models on now-obsolete projections based on low-turnout, high-intensity-voters-only projections. One other good Nate Silver observation is that Obama’s approval is polling under 50% in most polls, which is lagging his national averages… in Massachusetts, one of the bluest of all states… suggesting their LV models are predicated on conservatives disproportionately showing up. (Of course, he also points out the possibility of what Rasmussen alone seems to be seeing: people approving of Obama, but still voting for Brown.) But if the state’s turnout predictions are to be believed, maybe some of those unlikely-voter Dems who were planning to sit this one out or weren’t aware of it have finally realized there’s a real race here and have gotten converted into LVs over the last few days, and pollsters are still playing catchup.

RaceTracker Wiki: MA-Sen

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.

Rasmussen (1/13, likely voters, 12/8 in parens):

Michael Bennet (D-inc): 37 (34)

Jane Norton (R): 49 (45)

Michael Bennet (D-inc): 38 (41)

Tom Wiens (R): 44 (42)

Michael Bennet (D-inc): 38

Ken Buck (R): 43

Andrew Romanoff (D): 35 (37)

Jane Norton (R): 47 (46)

Andrew Romanoff (D): 39 (40)

Tom Wiens (R): 44 (41)

Andrew Romanoff (D): 39 (39)

Ken Buck (R): 40 (41)

(MoE: ±4.5%)

In order to push back at the idea that Bennet is being swamped by Norton, his campaign released a recent internal poll of its own that shows Bennet… well, still down, but not as badly.

Harstad Strategic Research for Michael Bennet (January, likely voters):

Michael Bennet (D-inc): 40

Jane Norton (R): 43

Undecided: 17

(MoE: ±4%)

Harstad’s poll isn’t a pie in the sky look at the race; its partisan sample gives a 5-point edge to Republicans (despite Dems actually having a slight registration advantage in the state). Bennet’s problem remains the same: few know him (his favorable rating his 29-27, compared to Norton’s 23-17). The swapping of incumbent Gov. Bill Ritter for Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper will surely help Bennet with base turnout, but that alone probably won’t be enough to get him past the finish line — he’ll need to lay out a convincing case that he deserves to keep his job.

RaceTracker Wiki: CO-Sen