Scott Brown

In Coakley-Brown race, things look bad for Democrats

Democrats' Senate supermajority may be at its end after Massachusetts' special election, polls show

  • more
    • All Share Services

In Coakley-Brown race, things look bad for Democrats

Strictly speaking, anything could happen when Massachusetts voters go to the polls on Tuesday for a special election to replace the late Sen. Ted Kennedy.

Polls can, and will, be wrong — especially in the case of a special election, when the pollsters’ first task becomes figuring out a sample that gives something close to an accurate picture of the electorate that will actually vote. And in this race, given how improbable the idea that a Republican — a Republican! — could take over for the last of the great Kennedys once seemed, the notion that things could suddenly shift in Democrat Martha Coakley’s favor doesn’t seem so wild.

That said, though, looking at the race right now, it seems very likely that Republican Scott Brown will win. In doing so, he will cut the Senate Democratic Caucus down to 59 members, and he may well doom healthcare reform, at least for this year.

If nothing else, here’s what you need to know right now: FiveThirtyEight.com’s Nate Silver has spoken. And he, in his infinite, omniscient polling wisdom, sees a victory for Brown and the GOP. Brown is a 74 percent favorite to win the seat, according to Silver’s model.

“We have traditionally categorized races in which one side has between a 60 and 80 percent chance of winning as ‘leaning’ toward that candidate, and so that is how we categorize this race now: Lean GOP,” Silver writes of the race. And, to add insult to injury for the Democrats among his readership, Silver notes that his model “correctly predicted the outcome of all 35 Senate races in 2008.” (He does, however, observe that due to the fact this is a special election, “there is a higher-than-usual chance of large, correlated errors in the polling, such as were observed in NY-23 and the New Hampshire Democratic primary; the model hedges against this risk partially, but not completely.”)

Silver isn’t the only one who sees the race going in this direction. Stuart Rothenberg’s Rothenberg Political Report moved the race into its “Lean Takeover” — that is, Republican — category on Monday. And on Thursday, the Cook Political Report changed its classification of the election from “Lean Democrat” to “Toss Up.”

The reason for all this, and the pessimism coming from Democrats nationwide lately, is a series of polls that has come out recently showing a trend away from Coakley and towards Brown. As of this post, almost every single poll conducted on or since last Friday and included in Real Clear Politics’ roundup shows Brown with a lead. Only one, sponsored by Daily Kos, broke from the pack — and it just showed a tie.

One poll in particular got the most attention of any late Monday. Sponsored by Politico and conducted by InsiderAdvantage, it showed Brown with a pretty solid lead of nine percentage points, at 52 percent to Coakley’s 43 percent. (The margin of error was plus or minus 3.4 percentage points.) But InsiderAdvantage is run by a former aide to Newt Gingrich, and that’s a fact the Democratic National Committee jumped on when it moved, hard, to try to counter the poll was doing to Coakley’s media coverage.

In an e-mail to reporters, with a subject line of “Don’t Buy This Skewed Poll,” DNC spokesman Brad Woodhouse laid out his reasons to doubt the survey results:

  1. It was conducted in one night – which is notoriously unreliable
  2. It has a 20 percent Republican sample – which is 5-8 points more than most polls. Obviously skewing the sample more Republican than the electorate is – is going to skew the result in Brown’s favor.
  3. The poll was conducted, and the charged quotes in the article are attributed to, a former aide to NEWT GINGRICH – which Politico pointed in the 6th paragraph.
  4. Does anyone really believe – as this skewed poll shows – that Brown is going to win 77% of Hispanics and 26% of blacks? Those results alone should ring alarm bells about the accuracy of this poll.

Woodhouse’s first and last points undoubtedly had some validity to them, even if his second seemed lacking. (Part of Coakley’s problem is, after all, that Republican turnout seems like it’ll be higher than it might otherwise in Massachusetts, one of the bluest of states.) But given the general trend in polling for this race, it seems like it won’t be that easy for the DNC to get observers to write this particular survey off. More importantly, though she could of course still pull something out, it doesn’t seem like Coakely will be able to do much at this late date to prove the polls wrong.

Alex Koppelman is a staff writer for Salon.

GOP gets giddy about Massachusetts

Dems in trouble as Senate special election approaches, and Republicans are going all wobbly-kneed with excitement

  • more
    • All Share Services

GOP gets giddy about MassachusettsFormer New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani campaigns with Massachusetts State Senator Scott Brown, R-Wrentham in Boston, Friday, Jan. 15, 2010. Brown is on the ballot of the Tuesday, Jan. 19, 2010, special election to fill the U.S. Senate seat left vacant by the death of Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass. (AP Photo/Winslow Townson)(Credit: Winslow Townson)

There’s barely more than a weekend standing between us and Judgment Day for Massachusetts Democrats. On Tuesday, the state’s holding a special election to pick a replacement for the late Sen. Ted Kennedy, and the bases of both parties are apparently a-quiver with dread and anticipation, respectively.

You could guess it was going to be an intense final stretch yesterday, when a new poll came out from Suffolk University showing Republican Scott Brown leading Democratic nominee Martha Coakley by four percentage points, 50 percent to 46. That’s only the second poll to give Brown a lead, and the race is obviously too close to call — but still, trailing by four in Massachusetts can’t feel great for Democrats. As pollster David Paleologos put it, “It’s a Brown-out!”

Republican activists see Brown’s blossoming chances as an opportunity to deal a crippling blow to the Obama administration, and are mobilizing to turn his bounce into an actual win. Politico reports that, across the country, other GOP campaigns are turning themselves temporarily into remote offices for Brown. In New York and Connecticut, Republican candidates for governor and the Senate are urging supporters to donate to Brown, and travel to Massachusetts to volunteer. In Florida, Republican Senate rivals Marco Rubio and Gov. Charlie Crist are trying to outdo each other in their support for the candidate.. And as far off as Texas, local Republicans are phone banking for their Massachusetts brother-in-arms.

It’s understandable for the GOP’s base to get all riled up. Running off with Kennedy’s seat at the climax of the healthcare fight in Congress would have undeniable symbolic weight. In one independent ad advocating Brown, the narrator explains, “We need Scott Brown’s vote in Washington. Together, let’s stop the politicians’ takeover of our healthcare.”

In an article today in the National Review Online entitled “Dems Feeling Heat Over Kennedy Seat,” conservative commentator Jonah Goldberg takes it one step further. Brown, Goldberg points out, is “not just any Republican, but an actual conservative, as opposed to some me-too Republican who promises to drive in the same direction as liberals.”

Goldberg captures the substance of conservative excitement when he argues that Coakley isn’t just suffering because it’s some metaphysically “bad” time for Democrats. Rather, the party in power is the author of its own sad destiny.

The Democrats’ “bad climate” is a direct result of how they’ve governed. The populist backlash is fueled by a sense that Democrats are acting on their preferred agenda and by their own rules. From the shenanigans of the people who write our tax code and collect our taxes to special deals and secret arrangements for big businesses and legislators who play ball, the Democrats have abandoned transparency in favor of transparent arrogance.

Of course, if we take Goldberg’s word for it, then we’d have to assume that voters in Massachusetts don’t actually want healthcare reform to pass. But there’s pretty clear evidence that they do. Likewise, does it really seem likely that Bay State voters are engaged in some kind of populist uprising against Democrats being too cozy with business, and are hence voting for the candidate who opposes the president’s proposal to tax the big banks to recoup the bailout money?

Which is more probable?

Option One: Massachusetts voters, like voters everywhere, are displeased with the groaning national economy and sky-high unemployment. Democrats are staying home, disillusioned by their party’s ineffectuality in power, while Republicans are all excited about the success their guys have had in blocking the majority’s agenda. And all this has been exacerbated by Coakley’s general election campaign, which nearly every political observer agrees was too little, too late, and has been plagued with mistakes ever since she realized she really had to run hard.

Option two: Massachusetts voters, some of the most liberal in the country, have seen the conservative light just a year after voting in vast numbers for President Obama and are for some reason expressing this view by turning against the policy positions that they in fact hold dear.

Seems like that second option could use some work in the logic department. 

Continue Reading Close

Gabriel Winant is a graduate student in American history at Yale.

Scott Brown disowns tea partiers?

The GOP Senate candidate says he's a "Scott Brown Republican," not part of any tea party movement

  • more
    • All Share Services

Since Saturday, the group behind TeaPartyExpress.org has spent at least $32,000 supporting Scott Brown, the Republican candidate for the Massachusetts Senate seat, federal records show. Brown’s own campaign Web site highlights a fundraiser held a couple weeks ago called the “Friends of the Tea Party Scott Brown reception,” where paying $500 earned supporters the label “American Revolutionary” (for a mere 25 bucks, you could be a “Patriot”). The conservative blogs that help fuel the tea party movement have been abuzz over Brown for weeks, eager to see the GOP candidate pull an upset win over Democrat Martha Coakley.

Which makes Brown’s statement to the Boston Globe Wednesday about all the fuss a bit of a surprise. “I’m a Scott Brown Republican,” Brown told the paper when asked about his ideological alliances. When a reporter asked him about the support from the tea party groups, he apparently demurred. “He also claimed that he was unfamiliar with the ‘Tea Party movement,’ when asked by a reporter,” the Globe reports.

National Democrats — who have been trying to highlight Brown’s conservative positions and ties to the far right, hoping that will turn off liberal Massachusetts voters — wasted no time highlighting the quote.

UPDATE: Audio of the exchange posted by the Plum Line takes off much of the edge Democrats were finding in it. Brown doesn’t seem to be disavowing the tea party movement as much as he’s dodging the question about it. “I’m not quite sure what you’re referring to,” Brown says — but it seems like he’s mostly trying to avoid talking about the tea partiers, not claiming he hadn’t heard of them. The Globe’s original characterization, it seems, went a little far.

Continue Reading Close

Mike Madden is Salon's Washington correspondent. A complete listing of his articles is here. Follow him on Twitter here.

Scott Brown’s ugly friends

In Massachusetts, the GOP candidate for Senate draws some support from the far right

  • more
    • All Share Services

As the Massachusetts Senate special election wraps up, a couple of unsavory right-wing groups are coming to Republican candidate Scott Brown’s aid — underscoring just how conservative the GOP nominee who’s suddenly causing Bay State Democrats to panic really is.

Brown was endorsed Wednesday by Americans for Legal Immigration PAC, one of the most aggressive organizations against illegal immigration in the country (the group runs a Web page where it encourages people to “report illegal immigrants, employers that hire illegal labor, and smugglers”). Officials say ALIPAC is backing Brown “due to his campaign’s focus on the issue of the illegal immigration.” The endorsement may not be entirely welcome news; the Southern Poverty Law Center points out that the group is aligned with the Federation for American Immigration Reform, which the SPLC claims is a hate group. (FAIR vehemently disputes that charge.)

Another group on the SPLC’s list, MassResistance, is also urging its ideological allies to vote for Brown. A blatantly anti-gay organization, MassResistance says Democratic candidate Martha Coakley’s “enthusiastic support of [the] radical homosexual/transgender agenda” is reason enough to oppose her — though the group worries Brown is moving to the left to try to win independents. “Let’s hope the election comes quickly, before Brown morphs into a Republican Barney Frank,” says an analysis of the race on the MassResistance Web site. But the group still says Brown is “the best man” for the Senate seat.

A Brown campaign aide didn’t immediately return a phone call about the endorsements. And it doesn’t appear the campaign solicited the help from either group.

But the support from fringe groups does underscore the point national Democrats and labor groups have been trying to make about Brown over the last week, as they leap to rescue Coakley’s campaign: he’s far too conservative for Massachusetts voters. The type of moderate Republicans who nearly beat John Kerry and Ted Kennedy in previous elections (Bill Weld, pre-presidential politics Mitt Romney) didn’t take positions that won them much sympathy from groups like MassResistance or ALIPAC. “When you lie down with dogs, you wake up with fleas,” one Democratic operative said. Then again, remembering how conservative Brown is also shows how mystifying it is that the race is this close.

This story has been <a href=”/letters/corrections/2010/index.html#brown”>corrected</a> since it was originally published.

Continue Reading Close

Mike Madden is Salon's Washington correspondent. A complete listing of his articles is here. Follow him on Twitter here.

Page 11 of 11 in Scott Brown