So proclaims an article by Byron York in the Washington Examiner. Some key paragraphs:
Here in Massachusetts, as well as in Washington, a growing sense of gloom is setting in among Democrats about the fortunes of Democratic Senate candidate Martha Coakley. “I have heard that in the last two days the bottom has fallen out of her poll numbers,” says one well-connected Democratic strategist. In her own polling, Coakley is said to be around five points behind Republican Scott Brown. “If she’s not six or eight ahead going into the election, all the intensity is on the other side in terms of turnout,” the Democrat says. “So right now, she is destined to lose.”
Given those numbers, some Democrats, eager to distance Obama from any electoral failure, are beginning to compare Coakley to Creigh Deeds, the losing Democratic candidate in the Virginia governor’s race last year. Deeds ran such a lackluster campaign, Democrats say, that his defeat could be solely attributed to his own shortcomings, and should not be seen as a referendum on President Obama’s policies or those of the national Democratic party.
The same sort of thinking is emerging in Massachusetts. “This is a Creigh Deeds situation,” the Democrat says. “I don’t think it says that the Obama agenda is a problem. I think it says, 1) that she’s a terrible candidate, 2) that she ran a terrible campaign, 3) that the climate is difficult but she should have been able to overcome it, and 4) that Democrats beware — you better run good campaigns, or you’re going to lose.”
With the election still four days away, Democrats are still hoping that “something could happen” to change the dynamics of the race. But until that thing happens, the situation as it exists today explains Barack Obama’s decision not to travel to Massachusetts to campaign for Coakley. “If the White House thinks she can win, Obama will be there,” the Democrat says. “If they don’t think she can win, he won’t be there.” For national Democrats, the task is now to insulate Obama against any suggestion that a Coakley defeat would be a judgment on the president’s agenda and performance in office.
In other words, it’s all about “The One”. So they must therefore insist that it has nothing to with “The One”.
It would appear that the Democrats are starting to cut their loses. This cannot be good news for Coakley. These sorts of things tend to become self-fulfilling prophesies.
The only way Coakley can win now is to get a high-turnout from the yellow-dog Democrats, and they seem to becoming more demoralized by the hour. It’s going to be a long, long four days for Ms. Coakley.
***Update***
As commented below (thanks Jake), Obama is now scheduled to campaign in Massachusetts this Sunday according to Politico.
January 15th, 2010 at 2:40 pm
Let them whistle past the graveyard. All the better.
January 15th, 2010 at 2:43 pm
I find that hard to believe. It seems Democrats are doubling down by sending Obama in to campaign.
January 15th, 2010 at 2:44 pm
If they are, I’d like to volunteer as the driver
No doubt they’ll blame THE DEFEAT on her candidacy rather than an anti OBAMA mandate.
January 15th, 2010 at 2:46 pm
Obama is going to Mass. on Sunday to campaign according to Politico.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0110/Obama_to_campaign_for_Coakley.html
He wants to distance himself?
January 15th, 2010 at 2:49 pm
Well, you had to know Coakley was in trouble when Obama wouldn’t visit a state he won by 375%, especially with health care on the line. If she was going to win, he would be up there soaking up adulation. But he doesn’t want to risk campaigning for yet another blue state loser.
January 15th, 2010 at 2:50 pm
HE WON THE STATE BY 375??? IS THERE ANYTHING HE CAN’T DO?????????
January 15th, 2010 at 2:50 pm
Well, I should have read #4. I was basing my comment on news I read this morning or last night, when Obama didn’t have MA on his schedule.
January 15th, 2010 at 2:59 pm
she will win, Obama is going
January 15th, 2010 at 3:10 pm
Thanks, Jake, for the new info. This makes things interesting. Now Obama is tying himself to this race. If she should lose… .
January 15th, 2010 at 3:10 pm
Why isn’t Scott Brown campaigning with his man Mitt? All I’m seeing is Guiliani…
January 15th, 2010 at 3:20 pm
So what do you guys think this will mean for Scott Brown’s chances that Obama is coming? Good or Bad? I’ve also been hearing from other sites where people are saying that Obama has taken Scott Browns bait and this is what Brown wanted to happen and now Brown will win by and even larger margin now? I really dont know what to think.
January 15th, 2010 at 3:23 pm
Well, I do not know what to think either, but most likely, the Obama camp thinks that this race is at least winnable for them, otherwise, he would not waste his time.
January 15th, 2010 at 3:27 pm
10 – Scott Brown was a McCain guy, not a Romney guy.
January 15th, 2010 at 3:28 pm
“10 – Scott Brown was a McCain guy, not a Romney guy.” Well this makes it more fun (I mean interesting.)
January 15th, 2010 at 3:34 pm
I still think Romney should be there to help.
That is, if it would help.
January 15th, 2010 at 3:35 pm
Bryan,
I’ve got to think- considering he won the state by 57 million votes- that Obama still has some pull up there, even in his weakened state.
January 15th, 2010 at 3:36 pm
Lol you guys are ridiculous. Romney was really the first national figure to bring this race front and center.
January 15th, 2010 at 3:36 pm
Bryan,
I do not have an “in” to Massachusetts, so I can only go by what I read — and I read primarily conservative sites. However, on all (and I do mean “all”) of the liberal sites I’ve visited, the word is, “We need to hold our noses and vote for Coakley because the alternative would be worse”.
Whenever that argument is all that a party is left with, they pretty much lose every time.
January 15th, 2010 at 3:41 pm
Well it might be that Brown asked Mitt to keep a low profile. If so, Mitt is not one to whine and complain about such things to the press. He knows the object is to get Brown elected, not score political points or play the victim.
January 15th, 2010 at 3:41 pm
mcon,
In what way?
January 15th, 2010 at 3:42 pm
marK,
Why would Mitt need to keep a low profile? This is his home state.
January 15th, 2010 at 3:45 pm
21, No. The people here don’t really like Romney. Guiliani has a better image…
January 15th, 2010 at 3:46 pm
This has been an utter disaster for the Democrats. They are having to pour resources into Massachusetts of all places when they need to be spending the money in places like Ohio, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire and others.
To update Pyrrhus “If we are victorious in one more election against the Republicans, we shall be utter ruined.”
January 15th, 2010 at 3:47 pm
Shhhh MWS, their might be a reason they tease you about your candidate’s approval level in MN.
January 15th, 2010 at 3:47 pm
I think Mitt would be a net positive in Mass now. He’s FAR more popular then the current Democratic governor- polls some months ago showed that- and probably cracks positive territory overall. I’m fairly surprised that he’s been so absent. This was a chance for him to help a high-profile Republican and line some more chits. And if the Brown McCain endorsement is the explanation…well, that’s really petty and stupid. It’s not like McCain will be running again, and Brown’s endorsement- I bet this is the first time any of us have heard of it- hardly hurt Romney in the 08′ primary. Bad form all around.
January 15th, 2010 at 3:49 pm
This has been an utter disaster for the Democrats. They are having to pour resources into Massachusetts of all places when they need to be spending the money in places like Ohio, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire and others.
” Shhhhh, don’t say that too loud; I love the fact that the Dems are spending money campaigning in MA instead of my state.
January 15th, 2010 at 3:51 pm
Coakley tests the limits: How many gaffes will it take to lose in liberal Mass.?
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Coakley-tests-the-limits-How-many-gaffes-will-it-take-to-lose-81739327.html#ixzz0ciT4agRW
3rd-Party Candidate Named Kennedy Could Tip Senate Race in Massachusetts
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/15/us/politics/15massachusetts.html?ref=politics&pagewanted=print
January 15th, 2010 at 3:51 pm
My day job requires me to monitor the political Twittersphere pretty closely – and I’m noticing a marked increase in angry, profane Coakley supporters tweeting vile stuff at Scott Brown. No bravado or conceit in what they’re writing – more like they’re realizing that they’re totally screwed.
January 15th, 2010 at 3:52 pm
I think this race is all about sending a message to Washington, if Obama shows then this officially ties Coakley in with the Obama agenda and totally plays into Scott Browns campaign strategy. I personally believe it
drives the final nail in her political coffin.
January 15th, 2010 at 4:02 pm
RayinRI,
What do you think the final tally will be on election night? Hope your right about Obama driving that nail in the coffin!
January 15th, 2010 at 4:05 pm
Matthew, I’m surprised at Romney’s absence as well, but I assume it means Brown’s polling shows Romney is not all that popular. You compare him to Patrick, but that’s a pretty low bar.
The other possibility is that Brown wants to avoid ‘nationalizing’ the race, for fear of turning off Democrats and Independents by tying himself to the Republican Party nationally. Which might be a very good idea. But then, Romney’s local, and Giuliani isn’t.
January 15th, 2010 at 4:05 pm
We’ll see. Obama has some popularity in MA but on the other hand the fact that he decided to come will probably play into the narrative that Coakley is sinking like a rock. That, and Coakley seems to have a machine gun aimed at her own foot – so if she keeps issuing rapid-fire gaffes than this will be meaningless. I hope she gets really wide play with the comment that Catholics shouldn’t work in hospitals…there’s dumb and then there’s just moronic. Coakley is starting to make Joe Biden look like a model of control and propriety!
January 15th, 2010 at 4:10 pm
MWS,
Mitt has proven to be a team player over and over again. He knows the race is about more than him. If Scott Brown had asked him to campaign, he would have. If Scott Brown had asked him to keep a low profile, he would have.
Since it isn’t in Mitt’s nature to leak such things, it is hard to know exactly what is going on and why. It does seem strange that Mitt would have extensively campaigned for the VA and NJ governors last November, but not for Scott Brown in his home state. He also is skipping the SRLC in April.
Ann’s health, perhaps?
January 15th, 2010 at 4:11 pm
Suffolk University/7News Massachusetts Senatorial Survey
http://race42008.com/2010/01/15/poll-watch-suffolk-university7news-massachusetts-senatorial-survey/
January 15th, 2010 at 4:14 pm
31. It might be that Mitt is considered too conservative to be of help in campaigning like Rudy is doing. That also might explain why his popularity numbers are not higher there. I know that would sound ridiculous to many conservatives who are further to the right than they believe Romney is, but we’re comparing it to the MA world, not the rest of the country.
January 15th, 2010 at 4:21 pm
Aron,
That’s more or less exactly where I would have expected Romney to be in the state. It’s hard to see how someone who’s viewed favorably by 49% of the electorate HURTS Brown. At worst, it’s a push. It’s hard to know for sure, but I have a difficult time understanding why the Brown campaign would call in Rudy, while asking Romney to sit out. Is Rudy really more popular than Mitt in Mass? To be sure, he was 2 years ago, but a lot has happened since then and none of it has obviously benefited Rudy, while Mitt has gone a fair way to rehabilitating his centrist image.
January 15th, 2010 at 4:24 pm
#30 Bryan
You probably missed it but I have been here all week stating that Brown should win by double digits, I’m in Mass everyday, most of my friends are Dems and Indies, not one is voting for Coakley, sentiment is that Coakley is out of touch (literally) with the voters. I’m telling you, I have not seen this much enthusiasm for an election in a long time, everyone is talking about it.
I’m still sticking with my double digit victory for Brown, who knows what the final
numbers will but I’ll take a crack and say Brown 55%, Coakley 43%, Kennedy 2%….sound good?
Oh, if only
January 15th, 2010 at 4:25 pm
Abortion stances at odds, mostly
For Senate rivals, position on issue is complicated
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/01/04/abortion_stances_of_brown_coakley_not_so_easily_defined/?page=full
Scott Brown daughters answer Martha Coakley’s abortion criticism
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/politics/view/20100112scott_brown_daughters_answer_martha_coakleys_abortion_criticism/
January 15th, 2010 at 4:38 pm
all this speculation on Mitt and why he isnt there is just that – pure speculation. and i am guessing just another excuse to rile up the romney supporters around here. Aron’s post at 34 seems to be that Mitt is still a positive, far more than say a Palin is in MA.
its getting to the point that commentators i used to look forward to reading have become predictable in their responses. Its a sad day when I yearn for Flip dixon and martha over MWS, OJ, and ILguy.
too bad the level around here has decreased so much
January 15th, 2010 at 4:38 pm
I still am taking a “doubting Thomas” attitude. I thought Hoffman was a sure deal as well. Burn me once shame on you, burn me twice, shame on me.
January 15th, 2010 at 5:06 pm
Coakley is behind in a new poll…HER OWN CAMPAIGN INTERNAL POLL…47-44 FOR SCOTT BROWN THE RESULT…
January 15th, 2010 at 5:28 pm
41. How do you know this?
January 15th, 2010 at 5:31 pm
God I’m loving this. I hope Brown wins, but not for the usual reasons. I just want to enjoy weeks of listening to the Dems spin the loss and explain why it REALLY doesn’t matter; why it’s just a “local thang” and has NUTHIN’ to do with Obama. If Brown wins, I’ll be popping a big bowl of popcorn and sitting in front of my TV enjoying the spectacle.
January 15th, 2010 at 5:32 pm
I just have a hard time believing ACORN, the unions, and just the general Democrat-ness of Mass will allow Coakley to lose. I hope to be shocked, though.
January 15th, 2010 at 5:47 pm
As to Romney’s Whereabouts, Maybe he plans on being the last major Republican Shadowing Brown. Perhaps Monday or Tuesday
http://mittromneycentral.com/2010/01/15/will-mitt-romney-stump-for-scott-brown-in-last-days-of-senate-race/
January 15th, 2010 at 5:51 pm
#34 — Romney’s numbers are worse than Coakley!??!
Doesn’t say much about what his own constituents think about him, he’s barely above water.
No wonder Scott Brown doesn’t want him around.
January 15th, 2010 at 6:05 pm
@Flip Dixon – Scott has benefited immensely by Romney’s fundraising network. And to say that he doesn’t want him around is very false… In fact, Romney was there back in October, when nobody had even heard of Scott Brown, stumping and raising funds on his behalf.
Also Scott Brown defends his vote on RomneyCare and thinks highly of Romney’s innovative capabilities: http://mittromneycentral.com/2010/01/13/scott-brown-defends-his-vote-for-romneycare/
Romney has better approval rating, by far, than current Gov. Duval Patrick in Massachusetts.
January 15th, 2010 at 6:06 pm
Some of Coakley’s internal polling is leaking out and it looks good for Brown – likely Brown by 6.
January 15th, 2010 at 6:13 pm
#47, I’m sure Brown is happy to tap into Romney’s fundraising network and having Mittens in the background…
but if he’s unwilling to have his guy by his side on election day, that speaks volumes.
By the way, I’m assuming Brown endorsed Romney for Prez in 2008.
January 15th, 2010 at 6:27 pm
Is there any link to a site where these internal poll numbers are leaking out at? Does anyone know of any polls that will come out tonight or tomorrow? Thanks
January 15th, 2010 at 6:29 pm
48. Where are you people getting these numbers? Link?
January 15th, 2010 at 6:43 pm
50,51
Here is the link on the internal poll:
http://hotair.com/archives/2010/01/15/oh-my-brown-by-three-in-coakleys-internal-poll/
January 15th, 2010 at 7:06 pm
Giuliani Stumps for Brown in Mass. Senate Race
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/15/giuliani-stumps-for-brown-in-mass-senate-race/
http://www1.whdh.com/news/articles/local/BO133506/
Giuliani: Republican Can Win Massachusetts
http://spectator.org/blog/2010/01/15/giuliani-republican-can-win-ma
Giuliani on WTC Ad: ‘Unthinkable, Offensive, and a Big Mistake’
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MzQ3MTI0ZjZjNTFjM2Q2ZGE0MmIyZGE3NWE3YzAzZTI=
Rudy Giuliani joins Scott Brown, slams Martha Coakley on terrorism
http://news.bostonherald.com/news/politics/view/20100115awaiting_giuliani_brown_supporters_welcome_surprise_surge/srvc=home&position=4
January 15th, 2010 at 8:01 pm
31 – probably closer to the mark on your second point. Romney has already endorsed and brought much support to the race. Brown has the momentum, but this isn’t anything that is real stable and I expect he is playing it pretty safe. It looks like the messaging has been positioning him as a local choice. He has been positioning Coakley as a pawn of the national party and ideology. Obama coming to town will only reinforce that picture. Romney is now considered a player on the national stage in a way that Rudy isn’t, if only because he isn’t in the spotlight for national office.
It looks like Brown is making this a referendum about state interests and national politics, which was also McDonnell’s startegy.
There was a blogpost earlier counting the impact of the CWA/Evangelical power shift of 1994 on blue states, and how it provided a foil for liberal politicians and how that now that the Dems have control, that has evaporated. Brown is smart to not raise the profile of national party politicians and reenergize that issue. This is a local politician against the Dem machine, which is exactly how Brown has played the game.
January 15th, 2010 at 8:05 pm
36 – it has nothing to do with popularity. It has to do with narrative. Rudy is completely outside of the socon GOP profile, it’s almost like he’s the anti-republican if you’re from MA.
January 15th, 2010 at 8:15 pm
[...] Post,Ruby Slippers, Clusterstock, Moonbattery, Gateway Pundit, The TrogloPundit,race42008.com, Commentary, Althouse, The Hugh Hewitt Show, JammieWearingFool,Jules Crittenden, Viking [...]
January 15th, 2010 at 9:16 pm
This leaked Coakely internal poll is a game changer!!!
January 16th, 2010 at 12:18 am
Large Brown supporter turnout at Coakley rally
http://washingtontimes.com/weblogs/watercooler/2010/jan/15/large-brown-supporter-turnout-coakley-rally/
Giuliani, Senate candidate Brown get rousing reception in Boston
http://www.telegram.com/article/20100115/NEWS/100119791/1116