Poltico / Insider Advantage
1/17/10; 804 likely voters, 4% margin of error
Mode: Automated telephone
(Politico story, crosstabs)
52% Brown, 43% Coakley, 2% Kennedy (chart)
Ok I had it. This poll is absurd.
61% of the 18-29 year old vote
27% of the black vote
77% of the Hispanic vote
49.5% of the Female vote
How is that even possible?
Posted on January 18, 2010 5:44 PM
Wow! Can anyone point to a recent poll that shows Cloakly UP?!?! Well, the final poll, and the only poll that counts, is 24 hours away. We may soon all hear the second "shot heard around the world".
Posted on January 18, 2010 5:46 PM
Wow! I am a registered democrat and voted, regretably, for Obama. He has clearly taken the country too far. If MA can see this and elect a Brown, then there will be a huge landslide (correction) this fall.
Posted on January 18, 2010 5:49 PM
You are not a Democrat. You are a republican shill. We are not idiots on this site.
Posted on January 18, 2010 5:52 PM
Clouded your judegement, your admiration for obama has.
Have you not seen what happened in New Jersey and Virginia. The Hope and Change has ran aground! You have to admit, when Obama loses a seat in MA, things do not look good for him.
Posted on January 18, 2010 6:00 PM
Ok, this is absolutely absurd. Look at the crosstab numbers obamalover pointed out.
They are just outrageously absurd and are likely fraudulent. I think some of these firms are going to be outed as such after this election.
Some of these firms have a vested interested in giving a particular polling narrative legs and so it would thus behoove them to fudge things to their particular benefit if they really didn't take their job seriously, which I believe some of these firms do not.
3/4 of the Hispanic vote? Are you kidding me?
There wasn't one minority for Scott Brown at Coakley's rally yesterday let alone a latino.
On the other hand I was holding signs next to a couple young hispanic people one of whom was very passionate about his support for Martha and was proficient in English but not totally fluent. There were a lot of people coming out of the woodwork for her, african-americans, latinos, none for Scott Brown in the entire crowd I could see.
These numbers are fraudulent. Give me a break.
"Where does that leave us? On Intrade, Brown begins Monday morning as the slight favorite in the race. However, nobody really knows who will win because it all comes down to turnout. Clearly, Brown has the more enthusiastic support and has run a better campaign. If turnout remains low, he is likely to win. That’s why the president went to Boston. If his appearance boosts turnout among Democrats, the Democrat will win.
That’s a long way around saying that we’re right back where we were a week ago - at the time of the last Rasmussen Reports poll. Brown is leading slightly among those certain to vote, and Coakley will do better if more Democrats show up. "
Why is he sitting on his weekend poll? Is he finding some good news for Dems?
Posted on January 18, 2010 6:01 PM
coakley is done! I was in Boston this weekend and the momentum is all with Brown.
Posted on January 18, 2010 6:05 PM
and you are a Republican.
OL - your starting to fall apart. You guys on the left are beginning to crack up. Brown is pulling ahead in all groups. The people of MA and in the country as a whole simply are not as stupid as you liberals wanted them to be.
The bottom has indeed fallen out of Coakley's campaign.....as well as the democratic party.
Lordmike - hahahaha, you guyus spend every day on here bashing Rassmussen and now your using his words as your last gasp of hope in this MA race....the irony is painfully hilarious.
Posted on January 18, 2010 6:06 PM
Since I am now a Republican....GO BROWN!
Posted on January 18, 2010 6:09 PM
I'm not saying Brown won't win. But the crosstabs of this poll are highly dubious at best.
all polls are wrong? you can pick apart crosstabs from one poll but all polls, except one, show lead for Brown!
Posted on January 18, 2010 6:12 PM
OL - of course they are dubious, of course they are....all these polls flooding in are showing us people have grown tired of being taken for granted by Democrats. The people are not as liberal as you thought they were. As a result Brown is pulling away.
you guys better hope acorn has about 100,000 votes in the trunk of some car somewhere....you will need them on this race!
Posted on January 18, 2010 6:13 PM
According to this poll, Coakley is barely ahead of Brown among nonwhites, 51-45 by my calculations. That is ridiculous. And a 2-1 Brown lead among 18-29 year-olds? I don't think so. If you adjust the results among nonwhites to something more realistic, like a 3-1 Coakley lead, the overall result is close to a draw.
Posted on January 18, 2010 6:15 PM
You have always been a Repuke.
Posted on January 18, 2010 6:16 PM
lol...why not just adjust the entire thing and make it Coakley up by 99!
You libs simply cannot accept the fact that people of all ages and races are turning on your radical agenda............horrible state of denial....its like Luke when he found out his fasther was Vader...........you'll be accepting it soon enough!
Posted on January 18, 2010 6:19 PM
Its been fun guys....I'm signing off for the night...gotta catch a flight.
But final prediction for whatever its worth heading int othe BIG day:
Posted on January 18, 2010 6:24 PM
You of all people posting here should realize that the numbers for subsamples are unreliable. I understand that you have a rooting interest in this race but you need to keep your professional standards ahead of your personal views.
Posted on January 18, 2010 6:27 PM
27 percent of blacks voting for a Republican? In Massachusetts? That's not possible.
I can see a possible Brown win (though I think Coakley pulls it out by riding a tsunami in Boston and Springfield), but by nine points? No way.
Posted on January 18, 2010 6:39 PM
Posted on January 18, 2010 7:06 PM
Right, the polls internals are screwed up... but that doesn't deny the fact that the internals on the Suffolk, PPP, and even Coakley's own internals show Brown up by over 30 among indies, at least 9:1 among Indies, and trails by less than a 4:1 margin among Dems.
If those are the breakdowns, this election is Brown, Brown, Brown.
Besides, Insider Advantage has always had funky as hell internals...
Average the polls, shrink that confidence interval...
We'll see if all these thoughts about this election being unpollable come true tomorrow.
Posted on January 18, 2010 7:14 PM
Sigh, you guys are so driven by identity-politics. "What, young people voting or a Republican, NO FREAKIN' WAY!"
Give me a break. You may be interested to know that Scott Brown has about 75,000 supporters ("fans") on facebook, who would mostly be 18 to 28 year olds. Martha Coakley, on the other hand, has a mere 15,000 declared supporters. Scott Brown therefore has 87% of publicly-declared facebook supporters.
While many of those supporters may be from outside MA, there is no denying that Brown can and does appeal to young voters.
Oh wait, I just violated your world-view that ALL young people and minorities MUST vote for Democrats.
Seriously you guys, don't be so close-minded.
independent345 (from MA)
Posted on January 18, 2010 7:36 PM
Tom Brady--First, are you THE Tom Brady? Okay, I didn't think so. Second--Of course the results for small subsamples are unreliable--that's why I combined all of the nonwhites. Maybe Coakley is overperforming among whites in this poll and the results cancel each other out. I don't know. But those numbers for blacks and Hispanics (and under 30's) are ridiculous. I hope someone is doing an exit poll tomorrow so we cvan see what the actual breakdowns look like--even though exit polls are far from perfect, a larger sample of actual voters would give us a much better estimate of the voting patterns by age, race, gender, etc. It's going to be interesting.
Posted on January 18, 2010 7:47 PM
Have no reason to change my prediction. There are a number of reasons why these polls are inaccurate. Obama's problem has been his unwillingness to go far enough. According to almost all polls A health plan with a public option and a surtax on people making over $250,000 would be extremely popular. A larger stimulus for the average person and less for the banks, Would have helped too.
Posted on January 18, 2010 8:26 PM
this isn't some naive world view. This is historical fact. Minorities hate conservatives (whether it be conservative Dems or conservative Republicans) because they consistently support and implement bigoted laws that oppress them. As a result blacks in particular and hispanics to a lesser extent consistently vote Liberal. It would be really crazy if they went against that trend in a blue state. That is just the way things are.
Posted on January 18, 2010 8:44 PM
I think there are a number of reasons Coakley's numbers are underestimated in these polls(1) There is strong evidence based on absentees that turnout will acutally be quite high . Possibly as high as 70%.(2) Even in a skewed poll like ARG's voters who have already voted are 54-44 Coakley and make up nearly 10 # of the total vote. My guess when they are actually counted it will be more like 60-40.(3) the Democratic gotv will be much better than the Republican.(4) With the combination of the Obama appearance and the MLK holiday today will increase minority turnout substantialy. Final numbers Coakley 54% Brown45% Kennedy 1%. By region Boston C 60% B 40%. West-Central C49-B51,South East 45c-55B. Assuming appox 60 of the vote form Boston and 20% from each of the other area This comes to 54C-45B.
We will know for sure at the end of the day tomorrow.
Posted on January 18, 2010 9:00 PM
With all respect, I think you need to re-read the ARG press. They have absentees at 54-44 Brown, not Coakley.
Suffolk's bell weather cities release today was amazing. Kerry carried each of these cities +31-34%. Brown is ahead +14-17%. That's simply amazing...if true.
And if Brown gets 40% of the vote in Boston, it's lights out..or should I say Brown out?
Posted on January 18, 2010 10:11 PM
Louis ...your political slant has caused you to either a) misread the actual ARG data OR b) Lie to yourself
this is NOT what ARG says....
Even in a skewed poll like ARG's voters who have already voted are 54-44 Coakley and make up nearly 10 # of the total vote...
In Fact ARG ays absentee ballots are 54-44 for Brown.
however instead of just saying "opps I mis read that.. I was wrong" you will likely come up with a new rationalization.
Folks on the far right and far left always do.
Posted on January 18, 2010 10:53 PM
There's just too many polls with Brown ahead. We have to assume that Brown is favored to win anywhere from 4-9 points, despite some subsamples being strange. I remember a lot of republicans saying in 2008 that ALL the polls were wrong, Obama couldn't possibly win, etc... They looked like fools after the election. I don't want to be like that.
I believe hispanics are a small minority in Mass - about 6%. I actually think there are more Asians than hispanics there. The 2008 exit polls only had a 4% hispanic sample, too small even for a breakdown, so just because Obama did well with hispanics nationally in 2008 doesn't mean that they can't go for Brown in MA in 2010, even though it seems contrary to conventional wisdom.
The result for ages 18-29 does make one wonder however. PPP found the same percentage - 62% - going for Coakley, losing among the rest. Someone is wrong, but they both found Brown ahead.
Posted on January 18, 2010 11:33 PM
Rassmussen: Coakley-49% Brown-47%
The democrats are clinging to one poll...the Rassmussen one!
This is crazy.
My prediction is a dead-heat with Brown in the lead...after a recount...Coakley wins.
Posted on January 19, 2010 12:00 AM
I wish there was somewhere we could see polls for the 1996 senate election between Kerry and Weld to use for comparison.
I do agree, however, that the media narrative has become quite ridiculous and annoying. I hardly ever watch cable news, but I watched some of Chris Matthews and then the Fox Report. Have to say, Fox Report was much less annoying, but still annoying.
Massachusetts used to be a bastion of republicanism. Republicans only controlled the house for 4 years from 1931-1996, but guess who was the speaker during those 4? Representative Joseph Martin from Massachusetts. This is no "shot heard round the world." John Kerry only beat William Weld 52-45, in 1996, when Bill Clinton won Mass in the same election 61-28 (Perot got 9%), so in an election with a poor dem candidate and a good rep one, it is possible for a rep to win in MA. Scott Brown must be doing something right.
Posted on January 19, 2010 12:10 AM
I guess I am on the extreme left then. You are correct about the ARG poll. but that really doesn't change what I think the final result will be. I will drop the margins to 53-47 just to make everyone feel better. If my point of view makes me an extreme leftist than that is what I am. I am still believe what I believe and am very proud of my beliefs and secure in them Secure enough not to have to pin labels on my opponents rather than discuss ideas.
Obama is too conservative for me that's true enough. I been in most counties of the world and even the conservatives in France , England, Canada have no desire to go to a private health system. They live longer than we do and have a much smaller per capita expenditure on health. Their health is not rationed by the insurance companies or by the amount of currency in their bank account. But instead by systems that emphasis preventive health care.
You have the Libertarians who oppose all coercion except that of Capital. The conservatives who would rather spend money on guns, missiles and telling people who they can and can't sleep wit then invest in Human Capital. Liberals who just want to be like the conservatives only a little less so. In that type of society a guess you would have to put me on the extreme left i guess.
Be happy , health and well. Because god knows most of us can't afford to get sick.
Posted on January 19, 2010 1:25 AM
"They live longer than we do and have a much smaller per capita expenditure on health."
To be fair, we have a far bigger population than any of those countries and our populace is much less healthy. Much of their favorable health statistics stem from the fact that they are healthier and less obese than we are.
"Because god knows most of us can't afford to get sick"
But I completely agree with you here and feel that it's a moral failing that we don't adequately care for some of the weakest members of our society - those that have the misfortune to be sick. Instead, we force them into bankruptcy.
Posted on January 19, 2010 2:03 AM
I wish these polls would say what their turnout estimates are... I mean, it could be as low as 40% and as high as 70%, and that can dramatically alters the modeling.
Gallup said that this race is not even close to being pollable (if that's a word), there are too many variables, and no one knows who is going to show up.
That being said, brown definitely is peaking at the right time. Note to candidates in the lead... never, EVER, do a debate just before the vote. That's how Reagan managed to win, and it looks like how Scott Brown is going to manage to win as well.
Posted on January 19, 2010 2:36 AM
I mean 9:1 among republicans... quick typing.
Posted on January 19, 2010 3:58 AM
@Louis: FYI France has partly privatized its health care system in the '00s. conservatives throughout Europe are to overhaul national health care by introducing market elements to the system. Health care IS rationed in these countries by national health authorities - have you heard of the wait lists in the UK? Do you know, that in Hungary there is only 9,900 MRI exams financed through the national health care systems, while there are more than 300,000 thousand cancer patients?
That it might be true, that while the average health care cost of an american is at 7,700 $, a hungarians is at 1,300$, but that is collected through a debiliating 33% payroll tax, and that the average yearly income of a middle class hungarian is app. 10,000 $ (and that only around half the hungarians are active)
It is true, that the average livelihood in these countries is above of that of the US, but these countries don't have an influx of 10+ millions of immigrants of poorer health standards each year.
Not to mention that the continental european conservatism is not an individualist, but a rather statist and egalitarian school of thinking. Think of de Gaulle or Konrad Adenauer.
Apples and oranges.
Posted on January 19, 2010 5:37 AM
It is a little desperate to start talking about Hungary, when you have France, England, Canada,and the Scandinavian countries to compare to. The issue isn't rationing all resources are rationed. In the current setup they are rationed by the the insurance companies and how whether you can afford it.
As for immigration European countries are having a large immigration at this time from turkey, and eastern European counties with poorer health standards than they have. These people are able to elevate their health standards because they can get health care.
But this is't really the site to debate health care we have an election coming up. At the end of the day we will know the reality there and how well or badly the pollsters did.
It think most will have egg on their face but we will see.
Posted on January 19, 2010 8:57 AM
Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)
Please be patient while your comment posts - sometimes it takes a minute or two. To check your comment, please wait 60 seconds and click your browser's refresh button. Note that comments with three or more hyperlinks will be held for approval.
Please email us to report offensive comments.
See our comment policy here. Note that we require commenters to share their email address via Typekey. We will never share your email address with anyone without your explicit permission.
MAP - US, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY, PR