The same poll that showed Elizabeth Warren with a 2-point lead over Scott Brown shows that she has an enormous lead over the rest of the Democrats hoping to take him on. As of now, here are the numbers (the details: “461 usual Democratic primary voters, with a +/-4.6% margin of error, from September 16th to 18th”).
“Who would you most like to see as the Democratic candidate for Senate next year?”
Elizabeth Warren: 55%
Alan Khazei: 9%
Tom Conroy: 7%
Bob Massie: 2%
Marisa DeFranco: 2%
Setti Warren: 1%
Herb Robinson: 1%
Someone else/not sure: 22%
Yes, Elizabeth Warren has benefited from a lot of free media coverage that the other candidates haven’t had (as of now, she has “69% name recognition with Democratic primary voters compared to only 42% for Khazei, 30% for Setti Warren, 22% for Massie, and 19% for Conroy”). Nonetheless, that’s a lot of ground for the others to make up. Also striking to me were the favorable/unfavorable numbers, which look like this:
Candidate: Favorable/Unfavorable/Not Sure
Elizabeth Warren: 55/14/31
Alan Khazei: 21/21/58
Tom Conroy: 5/14/81
Bob Massie: 9/13/79
Setti Warren: 13/17/70
It’s not all that surprising that most of the candidate still have huge “not sure” numbers. What did surprise me, though, is that three of the candidates (Conroy, Massie, and S. Warren) have higher unfavorable than favorable ratings, and Khazei is even at 21/21. Only Elizabeth Warren is in positive territory – and she’s way positive, at +41.
There’s a long way to go, to be sure. But there’s little doubt right now as to who the front-runner is.
In related news, the right-wing smear machine has kicked into high gear where Elizabeth Warren is concerned. Check out this hilariously incoherent rant from Rush Limbaugh, who if I didn’t know better I’d think might be in some sort of altered state of consciousness when he spews this stuff.
The favorable/unfavorable results for the candidates with very low name recognition are bizarre. Are some of the Warren fans just automatically saying that they have an unfavorable opinion about candidates who they know little about?
It would seem that the unfavorable rating comes from them having the temerity to run for office before she had finished her dithering on the matter and graciously announced she WOULD run.
Arriveth Our Queen!
Seriously, the reaction of the GOP to Elizabeth Warren’s entry into the race is nothing short of hilarious. Between Rush Limbaugh’s bizarre rant, Scott Brown’s overheard telephone call, the MA GOP’s hysterically desperate effort to get Harvard to cut off Warren’s salary, and Porcupine’s snide “Queen” commentary that echoes Rob Willington’s “QueenElizabethWarren” project … well, all of a sudden, folks on the right are looking awfully worried.
No, my derision comes from watching the Mass. Dems try to stage manage a grass roots swell, while furtively crushing actual Massachusetts candidates. I mean, Setti Warren jeopardized his mayoralty to declare with their encouragement, and now – back under the rock! We don’t need you now! National will let us SWIM in money if we nominate her!
I regard Amber as a classic MA activist, and she is being shunted aside because she supports Massie. The Dems need Ambers badly. You’re discouraging your own GENUINE base for a person who likely didn’t even bother to serve on a town committee where she lived, much less run for anything but top tier office.
But that’s OK. With me.
Honestly, though, listen to yourself. Who are these all-powerful “MASS DEMS” whose omnipotence is so great that they can control the responses of randomly-selected likely MA primary voters to a poll conducted by an out-of-state firm? “Furtively crushing actual Massachusetts candidates” – heh. What a joke.
I’m sure your concern for AmberPaw is deeply heartfelt … but again, who is “discouraging” her? Other activists who don’t support her candidate? Everyone has the right to support whichever candidate they choose, and Amber knows that as well as anyone. And if somebody could point me a single instance of John Walsh or any other member of the Mass Dems hierarchy being anything other than entirely even-handed to all the MA-Sen candidates, I’d certainly be interested to hear about it. I’ll bet you can’t do it.
And oddly, they are the true mother’s milk of politics.
Amber and I agree on some things, and disagree on others. But I respect her activism, and was relying on her own description of her own experience.
You were dismissive of her descriptions, too, when she recounted them and demanded name/rank serial number of the Hiarachy Official who had dismissed her. Understandably, she didn’t want to provide them in a public forum. Hence, in your view, it didn’t happen.
As I said, it’s OK. With me.
is your view that the omnipotent, all-knowing “MASS DEMS” are somehow snuffing out other candidacies in favor of their preferred one, apparently to the point of controlling out-of-state independent pollsters. It’s simply an outlandish and ridiculous notion, and the only reason I can conceive of for your trotting it out is fear, like I said earlier. Well, knock yourself out.
I like to see some, you know, evidence of nefarious behind-the-scenes foul play or skullduggery before I conclude that it’s happening and start tossing around accusations. But I guess I’m funny that way.
I have the impression that AmberPaw is fully capable of speaking for herself. I am confident that if she feels that she is being “shunted aside”, she will say so, and in no uncertain terms.
I share David’s impression that this line of commentary comes more from fear of how strong an Elizabeth Warren candidacy might be than from any genuine concern for any activist Democrat.
expresses some concern.
And I am still supporting Bob Massie, too. The most obnoxious EW supporter so far has actually been a first cousin in Michigan! I think she has enough work to do in Michigan, what with Detroit having a 24.7 unimployment rate and a governor every bit as bad as Scott Walker. No worries – John Walsh has been totally welcoming to Bob Massie and all the candidates. If I feel some are dismissive that should not be – no worries – I have told them so myself. I do that sort of thing one on one, frankly.
Back in June, when his campaign declared victory.
Mission Accomplished, just like his hero George W. Bush.
I am a grass roots activist who was listening carefully to the other candidates while waiting to see if Elizabeth Warren would enter the race. Despite my history of campaign work no one — Mass. Dems or DC alleged puppeteers — contacted me about her, although several people asked me to meet other candidates they were supporting. (I was glad to do so and am impressed with them.) The reason I waited for Elizabeth Warren has everything to do with her record of working for the middle class and her total dedication to that cause. I am part of the “GENUINE” base and there are a lot of us – thinking for ourselves, thank you. (What town committee did Mitt Romney ever serve on?)
I listened carefully to every speech at the Mass Dem State Convention. I’ve attended a Khazei fundraiser, have seen Setti Warren speeches, and went to meet Tom Conroy at a local diner where we had 30 minutes of talk on energy policy. Bob Massie gave a heck of a speech at the convention. All are good people, and would all make fine senators in my opinion.
I haven’t “finalized” my support yet, but I’m strongly leaning Elizabeth Warren, despite the fact that her campaign has never contacted me. I did attend one of her listening tour events, and I liked what she said and how she responded to questions and suggestions. I like her history. I like her focus on issues.
Porc, you’re manufacturing nonsense. I haven’t heard any Dem speak poorly of any candidate, Warren or otherwise. The fact is that the non-EW candidates never gained traction. Never gained lots of money. Never attracted the media. It may be unfortunate, but there it is. Elizabeth Warren has. I’m grateful that her tremendous skill and ability match the interest others have taken in her.
Indeed. Another name for it could be “concern trolling,” though we know that Porc is in Brown’s camp, so it doesn’t precisely meet the usual definition of that term.
Just because we know what camp PP is in, doesn’t mean you can’t concern troll and try to stir up trouble…(in this case, attempt drive a wedge between Amber and other activists who are for other candidates).
Luckily our activists are smarter than that, and have been around this block before. 😉
is generally not useful. If they had our best interests at heart, they would no longer be our political opponents.
This whole piece of “advice” fits in neatly with the Scott Brown narrative that the only kind of people who would oppose our pure-of-heart, independent, and hard-working Senator would be Machine Politicians. The “advice” then can be taken as an attempt to get us to sing from that tune book as well.
I made an observation.
As you correctly note, I if had good advice I wouldn’t offer it, and I wouldn’t care to offer bad advice deliberately.
The reaction to the observation – by David and others – lets me draw my own conclusions about anxiety amid Warren’s supporters.
Ah – so what you’re doing is just looking out for our best interests in sort of a benevolent, fatherly way. Not “advice,” exactly, just an observation made from a mixture of concern and, perhaps, a bit of sadness to see once promising people go astray from the path of virtue.
Please. Team Brown is scared, and therefore Team Brown’s supporters are doing everything they can think of, however panicky, including concern trolling. That’s fine – it’s all part of the game. But don’t pretend you’re not playing.
And this is the first time you’ve felt so defensive you’ve needed to call me a troll.
I will draw my own conclusions.
LOL I would not have it any other way, PP.
For what it’s worth, this is also the first time you have seemed to me genuinely scared. Nobody thought Kerry Healey would win; you always had doubts about Charlie Baker; Romney’s ’08 campaign never got up much of a head of steam. So when they all went down in flames, it was easy for you to take it in stride. But Scott was supposed to be different….
We can’t stage manage a stagecoach.
I thought the same thing…i have never seen such weird fav/unfav for unknown people…I also thought having 57% female respondents was odd as well…but it does go to show the power of the media…if Conroy, Khazie or Setti Warren had been given the (free) media blitz and party grand pooh-bah attention Prof. Warren received their numbers would be decidedly different…ah, but they were barely covered at all…when I saw the front page of the Globe with a photo of Prof. Warren and the “big news” in the story was that she “had still not decided” whether or not to run, I knew the di was cast…front page coverage of a non-story…can’t beat that for increasing name recognition!
That, I suspect, reflects the poll’s limitation to “likely Democratic primary voters.” We know that women tend to vote Democratic more than men, so it stands to reason that they’d be more heavily represented in Democratic primaries.
57% seemed kind of high even for a Dem primary demographic…called a pollster friend to check it out…will let you know what she says.
Elections are so inconvenient.
Then again, the ad buys might stimulate the local economy.
It’s a snapshot of where the electorate is right now, with a 95% likelihood of being within the margin of error. No more, no less.
Are you objecting to the fact that the poll was taken? Or that I took the time to mention it in a post? Or what? Seriously, what’s your point?
It was just one of my trademark wry remarks. All our comments have to have a point now?
Is the ‘scent of fear’ being drowned out by the stench of defensiveness?
n/t
Well, we do encourage it. From your comment, you seemed upset at the poll, or the post, or something, and I was wondering why.
I just decided to dispense with the usual disclaimers “It’s early,” “A year is a lifetime in politics,” “What were Hillary’s numbers a year before New Hampshire?” etc.
Re: the poll, to me the big shock is Setti Warren’s showing. But, you know, it’s early. And a year is — oh darn.
OK, fair enough. 🙂
My question is, What should the Mass Dems being doing?
I don’t have an answer and don’t know enough to provide one specific to this situation. This comment isn’t a setup. My observation is that there will always be some inside/outside tension in a political party.
Whenever a candidate enters a race with any profile, they start out with a media love-in. Then reality bumps into them, and the numbers tend to change.
I’d say Elizabeth Warren is a favorite right now to win, sure. But when she’s on a stage with a few other people, that’s liable to change.
Definitely some truth to that – witness the ongoing crisis of confidence among national GOP primary voters with respect to the guy who just a couple of weeks ago was the GOP’s shining hope: Rick Perry.
Anyway, as I’ve said many times, there’s no doubt that horserace numbers at this stage of the game will change a lot over the coming months. Polls are snapshots of (a) whether people are paying attention, and (b) what the ones who are paying attention are thinking at the moment. Both of those are worth knowing and discussing; neither (at this stage) has much predictive value for what’s going to happen a year from now.
To me the most shocking number above is 30% name recognition for Setti Warren, but only 1% primary support. Clearly Setti support has moved to Elizabeth. Take Elizabeth out and there’s no way Setti is behind the rest of that pack, save maybe Khazei. He and Khazei tie for 2nd in the head-to-head matchup vs. Scott Brown. So enough Democratic primary voters know who he is to justify better numbers. He’s a good candidate, but his early supporters appear to have been looking for an alternative.
Could the fact that Elizabeth Warren shares the last name of Setti Warren affect his name recognition?
…but I have to think they knew the difference in the one-on-one matchups with scotto. The fact that Setti had 30% name recognition, versus 69% for Elizabeth and 42% for Khazei, but still Setti ties Khazei in the head-to-head? Doesn’t seem like there’s a confusion about the names, does there?
Setti has 20% unfavorable vs. 10% favorable. To dislike someone usually means you know them.
And the order of the poll asks his name after Elizabeth’s so there’s apt to be less confusion between the two.
Talk about how important it is to do things to create jobs without actually ever doing anything that might have that effect and never, ever, ever put yourself anywhere in the vicinity of a real question.
The Half Term Senator Website is courtesy, by the way, of Bob Massie’s campaign staff. Enjoy. His cross hairs and focus are just where they should be: on the total failure of leadership by Scott Brown, such as the reality that Scott Brown is the ONLY member of the Massachusetts delegation not to join in the “it gets better” campaign.
It’s very exciting but it is early and we have to be careful. There is no phone number on Elizabeth Warren’s website (at least I couldn’t find one). That needs to change. Where is her campaign headquarters and will she have an office in Western MA. We need to see some infrastructure. I’m reluctant to direct people to her website without those things in place.
So, every year at Watertown’s Faire on the Square, the DTC has a table and we run some kind of poll. This year we polled on the 2012 Senate Primary since the Faire next year won’t be until after that election.
The Faire was yesterday. We got more votes this year than any other year, and Elizabeth Warren won in a landslide. She got 77% of the vote with no other candidate breaking 10%. I have not seen anything like it in all the time we’ve done these polls.
Yes, it’s a year out and it’s super early and things can change. Yes, it’s not a scientific poll because the sample is non-random. But this is a real thing. People are excited about Elizabeth Warren in a way I didn’t even see with Deval or Obama, especially this early on.
One other observation from working the table: Newton mayor Setti Warren came in second with 8%, but there were several Newton residents who told me they’d never vote for him again because they were upset he was ready to leave after such a short time as mayor.
sco, although I can’t point to a poll, what you are saying matches what I am seeing and hearing. Admittedly, I posted about Elizabeth, so people are reaching out to me, but I have never seen anything like this here in Massachusetts.
He is clearly still struggling through this primary campaign for Senate (1%? Electorally, he’s sitting at the also-ran table with Robinson and DeFranco – surprising he’s not in the same tier as Conroy and Massie at least).
Just as clearly is his plummeting popularity in Newton, and frankly I think he should cut his losses in the Senate race and re-focus on rebuilding his brand as mayor – if he doesn’t, I think he’ll soon be out of the political game completely, courtesy of Mayor-elect Ruth Balser. His fundraising is weak, his hometown state Senator Cindy Creem made a point of endorsing one of his opponents, and his message/delivery is getting nowhere. One wonders if he’s stuck in the race, trying to raise enough to cover his existing debts before he bows out, like a gambler chasing his losses.
Another surprise (to me, at least) on the poll – Massie only polling at 2%, even with DeFranco and several points behind Conroy/Khazei. I know plenty of Dem activists who are firmly in his camp (way more than I’ve seen for Conroy) – seems his supporters are committed, yet quite limited in number.
More polls please, let’s see if these results hold up.
We have no idea how this will play out, especially before she’s been closely questioned by local residents and media.
A number of people in Newton are upset at him possibly leaving, but he’s doing an excellent job. 12 of 13 contracts negotiated with very good results, has dealt with every storm crisis with great success, and works productively with people across the political spectrum. He came into office to a deeply divided city, everyone angry with one another, etc., and turned things around quickly.
Rather than polls, I’d like to see some forums where we hear all the candidates speak and where they must face tough questioning from those who don’t support them.
BTW, Cynthia Creem was a strong Balser supporter and really hasn’t gotten past that loss. I wouldn’t expect her to either.
It just wasn’t his year, back in 2006 or 2008, but for 2012 Democrats are a lot more serious and we want a proven fighter, not another ‘YES WE CAN!’ candidate who is all talk and no record. And I say this knowing full well what I fell for not once but twice…