Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

New poll: Coakley maintains a commanding lead

By

The big news in the just-announced Globe poll is that there’s no news.  The numbers are startlingly similar to where they’ve been all along.  There are 537 likely Democratic primary voter respondents, interviewed Nov. 13-18, giving us a margin of error of +/- 4.4%.  So these numbers should take into account pretty much the whole health care brouhaha.

Candidate: Current (last week) {3 weeks ago}

Coakley: 43 (44) {42}

Capuano: 22 (16) {16}

Pagliuca: 15 (17) {15}

Khazei: 6 (3) {5}

Also very impressive — and very bad news for the three guys — are Coakley’s favorable/unfavorable ratings.

Candidate: Fav/Unfav — net

Coakley: 71/13 — +58

Capuano: 56/14 — +42

Pagliuca: 40/22 — +18

Khazei: 28/12 — +16

The poll asked about the health care bill: 32% of respondents would reject the bill if it contains the Stupitts amendment, while 43% think it should pass in any case.

However, the race does retain a measure of fluidity.  Although Coakley’s numbers are commanding, only 26% respondents said that their choice is definite, and another 24% are leaning.  Half the electorate remains undecided.

Still, it’s looking like Coakley would have to really screw something up to blow this lead.  It will be most interesting to see whether the other candidates decide to attack in the upcoming debates.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

    • Please correct me if I’m wrong, but I think the last poll (Suffolk-WHDH) covered Nov. 4-8. So we’ve gone a little less than two weeks, with about two weeks to go, and he’s only made up 6 points. I think Coakley can live with that, as the race was going to tighten anyhow.

      <

      p>Very disappointing poll for Pags, though, after all his talk of being in second place. The biggest number in this poll, though, is the 50 percent undecided, although it’s interesting that more Capuano voters are undecided than Coakley voters.

      <

      p>Also, note that Coakley leads Capuano by a huge margin on “who would better handle health care.” That’s the place I was expecting the Stupak-Pitts issue to potentially hurt Coakley, and yet apparently not. Perhaps Capuano’s flip-flop there resonated with voters?

          • Candidate: Current (last week) {3 weeks ago}
            Coakley: 43 (44) {42}
            Capuano: 22 (16) {16}

            <

            p>I had no idea.  Did I misread that or was it not noted?

            • Current – [last week] – {3 weeks ago}
              UNH – [Suffolk] – {Research 2000}

              <

              p>As far as I know, the methodologies are similar, but I’m sure there are some differences.  I don’t think any of them are robopolls.

              • in sampling, questions asked, etc.

                <

                p>Both pollsters are reputable, but its best to graph all the polls and sample the mean over time to get an idea of the trend.

                <

                p>Re AVR polls (“robopolling”): there is some evidence that they may better than human-to-human interaction under certain cirstances, such as ballot questions.

    • is “polishing a turd.”  đŸ˜‰

      <

      p>Seriously, the changes are all well within the various polls’ margins of error.  So they don’t mean a lot.  The bottom line is that Coakley is still way, way ahead, and even if you can describe the difference between the various polls as progress for Cap, the pace is so glacial that it would take until about 2037 for him to catch up.  That’s probably too late.

      <

      p>I’m not saying things can’t change — of course they can.  But it would take something fairly dramatic IMHO.

      • he needs 3 weeks of 7 point gains. It would be the upset of the century in MA politics.  

        <

        p>Nonetheless, I don’t think a 7 point gain in one week is a turd in any race, nevermind a statewide race for US Senate.  

          • for Cap, however, are these numbers (from the crosstabs):

            <

            p>”Have you definitely decided who you will vote for in the special primary election for US Senator … are you leaning toward a candidate … or have you considered the candidates and still trying to make up your mind?”

            <

            p>Candidate: Decided — Leaning — Still trying to decide
            Cap voter: 28 — 28 — 44
            Coak voter: 32 — 29 — 38
            Khaz voter: 40 — 24 — 36
            Pags voter: 19 — 22 — 59

            <

            p>From those numbers, it appears that Coakley has a small but measurable advantage over Capuano (61-56) in terms of voters who are either firmly or somewhat committed to her.

  2. if Capuano loses, it’s not because he isn’t the best candidate, because he is.  It has been miserable trying to get his campaign workers to give a call back.

    <

    p>His “Open Mikes” are the best, but he is ignoring the economy in his television ads. That is a huge mistake. I have also contacted his campaign about 2 times to get his Springfield office location and phone number. I’ve contacted them about 4 times to get lawn signs. No one ever get’s back to me.  There is not a single lawn sign in our area — for anyone.  It’s very disappointing.

    <

    p>I have not yet resigned myself to Martha Coakley as our new Senator.  It’s going to be really hard to accept if she does get elected.  The hardest part is that we elect lifers around here.  Once we have her, she is never going away.

    • Don’t be discouraged. Cap is the best candidate in your opinion and Coakley is the best candidate in others’ opinion. They are both good candidates and will continue to be excellent public servants. If anything, I am happy that if Martha wins which I believe she will, we get BOTH of them serving us in DC. I think Mike has the best temperament for the House and Martha has the best style and demeanor for the Senate. It’s a win-win for us!

      • What do you like about her style and demeanor and what makes them senatorial?

        <

        p>I am seriously asking because I have heard this a bit, but don’t understand it.  

        <

        p>I see her as largely dispassionate on most issues and unwilling to answer questions or engage voters.  

        <

        p>I view her style and demeanor as much more similar to Kerry’s than Kennedy’s, and that’s not something I can get behind.  

    • liveandletlive,

      <

      p>I’m Mike’s campaign manager.  Thank you so much for your support and for bringing this matter to our attention.  I apologize for not getting back to you.  As you know, things have been happening quickly on this short campaign and we are so grateful for the support Mike has received across the state.  

      <

      p>No excuses though.

      <

      p>Please call me when you have a moment at 857-249-8350 and I will make sure this issue is addressed immediately. Once again, I thank you for your support and your persistence in getting this matter resolved.

      <

      p>- Roger Lau, Campaign Manager, Capuano for Senate

      <

      p>P.S. Our Springfield HQ is located at 115 State Street, 4th Floor.  The office is staffed Monday through Fridays from 9am to 5pm.  For more information, please email Brian@mikecapuano.com

  3. Do you happen to know Capuano’s Springfield office location and phone #. If I can get in touch with them, I will drive out there to pick up lawn signs. Thanks.

    • I have not been working with the Western Mass team, but I am sure I can get this to you.  Can you call me on my cell at 508-404-8531 or e-mail me off line at KateDonaghue AT aol DOT com.

      <

      p>Thanks,

      <

      p>Kate

      • for responding and for offering to help. I appreciate it very much. RogerLau responded with the address and email so I will contact Brian and take a drive out to Springfield next week.  Thanks đŸ™‚

  5. To me one of the most compelling reasons for supporting Martha Coakley is her friendship and connection to Elizabeth Warren.  With economic advisors like that and her unwavering and undeniable support for civil rights-I’m truly excited about the possibilities!  

    • That would be a good reason to vote for Elizabeth Warren for US Senate but not a good reason to vote for Martha Coakley for US Senate.  

    • I’m sorry, but the “unwavering and undeniable support for civil rights” is just so wrong.  Choice is not the only civil right.  

      <

      p>You don’t go to the Supreme Court and argue the side she did in Melendez-Diaz if you have “unwavering and undeniable support for civil rights.”  You don’t stand by the Fells Acre verdict and negotiate a gag order with Cheryl Amirault if you have “unwavering and undeniable support for civil rights.”  You don’t try to limit the ability of wrongfully convicted prisoners to appeal their cases to federal courts if you have “unwavering and undeniable support for civil rights.”  

      <

      p>Her position on Choice (and gay rights) does not translate to a broad support of civil rights.  

  6. Though it is hard to avoid David’s conclusion–I mean, whose numbers would you rather have, Coakley’s or Capuano’s?–he is premature in declaring the race over.

    <

    p>With this poll, Capuano becomes the challenger, breaking away from Pagliuci. Progressives leaning towards Khazei will at least be sobered, and perhaps persuaded, by that hateful strategic “don’t throw your vote away” argument. (Oh for IRV!)

    <

    p>I’m sure Capuano would have preferred to be in this position two weeks ago, but now, to voters who are just starting to pay attention (which is most of them), it looks like a two-person race.

    <

    p>That’s not so great for Coakley, who has benefited from divided opposition.

    <

    p>All that is more than polishing a turd, at any rate.

    <

    p>It is also significant that these numbers follow the whole Stupack counter-factual brouhaha, which I would have expected to boost Coakley’s numbers materially.

  7. There are four candidates in the Democratic primary to choose from.

    <

    p>One has a proven track record – eleven years of courageous, prinicpled votes.

    <

    p>No on the Iraq War

    <

    p>No on NCLB

    <

    p>No on the Patriot Act

    <

    p>We need Mike Capuano in the Senate!  Our D Senators are very often fence sitters who straddle the line politically.  We have a majority in the House and the Senate – yet it’s still so difficult to push through progressive legislation.

    <

    p>Mike will be the fighter we need in that seat!

    <

    p>We have a real opportunity here to elect a fiery lib in the tradition of Ted Kennedy and Paul Wellstone.

    <

    p>Let’s go out and work hard to elect Mike Capuano!  We have two weeks. Talk to your friends and canvas your neighborhood for Mike.

    <

    p>We have two weeks to make it happen!

      • But he took those votes, and those votes give us a very good indication on how he would vote in the Senate, no?

        <

        p>He’s the clear choice for that reason.

        • that is not like buying a pig in a poke.  Past behaviour is the best predictor of future behavior.  

          <

          p>For example, Coakley would have voted against health care reform in the house. Capuano voted for it.  

    • The show has only been around about a month, but they make the same mistakes every time.  

      <

      p>At least one of the pop quiz questions will have an error in it and Janet Wu will ask a loaded question to which the candidate will not take the bait.  Both hosts just seem completely unprepared for the show.  

      <

      p>As much as I think he can sometimes be a condescending d-bag, I still really like Jim Braude.  He should be hosting a higher profile morning show like OTR.

  9. I just hope it’s in the primary and not the general.  She will lose, not because of what she stands for, but because she is a terrible campaigner.  She is stiff and formal.  she can’t debate.  She speaks in an inarticulate legalese that often gets her into trouble.  My biggest fear is Sen. Scott Brown.  What irony that would be.  The seat of Ted Kennedy the liberal lion of the Senate for 45 years gives the Republicans 41 votes.  Ugh.

    • not because of what she stands for, but because she is a terrible campaigner, would be substandard as a Senator in terms of her communications skills, is stiff and formal, projects none of the warmth and humanity required to make people think they might like you, speaks in an inarticulate legalese that often gets her into trouble, and has difficulty explaining complex issues in simple terms.

      <

      p>Compare her to speakers like Ted Kennedy, Al Franken, Sen Caldwell and Rep. Weiner.  If US Senate was debate club, I’d pick her for my team but its a whole lot more than that.    

      • Not to you, maybe, but …

        <

        p>

        “Which candidate would you most like to have a beer with … Michael Capuano … Martha Coakley … Alan Khazei … or Steve Pagliuca?”

        <

        p>Capuano: 15%
        Coakley: 26%
        Pagliuca: 20%
        Khazei: 7%

        <

        p>Interestingly, among self-identified Capuano voters, 15% chose Coakley, whereas among self-identified Coakley voters, only 8% chose Capuano.  So … not sure how far this line of argument is going to get you.  

        • that doesn’t mean they’d vote for her, it just means they find her interesting.

          <

          p>Who won the beer poll during the presidential election in 2000?  A majority of Americans would have preferred to have  beer with Bush but a majority of Americans voted for Gore.  I venture to say that if more folks knew the difference between interesting and competent we’d be living in a different world today.  

          • I was responding to your assertion that Coakley

            <

            p>

            projects none of the warmth and humanity required to make people think they might like you

            <

            p>Since you’re the one who said that, I assumed you thought it was important, or at least worth discussing.  I was simply pointing out that, in the poll question designed to measure that very characteristic, Coakley actually does pretty well, and Capuano fairs relatively poorly.

            • I got the sense you were shooting down one part of a multi-part argument, “So … not sure how far this line of argument is going to get you.” I concede 1 in 4 likely voters find her interesting enough to have a beer with her, whereas 1 in 6 find Capuano interesting enough.  

    • …MA voters choosing one of the Republicans over Coakley.  She already has statewide name ID plus I just don’t see the votes there for the GOP.

  10. Martha’s campaign is filled with extraordinarily loyal and loving friends and colleagues who have no doubt shared many a pint.  They are truly connected to her and tell funny and yes, warm stories.  Many on this site have attempted to turn her into a cardboard cut out-the “mean girl” the “cold and calculating” woman- obviously they have never met Martha and have only seen her giving press conferences on serious subjects.  
     As Coakley herself has said-she’s not running to replace Jay Leno, she’s running for a very critical and sobering job- the United States Senate in a time of two wars and a major economic crisis.  Then of course there is always the “too shrill” or “too timid”  never just right if you’re a woman with power problem.  Throw it at me-I know you (especially Mike’s gals)  think that’s hogwash but how else to explain why women, especially in this state, have a hard time getting elected?  17%  good enough for all of you?  Martha is intelligent (Honors from Williams, BU) experienced (23 years in public service) connected to her roots (close to her family)- lowest income and net worth of all the candidates.  Married to an ex-cop- later in life no doubt because it’s hard to have an intense career and also be a woman.  

    <

    p>The fact that Mass Equality and other major rights groups have more than supported her along with most of her colleagues makes me think that she’s pretty good at what she does.   And NS- Elizabeth Warren isn’t running for the Senate- but having someone of that caliber brainpower and integrity in your court is a decidedly good thing- no matter how you attempt to dismiss it.   I’ll take an advisor like her to an endorsement by Nancy Pelosi any day.   Those who bend the ear of our Senate leaders matter-a lot.

    <

    p>You are all entitled to have your opinions about Mike- If you think he’s the absolute best fine but if you can only elevate him by trashing Martha and your perceived notions of her  personality-that’s simply not fair and not appropriate political dialogue.  

  11. …Coakley still holding a solid lead among likely voters, with the electorate still largely undecided. Capuano is in second, with a decent gap between him and Pagliuca, while Khazei remains mired in single digits…

    The good news for Cap: he’s the second choice of most Coakley voters, so he may be able to peel some away. The good news for Coakley: she’s the second choice of everyone else’s voters, which means there’s no large “anti-Martha” vote waiting to coalesce around Capuano.

    link

Archives