Elizabeth Warren is up 50% to 45% in a new poll conducted by the Western New England University Polling Institute in partnership with the Springfield Republican/MassLive.com.
Here’s your key quote, from political strategist Anthony Cignoli:
“If she continues to keep this lead over Brown, despite her unfavorability numbers having gone up, she is on a path to victory. If three weeks from now she has the same results as over the three weeks since the last WNE poll, Brown will have little time to move that distance before the election.”
That and making sure to get out the vote next month.
I haven’t seen all the details yet, but here are the points they’re calling out:
* She leads among women by 26 points and trails among men by 18 points.
* Warren has the support of 85% of Democratic voters while Brown takes 98% of Republicans. Nudging a few more of those Democrats to come back to the party instead of voting for the guy who most admires Justice Scalia will really help.
* Brown is up 1 percentage point vs their Sept 6-13 poll. I’m assuming that’s well within margin of error.
* Warren is leading handily in the Boston metro/area and western Mass; she holds a 3 percentage point lead in the North & South shores. The only geographic area of the state where Brown is leading is central Mass, but he’s crushing there. Again, don’t know margin of error for these geographic slices.
* “Both candidates saw their positive ratings drop slightly and their negative ratings climb.”
The main story doesn’t say so, but other stories say this is a poll of likely voters conducted Sept. 28 to Oct. 4. So some people were questioned before the second debate.
Our canvassers have been knocking on doors for Joe Kennedy and Elizabeth Warren non-stop!
Scott Brown’s people will look at this poll carefully. Elizabeth Warren’s unfavorable rate is up dramatically. So, Brown will think that his relentless negative ads are effective. The poll also shows very few undecided voters remain. There is only one way for Brown to win now. He has to expand his negative ads, so that he creates enough doubt about Elizabeth that voters change their minds.
There’s going to be new attacks. The next few weeks are going to be rough. Fasten your seat belts!
His own unfavorability is going up as well, and likability is pretty much all he has.
I finally dug up the complete results tables for this poll, and 16% of likely Brown voters say they’re open to changing their mind — 2 percentage points more than likely Warren voters. The difference between them is probably within margin of error, but the key thing here is that a lot of Brown voters are open to changing their minds as well. In other words, there’s risk involved in trashing his own image. If all he’s got is personal attacks, that doesn’t help make him look nice, moderate and bipartisan.
She doesn’t have to run on being someone you want to have a beer with. How many people want to have a beer with John Kerry? As long as her unfavorables don’t go too high, she’s also on the same side of issues as a majority of Mass. voters, and she’s got the spectre of Republican control of the Senate if you vote for him. She’s got Menino and Patrick pointing out all the reasons Democrats shouldn’t vote for Brown. Plus, his attacks are heavily motivating her base.
Unfortunately, though, I think you’re correct in what Brown and his Republican surrogates are likely to be doing the next 4 weeks.
I agree with your analysis. Brown’s Mr. Nasty/race baiting attacks are a bad strategy to get undecideds. The key line for undecideds, once it is clear that (a) he is a Republican, and (b) he is personally nasty and attacks professors and higher education on principle, is your line: Warren is “on the same side of issues as a majority of Mass. voters.” Brown represents the “angry 13%:” registered Republicans hanging on in the Commonwealth before they complete the move to Oklahoma.
Brown’s heavily cultivated image has been that he is a nice guy, and can be counted on to work honestly across the aisle. This kind of campaign by him, plus wide exposure of his reliable votes when the conservative Republican leadership comes calling destroys that image. What is left? Just “the angry 13%”.
Trying to win high office by banking on the lowest of human psychology.
The mud falls on the just and the unjust alike. A smear campaign raises everyone’s negatives.
It’s too hard for me to psych out what Brown’s handlers were thinking when they chose to go down this path. Do they have some actual reason to believe it hurts Warren more than Brown? Or Is it just their only option, their hail-Mary pass? Is it all they know, the hammer that makes everything look like a nail?
This latest poll shows that the attacks are hurting Warren more than they are hurting Brown. Her unfavorable rating went up more than his.
They know exactly what they are doing, and they are just getting started.
We need to keep up our field efforts.
…Nate Silver currently puts Warren at 70% chance of winning.
Thank you to all the hard working workers for the Warren campaign. You have successfully put a lid on all the Democratic angst that was so prevalent just a few short weeks ago. Go Liz!
Great quote from Tony Cignoli!
And, for the most part, I agree with the commentary. I am troubled, though, by the constant misuse of the term “margin of eror” (MOE) — there was a long discussion on BMG several years ago, but memories evidently have dimmed.
The MOE has nothing to do with the *accuracy* of a poll result. It is, instead, a *confidence* measure: how likely is it that the poll result is representative of the entire population from which the sample is drawn?
The poll result is still the *best estimate* of the election outcome (at the point in time the poll was conducted).