In a Senate campaign that has re-written the textbook on political self-destruction, Democrats have blown it yet again. An anti-Brown smear piece was apparently created by someone who was unaware of what occurred on September 11, 2001. Red-faced Dems have since pulled the spot.
A new ad from the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee uses an unlikely symbol of Wall Street greed: the World Trade Center.
The image in the attack on Scott Brown for his alleged closeness to Wall Street pictures the Trade Center and the destroyed Marriott Hotel on its western side.
A National Republican Senatorial Committee spokesman, Brian Walsh, attacked its use.
“Using the image of a site where over 2,700 Americans died in a terrorist attack to distort Scott Brown’s position on regulating Wall Street is both distasteful and disrespectful. Martha Coakley should immediately renounce this ad and call for it to be removed from the airwaves,” he said.
Confirming shifting momentum in the Massachusetts Senate race, a just-released WHDH-7 / Suffolk University survey has Republican State Senator Scott Brown four points ahead of embattled / surprisingly thuggish Attorney General Martha Coakley.
It’s the first poll to show Brown with a decent lead over Coakley, though others have shown him ahead by as much as a single point.
The data is fascinating: while Obama remains somewhat popular, Deval Patrick and Sarah Palin are relatively unpopular and Mitt Romney still polls surprisingly well. Despite Coakley’s barrage of negative ads, Scott Brown’s net favorability rating is exceptionally high. It’s fair to ask whether her hit pieces have actually backfired.
Those polled also believe Brown won the debates.
Also to be reported in Friday’s Boston Herald, Coakley’s official Kennedy nod has apparently chased support away as what’s left of the family becomes increasingly disliked here in the Bay State.
Because, of course, it’s all a right-wing plot to stop Coakley’s “quiet diligence“…
Just look at that contrived excuse for a smile.
Of course, the real Globie manure will hit over the weekend as whatever sleazy last-minute hit pieces they’ve cooked up on Brown hit Sunday’s front page. Bet on it.
Now, video of a second violent dust-up has emerged, this time outside the DC restaurant where Coakley was attending a fundraiser hosted by piggish K Street lobbyists. This time, it was a Weekly Standard reporter who was on the receiving end of a violent outburst from someone in Coakley’s entourage. John McCormack says he was “pushed into a railing” by “someone with the Coakley campaign”.
Here’s the best clip, though far from conclusive, to emerge so far:
After taking a question from a CNN reporter on the street outside the restaurant, I asked her:
TWS: Attorney General Coakley, you said last night that there are no terrorists in Afghanistan–that they’re all in Yemen and Pakistan. Do you stand by that remark?
COAKLEY: I’m sorry, did someone else have a question?
GRIFF JENKINS, Fox News: I did. Why are you in Washington tonight?
COAKLEY: We planned an event after the primary that would be a unity event in Washington. We’re also in the middle of a very intense campaign [...]
After Coakley finished her answer, she began walking away from the restaurant, and I walked behind her asking why health care industry lobbyists were supporting her at the fundraiser. She didn’t reply.
As I walked down the street, a man who appeared to be associated with the Coakley campaign pushed me into a freestanding metal railing. I ended up on the sidewalk. I was fine. He helped me up from the ground, but kept pushing up against me, blocking my path toward Coakley down the street.
He asked if I was with the media, and I told him I work for THE WEEKLY STANDARD. When I asked him who he worked for he replied, “I work for me.” He demanded to see my credentials, and even though it was a public street, I showed them to him.
UPDATE: This story appears to have legs after all. The Boston Heraldhas a story in today’s edition, while an AP photographer appears to have caught some portion of the altercation:
As he continued to walk down the street, he said a man who appeared to be associated with Coakley’s campaign pushed him into a freestanding metal rail.
“I ended up on the sidewalk. I was fine. He helped me up from the ground, but kept pushing up against me, blocking my path toward Coakley down the street,” he wrote.
McCormack said the man asked him whether he was with the media and he responded he works for the Weekly Standard.
His online entry includes a YouTube video of the incident, in which you can hear a man ask McCormack if he’s OK after he fell. The reporter then tangles with the same man, showing him a press credential as he tries to make his way around him.
McCormack wrote he eventually caught up to Coakley, who declined to answer his question.
He said Coakley staffers informed him they don’t know who pushed him. In an updated blog post, McCormack writes he believes he was pushed by Michael Meehan, president of Blue Line Strategic Communications in Washington, D.C. The Associated Press also identifies the man as Meehan, based on photos and videotape of the incident.
A Coakley spokeswoman could not provide an immediate response to a Herald inquiry about McCormack’s account. Meehan did not immediately return an phone message or e-mail.
A message left for McCormack was not immediately returned.
BOSTON—A reporter trying to question Massachusetts Senate candidate Martha Coakley was involved in a scuffle with one of her aides.
John McCormack of the Weekly Standard fell Tuesday night as he tried to speak with the Democrat while simultaneously videotaping her and trying to pass a metal grate on a Washington sidewalk.
Photos and video of the incident show Coakley aide Michael Meehan trying to help McCormack up. A scuffle broke out as Meehan tried to block McCormack and determine if he was an operative of a rival campaign.
Coakley is seen ignoring McCormack. The trip prompted criticism, since Coakley was in Washington seeking money from lobbyists while polls show a tightening race.
A just-released Rasmussen Poll shows the US Senate special election to be a horse race, a virtual tie. As opposed the last week’s survey from the same outfit showing Democrat Martha Coakley nine points ahead, this one has that lead trimmed to just two: a statistical dead heat.
One key: this one asked about huckster “Joe Kennedy” by name, while the previous survey threw him into “some other candidate” territory. It appears Kennedy really does take votes from Coakley when his name is included:
The Massachusetts’ special U.S. Senate election has gotten tighter, but the general dynamics remain the same.
A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of likely voters in the state finds Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley attracting 49% of the vote while her Republican rival, state Senator Scott Brown, picks up 47%.
Three percent (3%) say they’ll vote for independent candidate Joe Kennedy, and two percent (2%) are undecided. The independent is no relation to the late Edward M. Kennedy, whose Senate seat the candidates are battling to fill in next Tuesday’s election.
Coakley is supported by 77% of Democrats while Brown picks up the vote from 88% of Republicans. Among voters not affiliated with either major party, Brown leads 71% to 23%. To be clear, this lead is among unaffiliated voters who are likely to participate in the special election.
A week ago, the overall results showed Coakley leading by a 50% to 41% margin. The closeness of the race in heavily Democratic Massachusetts has drawn increasing national interest, and Brown made it clear in the final candidate debate last night that a vote for him is a vote to stop the national health care plan Democrats are pushing in Congress.
In addition, Michelle Malkin has the story on ringers who were paid to wave signs for Coakley outside last night’s debate. One admits he’s actually a Brown supporter!
Finally, in this clip also from Fleming & Hayes, Coakley’s arrival is met with shouts of “Go, Scott, Go!”, while Brown supporters are suddenly pushed aside by thugs:
A few days ago, Scott Brown was a local political figure known to few outside of the Bay State. Today, he’s been transformed into a national superstar, largely on the basis of yesterday’s massive Internet Money Bomb haul ($1,300,000!) and most importantly, his declaration that “it’s the people’s seat.”
Drudge has given it a red headline, talk radio is all over it, as is the buzz on the street. Scott, you’ve got a hit single.
“Are you willing, under those circumstances, to say I’m gonna be the person, I’m gonna sit in Teddy Kennedy’s seat, and I’m gonna be the person that’s gonna block it for another 15 years,” Gergen asks.
Brown responds: “Well, with all due respect, it’s not the Kennedys’ seat, and it’s not the Democrats’ seat, it’s the people’s seat…”
Suddenly, our own struggle to transform Massachusetts from a corrupt, national political embarrassment to a center of reform has resonated nationwide. “It’s the people’s seat” as a search already turns up 5000 responses, with the count growing by the minute.
I’m hearing from people outside Massachusetts who ask, “do you really think he can win?”
My answer: YES. Coakley has done everything imaginable to blow this campaign, especially all but shutting down her operation after the primary. She’s made no effort to distance herself from the corrupt establishment that feels it should rule by decree.
By contrast, Brown has shown what a real Republican campaign can look like in Massachusetts: it’s well-organized, the spots are clever, the candidate well-versed. Not since Mitt Romney’s gubernatorial run have we seen this kind of effort in the Bay State.
Brown CAN win this race, but it’s going to be an ugly week as Coakley’s establishment cronies throw everything but the kitchen sink at him. Regardless of the outcome next Tuesday, his political future has never been brighter.
It’s a day of duel fundraising marathons as the Money Bomb campaign for Scott Brown races toward meeting its goal many hours earlier than expected. At the same time, MoveOn.org is apparently raising money for Martha Coakley.
As of 12:45pm, the Brown Money Bomb has already generated $273,487 against a midnight target of $500,000. Clearly, the bar wasn’t set high enough.
2pm: $331,137.50
2:11pm: $359,166.83
2:32pm: $403,429.12
2:45pm: $430,713.17
3:30pm: $478,023.82
3:35pm: $485,781.70
3:55pm: $493,754.84
4:00pm: $501,750.94 — TARGET EXCEEDED
4:30pm: $525,529.12 – TARGET RAISED TO $750,000
4:46pm: $618,518.11
5:11pm: $658,522.43
6pm: $750,018.81 — SECOND TARGET EXCEEDED – NEW GOAL: $1,000,000
An incredibly busy weekend for campaign-related developments continues, this time with eagerly-anticipated results of the Public Policy Polling survey that is the first to show Republican Scott Brown with a lead over Democrat Martha Coakley for the open US Senate seat.
As PPP has a relatively good track record in political polling, the results are seen as credible. But Brown’s one-point lead makes the race a virtual tie when the margin of error is considered:
Buoyed by a huge advantage with independents and relative disinterest from Democratic voters in the state, Republican Scott Brown leads Martha Coakley 48-47.
Here are the major factors leading to this surprising state of affairs:
-As was the case in the Gubernatorial elections in New Jersey and Virginia last year, it looks like the electorate in Massachusetts will be considerably more conservative than the one that showed up in 2008. Obama took the state by 26 points then, but those planning to vote next week only report having voted for him by 16.
-Republicans are considerably more enthusiastic about turning out to vote than Democrats are. 66% of GOP voters say they are ‘very excited’ about casting their votes, while only 48% of Democrats express that sentiment- and that’s among the Democrats who are planning to vote in contrast to the many who are apparently not planning to do so at this point.
-Brown has eye popping numbers with independents, sporting a 70/16 favorability rating with them and holding a 63-31 lead in the horse race with Coakley. Health care may be hurting Democratic fortunes with that group, as only 27% of independents express support for Obama’s plan with 59% opposed.
-In a trend that’s going to cause Democrats trouble all year, voters disgusted with both parties are planning to vote for the one out of power. Perhaps the most remarkable thing about Brown’s standing is that only 21% of Massachusetts voters have a favorable opinion of Congressional Republicans…but at the same time only 33% view Congressional Democrats favorably. And among voters who have a negative take on both parties, who account for more than 20% of the electorate, Brown leads 74-21.
-Because he’s basically been untouched so far, Brown’s favorability spread is a remarkable +32, at 57/25. For some perspective on how good those numbers are, Bob McDonnell was at a +20 spread with Virginia voters in our final poll there before going on to a 17 point victory.
PPP also includes constructive advice for Coakley, should she choose to turn the race around in her favor, but time is running out. At this point, her party’s best hope will be a last-minute smear campaign against Brown, most likely utilizing the Boston Globe or other area media outlets. Count on desperate Democrats to go this route.
NEXT: we await results of the Herald and Globie polls. Early word has the Herald portraying this as a horse race, while the Globies show Coakley with a comfortable lead. The latter survey would actually help Brown’s cause if it lulls panicked Dems back into a sense of complacency.
A number of well-meaning Scott Brown supporters have been led to believe that in-state polling is key to waking up sleepy Beltway GOP leaders who’ve so far missed what is clearly a much closer US Senate race than outsiders realize.
To that end, they’ve pushed for polling, even collecting donations to fund such an effort. And there is additional excitement over an expected Rasmussen Poll that was supposedly conducted in the Bay State last night.
Unfortunately, polling is the wrong way to back Brown, for these reasons:
— No pollster in his right mind would release results showing a Republican ahead in Massachusetts, even if the data supported it. They’d redo the survey for the sake of political credibility.
— If Brown is catching up with Coakley, it isn’t something you’d want plastered all over the news, because it could increase Democratic votes. Low turnout is key to any Brown victory (and I DO mean low).
— Any money diverted toward polling would be better spent making sure his clever spots actually reach the airwaves.
Meanwhile, at National Review Online’s Campaign Spot, Jim Geraghty believes primary results show Brown probably doesn’t have a chance, but he’s missing a key point: Dem turnout was higher proportionally due to a hotly-contested, four-way race. That was not the case on the GOP ballot, where Scott had no real competition.
In addition, unenrolled voters, who make up a majority in the Bay State, will be up for grabs. Beltway coverage of Massachusetts politics almost always overlooks the huge percentage of independent voters here.
It was passed during fishy Town Meeting proceedings by just three votes. Small business owners there are rabidly opposing the tax hike, fighting it tooth and nail. This could help Brown in a key stronghold as voters turn out in greater numbers to repeal it.
Not only has Martha Coakley confirmed our suspicions that Scott Brown’s feisty effort has her worried, but the Democratic Party’s US Senate nominee has made the mistake of revealing her surprisingly unsophisticated campaigning skills.
In attempting to fire back at Brown after a series of challenges to her non-presence on the campaign trail, Coakley made the rookie mistake of repeating the primary charge against her:
“It’s not clear to me that he’s articulated anything other than he feels I’m not campaigning hard enough,” Coakley said. “Having no plans is not an option.
In Campaigning 101, the first thing prospective candidates are taught is NEVER to repeat your opponent’s charges! It only lends credibility to the allegations.
From there, it quickly goes downhill as Coakley claims she’s working hard during the campaign by creating “white papers” on issues. Too bad she’s forgotten to let us in on what these profound documents actually address.
Meanwhile:
— At The New Republic, Editor Marty Peretz believesBrown may win the election. A supporter of Democrat Alan Khazei during the primary battle, Peretz calls Coakley “a run-of-the-mill candidate” and believes sudden Democratic Party panic over the US Senate race may be “apt”.
Sure, they’re on the same side of the fence, so this should be expected. But Romney has a history of keeping a firm distance from candidates he believes don’t have a chance at winning, most notably in the last Massachusetts gubernatorial election.
If Romney really believes this, he should make a greater effort to steer money Brown’s way in short order.
