Mass. poll: Scott Brown for John Kerry's seat
Source: Politico
Outgoing Sen. Scott Brown might not be out of Washington for long.
The Massachusetts Republican would be in a strong position to win a special election to fill the seat of Sen. John Kerry if the latter is appointed secretary of state, according to a WBUR/MassInc. poll released Thursday.
Forty-seven percent of registered voters would vote for Brown compared with 39 percent who would vote for a generic Democrat. Against many of the most talked-about Democratic candidates, Brown holds big leads. He tops Rep. Michael Capuano, 47 percent to 28 percent; has a 48 percent to 30 percent lead over Rep. Ed Markey; and holds a whopping 51 percent to 24 percent lead over Rep. Stephen Lynch. And his lead over former Rep. Marty Meehan is 49 percent to 30 percent.
The four House members suffer from low name recognition. A majority of Bay State voters either dont know of or dont have an opinion of Meehan, Capuano, Markey and Lynch. Brown is viewed favorably by 58 percent of voters, and only 28 percent view him unfavorably, the poll found.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2012/12/mass-poll-scott-brown-for-john-kerry-seat-85352.html?hp=r3
Mass
(27,315 posts)But they do not like so much to talk about the one showing Deval Patrick up and Vicky Kennedy very close, when nobody is even running.
http://www.sys-con.com/node/2492085
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)We need him in the Senate.
Let Kerry help get someone ready to win the election against Scott Brown and take his seat.
Then when polls show that person would win, then Kerry can leave the Senate.
It would be utterly wrong, utterly unpatriotic for Kerry to leave the Senate to become Secretary of State. We need him in the Senate.
He is a good man. He would make a great Secretary of State, but that is not where we need him. We need him in the Senate.
Please, Please, Please, Senator Kerry, you have already sacrificed a lot for you country. Once more, please, please. Your presence in the Senate makes more of a difference than your presence would make on the diplomatic circuit or in the State Department.
wisteria
(19,581 posts)Bucky
(54,087 posts)...we quit being democrats (small "d" and thus quit honoring what it means to be Democrats (big "D" .
Cha
(297,794 posts)everything to do with what an excellent SOS, John Kerry would be.
The next Senate race in Mass should generate interest across our Nation.. I sent money to Elizabeth who was behind Brown in the polls and I'll do it again for whomever. I do not want to see Scott Brown's racist ass in there again.
MADem
(135,425 posts)I am bummed, I hope the national party folks get behind the Dem and push HARD. We'll need star power and money in a hurry--and I'd take a Senator Affleck (D) over any Republican...
Smarmie Doofus
(14,498 posts)yodermon
(6,143 posts)LynneSin
(95,337 posts)A named person is ALWAYS going to poll better than a generic name.
A year ago Brown was polling strong against the democratic generic name. How did Brown do last election?
blm
(113,105 posts)Big difference.
thesquanderer
(11,995 posts)re: "A named person is ALWAYS going to poll better than a generic name. "
A generic--who has no negatives--can poll very well against a known name. And also compared to actual people who have either some negatives or little name recognition.
Little Star
(17,055 posts)quakerboy
(13,921 posts)by nearly 20 points.
And he did remarkably well last election, considering he was a republican running in a blue state after selling out most anything important that people might have cared about. He got far better numbers in his attempt to be reelected than any republican presidential candidate in mass in recent history.
In fact, he got around 46% of the vote. Which is not far off of what they are polling him at in these polls. So people who voted for him before say they will vote for him again given the opportunity.
Will the people who voted against him bother to show up in a non-presidential election? It didn't work out so well for Mass the last time around.
LynneSin
(95,337 posts)THere were 2 zillion polls done before MA democratic voters had picked their nominees that showed Brown would be Warren. Warren was NOT the nominee just one of several options to choose from.
When it's a '1 to many' choice the 1 will always come out the winner because the many end up getting diluted. When we finally have the 2 main candidates named then I'll pay attention to the polls.
And provided that the democrats do NOT get another Martha Coakley on the ticket I think we can still beat the guy. Brown was an absolute douchebag with his racist attacks on Warren's heritage. The only reason it was as close as it was is because Warren association with the consumer advocate groups there to protect average folks against the banks. Alot of big money came into that race specifically to defeat her because of that issue.
My 2 cents is if a strong candidate is on the ticket that Brown will lose with an even bigger margin. Kerry will see to it that his seat is replaced by a democrat. He wouldn't take the SoS position otherwise.
Mass
(27,315 posts)banned from Kos
(4,017 posts)pretty much so anyway.
chelsea0011
(10,115 posts)No one outside his district knows him. This poll is BS.
DonViejo
(60,536 posts)Lynch is pro-life; that won't fly in Massachusetts.
karynnj
(59,507 posts)DonViejo
(60,536 posts)outright rejected the endorsement of the National Right to Life Committee.
karynnj
(59,507 posts)chelsea0011
(10,115 posts)and Moakley would have never become Representative and Romney would have never become Governor and Ed King would have never become Governor, and on and on. MA has had many pro life Catholics elected. Granted many are like the VP Biden type but they can and will get elected.
DonViejo
(60,536 posts)Last edited Fri Dec 21, 2012, 01:12 PM - Edit history (1)
he ran against Mel King (an alleged "black-radical" and Flynn promised to do nothing to interfere with or change existing law on abortion, to include not blocking Boston City Hospital from performing abortions. While Flynn served several terms as Mayor, he was defeated in his bid for Congress.
Moakley represented a heavily conservative Roman Catholic district (pretty much the same district Lynch is from and represents).
Ed King defeated Mike Dukakis owing to Democratic/liberal anger with Dukakis, his perceived arrogance and aloofness, but also, King ran as pro-life at a time when abortion was a very hot button issue in MA (late 70's/early 1980's). Dukakis came back four years later and defeated King.
We're also talking about the Massachusetts of 30+ years ago, when conservative Dems were a big but waning influence in the MA Democratic Party. I believe John Silber's campaign was the last hurrah for conservative MA Democrats. Republican Bill Weld was elected, attributing his narrow victory to his pro-choice position AND the gay community (Silber ran promising to undo an out of court settlement between Dukakis and the gay community over the issue of gay foster parents).
You may also recall Cardinal Medeiros interfering in the elections of Barney Frank and Jim Shannon, urging people to vote against them because of their pro-choice positions. Shannon and Frank won huge victories and the Church never again involved itself in elections to the extent Medeiros involved it in those two elections.
BTW, I was the Administrative Aide to a MA State Senator while King was Governor, leaving the position to work in Mayor Flynn's office,
chelsea0011
(10,115 posts)refer to Mel King as a black radical.
DonViejo
(60,536 posts)Last edited Fri Dec 21, 2012, 03:34 PM - Edit history (1)
that's why it was (and is in this comment) in quotation marks. You seem to be aware of Boston politics, thus you know that is how Mel was portrayed by portions of the media (columnists from the Boston Herald and yackers on WRKO for example. Mel has been a good friend to me and was a strong supporter during a particularly painful time. It was my partner's and mine home then Governor Mike Dukakis ordered the removal of two foster children from. However, your point is a good one and I will edit my previous comment to read alleged black radical.
On edit:
I couldn't recall the year Mel ran for Mayor of Boston so I went over to Wikipedia to see if there was a listing. Guess what? This is how they describe him;
The entire entry for Mel is under dispute, apparently someone believes the piece reads too much like a PR piece.
So, you think it's unimportant why a person is elected? Does your standard apply to President Obama as well?
chelsea0011
(10,115 posts)and good guy. I got a kick out of the Wikipedia comment about King. I would hardly consider Mel obscure. I hardly think it is unimportant about how people get elected and apologize if my comments make it seem that way. I do believe that a pro life candidate can win in state wide election in MA. Brown won even though he claims pro choice which he most certainly is not. I don't think a pro life Catholic candidate like Lynch will hurt him statewide. I think he will gather votes between the cities and take a lot of Brown's support in those areas away from him.
meegbear
(25,438 posts)there are three names not there that could have a big impact:
1. Vicky Kennedy - People are pushing Teddy's widow (again) to run for Senate.
2. Edward Kennedy Jr.
3. Ben Affleck
This could become interesting.
Fearless
(18,421 posts)Would mop the floor with Brown.
Little Star
(17,055 posts)As a matter of fact I think he is the only person who's name has been thrown around who stands a real good chance.
Now if only he'd be willing to run.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)The Kennedy name means a lot, but Ben Affleck is the only one who could get elected.
Little Star
(17,055 posts)Tonight on the local evening news (can't remember the station) they said that Ted Kennedy's son, Ted Jr. was a possibility.
Now, because of name recognition, I might buy that one. Though he has no political background.
For the past few years I've been living in Norfolk County but spent most of my life in Worcester County, still have big family there.
From this neck of Mass, both Norfolk Co & Worcester Co, even Dems find Brown likable and consider him either independent or at least moderate. At least that's what I hear every time his name comes up.
Do you live in MA?
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)I just think Kerry should stay in the Senate. Ted Kennedy, Jr. needs to serve in the House first.
Cha
(297,794 posts)hughee99
(16,113 posts)and essentially killed off the Jack Ryan character in "The Sum of all Fears". Most of his best acting work has been playing some kind of lovable fuck-up (though I haven't seen Argo yet). I'm not sure how convincing he'd be when giving speeches as "Your Next Senator".
And of course as a Freshman senator, he'd have to watch out for guys like this...
Is That All There Is
(15 posts)Vikki Kennedy- I did not know that political aptitude could be sexually transmitted. What the Fuck has she ever done, besides throw your next in line off her property.
EKjr- Silver Spoon Drunk (AKA 1%er), see above. No thanks.
Ben Affleck- See Ronald Regan. Confusing his acting smart as really being smart. Not what the country needs.
How about a true open race of ideas and merit. Excluding nobody because of lack of name recognition. Demand better of the party. There were some very good Dems in the primary that got roled by the Political establisment in Warrens coronation. They never got a say in our supposed open democracy.
demwing
(16,916 posts)Afflek may or may not be Senate ready, but he's no Reagan. Are actors now Persona Non Grata in Washington, just because of St. Ronnie? What a shame...
Afflek is a progressive, popular in his state, quite thoughtful, speaks well, and is prettier than Brown
Is That All There Is
(15 posts)I will pick some up at the free clinic on my way home. How about we listen to all the canidates and not fall in love with someone based on name, looks and percieved info. No they let in Sonnie Bono and Cooter as well. St Ronnie? boy you have got me pegged wrong. His movies are popular, but the blue collar folks (you know the ones he likes to act like in his movies) do not much like people from Cambridge.
Lordquinton
(7,886 posts)Unless they are republican
demwing
(16,916 posts)Except you actors. No room for your type in our perfect union.
Cha
(297,794 posts)was a comedian.
I really can't see Ben being interested in being a Senator with his young family but ya never know.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)Vicki Kennedy would be an excellent place holder for the six or so months it would take to have the special election, but not as a permanent replacement.
It looks to me like the A list is now gone.
Response to dlwickham (Original post)
Post removed
demwing
(16,916 posts)wait...that never happened...? Oh...
(never mind)
Arugula Latte
(50,566 posts)sasha031
(6,700 posts)if he's viewed favorably by 58%, how is it he lost to Warren 53-47.
It's also come out that he has received $$$1000's from the NRA both in 2010 & 2012.
Not exactly something that MA voters care for.
What I don't understand, is why people aren't talking about Ed Markey, he's got more than an outstanding record.
Bucky
(54,087 posts)Yowza!
Cha
(297,794 posts)the most campaign funds and bonus points.. he was Endorsed by the Hypocrisy of Michael Bloomberg.
"BLOOMBERG BACKS SCOTT BROWN, THE NRA'S CANDIDATE, AGAINST ELIZABETH WARREN"
http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/politics/2012/07/6292816/bloomberg-backs-scott-brown-nras-candidate-against-elizabeth-warren
blm
(113,105 posts)Last edited Thu Dec 20, 2012, 03:21 PM - Edit history (1)
.
MessiahRp
(5,405 posts)and then their predictable John Kerry attacks, let's remember the source of this shit: Politico.
Give Brown a challenger with a face and people won't be so apt to pick him over generic unknown.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)54% to 46% - eight friggin points!
Politico luvs them sum Republicans, tho, so that's why I take a pound of salt every time they report something.
On the other hand, I would be more open to polls conducted by the PPP since they were the third most accurate pollsters in last election (Nate Silver was No. 1, I believe. Don't know who No. 2 is, though).
GoCubsGo
(32,097 posts)And, she had low name recognition, too. Just like all the Dems in the OP's poll. All this hand-wringing and teeth-gnashing is getting kind of tiresome.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)Some people just can't wait to light that match and set it to their hair.
GoCubsGo
(32,097 posts)You ain't kidding!
Little Star
(17,055 posts)People here like Brown as a person and they believe he is more of a Independent than a Republican.
That's simply just the way it is here.
It would take someone like Ben Affleck running to ease my mind on this horrible turn of events.
Is That All There Is
(15 posts)Like Affleck here in Ma. Maybe his movies(some). You are again confusing an actor as smart person. Most of them are parrotts that can read lines really good. Someone like him to ease your mind, how about a True Blue Collar man who understands the REAL Ma. Former Iron Worker, REAL Southie boy worked his way up from nothing Steven Lynch. Stop with all the Social Dem frauds and elect real persons of the people.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)means you've totally forgotten the hugely successful, Good Will Hunting.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Will_Hunting
Is That All There Is
(15 posts)So that is your litmus test for smarts, money and awards by like minded droids. Then MeL Gibson is a genius according to that standard. Clint Eastwood is equal to old Albert E-MC2.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)Affleck was a very young man. He was only 25-years-old. Neither Gibson nor Eastwood were anywhere near that successful or creative at that very young age.
Writing an incredible award-winning script like Good Will Hunting, producing the movie, and securing an A-list entertainer like Robin Williams at the tender age of 25 shows just how smart the guy is. Ask yourself, could YOU have done it at that age or even twice it? Don't think so.
grantcart
(53,061 posts)activities, not the least of which is his work on the conflict in Congo.
He is a much more substantial person than Brown. Politics and public interest is not a hobby for him.
Affleck's mother was a civil rights freedom rider. He is as authentic a MA home grown boy who was raised by a single mother and made something good for himself.
You don't seem to be very well informed about Affleck's history or politics in any way.
blm
(113,105 posts).
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Americans, particularly Bay Staters, are growing ever more tired of abject liars who shill for the 1%.
Rider3
(919 posts)I do not want that guy representing me or my state at all.
and-justice-for-all
(14,765 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)And this would constitute a very early poll. The generic Democrat - reminds me of the generic Republican who was supposed to be able to beat Obama.
hedda_foil
(16,375 posts)He recently said he'd probably run for office at some point.
BigDemVoter
(4,157 posts)railsback
(1,881 posts)Seriously?
Tarheel_Dem
(31,243 posts)I hope to the heavens this guy isn't allowed near the Senate EVER again. Many of us voiced this concern prior to this selection. We remember how we got Scott Brown and Jan Brewer in the first place.
Arkana
(24,347 posts)He didn't play the "Hello, I'm Teabagger McFuckinangry" game, because he and his staff knew that those Republicans don't win elections in Massachusetts.
What he did was play the game purely on character. "Hi, I'm a nice guy. I wear a barn coat and I drive a truck. I'm just a regular Joe, like you."
Normally this shit doesn't work either, but it wasn't helped by Martha Coakley's flat refusal to run anything resembling a campaign, her sneering jokes about him standing in front of Fenway Park shaking hands, and her calling Curt Schilling a Yankees fan (Bostonians take their baseball seriously.)
Add to this about 8 kabillion Tea Party shock troopers, scads of Tea Party money, and a Republican team that DESPERATELY wanted to stick it to the Democrats by stealing Ted Kennedy's seat, and you have a recipe for complete and total disaster.
Scott's on his own this time. He may have the money, but he's a known quantity--and the Tea Party's diminished power coupled with their complete hatred of him will hold many if not all of them back. And Democrats have been preparing for this eventuality ever since it was announced that Kerry might possibly be the new SoS after Hillary. The MA Democratic Party is ready, and so is the 54% that cast their ballots for Elizabeth Warren. We are NOT going to let it happen again.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,243 posts)the ground. I just hope that EW's supporters will still be as engaged several months from now. You know, we Dems are notoriously slack when it comes to special elections and midterms, and that's what scares me.
I hear that Markey has quite the warchest compared to Brown at this point. You guys know best who'd be the best fit for the state of MA. I'll try and keep my misgivings close to my chest throughout this procedure, but it's beyond frightening to think this guy was just soundly rejected, and could turn around and win this newly open seat. I am so hoping that the president's & EW's crushing victories in the state will hold til the special election.
McCamy Taylor
(19,240 posts)Nominating Kerry was a very bad idea.
blm
(113,105 posts)Ithink Mass Dems are too smart to NOT learn the lessons of 2010.
Besides, Brown won when TeaParty was on an upswing. Too much has happened since then. He also proved he's a terrible debater.
Cha
(297,794 posts)smear Elizabeth because he was afraid to run on his record. We also found when he slipped up that "Scalia" was his favorite SC Justice
Arkana
(24,347 posts)while running the worst campaign in the history of campaigns.
Someone actually showing up should get 52-53 easy.
Meanwhile, Brown is without his Tea Party friends and without Obamacare as a rallying point. If he does decide to run, he'll find that this special election won't be as easy.
Turbineguy
(37,372 posts)when we snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
graywarrior
(59,440 posts)He'll never get re-elected again....he can run all he wants. He's a LOSER.
Cha
(297,794 posts)cyclezealot
(4,802 posts)Should Obama appoint Kerry , he's an idiot. Scottie during the campaign said a supreme court nominee similar to
Scalia is his perfect candidate for future openings.
blm
(113,105 posts).
cyclezealot
(4,802 posts)But they show Brown leading over any generic Democrat.
blm
(113,105 posts).
Arkana
(24,347 posts)Just as useless as "Generic Republican" was.
Martha Coakley went into the general against him with a 30 point lead. How'd that work out for her?
heaven05
(18,124 posts)find someone else for SOS. We don't need another rethug extremist/bigot in the Senate.
valerief
(53,235 posts)MiniMe
(21,719 posts)Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)If the president doesn't have majorities in congress, then he can enact a Repuke agenda and deflect all of the blame.
Are you catching on yet?
Joey Liberal
(5,526 posts)We don't need that moron Brown back.
Response to Joey Liberal (Reply #54)
politicasista This message was self-deleted by its author.
The Stranger
(11,297 posts)Why why why why why?
Flatpicker
(894 posts)Will probably be why we won't have Kerry as SOS.
I'm willing to believe that after the holiday next week, we will start hearing another name being mentioned.
Once they have enough data to show that the Dems will lose the MA seat, you will see that they will bring in someone else.
wisteria
(19,581 posts)It is ridiculous the emphasis some Dems place on Brown.
Flatpicker
(894 posts)Just the trend.
Anything outside a lead pipe cinch to keep the seat blue should be seriously considered.
It's not that Brown is any good, it's just he hadn't been in long enough to be hated. So people may give him a chance just because he has name recognition.
wisteria
(19,581 posts)Brown will never win again in Mass. He isn't that popular and right now it is only about name recognition. Once a Dem is chosen, that Dem will lead and win.
RoverSuswade
(641 posts)Would he run if asked?
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)RoverSuswade
(641 posts)I wish he would if asked. He would really shake up the Senate. (Maybe Harry wouldn't want him) ? ?
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)After being the chairman/ ranking member for years of a committee he would not want to be junior to anyone in the senate.
cstanleytech
(26,332 posts)Surely that might work to keep Brown from getting back in office?
SunSeeker
(51,744 posts)This is exactly what I was afraid of and why I thought Kerry was a bad pick for SoS. Crap.
GoCubsGo
(32,097 posts)She stomped him in the end. Just sayin'.
foo_bar
(4,193 posts)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Reich
Of course that was the year was Romney was selected, and it might sound like a long shot (esp. if RR doesn't live here anymore), but I think Mass voters are more inclined to elect a fire-breather in a statewide race than a business-as-usual pol like Capuano (my recollection is that he used to win mayoral elections in Somerville by ... slightly unethical means involving the police department harassing his erstwhile opponents, but I can't find any good Google citations.)
Arkana
(24,347 posts)Lack of name recognition and a decent approval rating is what's buoying him.
cosmicone
(11,014 posts)Cha
(297,794 posts)big ol ugly mouth off about her Native American heritage. Just to show what a classy asshole he was.
Cha
(297,794 posts)If Brown's runs again ..is Michael Bloomberg going to endorse the NRA candidate again like he did over Elizabeth Warren?
"BLOOMBERG BACKS SCOTT BROWN, THE NRA'S CANDIDATE, AGAINST ELIZABETH WARREN"
http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/politics/2012/07/6292816/bloomberg-backs-scott-brown-nras-candidate-against-elizabeth-warren
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)He might stay neutral this time around. I'm sure the Republicans will try to push him to endorse whichever their clown they put up.
NHDEMFORLIFE
(489 posts)Brown is popular - in the abstract. He has an approval rating of 58 percent, but polls just 47 percent (about what he got in Nov.) against a "generic" Democrat.
This is taken without any context that comes with a campaign - issues, ads, debates (remember his love of Mr. Justice Scalia?).
Members of Congress are generally popular within their district; members of Congress from other districts are generally unpopular - again, in the vacuum of no active campaign.
Finally, and perhaps most importantly - MASSACHUSETTS IS THE BLUEST STATE IN AMERICA!
This seems to be conveniently overlooked by everyone who simply adores Scottie.
And anyone who doesn't think the President will get heavily involved in this, from fundraising to stumping, is a fool.
Response to dlwickham (Original post)
ann--- This message was self-deleted by its author.