I want salt in the wound.

New Rasmussen showing Coakley + 2. But the dynamic that hasn’t been analyzed is that the bulk of Coakey support comes from young voters, who have a poor record of showing up for special elections. Another traditional Dem block are seniors, who think its cold when it 50, not to be mean. But it will be a tough block to get out in January.

Coakley internal memo confirms phone call:

http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/CoakleyforSenateUrgentMemo11010.pdf

Washington Examiner is reporting that Ben Nelson is waffling again. We heard what Dodd said yesterday. If this thing is hanging by a thread, perhaps the Democrats know that anything close will tip a member or two off the fence.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Nelson-may-not-vote-for-health-care-reform-now-81268167.html

I hope the Right is counting heads. This is a critical win, and they will surely pull out all the stops.

They cannot get away with corrupting this election, as they did in NY-23.

Far-left agendas have consequences.

Far-left agendas have consequences.

Turnout on our side is key. Democrats outnumber us by 1 million in the state. If they have a moderate turnout, we need a great one. Independents will likely vote for Brown. It all comes down to getting the vote out. Low turnout=Brown victory.

http://neoavatara.com/blog/?p=9444

This is probably as good a place as any to issue a public, “boy, was I wrong” on this race. It’s almost impossible to ponder how strong the anti-Democrat riptide has to be for this race to be a dead heat. I’m stunned.

I want a convincing Win and a clear message sent. A “close” win will be contested and then (eventually) stolen (See, Franken, Al – Senator, MN). Hell, a convincing Win will probably be negated by an indeteriminable delay to seat Scott Brown. (Is indeterminable even a word?) A “close” loss might do something, but I doubt it.

Yes, I’m very happy that Brown raised over $1.3 million yesterday. And yes, I’m pleased that there are polls that show Brown not getting completely stomped on like a mouse in Mrs. Jumbo’s cage.

But have I allowed myself to believe for one minute that he will win? Not on your life.

I don’t deal well with disappointment after getting my hopes up. It’s one of the reasons I don’t really follow any sports teams closely. (Well . . . that and the fact that I don’t really like sports.)

Anyway, I’ll believe it when I see Martha Coakley on TV thanking her campaign staff and telling us that despite her loss, we all need to try to carry on the work of our beloved Teddy.

… from Coakley going to Washington for her “insider” fund raiser. Man, are these people eating stupid more and more or what?

Martha: “I’m for the people of Massachu …. ooops, gotta go, lobbyists in Washington are calling – hold that thought!”

The Democrats are right to be freaked out – but they still let her go to Washington. They just don’t see what we and everyone else sees. And for that we should be grateful.

And, btw, my heartfelt thanks to David Gergen …

“All polling indicates that a lower turnout is better for the Republican. The new Rasmussen Reports poll shows that Brown is ahead by two percentage points among those who are absolutely certain they will vote. A week ago, he trailed by two among those certain to vote. “

It’s starting to look to even the most grizzled chowder-head like Brown’s the guy who deserves the job, not some lackey foisted on the Commonwealth by a pompous Democratic establishment… so why don’t you give him a crack at it, New England?

http://reaganiterepublicanresistance.blogspot.com

“Fifty-nine percent (59%) of voters think Coakley will win the election, while 33% expect a victory for Brown. ”

This “she has it in the bag” thinking may discourage Dems from voting.

$650,00 on attack ads against Brown. Let’s not count our chickens while the wolves are outside the coop.

nt

There’s something out here in CA called the Tom Bradley effect. Here’s a article from that unreliable source, Wikipedia on it.

The effect comes down to mostly white people in CA saying to pollsters that they were going to vote for Bradley, who was African American, which resulted in a large lead in the polls for Bradley going into the election for Governor. Bradley lost the election after people voted differently in private than what they told the pollsters.

Wondering aloud, how much does this sort of thing come into play in a very Democratic Mass which Obama carried by 22 percent and a vote for a Republican might be seen as a rejection of both Obama and the of the Democratic party. I’m not sure about the methods used by pollsters, but I’d think face to face ones some people might just say one thing, voting for the Donk, and doing something in private once they get behind the curtain.

Next Tuesday is going to be very interesting.