Massachusetts Poll Review: Brown Leads But Still Too Close To Call
Update: Nate Silver now calls Brown a 3-1 favorite to win. I respect his analytical skills but will remain cautious about any GOP prospects in Massachusetts.
Like many armchair analysts I’ve been following every new poll in the Coakley/Brown race and I’ve found the results hard to believe. The idea that in the hard blue state of Massachusetts a virtually unknown Republican could defeat a long time state Attorney General seems as bizzare as the idea that I could play center for the NBA.
But as noted by a number of analysts, the trendlines have been steadily in favor of Brown. The last poll to come out showing Coakley ahead was conducted on the 12th and 13th, every other survey since has put Brown ahead or in the case of the new Daily Kos poll shows the race tied (the mere fact that a Kos poll has the race tied is pretty telling).
One of the tools that many people use is to compile an average of the various polls on the theory that this works out the various biases. The web site Real Clear Politics did this during the 2008 campaign and in most cases the averaged poll came very close to the actual result.
So I decided to do the same and took the information from RCP. I decided to use the last ten polls, all of which were conducted on January 11th or later. Taking polls prior to that seemed to be going a bit far back in terms of reflecting the current trend.
The combined average of those polls gave me a Brown lead of 4.4 points (Brown: 49.4, Coakley: 45.0)
I then decided to see what happened if I eliminated the all three polls showing Brown up by double digits, reducing it to 7 polls.
The combined average of these surveys left me with a Brown lead of 1.28 points (Brown 48.14, Coakley: 46.86)
So in both cases we have a Brown win by at least a full percentage point and thus outside the realm of a recount.
However we also have to factor in the heavily Democratic nature of the state. As Chuck Todd put it, in almost any other state this race would be over but this is Massachusetts. For this I turned to the analysis of Nate Silver on the web site fivethirtyeight.com. Although Nate is open about his strongly liberal politics, he does offer a lot of interesting and fact based analysis.
His review of races in heavily Red or Blue states did show a tilt towards the majority party when compared to the polls on those contests. In the case of strongly Democratic states the variance was 3.4 points. I’m not sure that this really applies to the current race but just to be fair I’ll apply the numbers.
If you adjust the ten averaged polls above by 3.4 points then the Brown lead is reduced to 1 point.
If you adjust the seven averaged polls (eliminating the double digit Brown polls) then you have a Coakley edge of about 2.12 points (the only averaging that gives her an edge).
So looking at these polls we find three averages which give Brown an edge and one that gives it to Coakley.
In theory that should cause me to predict Brown as the winner, but the one major intangable we still do not (and indeed cannot) resolve is turnout. If the turnout tomorrow is similar to that projected in most of the polls then Brown will not only win but will do so comfortably. But if the turnout is closer to the 2008 model then Coakley will pull out a victory.
Of course I think a strong argument can be made that the mere fact we are even discussing the outcome of this race is in itself either a win for the GOP or a loss for the Democrats. It’s a race that Coakley should be running away with and yet she is struggling. There seems to be to be little room for the Democrats to claim a victory here, either they lose a safe seat or barely hold on to it. In either case a bad day.
Whatever happens tomorrow night is going to be very interesting to see.
opinions powered by SendLove.to
19 Responses to “Massachusetts Poll Review: Brown Leads But Still Too Close To Call”
Hopefully Brown will win and the so-called stimulus boondoggle can remain as Obama's biggest failure.
Now hopefully the DNC will learn deference to their base. It's stupid, of course, to punish a party rather than support some individuals within a party and punish others, but right now the left-wing establishment is unworthy to represent left-wing policies and needs to change.
Every right-wing smughead is going to scream about going too far to the left, ignoring of course that Obama simply acted on his campaigning (even disappointing many lef-wingers) and that the bill as it is includes some ideas right-wing politicians have supported before.
What the left should do is to adapt to the fact that the GOP is ready to lose its mind and philosophies entirely in order to win, and never again sacrifice the interests of the base unless they know it is necessary or they get something of worth in return.
This month's surprise — unlike last year, currently in Masschusetts, there's real Hope for real Change.
Note who's alarmed at this — the Usual Suspects.
what we need is a major change at all levels of government as well as education reform. The system is corrupt and thus needs to be fixed. How? The public school system should be dismantled, giving communities the power to manage their children. And how the pupils are so called taught must also be changed. The way is a mission based process with holistic methods so that one learns how to lead productive lives. Principles with a solid mission leads to success for us all.
The Democrats have already determined which left-leaning precincts they will concentrate on for their “selective” recount. They already have their liberal judges sewn up. It almost worked for them in Florida in 1980, but they perfected the fraud in Minnesota and Washington State in later elections. Look for this to be stolen by the Libs/Dems in a legal, but unethical and immoral recount. In the 60's and early 70's the liberals were truly for openness and freedom in politics. They sold their souls some time around when Harry Reid was mayor of Las Vegas..
“In the 60's and early 70's the liberals were truly for openness and freedom in politics. They sold their souls some time around when Harry Reid was mayor of Las Vegas..”
They've been resentful (and revanchist) since Reagan was elected in 1980. (Reagan was the handy object of projected hatred of the mainstream rejection of liberalism's post-1960s radicalism and its failures, as well as a handy object of hatred for himself, specifically. Bush-hatred has also been truly pathological and savage, but Reagan remains the big story.)
Yes. I agree totally. Very well put.
Just to remind all you Brown supporters what you're voting for:
http://www.hulu.com/watch/118916/the-big-buy-to…
[...] Moderate Voice: ” … the mere fact we are even discussing the outcome of this race is in itself either a win for the GOP or a loss for the Democrats.” [...]
That photo — it really makes me think of Romney. That, or the GOP equivalent of Mark Warner (D-VA), poster cutout, that is, or even — kind of like Keith Olbermann, but not an extremist leftist or near-lowlife.
Incidentally,
“Keith Olbermann”
If Ed Schultz won't be “drafted” to run for office (Senate, ideally, but House, maybe), why not Keithie?
Yes…Go Scott Brown Go!!
Thank You…Thank You…Thank You People of Massachusetts!!!!!
Hope Chicago IL is watching and will follow your wonderful example.
Good ridance to chicago gangsters and their shady back room deals.
Bye the way Scott Brown..love the truck!
Maybe, just maybe, even the heavily democratic state of mass is sending a message on healthcare that they share with the national polls. Don't shove this down the throats of Americans when they are saying no. Every poll says the majority does not want this healthcare bill passed and in some polls the vast majority. Obama and the Dems apparently feel that they care ignor the wish of the people…..if this race is any indication wait until November.
Then what will we do with health care? I'm still uninsured. My fiancee's still uninsured. What plans do the GOP have for people like me?
They offer you what they said Obama offered – unicorns and rainbows.
They will happily let system reform wait until they are in power no matter how many people die or have to default to bankruptcies – up to that point they don't give a toss about you and they probably won't even when they are in power.
My advice is to leave the US or turn to crime and terrorism.
“I then decided to see what happened if I eliminated the all three polls showing Brown up by double digits, reducing it to 7 polls.”
Why did you do that? Why not take eliminate all polls showing Brown up? I can understand taking out 1 when 9 are much closer…but not 3 from 10.
The GOP has offered HR 3400, which would give health insurance consumers many of the same kind of choices they now have with auto insurance or term life insurance, thus driving down the cost of healthcare while raising its quality through competition. HR 3400 has been suppressed by Congress.
State insurance commissioners do not like it because it reduces their regulatory power.
Democrats at the federal level do not like it because it reduces their political power.
Trial lawyers do not like it because it could moderate the punitive fees they are able to win in torts.
Big insurance companies do not like it because it forces them to compete and reduces their profit margins.
Only consumers – such as patients and doctors – stand to gain. No wonder you don't hear about HR 3400 much.
The major health care reform flaw is the preexisting condition clause that sounds so good on the surface but when applied in the real world falls flat. If you pay a small yearly tax penalty each year until you get cancer and then sign up for $1000.00 per month insurance, the insurance companies will be forced to factor into the premiums potential losses of $500,000.00 or more. Someone has to eat this potential loss and it will not be the companies. Premiums will rise radically. Mass residents now insure 97.4% of the population but this comes at a price. Taxes and premiums are the highest in the country excepting New York. Who knows which state will go bankrupt first. Which state will lose jobs at the fastest rate? Time will tell. Health care is expensive and the under educated really can't afford it. May the best answer prevail.
Massachusetts Election Results 2010
http://www.monkeydollars.net/2010/01/massachuse…