Tuesday, January 19, 2010

538 Gives Brown Almost 3/4's Edge

Scott Brown

Nate Silver called all 35 Senate races last year correctly. So when he says Scott Brown has a 74% shot at victory today, well, people should listen. And if the GOP weather front makes the polls less accessible, there might be a landslide. Silver says:
Coakley's odds are substantially worse than they appeared to be 24 hours ago, when there were fewer credible polls to evaluate and there appeared to be some chance that her numbers were bottoming out and perhaps reversing. However, the ARG and Research 2000 polls both show clear and recent trends against her. Indeed the model, which was optimized for regular rather than special elections, may be too slow to incorporate new information and may understate the magnitude of the trend toward Brown.

But Silver doesn't seem to understand that "likely voters" or the better off voters, the responsible citizens, are really in an ugly mood concerning a POTUS who blithely promised 8 times last year to be the "most transparent" president and to broadcast deliberations on Health Care on C-Span and now completely renege, showing himself to be a liar or bereft of any apparent leadership skills vis-a-vis a mentally-ill Speaker of the House and a doddering old fool of a Senate Majority Leader:
Some of the pollsters' findings, like a mid-40s approval rating for Obama among 'likely' voters, are hard to reconcile with the turnouts in New Jersey or Virginia, with evidence from national polling trends, or with anecdotal reports of potentially very high turnout. A variety of factors, ranging from the increasing use of IVR polls and short sampling periods, to the unusual partisan composition of the Massachusetts electorate (which is plurality independent), to the generally inexperienced polling firms which have surveyed the state, could make these effects more likely.

It's been a while since Virginia and New Jersey, both Dem defeats, and the educated tax-paying public is becoming aware of a humongous debacle on tripling or quadrupling the national deficit in the next three years if this careless silly little tyro is not severely disciplined by the ballot box revolt that "likely voters" can engineer. I had a libtard houseguest a couple of weeks ago say "I hope you don't like those tea party people." I said they were exercising their constitutional rights. More Silver:
n addition, there is a small chance that movement toward Coakley could occur after the pollsters have left the field. Until very recently, most voters assumed that Coakley would win; the fact that her chances are now imperiled could motivate more of them to vote, or to avoid casting a "protest vote" against her for one of her opponents. However, the chances are perhaps just as good that her voters become too despondent to turn out, which could produce a fairly substantial victory for Brown.

Silver in his last paragraphs hedges a bit, but seems to hint that Coakley's 3-1 advantage in registered party voters doesn't mean much when the Dem base appears apathetic, the weather seems bad, and over 50% of the voters are independents strongly leaning toward Brown.

In the last two weeks, an historic turnaround caused by a number of missteps by the lace-curtain matron of entitlement has brought her essential mediocrity front and center. Coakley is not the hard-working civil servant the New York Times makes her out to be, but a slovenly amoral in cases which scream out to God for justice, such as a Somerville cop's rape of his niece with a hot curling iron that Coakley studiously ignored and the terrible Amirault family debacle. When these skeletons fell out of her closet, the electorate began to perceive an arrogant self-righteous bitch with a tendency to make horrendous misjudgments. Who thought she was entitled to a Senate seat by some sort of Dem seniority system. And ridiculed Brown for campaigning outside Fenway on the New Year's Flyers-Bruins game. And ridiculed Red Sox hero Curt Schilling for being "a Yankee's fan." She's too stupid and out of touch to be a Senator.

Scott Brown opened up the breakout in the debate that Coakley tried to avoid when he answered pompous serial-oaf David Gergen's "Ted Kennedy's seat" question: "with all due respect, it's the people's seat" which both exposed his own readiness not to compromise and cut corners and the smug complacency of the rotten-borough Dems in MA. A former Army colonel, he will be much better than corrupt AG Coakley as Senator. And driving an old truck is a slap in the face of limo-boy Obambi whose ridicule of small truck drivers Sunday will not be forgotten.

If Brown wins the election, it'll be a political earthquake that will match the seismic quake in Haiti.

And like the quake in Haiti, it will reveal the utterly corrupt state of the ruling authorities, in the political case in the US, the rotten-borough Democrats and their ridiculous leadership.

Nancy Pelosi can pass a health bill, but the SCOTUS can declare it unconstitutional, and will if November 2010 is a GOP replication of Scott Brown's amazing ascent.

No comments :