Jan 16 2010

Coakley Down By 16% In Absentee Voting

Published by at 3:06 pm under 2010 Elections,All General Discussions

Looks like it could very well be a historic wipe out in MA Tuesday. RCP is reporting that of the 9% of Massachusetts voters who voted absentee (which ended yesterday) Brown is winning 58-42, or 16%.

This is right in line with my computations this morning, which indicate Coakley could lose by as much as 10% – depending on who is energized to get out and vote. If Absentee voting is an indication of intensity (and it is of course) then Coakley is toast(ly).

12 responses so far

12 Responses to “Coakley Down By 16% In Absentee Voting”

  1. Paul from Boston says:

    The end of this election can’t come too soon. So far we’ve had a robo-call yesterday from Obama, and a visit tomorrow, a visit yesterday from Bill Clinton and a robo-call today, and Curt Schilling calling this noon telling Matha to stuff it. That’s not even counting all the phone bank calls from both sides.

    I keep wondering what Obama and Clinton are thinking when they come here. It’s not as if people are out on the street this time of year so that they can go out and shake hands. They seem to wind up giving a speech in the ballroom of the priciest hotels in town where no one is going to see them except on the 11 o’clock news. The last time Obama showed up for a fund raiser for Gov. Cadillac Deval, they were giving away seats to fill up the room.

    At least Scott Brown and Rudi Guiliani had the good sense to walk through the North End yesterday afternoon shaking hands and posing under the Paul Revere statue. It must have been big because the Globe reported it as “Gawkers and well wishers emerged from the coffee shops”. They even cheered when a UPS truck went by.

  2. Redteam says:

    It all sounds good. Hope it only gets better………

  3. archtop says:

    InTrade as of 5:47 PM EST

    Coakley 47
    Brown 52

  4. archtop says:

    Speaking of wipeout…a musical interlude…


  5. archtop says:

    Whoops – here’s the link…


  6. ivehadit says:

    I think the spreads are now being manipulated at InTrade. The “money man” is in the game now, imho. Once the word gets out then the “players” (aka operatives) make their moves. No way do the numbers match what is happening for Brown now.

    Imho, the dems along with the media are just trying to keep this things close IN PERCEPTION so they can challenge, delay, and yes, corrupt the voting process…also known as cheating, imho.

  7. crosspatch says:

    The Senate is already making noise of using the “nuclear option” if Brown is elected and bypassing cloture on a healthcare vote. If they do that, they need only 51 votes and not 60.

    If they do decide on the “nuclear option” then they are going to get some nuclear blowback. Democrats whose seats have until now been safe will be at risk.

    If Democrats continue acting like this, not a single seat in the Congress will be safe for them and that extends down to state and local governments, as well.

    A situation where practically every single Democrat standing for election is defeated is now within the realm of possibility.

  8. crosspatch says:

    Reid’s “nuclear option” reminds me of a joke about a nuclear hand grenade. It kills everything in a 1 mile radius but can only be thrown 30 feet.

  9. […] This post was mentioned on Twitter by chp3871, AJ Strata. AJ Strata said: new: Coakley Down By 16% In Absentee Voting http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/12345 […]

  10. […] The Strata-sphere claims that of the 9% of Massachusetts voters who voted absentee (which ended yesterday) Brown is […]

  11. WWS says:

    There’s an even bigger problem than next November with the “nuclear option” (reconciliation) The bill as written would never stand up to, because only revenue related legislation can be passed that way.

    So, the current bill would have to be carved up with many of the most important parts left out, and then put back together in a completely different way. Both House and Senate would have to vote on it all over again, probably with a new round of committee meetings.

    They could do this in theory, but the worst problem they have is *time*. Democrats already know this has gone on too long and they want to start talking about jobs or something. Remaking everything for reconciliation would take months, and that puts it right into the middle of primary season.

    They ain’t gonna go for that. If they could have used reconciliation, they would have used it in December rather than dumping the public option to get to 60 votes.

    Reconciliation is a bluff – they don’t have the stones for it. And they don’t have the time.

  12. Alert1201 says:

    WWS is right. If they go with the nuclear option then the bill goes back to the committee level and start all over again, thus keeping it on the front pages through the beginning of the primary season. Not something the dems want. As dumb as they are they know they need to get his albatross of they neck as soon as possible.

    Red state has a good summary at