Poll: Brown Up by 15 Points
No need to rub your eyes; you read that right.
Via Ace we learn that a Pajamas Media/CrossTarget poll has Scott Brown up by 15 points in Massachusetts (or, if you prefer, Massachusettes).
15.4%, to be precise.
No, this isn’t an online poll conducted by Pajamas Media of its readers. It’s a real survey conducted by a real survey research firm.
Holy bajolies.
We learned last night that another poll had Brown up by 4 points. Ace is optimistic. He admits that the new poll is an outlier — but thinks 15 is closer to right. I can’t wait to see how Allahpundit, the eternal pessimist, reacts to this Pajamas Media poll. My prediction: a .5 on the AP pessimism meter.
Which is pretty damn good.
MORE: Byron York: “a growing sense of gloom is setting in among Democrats.”
David Frum gloats: “The Scott Brown who may rescue the country from Obamacare is not a talk radio conservative.”
UPDATE: Allah tells me on Twitter that his pessimism meter is “unchanged” as he believes the poll is not accurate.
His pessimism knows no bounds. I think he fears disappointment. Me, I agree that the 15-point margin is unlikely — but I think this poll corroborates the more realistic poll from yesterday.
The ObamaCare bill will soon supplant the British Labour Party’s 1983 election manifesto as “the longest suicide note in history“
Neo (7830e6) — 1/15/2010 @ 7:40 amMy prediction: a .5 on the AP pessimism meter
AP pessimism meter check: 1.0, down from 1.5 earlier today
Close, very close! Only 50% off!
Official Internet Data Office (c93f96) — 1/15/2010 @ 7:45 amYou don’t understand, OIDO. That’s LAST NIGHT’S pessimism meter. Linked so people understand what I’m talking about.
Patterico (c218bd) — 1/15/2010 @ 7:49 am[…] My pessimism is disappearing quicker than Michael Moore’s lunch, there’s a feeling here that Brown really will win and it’s getting stronger by the day A new poll taken Thursday evening for Pajamas Media by CrossTarget– an Alexandria… Patterico's Pontifications » Poll: Brown Up By 15 Points […]
Scott Brown Poll (fcb73f) — 1/15/2010 @ 7:51 amYes, you’re right. Of course I knew that. And it’s time for that first cup of coffee.
Official Internet Data Office (c93f96) — 1/15/2010 @ 7:52 amIt would be a slap in the face to the Democraps and other leftie elitists to lose the swimmer’s seat. It might puncture their arrogance like nothing else.
PCD (1d8b6d) — 1/15/2010 @ 8:00 amFrum is right.
SteveG (909b57) — 1/15/2010 @ 8:02 amBrown is a product of his blue state market and is running for Ted Kennedy’s vacant seat….
It’s not like anyone wanted to airlift the chattering skull of Strom Thurmond in to run against Coakley
well, let me say I hope and pray it is true, but i have never even heard of this polling outfit before, i don’t know their track record, so i just don’t know.
I will note that it appears to be a robopoll, which gives me more confidence. But on the other hand, it doesn’t seem to be weeding out people by whether they are likely voters, although on the other hand (we are up to three hands, now), polls of the general population tends to favor the democrats.
The other interesting thing is the party identification question. my understanding is that in registration the republicans are beaten by the dems 3-1. in this 20% are republicans, and 36% are dems, a much thinner margin. But then the question is different. it is one thing to register as a republican or dem, another to identify yourself as one. So is the poll skewed for some unknown reason toward republicans? or has party identification shifted? impossible to know, of course.
A.W. (e7d72e) — 1/15/2010 @ 8:06 amwell, let me say I hope and pray it is true, but i have never even heard of this polling outfit before, i don’t know their track record, so i just don’t know.
I will note that it appears to be a robopoll, which gives me more confidence. But on the other hand, it doesn’t seem to be weeding out people by whether they are likely voters, although on the other hand (we are up to three hands, now), polls of the general population tends to favor the democrats.
The other interesting thing is the party identification question. my understanding is that in registration the republicans are beaten by the dems 3-1. in this 20% are republicans, and 36% are dems, a much thinner margin. But then the question is different. it is one thing to register as a republican or dem, another to identify yourself as one. So is the poll skewed for some unknown reason toward republicans? or has party identification shifted? impossible to know, of course.
A.W. (e7d72e) — 1/15/2010 @ 8:06 amsorry for the double post… feel free to delete it.
A.W. (e7d72e) — 1/15/2010 @ 8:08 amPCD
Yeah, God can you imagine what the impact would be if Brown not only won, but in a LANDSLIDE. it would be so good i am afraid to get my hopes up.
i mean the dems might actually replace harry reid and pelosi that night. that’s how big it would be.
i mean, i won’t be able to go to downtown D.C. for two days because the democrats would collectively soil their pants.
my only worry is that pelosi and reid might pass healthcare anyway. for instance, if the house passed the senate bill as is, then it is law, instantly, with no more filibuster attempts.
i will repeat what i said in the last thread. if you want to kill healthcare, and you are wont to donate to these kinds of campaigns, probably dollar for dollar, Brown is the best investment in campaign donations you are likely to make in a long time.
A.W. (e7d72e) — 1/15/2010 @ 8:13 amAllah tells me on Twitter that his pessimism meter is “unchanged” as he believes the poll is not accurate.
Patterico (d190ef) — 1/15/2010 @ 8:14 amWhy is David Frum so gay like that? The little president man what foisted this nightmare on our little country is a reprobate tool and all good Americans oppose him. Simple as that.
happyfeet (e9e587) — 1/15/2010 @ 8:17 am> Allah tells me on Twitter
You mean the muslim God is real, and he is tweeting? kind of a let down after the burning bush.
Well, allah’s justice is infinite i suppose.
(sorry, couldn’t resist)
and i should correct something i said. roger simon says in the comments to the PJ media post that it is a sample of likely voters. still, i just get a nagging “too good to be true” vibe.
A.W. (e7d72e) — 1/15/2010 @ 8:21 amCould be the reaction to Coakley letting a brutal child rapist go
Democrats in Mass have a waters edge and she just found it
EricPWJohnson (86d084) — 1/15/2010 @ 8:23 amA.W., Obama will probably issue a fatwa,…,er,…, Executive Order making Coakley Sentator for life from MA and putting Brown in a re-education camp.
PCD (1d8b6d) — 1/15/2010 @ 8:31 am[…] morning Patterico informs us Poll: Brown Up by 15 Points No need to rub your eyes; you read that […]
Friday Link Fest (970e5d) — 1/15/2010 @ 8:43 amAh, feets, sometimes it’s like he’s like C3PO, with all those inflections. Brown is certainly the candidate that is benefiting from the tea party
ian cormac (dfb136) — 1/15/2010 @ 8:53 ammovement, and from a candidate who seems to be teaching people how not to campaign, are we sure
Schmidt isn’t her manager?
This post will be catnip for trolls. Hope not, though.
Fingers crossed in “Masschusettes.” But it is the most liberal of all 57 states.
Eric Blair (ddbceb) — 1/15/2010 @ 9:11 amBrown is surging because he is so OBVIOUSLY a better candidate and he isn’t carrying blue-state baggage like opposition to abortion.
This is a rebellion against self-entitled and arrogant elites that haven’t managed to actually DO anything except hector all of us about our many failings. It may of may not be a harbinger for November, but the landslide next Tuesday is going to be quite satisfying.
Assuming the powers-that-be count the votes right, of course.
Kevin Murphy (3c3db0) — 1/15/2010 @ 9:15 amFrum is happy because Brown is Frum’s kind of R, just like the clown in Illinois, Mark Kirk-R, who is running for Barackula’s seat no doubt is-a liberal, nice and safe, republican. He won’t scare the social workers.
I have a hard time believing Brown will beat Coakley simply because the D’s are now forewarned: they better get out the vote or they stand to have a big time loss on their hands–real and symbolic (and they are very good at getting out the vote). So that means that every state employee, municipal employee, their families, union thugs, cultural liberals, blacks and all others that are dependent on the state for their sustenance will be dragged to the polls to save Teddy’s seat and BO’s butt.
I do not doubt that there is a great deal of anger in a large part of the electorate concerning the D’s and their policies but in a state largely controlled by one party for as long as MA has been (and I say this as a resident of a state with the similar circumstances–Illinois) one thing that is not being figured in is the ability to get out the vote that the D’s have built up in urban areas like Boston. It is formidable and it will literally take a tidal wave to trounce Coakley. Also can anyone say NY 23? Remember when that was a shoo-in for the R’s? Granted there are many differences between these two races but what is similar is the giddiness over an R victory. If I know my D’s like I think I know my D’s, Coakley will be your next senator/senatoress from MA. I hope I am wrong.
BT (74cbec) — 1/15/2010 @ 9:28 amFrum is definitely right about Brown. Brown isn’t the conservative people think he is. In fact, I wouldn’t doubt it if he votes for other Dem initiatives like cap and trade. We’ll see.
Question: if healthcare gets shot down, won’t the dems just write another bill to push through before 2010? I’m really not convinced that Pelosi and Reid will just accept defeat and blame it on Republicans (getting to be an old meme).
TheAudacity (2fd5ad) — 1/15/2010 @ 9:33 amAlso don’t forget the ACORN ballots, since the counters belong to ACORN.
Sabba Hillel (153338) — 1/15/2010 @ 9:36 amHow about looking at how Brown is collecting internet donations vs how Obama did it? Night and day.
mark (21722f) — 1/15/2010 @ 9:39 amhttp://thebigswedeofthenorthshore.blogspot.com/2010/01/internet-donations-brown-vs-obama.html
Link was a no go.
mark (21722f) — 1/15/2010 @ 9:41 amCap and trade is dead. It just hasn’t been buried yet.
I like the quote about Brown when he won another special election to the state Senate. “We cheated and he still won !”
I think the path to a majority for Republicans is through libertarian policies. Those who think Brown is going to be a left leaning Senator, remember that he wrote the amendment to allow those who are opposed to abortion to opt out of giving the morning after pill to rape victims, AS LONG AS they got it from someone else. Coakley has been trying to beat him with this but it hasn’t worked.
Frum is weird and I have stopped reading his blog.
Mike K (2cf494) — 1/15/2010 @ 9:44 amHonestly it’s like the Python sketch of Conquistador Coffee, clueless doesn’t cover this:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0110/A_Trade_Center_image_in_DSCC_spot.html?showall
ian cormac (dfb136) — 1/15/2010 @ 9:55 amBrown’s about as conservative as anyone can possibly expect from Massachusettes. If Frum wants to try to derive some kind of sweeping national narrative based on the Brown-Coakley race, then he’s either even dumber than I already knew or he’s being disingenous.
radar (98f691) — 1/15/2010 @ 10:22 amI’m still skeptical.
And Frum is a still an ignorant clown.
Subotai (ca386c) — 1/15/2010 @ 10:28 amI had a deeper thought about this after lunch.
Look, why was it that Kennedy had such a cinch each time he ran?
Well, first he had two brothers shot.
Second, after a while it became extreme seniority.
Third, the intimidation factor. Republicans began to think it was impossible to beat him, so they didn’t run very good candidates against him. So in a sense kennedy’s undefeatability became a self-fulfilling prophesy.
Well, needless to say coakley doesn’t get much juice from the kennedy legacy. And of course the intimidation factor went away in that an enterprising candidate, brown, saw that a republican had a real chance at this pick up.
And then there is seniority. Whoever is elected, will be the junior senator from mass. The question then becomes who can be depended on the bring home the bacon? And this is where Coakley’s amateurishness really was devastating, because if you just wanted a little graft you would take one look at her and say, “she’ll never get me any.” I am not saying brown will give out graft, but it’s at least possible because he is a competent politician.
so, fwiw, that is my analysis.
A.W. (e7d72e) — 1/15/2010 @ 10:37 ambtw, here is a rousing message in support of coakley:
“Yes it sucks. Yes you have to vote Coakley.”
You can read more of it, here: http://www.nationalreview.com/baystate/post/?q=NTQzNzQyNGQxN2RiYzgyYWI3YjA5OGFjZTI3Y2U2ODU=
Heh, this is getting fun.
A.W. (e7d72e) — 1/15/2010 @ 10:45 amBrown has shown himself an open and accessible candidate, optimistic and without rancor. In short – he’s running exactly the kind of campaign that we alleged RINOs have been urging on the GOP for months now.
Did David “We are all doomed unless we adapt the lefts agenda” Frum REALLY just describe himself as an optimist?
Subotai (ca386c) — 1/15/2010 @ 10:50 amNot when we still have the chattering skull of Byrd.
quasimodo (4af144) — 1/15/2010 @ 11:10 am“If it’s not close, they can’t cheat!”
AD - RtR/OS! (bc0057) — 1/15/2010 @ 11:13 amWhy would Frum want to gloat that Scott Brown is actually a pansy like him though? How is that helpful to getting him elected?
happyfeet (71f55e) — 1/15/2010 @ 11:14 amThe cluelessness of someone using the WTC in an attack ad is indicative of the Democrats’ problems in Mass. They haven’t had to fight a battle in so long they have lost the ability.
Brown, assuming he wins and I think he will now, is going to be a major figure in the GOP Why ? Look at the guy ! Look at the video of him shaking hands at the hockey game. He is a skilled retail politician. We don’t have many of them. Unless he goes high hat in the Senate, he will be another Thune but with a manner that will resonate in the northeast. He can talk to union guys and to ethnic folks from Staten Island.
This guy has unlimited upside potential.
Mike K (2cf494) — 1/15/2010 @ 11:38 amwow, and coakley is soft on pedophile priests.
http://bigjournalism.com/ghewson/2010/01/14/marthas-greatest-hits-the-things-the-democrats-would-like-you-to-forget-about-candidate-coakley-2/#more-6242
i guess the only catholics that coakley wants to jail are the ones who don’t want to kill children. *rolls eyes.*
A.W. (e7d72e) — 1/15/2010 @ 11:39 amThe difference between Romney and Brown, besides 16 years, is when Ted tried to blame Reagan for poverty, racism, and the plague, Romney said, well
ian cormac (dfb136) — 1/15/2010 @ 11:43 amI was an independent then; that’s the Frum approach
The latest attemt by the Coakley, “Brain Trust”, uses the World Trade Center,as an attack ad against Brown.This should end Coakleys’ political career.
mike191 (d4febe) — 1/15/2010 @ 11:57 amOthers are all excited about a poll by Research 2000 commissioned by Blue Mass Group:
BlueMassGroupPoll
It puts Coakley up 8, but still below 50%
The commentary on the BlueMassGroup page is that the local media is obviously biased, because they are highlighting the Suffolk Poll and ignoring the BMG poll.
DOuglas2 (62fec6) — 1/15/2010 @ 12:20 pmmike191
Wait, i saw the ad, but its actually entitled “brain trust?”
Bwahahahaha.
A.W. (e7d72e) — 1/15/2010 @ 12:23 pmComment by A.W. — 1/15/2010 @ 11:39 am
She’s fine with keeping them in jail if they were convicted with tainted/manufactured testimony devoid of any actual physical evidence.
A real piece of work!
AD - RtR/OS! (bc0057) — 1/15/2010 @ 12:35 pm“The Scott Brown who may rescue the country from Obamacare is not a talk radio conservative.”
Frum is becoming more irrelevant by the day. We are talking about Mass. here, not Texas. His views on a lot of issues will be different. And “talk radio” conservatives are supporting him and contributing millions to his campaign, thereby destroying another Frum meme, that “talk radio conservatives” are stupid.
CC (59b6a2) — 1/15/2010 @ 12:35 pm“The Scott Brown who may rescue the country from Obamacare is not a talk radio conservative.”
Duh. Frum is becoming more irrelevant by the day. We are talking about Mass. here, not Texas. His views on a lot of issues will be different. And “talk radio” conservatives are supporting him and contributing millions to his campaign, thereby destroying another Frum meme, that “talk radio conservatives” are stupid.
CC (59b6a2) — 1/15/2010 @ 12:36 pmIndicative of Coakley’s lack of any integrity at all was attacking Brown as a “defender” of insurance companies after she attended a fundraiser of insurance industry lobbyists this week.
Typical really of Democrat rhetoric.
SPQR (26be8b) — 1/15/2010 @ 12:43 pmMeanwhile back on planet “Pelosi” …
Neo (7830e6) — 1/15/2010 @ 12:44 pmMike K.:
I think the path to a majority for Republicans is through libertarian policies.
Hear, hear!
David Rodham Frum
It would be a travesty if Brown’s victory is seized upon as a victory for anger, paranoia, and ideological extremism.
Jeer, jeer!
Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (a18ddc) — 1/15/2010 @ 12:47 pmBradley, Frum doesn’t get it. If you go to his blog, it is dominated by lefties ranting about all the terrible Rush Limbaugh listeners. Dorothy Rabinowitz, who wrote the definitive book on the child abuse scandals of the 80s, has a piece today about Coakley’s role in the Amirault case. The comments are 90% appropriate but not all.
So, Coakley becomes Middlesex County District Attorney Martha Coakley in 1999, 14 years after charges were filed in the case, and 13 years after the convictions, however, it’s ‘all Coakley’s fault?’
The case was DUMPED into Coakley’s lap, and the first thing she did was reach an agreement with Cheryl Amirault whereby she would be sentenced to the time served and she was released. Yeah, really inhumane of Coakley..
The commentator fails to mention, surprisingly, that prior to Coakley’s taking over as DA, the the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court had reinstated the conviction TWICE, overturning appeals by lower courts. Coakley’s total involvement in the case ended in April, 2004 when Gerald’s sentence was commuted; in the twenty year history of the case, Coakley’s brief tenure helming the prosecution marked the end of the Amirault’s ordeal, another point the writer glosses over as not worth pointing out.
This is what Coakley’s defenders sound like. These are the kind of people who would put the World Trade Center in a TV ad as symbol of greedy bankers.
That’s how I know Coakley is toast. Only massive, really massive, cheating could save her.
Mike K (2cf494) — 1/15/2010 @ 1:07 pmAs to Frum… I’m sure it’s the widespread acceptance of liberal positions that’s fueling the million dollar a day donation rate. Yeah, nothing to do with the tea parties.
Hadlowe (061332) — 1/15/2010 @ 1:09 pmWell, Mike K., hopefully massive cheating won’t happen. I’m not holding my breath.
It’s amazing to me that between the Amirault case, the Cop-Rapes-Toddler-With-Hot-Curling-Iron case and the Rogue Pedophile Priest case she hasn’t already been chased off the eastern seaboard by angry mobs with torches and pitchforks. She is a HORRID candidate.
Vivian Louise (eeeb3a) — 1/15/2010 @ 1:18 pm“David Rodham Frum
It would be a travesty if Brown’s victory is seized upon as a victory for anger, paranoia, and ideological extremism.”
Extremism? A Republican succeeding in Massachusetts is clearly moderate. It’s a huge tent that holds MA and TX together. Frum thinks government solves all our problems, and Tea partiers and lots of other folks think there are many cases where government makes things worse. That’s not paranoia. It’s kinda nutty not to realize the truth of this view by now. Frum refuses to engage his ideological opponents on the right by taking their arguments at face value. A lot of these beltway republicans and democrats have to demonize Tea partiers with ridiculous descriptions fitting Branch Davidians.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 1/15/2010 @ 1:22 pmAllahpundit pessimism meter rising:
AP pessimism meter check: 2.0, up a point from last night, indicating mounting concern and increased chances of heart-ache.
Official Internet Data Office (c93f96) — 1/15/2010 @ 1:24 pmMike, interesting link. I was especially outraged by this:
I’d love to hear a Coakley defender explain her assault on the Constitution right to counsel.
SPQR (26be8b) — 1/15/2010 @ 1:25 pmThe Amirault case in Mass or the Snowden case in Florida ought to derail any prosecutor forever, but apparently not Coakley or Janet Reno. At least it got recognize in the duke rape case before anyone went to prison.
Joe (38e73c) — 1/15/2010 @ 1:29 pmNot that any more info is needed on Coakley’s ridiculous abuse of power, but I found the story at Aceofspades about the heart transplant denial, denied because Coakley feared the remote possibility that the removal of the heart from the victim of a crime (a braindead victim), would reveal the victim had medical problems that would confuse the proximate cause of death. In other words, she avoided learning exculpatory evidence and giving it to the jury, even if it meant an innocent third party was denied a life saving heart donation.
Her role should have been justice, not to win and boost her career. I don’t understand, however, why someone so bent on self promotion has not passionately tried to win this more prestigious re-election. She was willing to kill people and keep the innocent in prison, but she took a vacation during most of her campaign?
Perhaps she is simply erratic and mean, instead of hellbent on her career.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 1/15/2010 @ 1:36 pmBradley, Frum doesn’t get it. If you go to his blog, it is dominated by lefties ranting about all the terrible Rush Limbaugh listeners.
I had a sneaking suspicion that was the case. I’m also one of those terrible Rush Limbaugh listeners. It is uncanny how he can predict the distortions of the state-controlled media and its minders, like Media Matters.
Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (a18ddc) — 1/15/2010 @ 1:45 pmAnother typical desperate Frum attempt to get some attention.
chaos (9c54c6) — 1/15/2010 @ 1:54 pmThe easiest way for a ‘conservative’ to get favorable media attention is to attack the right.
Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (a18ddc) — 1/15/2010 @ 1:58 pmThis is the first time that I’ve donated to an out-of-state candidate. Since it’s unlikely that at present I’ll have any true representation here in Illinois, I’m happy to donate to Brown to see if we can kill Obama’s pathetic agenda.
Rochf (ae9c58) — 1/15/2010 @ 2:39 pmFrum misses several points:
1) The Tea Party people are the ones donating the money
2) The Tea Party people are the ones donating time
3) The support of the grass roots is the only reason this race is even competitive
4) The Tea Party protests of the healthcare bill, and the outrage evident therein, are the only reasons this bill wasn’t already passed back in August
If it weren’t for those damn “talk radio conservatives” Coakley would be walking away with this thing.
bill (7ed7cb) — 1/15/2010 @ 3:25 pmWell, guess who’ll be a convenient scapegoat if Coakley loses?
With a Last Name Like Kennedy, Libertarian Could Be Spoiler in Massachusetts
The libertarian candidate in Tuesday’s special election for the late Ted Kennedy’s Senate seat is named Joe Kennedy, raising the possibility that some confused voters may pull the lever for a man they don’t support. . .
Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (a18ddc) — 1/15/2010 @ 4:19 pmDemocrats have just announced that Coakley is within “striking” distance of Brown and AP is starting to believe that 15 point poll may not be so far fetched
BTW DeDe is much more conservative than Brown – but hey – lets not go there again 🙂
I another Note Boxer in CA is sinking in the polls and is well below 50% and all her opponents are within margin of error
This is starting to look like a Tsunami is forming
EricPWJohnson (86d084) — 1/15/2010 @ 4:34 pmI don’t think Kennedy will get more votes than the margin between Brown and Coakley. Libertarians with a brain will probably vote for Brown. Anyone who hasn’t heard enough about this election to know who is running is pretty good at avoiding information.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 1/15/2010 @ 4:35 pmEven state-controlled NPR is reporting Brown’s surge, probably to give
Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (a467ac) — 1/15/2010 @ 4:45 pmthe most accurate information to their listenerstheir lefty audience a head start on facing an unpleasant prospect.Dorothy Rabinowitz, who wrote the definitive book on the child abuse scandals of the 80s, has a piece today about Coakley’s role in the Amirault case. Comment by Mike K — 1/15/2010 @ 1:07 pm
I don’t know what’s worse about people who are so deficient in common sense and basic logic. Their believing the accused in a trial is innocent in spite of overwhelming evidence (eg, DNA) to the contrary (Hey, OJ Simpson!), or their believing the accused is guilty in spite of evidence so weak that its flimsiness and absurdity can be detected a mile away.
For those folks who don’t click on the link provided by Mike K, I find the following excerpts from Dorothy Rabinowitz’s column to be so stunning and damning, that they alone indicate Oakley is a truly idiotic, truly irresponsible, truly even somewhat retarded individual.
She’s the type of decisionmaker who has brought about so much misery, dysfunction and decline in communities and societies throughout the course of human history.
Mark (411533) — 1/15/2010 @ 8:26 pmEPWJ throws out an intentional mud-sling and then tries to claim the high ground. How utterly cowardly of EPWJ to do that. *golf clap*
Now you evil Libertarians out there, you know who you are, the you cannot win without the Republicans. Just as we pure Conservatives cannot win without the Republicans. Or so say the Republican power-brokers.
I say the Republicans cannot win without the Libertarians. I also say the Republicans cannot win without the Conservatives. And I would venture a guess the TEA Party/912 Project/Town Hall people are by a super-majority a conglomerate of Libertarians and Conservatives.
In some races in some places (MA and NYC for examples), we both have to hold our noses and say “well, at least he’s on this side of the fence” but in others, if we band together, we can definitely trash the GOP power-brokers and put a real candidate in. There is no reason a strong candidate in CO or OH can’t beat back the mealy-mouthed RNC/NRCC and get the vote.
John Hitchcock (3fd153) — 1/15/2010 @ 9:31 pm