Saturday, January 16, 2010

News media shock over Massachusetts Senate race.

British newspaper The Guardian reports this story from The Associated Press reported today:
Analysis: Voter ire evident in Mass. Senate race
By LIZ SIDOTI AP National Political Writer The Associated Press
Saturday, January 16, 2010 1:44 PM EST

WASHINGTON (AP) — The ill winds of an angry electorate are blowing against Democrats, the warning signs clear in a closer-than-expected Massachusetts Senate race that may doom President Barack Obama's health care agenda and foreshadow the party's election prospects this fall.

Anti-incumbent, anti-establishment sentiment is rampant. Independents are leaving Obama. Republicans are energized. Democrats are subdued. None of it bodes well for the party in power.

"It's going to be a hard November for Democrats," Howard Dean, the Democratic Party chairman in the 2006 and 2008 elections when the party took control of the White House and Congress, told The Associated Press in an interview. "Our base is demoralized."
Beltway Confidential has this story:
Massachusetts: 'Bottom has fallen out' of Coakley's polls; Dems prepare to explain defeat, protect Obama

By: Byron York
Chief Political Correspondent
01/15/10 7:10 AM EST

Here in Massachusetts, as well as in Washington, a growing sense of gloom is setting in among Democrats about the fortunes of Democratic Senate candidate Martha Coakley. "I have heard that in the last two days the bottom has fallen out of her poll numbers," says one well-connected Democratic strategist. In her own polling, Coakley is said to be around five points behind Republican Scott Brown. "If she's not six or eight ahead going into the election, all the intensity is on the other side in terms of turnout," the Democrat says. "So right now, she is destined to lose."
Gateway Pundit carried this story:

Saturday, January 16, 2010, 1:52 PM
Jim Hoft
The (democ)rats are jumping ship.

One in five democrats in Massachusetts is going with Scott Brown.
And, there’s more bad news for democrat Martha Coakley…
Scott Brown is leading in the absentee voting 58-42. 9% of registered voters said they have already cast a ballot.
Real Clear Politics reported:

Coakley loses one-in-five Democrats to Brown, while the Republican state senator has 94 percent of Republicans behind him. Brown has a commanding 58-37 advantage among “unenrolled” voters, mainly independents and those who prefer not to register affiliation with the major parties.
A trend worth noting as well: 9 percent of voters say they’d already cast a ballot through absentee voting. Brown leads Coakley among this group 58-42.
And if anyone doubts how desperate the Democrats are getting up in Massachusetts, here are two stories about Bill Clinton, the recently appointed Special  Envoy for the United Nation Haiti Relief, taking time off from his pressing needs to go on the campaign trail for Martha Coakley.
Clinton: Haiti relief, Dem politicking are 'two sides of the same coin'

By: Byron York
Chief Political Correspondent
01/16/10 8:42 AM EST

Some observers have questioned why former President Bill Clinton, who is the United Nations special envoy for Haiti, took time away from earthquake relief efforts to travel to Massachusetts to campaign for Martha Coakley, the Democratic candidate for Senate. Clinton appeared at two rallies Friday in an effort to shore up Coakley's faltering campaign and stop the momentum of Republican opponent Scott Brown.

On Mass. campaign trail, National Review catches up with the UN Envoy to Haiti

By: David Freddoso
Online Opinion Editor
01/15/10 5:34 PM EST

Robert Costa of National Review ran into Bill Clinton in Massachusetts today and spoke with him as he stumped for Democratic Senate candidate Martha Coakley:
When I told him that some had been critical of his decision to stump for Coakley while hundreds of thousands are still trapped under rubble, he responded with annoyance: “Who?” he challenged, “who is criticizing me? It’s your problem if you can’t see how these things aren’t mutually exclusive.” Electing Coakley, he said, will “help lead to good governance” that will support Haiti while it rebuilds.
That's some logic.


  1. Barack Obama, Media Man

    There’s something very wrong about political figures getting a free pass from the MSM or, worse, being idolized, lionized by an institution that historically, rightly, should be detached from politics and politicians so that it can accomplish its underlying raison d’ĂȘtre objectively.

    We’re presently witnessing a journalistic sea change in which, instead of honest reporting on the political scene and on those who inhabit that scene, we’re seeing media fulfilling the role of lap dogs, snuggling up to Democrats in general and Barack Obama in particular in hopes of getting a gentle pat on the head and entry into the inner sanctums of their worlds.

    In the past 18 months or so, Americans have witnessed a media phenomenon, a unique–and unfortunate–alteration in our media in which they have become virtual appendages of a political figure and a political party. In that process, the media have abnegated their informational responsibilities and disgraced their sacred duty toward our democratic republic.

    Formerly reputable newspapers such as the New York Times, the Washington Post, the L.A. Times, magazines such as Newsweek, Time, and the US News and World Report, regularly bury and ignore news that would reflect unfavorably on the president, brazenly distort reports on his failures, and shamelessly exaggerate his abilities and accomplishments as if they were operating in the Pravda mode of the defunct U.S.S.R.

    In pre-internet, pre-YouTube, pre-24/7/365 cable news coverage times, media were far better able to misrepresent and mis-report, . . .

    (

  2. A lady from Massachusetts who calls herself QueenBee on her blog!57C67D21BFBFAD82!1331.entry
    posted this comment on the special election:
    I've noticed "Scott Brown for U.S. Senate" signs all over the place in front of lots of homes here in Massachusetts—which is not the norm. It would surprise the heck out of me if Coakley gets in because nobody I know is voting for that trashbag. It's going to be interesting to see how this election plays out. If it plays out the way we hope it will (that Coakley loses), watch the Democrats go into a frenzy because they would lose their power votes in the Senate and the Republicans would be able to filibuster. They must be panicking because they sent out Bill Clinton and now Obama is coming to Massachusetts later today (Sunday) to rally for Coakley. It's still not motivating her popularity among voters. Even when the tasteless TV ad of Ted Kennedy's wife tells voters to vote for Coakley "in honor of her husband". How low can the Democrats go? My only hope is Obama gets the same results as he got when he rallied for the Olympics on behalf of Chicago, his talk at the Climate Conference and when he tried to get Rep. Jon Corzine reelected in New Jersey—he failed on all counts.


No foreign language comments allowed. English only. If you cannot access the comments window send me an email at