The bad news for Republican Scott Brown in Massachusetts? Obama-who remains popular in the state-is planning a last-minute campaign appearance to prop up Martha Coakley, who is doing all she can to make Creigh Deeds look like an awesome candidate. The good news for Scott Brown? Creigh Deeds, Jon Corzine, and the Chicago Olympic committee all found out that Obama doesn’t have the pull he thinks he does. Maybe it’ll be different in Massachusetts…or maybe not:
But, in reality, the situation is a lot worse for Dems than it appears. According to strategists familiar with internal polls conducted for Coakley’s campaign, the consequences of Obama’s visit could produce a net-negative effect on Coakley’s campaign.
Obama has a net favorable rating in MA, according to public and private polls…But the intensity of voters who view him unfavorably, or who disapprove of his job performance, is so high that an appearance with Coakley could bring out more GOPers ready to vote for Brown than it could Dems set on their nominee.
“Obama is radioactive in polls,” said one senior Dem operative who has seen the campaign’s internal numbers. “Every time they dropped his name in a poll, it was awful. So you just can’t take those kinds of chances.”
We’ll see, I guess. The fact he is planning to stop in deep blue Massachusetts to try and salvage Teddy’s old seat for the Dems tells you all you need to know about how nervous Democrats are getting. Given that, you’d think they’d be on their best behavior. Not so. Check out this DSCC ad put out on Coakley’s behalf:
In case you missed it, they used an old image of the World Trade Center as they attacked Brown over Wall Street greed. Great job, guys…they pulled the ad and replaced the image. By the way, it takes some awfully big stones to suggest Brown won’t “stand up” to insurance companies when the Democrat is the one grabbing all the health care industry cash she can.
I still expect Coakley will win Tuesday, but it certainly is no longer a fait accompli.
UPDATE: Coakley really needs to stop giving interviews. Who knew Curt Schilling, who helped the Boston Red Sox win their first World Series in decades, was actually a Yankee fan? Only Martha, apparently.
#1 by megan on January 16th, 2010
| Quote
I kind of agree with her on the emergency room thing. Or at least the idea behind it. (How many people use the emergency room for birth control?)
If you are morally opposed to performing an aspect of a job, it probably isn’t the best job choice for you. I doubt the bacon factory would be a good place for a Muslim to work and a pacifist Mennonite shouldn’t pursue a career in the military. I wouldn’t seek work in an abortion clinic or most OBGYN offices.
A business can’t afford to hire someone that won’t do everything the job entails.
#2 by Frank J Witt on January 16th, 2010
| Quote
you mean, like spend most of the work day on the internet and then complain when they “lay you off”……..sounds vaguely familiar, but I can’t put my finger on her name.
#3 by Anon on January 16th, 2010
| Quote
I think the main issue with her statement has to do with her apparent ignorance, even as the state AG, of MA’s conscience exemption. I too wouldn’t choose to work in a job where I might be asked to do something that ran counter to my values, but at the same time I can understand why they’d want to enter the field but hope their objections to certain things would be respected.
And Frank, to whom are you referring? I agree that if you spend all day at work surfing the net you shouldn’t be surprised if they lay you off, but what specifically are you referring to?
#4 by Frank J Witt on January 17th, 2010
| Quote
a while back, when she had a job, she would sit in her little downtown office and type about ALL sorts of stuff on what appears to her favorite blog, of the news type, then complained when they laid he off…
I know too many people that I would not tolerate…especially wasting as much time as they do on the computers not business related. Thankfully, all my work is done on the road, then at home I mix my work with internet while faxing papers….
#5 by John Doe on January 17th, 2010
| Quote
Most nurses did not choose their profession knowing that the state would come in and force them to do something that violates their conscience. Most probably never even dreamed that it might happen. So, after they are deep in debt, spent years of training and practice, suddenly they should just change professions because some new Senator says so?
To me, it’s like saying I have to change professions because the state passes a law suddenly that I have to represent confessed killers and try my best to get them off. Let some other smuck do it. They have designated lawyers who get off on that sort of thing, just as they have doctors who perform abortion.
To me, they are just trying to jam it down the throats of the nurses who object: “You vill obey!” [said in most sinister sounding Nazi voice]
#6 by Anon on January 17th, 2010
| Quote
Well Frank, I guess she now has all the time in the world to go to her favorite blog and post to her heart’s delight. Funny thing about employers: in general, they kinda want you working while at work.
#7 by Frank J Witt on January 18th, 2010
| Quote
IMAGINE THAT…being expected to actually perform AT WORK…darn personal responsibilities…..HA HA HA