Posted on 01/10/2010 2:37:37 AM PST by Zakeet
Democrat Martha Coakley, buoyed by her durable statewide popularity, enjoys a solid, 15-percentage-point lead over Republican rival Scott Brown as the race for US Senate enters the homestretch, according to a new Boston Globe poll of likely voters.
Half of voters surveyed said they would pick Coakley, the attorney general, if the election were held today, compared with 35 percent who would pick Brown. Nine percent were undecided, and a third candidate in the race, independent Joseph L. Kennedy, received 5 percent.
Coakley’s lead grows to 17 points - 53 percent to 36 percent - when undecideds leaning toward a candidate are included in the tally. The results indicate that Brown has a steep hill to climb to pull off an upset in the Jan. 19 election. Indeed, the poll indicated that nearly two-thirds of Brown’s supporters believe Coakley will win.
“She’s simply better known and better liked than Brown,’’ said Andrew E. Smith, director of the University of New Hampshire Survey Center, which conducted the poll for the Globe.
“If there ever was a time for a Republican to win here, now is the time,’’ Smith added. “The problem is you’ve got a special election and a relatively unknown Republican going up against a well-liked Demo crat.’’
The poll, conducted Jan. 2 to 6, sampled the views of 554 randomly selected likely voters. The poll has a margin of error of 4.2 percentage points.
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
Sigh, we had a Brown thread the other day and I got trolled pretty hard for saying the same thing. My state has its pockets of morons as do most states. Mass though...marone! From border to border, utterly brain dead, at least 65% of the population. When did that state go off the rails so much, why are so many Mass folks so utterly corrupt, ignorant and covetous.
“Bubba wouldn’t be getting involved if Coakley were actually up 15 points.”
And neither would Massachusetts Dem political operative, former Ted Kennedy staffer and Kennedy family cronie Mary Anne Marsh if Coakley weren’t in deep doo doo. Go Scott Go!!!
This Boston Globe poll reminds me of Newsweek’s final poll in the 2004 presidential election that showed Kerry up by 9, don’t you agree?
Here’s that Boston Globe poll we’d mentioned in another thread. Small sample polled by a newspaper that the New York Times owns.
“..and it doesn’t identify the independent candidate by name at all”
Rasmussen (Coakley 50 - Brown 41) didn’t name the Libertarian candidate Joseph Kennedy either simply because he is polling extremely low. Do you remember NJ’s gov race last year and all the hype about the Libertarian candidate polling between 12 and 18 points? When it was all said and done on election night the 3rd party candidate got 5%.
This is going to be a close race either way. I still think SB pulls it off. Rasmussen and PPP polls seem to be the ones that are most accurate, IIRC.
Did you see his new TV ad? The one with him and his truck with 199,000+ miles on it? The ad ends with him walking in the front door at his house and someone saying “Hi Dad”.
Great ad- shows he’s a “regular guy”, not a pseudo-aristocrat like Maaaarth!
Go ahead dems, go back to sleep, this is Uncle Teds seat we are talking about.
Chances are that adds a couple of points to Brown’s total, however—because that’s where more of Kennedy’s voters are coming from.
Hey, I think the momentum is still swinging his way and he could pull it off. The Globe poll is clear propaganda, I’m just thinking the other poll might have been reaching a bit on the other side as well.
Sssh, dont wke the dems from their sleep.
Only us political junkies know this.
I like the fact that you are taking UNH to task by providing cold hard evidence!!!
Posts like yours are what make FReeping great!!!
wke= wake
I remember JP Licks. A lame attempt to be Ben & Jerry with a Bulletin Board covered with ads for Various New Age Services and Lonely Daughters of Sappho looking for new partners.
Time to do a little digging ...
wiki:
Controversy
Coakley has refused to investigate Thomas M. Menino, Mayor of Boston, and his office for allegedly violating laws in regards to destruction of public e-mail records.[citation needed] Coakley denies all accusations of misconduct.[21]
She also declined to reprimand the state’s District Attorneys in relation to false statements they allegedly made regarding the effects of the state’s voter approved Massachusetts Sensible Marijuana Policy Initiative and allegations the District Attorneys misused state resources (website) and failed to file as designated ballot committee in a timely manner while receiving contributions as required by law while challenging the initiative.[22].
The statements by the District Attorneys included allegedly inaccurate and misleading warnings in an effort to defeat the law, such as that if the law passed “any person may carry and use marijuana at any time.” When declining to pursue the case Coakley’s office responded with “nothing in the proposed law explicitly forbids public use of the drug”. This basically ignores the fact that the law still levies a $100 fine and confiscation for adults, as well as additional mandatory community service for minors for the act of possession, and in order to use you would have to possess the drug.[23]
The failure to file as a ballot committee allegedly stems from the fact state records show the district attorneys began raising money as early as July 18, 2008 but did not file a statement of organization with the state until Sept. 5, 2008. [24].
Coakley was herself a member of The Coalition for Safe Streets, the political action group eventually formed by the District Attorneys to fight the ballot question but did not feel it was necessary to recuse herself from any decisions based on any possible conflict of interest grounds.[25]
//
(no links)
AG ducks Herald, sends us on wild goose chase
By Edward Mason
Friday, October 16, 2009
Martha Coakley is running - but not from a Herald reporter’s tough questions, she insists.
The attorney general, who’s campaigning for the U.S. Senate, has gone to great lengths to avoid questions about her flip-flop on the City Hall e-mail flap, leading a Herald reporter on a wild chase down a long hallway and through a gift shop at the Fairmont Copley Plaza last week.
Then at the State House yesterday, Coakley twice refused to answer the same Herald reporter’s questions about her apparent use of state money to fund federal campaign activities, even as she took queries from other media.
“I’m not going to talk to you about it,” Coakley told reporter Hillary Chabot. “Anybody else have any questions?”
(snip)
A spokesman for state Sen. Scott Brown (R.-Wrentham), who’s also running for Kennedy’s seat, agreed. “As the commonwealth’s chief law enforcement officer, Martha Coakley must be held to a higher standard,” said Felix Browne. “Legitimate questions have been put to her, and she needs to answer them.”
Beyond Coakley’s about-face on whether she would probe the destruction of City Hall e-mails, the Herald has reported that Coakley accepted an honorary law degree from Suffolk University while her office was investigating the school in a conflict-of-interest case.
//
Coakley flip-flops, probes e-mails AG steps in as mayor’s office scandal expands
Boston Herald (MA) - Thursday, October 8, 2009
Author: DAVE WEDGE and RICHARD WEIR
Flip-flopping on an issue that has hounded her on the U.S. Senate campaign trail, Attorney General Martha Coakley now says she will investigate the intensifying e-mail scandal surrounding Mayor Thomas M. Menino .
Coakley’s abrupt reversal came as the individual at the center of “e-mailgate” - Menino ‘s top aide Michael Kineavy - took an unpaid leave of absence and City Hall admitted a computer formerly used by the aide has suddenly turned up.
(snip)
BOX: WHAT SHE SAID THEN, WHAT SHE SAYS NOW:
Attorney General Martha Coakley has changed her tune since balking at taking on the City Hall e-mail scandal three weeks ago. Here’s what she has said:
Sept. 15: Asked if she would heed Boston mayoral candidate Michael Flaherty’s call to investigate the missing City Hall e-mails, Coakley said she would defer to Secretary of State William Galvin.
“Particularly understanding this is the middle of a (mayoral) campaign, we get lots of complaints from folks who are adversaries who have a particular agenda.”
“If (Galvin) feels that needs to be referred to our office for further investigation he will do that,” she added.
Yesterday: Coakley reversed course and said she is now involved in the case.
“Secretary Galvin’s office has been working on this matter to ensure, first and foremost, that all public records are preserved, and also to determine whether there have been any violations of the public records law by city officials. We are now involved in that review. ...and we remain prepared to conduct a full investigation and take all necessary steps to guarantee the preservation of evidence and full compliance with the law.
//
AG’s critics cite degree of concern Coakley takes heat over Suffolk University honor
Boston Herald (MA) - Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Author: HILLARY CHABOT
Attorney General Martha Coakley donned a cap and gown to receive an honorary law degree from Suffolk University as her office actively probed a school trustee for conflict of interest - and maintains she did not have to get ethics clearance first.
Coakley cleared the university of any legal violations just two months after she nabbed the coveted honorary Doctor of Law degree in May.
Coakley spokeswoman Emily LaGrassa said the attorney general didn’t disclose the honorary degree to the State Ethics Commission because the degree “has no monetary value.”
But Ken Boehm of the ethics watchdog agency National Legal and Policy Center blasted Coakley over the Suffolk honor: “By any ethical yardstick, that’s way over the line and it shouldn’t have happened. Anything of value received from someone under investigation is wholly inappropriate.”
(snip)
//
Brown: Coakley letting ACORN fall through cracks
Boston Herald (MA) - Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Author: HILLARY CHABOT
Republican U.S. Senate candidate Scott Brown blasted his Democratic rival Attorney General Martha Coakley yesterday for failing to crack down on two local chapters of the controversial liberal group ACORN despite their repeated failure to file financial reports with her office.
“It appears as though the attorney general is looking the other way,” said state Sen. Scott Brown. “It’s her job to determine whether non-profits are properly licensed to do business, especially when they oversee state funds.”
The local office of ACORN - a grassroots organization that enrolls voters and helps secure housing for low-income families - never filed annual reports with the AG’s public charities division in 2006 and 2008, as required by law. Also, ACORN Housing - a branch of the organization which has received a $33,000 state grant - hasn’t filed a report since 2006.
The reports are supposed to detail how the nonprofits collect and spend their money.
The controversial non-profit - an acronym for the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now - is under renewed national scrutiny after several of its national offices were videotaped giving tips on how to cheat on taxes to two conservative activists masquerading as a pimp and a prostitute.
Coakley spokeswoman Emily Lagrassa said the AG has contacted both ACORN offices multiple times and is prepared to place ACORN and ACORN Housing on a non-compliance list. “We are going through the appropriate steps that we would with any organization to ensure they are complying with the law,” she said.
(snip)
//
Op-Ed Lack of conviction No compass to Coakley
Boston Herald (MA) - Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Author: MICHAEL GRAHAM
Does Attorney General Martha Coakley really believe in “magic rooms”? And if she does, should Bay Staters believe in her?
I realize it’s now gauche to bring up a candidate’s resume and experience. So what if we’re sending an untested leader to Washington to face war and recession? It’s not like they’re going to do something really stupid - like spend millions to “save or create” nonexistent jobs in fictional congressional districts, or give the 9/11 terrorists a trial with all the rights of U.S. citizens.
Right, Mr. President?
Still, I’m old fashioned on these matters, so I spent a few hours reviewing Coakley’s list of legislative and leadership accomplishments. Remember the pamphlet “Great Jewish Sports Legends” from the movie “Airplane”? It’s about that long.
And I ran into a name I hadn’t heard in awhile: Amirault.
The current controversy is over Coakley’s mishandling of the Rev. John Geoghan case. But her fight to keep the Amiraults in jail shows something worse than bad judgment - it shows she’s willing to put party loyalty over people’s lives.
If you lived in Massachusetts in the ‘80s, you remember the case. A grandmother and her two adult children who ran a day care were convicted of sexually assaulting very young children. The accusations were incredible in every sense of the word. As Dorothy Rabinowitz recounted in The Wall Street Journal:
“Children had supposedly been raped with knives - which miraculously failed to leave any signs of wounding or other injury - and been assaulted by a clown in a ‘magic room.’ Some children told - after interrogations by investigators - of being forced to drink urine, of watching the Amiraults slaughter blue birds, of meeting robots with flashing lights . . a child also testified he was tied naked to a tree in the schoolyard, in front of all the teachers and children, while ‘Miss Cheryl’ cut the leg off a squirrel.”
Uh-huh. Naked kids and squirrel mutilation in front of an audience, but then-Middlesex District Attorney Scott Harshbarger couldn’t find one witness. There was also no DNA evidence nor a motive. Lead prosecutor Lawrence Hardoon suggested child pornography, but nobody could find even one photo.
Hardoon’s answer: “Just because no evidence of photographs was found doesn’t mean that there were none.”
The Amirault case today is almost universally viewed as a a blot on the Massachusetts legal system. Almost. One holdout is Coakley.
In a statement to Blue Mass Group, Coakley said “I believe the conviction was sound and [Gerald Amirault] received a fair trial.”
Succeeding Harshbarger as district attorney, Coakley went even further. In 2001 when the parole board voted 5-0 to release Gerald Amirault, in part due to “the real and substantial doubt,” about his guilt, Coakley opposed it. In an unusual parole agreement with Coakley, Gerald’s sister Cheryl had to stop all challenges to her conviction and was banned from giving TV interviews.
What little courage it would have taken for Coakley to admit the error of the district attorney’s office. But she claims to believe in magic rape rooms and secret clowns.
Why? Because Coakley’s biggest resume item (other then her gender) is her party loyalty. Whether she’s protecting her fellow courthouse cronies, or letting the big fish wiggle off the Big Dig hook, Coakley is always carrying water for the Democratic establishment.
(snip)
Michael Graham hosts a talk show on 96.9 WTKK.
http://www.opensecrets.org/races/indus.php?cycle=2010&id=MAS1
Martha Coakley (D)
Industry Total
Lawyers/Law Firms $614,342
Democratic/Liberal $103,500
Securities & Investment $79,050
Hospitals/Nursing Homes $71,450
Women’s Issues $71,000
Retired $70,140
Real Estate $64,600
Business Services $54,800
Education $44,350
Misc Finance $32,250
Retail Sales $27,550
Health Professionals $23,550
Civil Servants/Public Officials $22,450
Misc Unions $20,000
Building Trade Unions $20,000
Food & Beverage $19,900
Beer, Wine & Liquor $16,900
Printing & Publishing $13,100
Misc Health $12,000
Misc Manufacturing & Distributing $11,900
//
Top Contributors
Select a cycle:
Martha Coakley (D)
Contributor Total
ActBlue $103,500
Mintz, Levin et al $84,000
EMILY’s List $64,250
Goodwin Procter LLP $48,150
Nixon Peabody LLP $30,927
Wilmerhale Llp $30,600
Cooley Manion Jones LLP $19,450
Bingham McCutchen LLP $17,600
United Liquors $16,900
Grant & Eisenhofer $14,898
Foley Hoag Llp $14,775
Caritas Christi Health Care $14,000
Edwards, Angell et al $12,850
Commonwealth of Massachusetts $12,450
FMR Corp $11,550
Vanguard Health Systems $11,400
Ropes & Gray $10,700
Boston Culinary Group $10,100
Home Depot $10,000
Painters & Allied Trades Union $10,000
Plumbers/Pipefitters Union $10,000
Service Employees International Union $10,000
As soon as I get my son leaves for school today, I will get my shovel :-)
Make that:
As soon as I my son leaves for school today, I will get my shovel :-)
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/politics/view.bg?articleid=1220446
Coakley, Brown sound off U.S. Senate candidates spar on WBZ
Boston Herald (MA) - Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Author: JESSICA VAN SACK
Attorney General Martha Coakley and state Sen. Scott Brown sparred face-to-face for the first time last night, dueling in a radio debate over health care and other issues after a bruising day that saw the Republican challenger put his Democratic rival on the defensive.
Brown, 50, the GOP nominee for the late Edward M. Kennedy’s U.S. Senate seat, accused Coakley of flip-flopping on her pledge to vote against a health-care bill with limits on abortion funding.
Coakley, 56 - who skewered her three Democratic foes over the abortion issue during the primary - now says she supports the current Senate bill despite abortion funding limits.
Earlier in the day, Brown also accused Coakley, the state’s $135,000-a-year attorney general, of playing fast and loose with the truth when she insisted she never benefited from Bush administration tax cuts.
“She’s either lying or she doesn’t understand federal tax code because, as somebody who makes what she makes, she got an across-the-board tax decrease, and she also benefited by the marriage penalty not being in effect,” Brown said during an appearance on WTKK-FM yesterday afternoon.
Coakley spokesman Corey Welford called Brown’s charge “ridiculous,” insisting that she was referring to the those tax cuts that benefited the 1 percent of wealthiest Americans - “those earning $1 million or more.”
Coakley wants to repeal the tax cuts, which are set to expire at the end of 2010, while Brown wants to keep them in place.
(snip)
Pol wants Big Dig firm ban Blasts governor for not going far enough
Boston Herald (MA) - Saturday, January 31, 2009
Author: HILLARY CHABOT
A top Beacon Hill lawmaker yesterday slammed Gov. Deval Patrick for allowing discredited Big Dig contractors responsible for a fatal tunnel ceiling collapse to continue doing business with state government.
Patrick recently blasted Massport officials for hiring Parsons Brinckerhoff even though MassHighway has paid the controversial firm more than $300,000 for engineering work since the governor took office, the Herald disclosed yesterday. However, the department has rejected or frozen bids from the contractor issued in fiscal 2008 for four state projects, including a bridge project in Amesbury.
(snip)
Patrick, who has the power to start the debarment process, deferred to Attorney General Martha Coakley , who was in negotiations with the companies. Patrick later supported Coakley’s settlement agreement to collect $458 million from the faulted contractors in exchange for not debarring them.
“He can’t be held responsible for issuing those contracts, but where he opens himself up for criticism is the debarment issue,” Baddour said.
“If we’re not going to debar them, then they can do work here. We can’t just keep talking ourselves into a circle. If they don’t ban them from working here, there’s no way we can keep them from state projects,” Baddour said.
Get the BIG one ... this requires a ‘big dig.’
:D
I agree 100 %. Conservative optimists are overlooking the massive vote fraud that will be taking place in the future. Commencing with the election of “The Divine One the far left has gained access to funding and power.” There is a good chance that no conservative will ever win another election.
ADMIN SLUSH FUNDS TO DATE:
(a) 80% of the trillion dollar stim is unspent and under Obama's control to finance endangered Dems 2010-12.
(b) June 9, 2009 Obama announced, "Several financial institutions are set to pay back $68B to taxpayers." Taxpayers assumed that would be returned to the general funds from whence it had come .......in order to pay down the debt. The truth, however, is that the money returned is finding new life as part of what amounts to a Treasury Dept-controlled slush fund....to finance candidates.
(3)Healthcare---the first four years of ObamaCare is to amass $$billions. Period. Healthcare does not kick in til 2013. Another gimmick pushes much of the legislation’s costs off the federal budget and onto the private sector by requiring individuals and employers to purchase health insurance....or pay a hefty fine or go to jail (only illegals are exempt from this provision).
===============================================
WHAT TO LOOK FOR IN MASS
Watch for any sudden infusions of "stimulus" that never materializes into tangible job activity.
Be very alarmed if candidates register one or more corporations in the state of Delaware. DEL is the number one state for financial secrecy (VP Biden was the US Sen from Delaware).
DEMAND candidates reveal their Del corporations, and any accounts they have offshore.
=================================
Conservatives must expose Dim profiling scheme wherever it surfaces. Key words here are "Democrats' Profiling."
HOW PROFILING WORKS Dims profile voters in specific districts; Dims then run message-controlled candidates, posing as amenable to the voter profile.
Endangered Dems are moving “familiar faces” around the country, to salvage whatever seats they can this November. The Dims have different colors of “dogs” -“blue,” “yellow,” “purple” - that they profile to run in specific voting districts........
Dims are much better at duping the electorate than the GOP. Rahm Emanuel profiled Republican voters, then ran Dems who posed as "reverential believers" in solid Republican districts, and they won. Emanuel even had Marxist candidate Obama say, "I want to be another Reagan."
Expose Coakley's profiling methods.
=========================================
Coakley‘s official campaign finance records filed with the FEC, and state election commissions, should be scrutinized for possible violations. Determine if names of contributors are legit and whether campaign funds were used illegally, and whether elected officials received tax dollars disguised as campaign contributions to influence Congressional votes.
Obama may have colluded and agreed to give something of value, campaign assiatance, campaign cash, a govt gratuity, jobs for relatives, etc, in exchange for votes.
FBI TIP PAGE http://tips.fbi.gov/ (you may remain anonymous)
Keep in mind that elected officials are held to a higher legal authority---what is acceptable behavior for citizens might be a crime for elected legislators under oath of office.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.