Posted on 09/17/2010 9:35:28 AM PDT by raccoonradio
The latest poll in the governor's race shows Gov. Deval Patrick and Republican challenger Charlie Baker running neck-and-neck.
But when the poll expands to included so-called "leaners" it's bad news for independent Tim Cahill.
According to the new Rasmussen Reports survey, Patrick leads Baker 42-to-38 percent. Cahill is a distant third with 11-percent.
But, when pollsters asked the undecided voters which candidate they're "leaning" towards, the numbers change.
Patrick leads Baker 45-to-42 percent, while Cahill loses more than half his support and drops to 5-percent.
The poll of 500 likely voters was conducted Wednesday, September 15. The margin of error is +/- 4.5 points.
Two weeks ago, before the debates started, Patrick led Baker by two points, 44-to-42-percent, while Cahill had eight-percent. Those numbers also included "leaners."
When leaners were excluded, Patrick led Baker 39-to-34, while Cahill had 18-percent.
As for Patrick's job approval rating in the Sept. 15 poll, voters are evenly split.
49-percent approve while 50-percent disapprove.
It’s a problem here in Massachusetts. We don’t have nearly enough conservatives, but that may change.
Slap to Baker’s face:
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/politics/view.bg?articleid=1282263&format=text
Polito should have run for governor.
yes I may have intended it for someone else.
Really only two candidates can win. Baker or Patrick. You could vote for Stein and either Baker or Patrick will win.
You could vote for Cahill and either Baker or Patrick will win. Yes, you may think it’s the same difference or that Baker would be even worse. Do what you will, but I can’t
see supporting Patrick in any way, including sitting out the election.
>>Polito is seeking votes from Republicans, independents and Democrats, because “winning is a game of addition, not subtraction.”
Is this saying that if a candidate goes after only the far right or only the far left, they couldn’t win? Brown needed
votes from across the political spectrum to get in. Baker,
and Polito, may need the same (OK, so liberals wouldn’t
nec be for Baker but moderates and “independents” will need to vote for him. Similarly Deval may not win if he just goes after the far left.)
I agree but there are some here who would rather see four more years of him than four of Baker. I settle for a partially full glass, not an empty one, though I do acknowledge that more than a few think it makes no difference whether one votes for Baker or for Patrick.
In this state, that means we may never have a Republican
governor again. We probably wouldn’t have a true conservative, surely, but if some Republicans turn up
their noses at the idea of people like Baker, we never will
have a Republican gov again.
Get a true conservative to run, third party. See how they do. (Probably as well as Cahill is doing now. What is he,
5 per cent among likely voters?) Yeah third party is
the ticket... :(
Then get more GOP into the districts. There could be significant gains this time around. It may take a few
election cycles to fully happen, but it’s a start.
Good points raccoon. I wish Polito was running for governor.
Again, I just cannot vote for Baker.
Right now I’m 60% voting for Stein or 40% blanking Gov. and Lt. Gov. altogether.
Or I could write in you and Howie - YEAH!!!
You make some good points, but what about Jim McKenna? I’m pretty excited about that, even if he doesn’t win.
Great he got on ballot now let’s get him in. Coakley losing to a guy who wasn’t even on the primary ballot but did get in through write ins!
I can’t wait until November. :)
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.