So Kerry has as much job approval as Brown, according to WNEC poll/

http://www1.wnec.edu/news/index.cfm?selection=doc.2507&DCIid=14248

Yes, it is scandalous given how little Brown does, but given that, according to some media outlets, Kerry is disliked and Brown is loved, this shows the disconnect between media and reality (which was basically confirmed by every single other polls, who were showing Kerry barely behind Brown). Let's be sure that this will not stop the media from repeating their meme, but it is good to know.

Now it is true that, taken at face value, the poll does look good for Brown, but given they test Brown against two candidates who are not running, are fairly unknown in the rest of the state (Boston area aside where they tie Brown), and that the independents are grossly overrepresentated, it is probably less dark that it looks at first view.

I agree with you that it is less dark than it seems. It also seems that this is a very nice rebound of Kerry's numbers.

Looking at the detailed results, I think the young were under-represented. That age group was too small to detail on the charts. There were 472 people surveyed and 37 were from 18 - 29. In 2008, 21.1% of eligible votes in MA were in that category. You would have expected more than double the 40 needed to detail that cell. (They seemed to use population weights to calculate the composite number.)

Other observations, Kerry does significantly better with women than Brown does - typical for democrats. One category where Brown has a huge advantage is with those over 65. (This group is over represented - they are 17.9% in the population and are about 25% here.)

I also suspect that if the Democrats are able to make an issue of the votes that Brown has cast - like the vote for the Wicker amendment that would have made unionization of the TSA illegal and the votes for the various Republican budgets, he will lose support - even if it does not show in his approval rating.

Given that both Kerry and Brown are significantly over 50, there have to be people approving both. This in spite of a media that has written endless Brown puff pieces and always seems to take the worst view possible of Kerry. Their approval of Kerry is likely because they really do approve of the positions he has taken over the years. Positions that Brown often votes against - I keep wondering if the Brown opponent will use the same type of questions Kerry used against Weld - who would you vote for as Majority leader? Chair of the environmental committee (Boxer or Inhoffe).

I also wonder how long it will take more people to see that it is Kerry meeting with people and politely and seriously answering their questions no matter what they are - and doing so for reporters as well. This while Brown seems to not be taking questions far too often. I hope the MA media force Brown to say whether he supports the cuts to all the endangered social programs.

similar (and about the same than Brown). The number the media usually use to say Brown is the most popular pol in the state is a (fav/unfav) number where Brown is favored (I cant remember what the difference was, and I am not sure it was that high anyway).

The main thing that bothers me in the poll is that there are way too many democrats who see Brown positively and thinks he deserves to be reelected. It is time to start campaigning against him, as the DSCC has announced they will do, but please, remember this is MA and make ads accordingly. And it is time to start seeing some candidates. There are some great people who are rumored to be running. Time to put your toe in the race.

for his re-election and my heart sank. I really, really want Dems to recapture this seat.

candidate not to run in 2012.

It only took a few hours after Hillary Clinton's interview on CNN for them to resurface.

http://thephoenix.com/BLOGS/talkingpolitics/archive/2011/03/16/hillary-says-no-2nd-term-and-helps-scotto.aspx?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+PHXTalkingPolitics+%28Talking+Politics%29


Bernstein is generally well informed about MA politics, and it would not surprise me that he is right. Brown is a serious candidate, but he is beatable and, as his election shows, things can change quickly. The worse thing that could happen is that serious people decide they dont want to run or enter in the race too late lacking name recognition.

Democrats in Mass. -- pols and voters. There is room for two new Democratic Senators if it comes to that. Plus, the track record is Kerry getting screwed by the Democratic leadership. Dems take a big risk counting on him being SoS.

to know more than the rest of us?

I also think that in 2008, Kerry had reason to think that Obama was close to where he was on foreign policy, but over the last two years, from Afghanistan to Honduras to Libya, Obama was very close to Clinton's positions, not Kerry's. In addition, I can see a new President with relatively little foreign policy experience picking a very strong foreign policy thinker with a well developed world view that the President agreed with. However, as a second term President, who has met most leaders and has 4 years of making the final decision, one might think he might be more likely to want a competent manager of the State Department, who is a polished diplomat, but one who would stay more in the back ground.

(One other thing is that people have spoken of the changes in the State department - many actually recommended by Kerry and Lugar. People have said that implementing them is likely HRC's legacy. My guess is that, as with any new changes, there will be bugs to fix. I know from working in a corporation that you never wanted to take over the job of a "fast tracker". All the credit was already given - and anything that would go wrong is yours.)

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2011/03/could_kerry_be.html


So, this is the new standard at the Globe? They create the story, then wonder why Kerry cannot shake it?

On the other hand, this is all they heard of the speech today

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2011/03/kerry_presses_o.html

nothing seriously wrong to anger the voters. And, the way he has been picking and choosing his issues, I would say he is being careful. As for Sen. Kerry being offered the SOS position, I think it is all talk. Pres. Obama will end up making another expedient political appointment to please the middle and the conservatives. It is unfortunate for Senator Kerry, he is well qualified for this position-more so than Clinton ever was, and he should be offered it, but Obama will play it safe IMO.

After a very idiotic article on Kerry a few weeks ago (poor Kerry, he wont be anything. Nobody likes him), he now has an article declaring Brown unbeatable. His source, an alleged poll by the DSCC that nobody has seen except an anonymous DC insider that would put Brown at ridiculously high approval ratings (never seen in previous polls). It is not even clear who described the poll to him, the DC insider, somebody who talked to the DC insider? Who knows.
http://www.salon.com/news/scott_brown/?story=/politics/war_room/2011/03/31/scott_brown_2012_poll


Or is he just promoting his own article in the Boston Globe:


I only have one word (well, three) for Kornaki: Kerry beat Weld.

Can Salon get a decent writer.

EDIT: and, in our good Internet world, Slate repeats, even if they have no more sources than Kornaki. If it is on the web, it must be true.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/weigel/archive/2011/03/31/martha-coakley-probably-should-have-shook-some-hands-outside-of-fenway-in-the-cold.aspx

Also, can we start having some serious candidates.

If he should decide to run?

statewide. I would assume he is experienced with statewide campaigns as well, but I never heard speak.

The names I heard are not that inspiring and even less well known, I think: an immigration lawyer whose name escapes me right now, and Bob Massie. Pozen is rumored to want to run (No thank you!!!), and a Kennedy staffer also announced he is considering a run, Gerry Kavanaugh (I dont know him, so he may be great, but given that Brown won on "the people's seat, not the Kennedy's seat", I wonder how it would play!).

We don't seem to have ANYONE proven (except maybe Capuano?) to run. This is such a competitive political state, it seems hard to believe. Let's hope we can get someone solid and persuasive, and soon.

but Martha Coakley and Charlie Baker were (according to the chattering class, at least). But we need somebody ready to jump in the fray and fight.

What gets to me though is that the chattering class continues their same prognosis, based on nothing that led them for months to wrongly predict the two last statewide elections. And they do that on a simple rumor.

I think that, intellectually, he runs rings around Brown, but then again, so does my dog. That said, I don't think Setti is ready. Plus, and I almost hate to bring this up, Setti has a young family and recently lost his Dad. Is this really the time to mount what would be a no-holds-barred Senate campaign? Setti is a young and highly capable guy, perhaps he can wait a bit.

Brown's aura of invincibility is cracking. Boston Magazine http://www.bostonmagazine.com/articles/scott_brown_campaign_confidential/">has an article from former Globie Eileen McNamara that takes Brown apart on his book and Brown's revelations on his past child abuse. Brown's days as a sacred figure in MA politics are numbered.

There are a number of people who could challenge Brown. The biggest obstacle to a challenge is that huge campaign warchest Brown has. Whoever runs on the Dem side has to unite the party early and then fundraise like mad. It will be a difficult fight because of this money advantage. It is not nearly impossible though, especially since Brown will be running in a Pres election year with a very Dem leaning electorate coming out to vote.

Suffolk has a new poll which is interesting because they have been doing pretty well predicting the 2010 races. However, even if the media are saying it shows Brown cannot be beaten, I think the results are mixed.

http://www.suffolk.edu/images/content/FINAL.7NEWS.Suffolk.Marginals.April.5.2011.pdf

First, Brown's approval ratings are good (in the high 50 %), but far from being in the 70% as Kornacki predicted they were. In fact, this poll is in line with each other polls I have read. Sure, I would prefer it is a lot lower, but given the lovefest the media give him, it is to be expected. And people think he is independent (once again, given people are not informed, it is not surprising).

Second, despite pairing him against names that are a lot well known in the state (from Setti Warren to my congressman Markey), Brown tops at 52 % (even against Warren). So this is probably his top, and we can hope this will go down when somebody is actually running against him.

Two candidates were actually as well known as Brown: Joe Kennedy and Deval Patrick. We just reelected Patrick, so I dont see why it would be a surprise he is behind (though I think that, against Brown, he is the closest except for Joe Kennedy).

Now, the good surprise of the poll is that, with a name that is known statewide like Joe Kennedy, Brown becomes eminently beatable (particularly considering that Kennedy said repeatedly he was not running). So, once again, can we get a candidate NOW, so that the person has the time to be known statewide.

The last point is that the poll shows Brown's book was a flop in MA. Only 3% of the people polled bought it and about 70 % of people are not interested at all or very little interested by Brown's personal life. And this despite the media buzz on national and local TV for the last two or three months.

So, please, can we have candidates who start to campaign statewide.