No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Fri Feb-17-12 09:25 AM
Original message
Poll shows Elizabeth Warren trailing Scott Brown by 9 points
Originally, she was polling ahead of Brown, the "neck and neck." Now, she is within walking distance of Coakleyville. What the hell happened?
Poll shows Elizabeth Warren trailing Scott Brown by 9 points
The Suffolk {University} poll shows Brown leading Warren 49 percent to 40 percent and offers a little insight as to why.
Brown’s personal numbers are better than Warren’s in the poll, with a majority (52 percent) rating him favorably and 28 percent rating him unfavorably. Warren, despite being less well-known, has the same unfavorable rating, compared to 35 percent favorable.
<snip>
When voters were asked what are the first words that come to mind when they hear Warren’s name, among the top words are “liberal†and â€Harvard†— two words Republicans are using to try to define Warren. Many of the other words that popped up for Warren are neutral or factual rather than overtly positive.
Brown, meanwhile, still appears to have some of the political brand and popularity that have made him a successful Republican in the country’s most Democratic state. Among his top words are “independent,†“fair,†“honest†and â€hard-worker.â€
Notice, she gets called "liberal," not "Democratic." He gets called Republican. (That last sentence is not from the OP story, but per a TV report I heard on the poll a few minutes ago.)
For heaven's sake, please, someone, save Massachusetts from the Brown turd. We don't deserve it, honestly.
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Fri Feb-17-12 10:26 AM
Response to Original message
1. She had so much momentum...sorry to read that the Repugs ads are working..
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Fri Feb-17-12 10:44 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Thing is, I live in Boston. And my TV is on a lot, no matter what else I am doing.
I heard/saw a flurry of TV ads a while back, both hers and Brown's. But then, they seem to have died down.
I certainly expect to see a lot more during the general, but I have not been seeing many.
Then again, local media gives Brown a lot of help--and has been doing that all along.
They don't even make a pretense of being objective. I've heard things like, "He's certainly been doing everything right."
And the few times he strays from his Party, they make a huge deal about how "independent" he is, which is how he sold himself--right after he first pretended he was Kennedy like. (His first ads featured a clip of JFK--and he never campaigned as a Republican.)
As an aside, when in blazes did "Harvard" become pejorative?
Damn Eisenhower and his "ivory tower" insults.
ILIMA.
(I like Ike, my ass.)
Divine Discontent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Fri Feb-17-12 05:37 PM
Response to Original message
4. a charmer former male model vs an older avg looking intellectual female?
what more needs said. so many people are vain and its gonna take education to get the moderate/conservative Dems to support the Dem. agreed, its horrible that any person could ever consider Harvard a bad thing! Yeesh!
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Sat Feb-18-12 09:01 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. You are very kind, DC.
But I am not sure that one nude centerfold in the early days of Ms. magazine qualified the Brown turd as a male model.
(Why is it that when one oppressed group begins to grab for equality, it takes on some of the very behavior that oppressed it?)
And I don't think comparing a young Brown with a sixtyish Warren is the way to go, although it did happen a lot after he dissed her lookds.
I think Warren was pretty cute when she was the same age as Brown was in his nude photo.
Today, they both look to me like pleasant-looking people, one of whom is very academically smart and one of whom is very street smart.
Making academia and brains seem like bad things are one of the many ways Republicans have hurt this nation and one of the many things I hold against them.
Baby Bear Donating Member (104 posts) Fri Feb-17-12 07:08 PM
Response to Original message
5. what happened?
This is the best headline of the week:
“Multimillionaire Elizabeth Warren: I’m not wealthy.â€
What makes it even more delectable is that it was posted on a moonbat website, which quickly yanked it down. The truth can be a dangerous thing.
Making academia and brains seem like bad things are one of the many ways Republicans have hurt this nation and one of the many things I hold against them.
She actually helped her own downfall in one of her own ads.
To make herself more 'common & folksy', she mentions about how she was married at 19, had kids, was dirt poor, finished college as an adult, etc etc. and many individuals realized that Warren makes a lot of stupid decisions.
She torpedoed her own campaign almost as effectively as Coakley- which is why she has been silent. She is hoping that people forget her first poorly thought-out campaign ads.
DUmmieDivine Discontent says . a charmer former male model vs an older avg looking intellectual female?
Yep, women vote on looks and everyone knows that ughly, bitter, old, liberal, Beotch's are supposed to get the female vote.
She was aRepublicanRINO until she was 46 years old. That alone was enough to make the Cambridge elite hurl.
That's exactly it Sparky - she is a millionaire and claims she is not rich.
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/columnists/view/20220203moonbat_logic_explains_how_millionaire_isnt_rich/srvc=home&position=1
Even Coakley wasn't that stupid.
FIFY. Oven Collins and Snowe, aka "Obama's Comfort Girls" are positively right-wing compared to her.
Oh, and claiming you're "poor" while showing PROFESSIONAL wedding photos? Yeah, not very effective, Dizzy Lizzy. (h/t: Howie Carr.)
Pul-eeze Mon AmiClinton Comfort Girls.
Willy the Wandering Wanker (who would hit a pile of rocks if he thought a snake had crawled through) would be be both Impeached and Removed from office without them.
Okay, Zeit, what the hell does that mean? I must be missin' sumpin.
Leopolds Ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Sun Feb-19-12 12:15 AM
Response to Original message
8. Doesn't ode well for Democrats this year. I've been saying that if Romney is the candidate
It will be an intensely right-wing election year and Occupy will be marginalized politically by people in both camps (the 53%ers who still believe that keeping their party in office is more important than fundamental change.)
She must've opened her Hahvahd feminazi Commie yap enough for even the Massholes to start realizing what an arrogant, controlling, self-righteous bitch she is.