As we wait for PPP to release their poll tonight on the Massachusetts race, internet bloggers are leaking the most recent results from the campaign organizations’ own internal polls. Coakley’s internal poll from yesterday has her still trailing Brown 47%-45%, which means the race continues to be essentially a dead heat. Keep in mind that yesterday’s polls do not take into account Coakley’s gaffe regarding Curt Schilling. Several of you have asked whether I was serious in suggesting it might cost her votes. I actually think it won’t persuade very many who are inclined to vote for her to change their mind. But because it seems to fit the Brown campaign frame that Coakley believes the Senate seat is hers by right and that she is out of touch with ordinary people, it certainly will be cited by lots of people who vote against her.
Meanwhile, in addition to bringing in the big guns, including Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, Coakley’s campaign has gone negative in a big way, by mailing a flier that purportedly accuses Brown of supporting legislation that would prevent rape victims from getting treatment at local hospitals. According to Greg Sargent’s Plumline blog, this is what the flier looks like:
The claim has been raised before by Coakley, but never in this fashion to my knowledge. It centers on Brown’s vote in the state Senate for an amendment that would have exempted hospital workers – doctors, nurses or other employees – from providing emergency contraceptives to rape victims if it conflicted with the hospital workers’ religious beliefs. The flier appears designed to shore up Coakley’s sagging support among women. The hope, I’m guessing, is that the gambit will force Brown to spend the last two days of the campaign defending this charge rather than focusing on attacking Coakley. The worry for Coakley (see my interview below with Mom) is that this type of attack will turn voters off. Again, however, she’s evidently calculated that there’s little to lose at this point.
With that in mind, I decided to conduct my own poll of women voters in Massachusetts, starting with Mom. She’s a life-long Massachusetts resident, registered independent, but someone who has voted Democrat in recent elections. She was a Hillary supporter in 2008, but strongly backed Obama in the presidential election. Almost 80 years old, she still works as a cashier at the local grocery store, drives her own car (badly), owns a modest mobile home in a senior residential park, lives on a fixed income, and pays attention to the news although she is anything but a political junkie. In short, she is precisely the voter that Coakley must reach if she is to pull this out on Tuesday.
Here is my interview with Mom. For brevity’s sake, I’ve excised the portions dealing with her posture (“I saw this woman walking in the mirror and it scared me!”); her treadmill workout (“I still don’t seem to be walking any faster”)”; her driving (don’t ask); medications; or the unexplained death of her neighbor Fred (“You know, the one with cows in his yard”).
Me: Mom, are you planning on voting Tuesday?
Mom: Yes, I am.
Me: Who are you voting for?
Mom: I’m voting for Coakley.
Me: Why Coakley?
Mom: She’s for women. She’s strong on women’s issues.
Me: In what sense?
Mom: What does she do now? Attorney General? She’s smart, has done some good things there. I know people say she’s too serious but I think she’s smart too.
Me: Are there particular issues she’s for that are good for women?
Mom: I know she supports the health bill that some say is bad for women, but I’ve always believed what Ted Kennedy said – that you pass something even if it’s not perfect because you can make it better later. That’s what she’s doing with the health bill.
Me: Have you seen any of her advertisements?
Mom: All the time. I don’t like it that these advertisements are so negative. It seems like that’s all candidates do these days is tear each other down. Why do they have to do that?
Me: What do you think about Barack Obama coming to support Coakley?
Mom: I don’t really like it. He’s a powerful person. Why does he have to come here? It’s..it’s ..it makes her look a little weak.
Me: Do you feel like he’s meddling in local issues?
Mom: Yes, that’s it. Meddling .. she should run on her own.
Me: So, you’re definitely going to vote for Coakley on Tuesday?
Mom: I’m going to try. I’ll have to remember to get someone to get me to the polling place. It’s the local school, I think.
So there you have my survey with Mom. The only question I didn’t ask her was whether she had seen Brown’s Cosmopolitan spread, and what she thought of it. In all candor, I don’t want to know. She’s my Mom, after all. .
P.S. A couple of hours after completing my survey of Mom, she called back, very excited, to say that Bill Clinton had just called her.
P.S.S. Have you called your Mom today? If she lives in Massachusetts, you now have an excuse to do so. Call her. Report back.
I am glad your mom stands up for what she believes in. However, Obama is not good for the saftey of our country. He has let more terrorist back into the states than any president I have heard of, or studied. I wonder is he is not part terrorist himself. Lets hope all the U.S. citizens realize how unsafe he is for our protection. With that in mind we can only hope the balance of congress changes, so maybe some safer changes can take place. I rest my case……