McCain gets 44% of the Massachussetts vote against Hillary's 43%.

[AX10]

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/2006/State%20Polls/June%202006/maPresidential2008.htm

:wtf:?

I find this hard to believe.

[Totally Committed]

1. I've been trying to tell anyone who will listen...

I live in Mass. and there is VERY LITTLE SUPPORT for Hillary Clinton here. I, myself, feel she is UNELECTABLE and have said so repeatedly. She has triangulated too far right on most issues, supports corporatism, and has supported the war -- several points which are definite turn-offs to a lot of Mass. Democrats. I don't doubt this at all.

McCain has a following here among the same Democrats and Indys that voted for the "moderate" (yeah, right!) Mittens Romney, thinking they'd found another William Weld. Given a choice between Hillary and McCain, they'd go McCain in a heartbeat.

TC

[bullimiami]

3. im sorry but anyone who would vote for mccain over clinton is stupid.

no matter what someone had against hillary, mccain panders harder and sucks up to the rightwing christofascists like crazy.
mccain is an illusion propped up by the smear machine and the msm who have a stake in republican control.
hillary is and has been a target of both. The main target.

hillary tried to get us universal health care. she is a bulldog of a politician though.

[Totally Committed]

4. We, here at DU, know about McCain, but

the average voter only knows what they hear from the Media or read in the media. and, as we all know, the media has abdicated it's responsibility to inform the average American impartially, so I am not surprised he is scoring ahead of Hillary here, is all I'm saying.

TC

[bullimiami]

15. if the whole world execpt us at du says the world is flat and evolution

doesnt exist. it wont change reality.

all we can do is try to change false perceptions. reality is truth. and mccain is a two faced bastard.

[sendero]

19. In the real world..

... McCain will be our worst nightmare in 2008 and he's going to be nominated. McCain plays in red state America, and lots of blue folks think he is a "moderate". You and I know better, but what good does that do?

So, we'd better be thinking of what we're going to do, and if it includes the word Hillary we might as well not even bother.

[TayTay]

8. Everyone just assumes that Mass is so blue that any Dem will win

This is not true. We have had Republican Governors for the last 16 years for a reason. The Repubs have been able to use the idea of Repubs as tax cutters and people who hold the line on spending as a wedge issue to separate blue collar Dems from the liberals and claim the Governorship.

McCain could be a beneficiary of that same thing. Of course, it is very early. The social issues, in Mass, do not play to the current Republicans benefit and this would be emphasized in a general election. (How do liberals get elected in Mass? Well, a lot of people would argue that Mass doesn't elect liberals. Mass elects blue-collar Dems who happen to be liberal as well. The pocketbook issues of money, education and spending play out here really well. Oh, and then you can be liberal, but only if you can appeal widely to the blue collar base.)

[sandnsea]

10. DeFazio - Blue collar liberal

Who is keenly in tune to exactly where those blue collar voters are, on any given moment, and never screws up a vote that will piss them off. That's it exactly Tay, even out here in blue Oregon.

[TayTay]

22. Although federal and Gov races are different critters

There is a lesson as to how Sens. Kennedy & Kerry get elected here. The big margins of difference in their closest races have always been in the blue collar cities. They win in Boston, New Bedford, Springfield, Pittsfield, Gloucester, etc.

McCain appeals to this crowd right now. (It is early. There is dirt on both McCain and Guiliani that would tarnish them.) I can easily see McCain taking Massachusetts with a blue collar appeal. A lot of the so-called liberal towns are not that loyal to candidates and are more idealogically driven. (A third party candidate could easily siphon away votes.)

Anyway, as Robert Reich said in 2002, there are two Democratic Parties in Mass. McCain appeals greatly to one of them and comes across as one of their own.

[Totally Committed]

23. TayTay, I totally agree with BOTH of your astute posts!

As a fellow Mass. voter, the reality you expressed in your posts has confounded me for years. But, yes, there ARE two different Democratic Parties in Mass, and I daresay a third is blossoming out in the western part of the state now, as well. And, these different factions come out and vote for different reasons. McCain is seen as a William Weld Republican (as was thought of Romney until he was actually elected and began to govern...). In reality, we who are informed about such things know that McCain is NOT moderate, NOT a "maverick", NOT a fiscal conservative/social liberal AT ALL. But, there are Democrats here who are blue collar and vote very differently than we "Mass. Liberals" who return Kerry and Kennedy to the Senate election after election.

Thank you TayTay for your excellent posts, which are the best explanations of the voting atmosphere here in Mass. I have seen in a long while.

TC

[TayTay]

26. Why is Teddy K so revered?

Two words: Constituent services. He is one of the best there ever was at being responsive and knowing Massachusetts. I have talked to people who will tell you that Teddy K remembers every final vote count from every election that he has ever been in. (This is true for just about every city and town in the Commonwealth.) He is the consummate politican in the best sense of that word. That's why he has blue collar appeal here and why he is Senator for life. (Especially after the scare in '94 from Mitt Romney that resulted in Uncle Ted's closest race ever: 59-41%. Teddy recommitted to constituent services after that.)

I heard a good story about Teddy earlier this year at a donuts and coffee event to kick off his re-election campaign. There were a few folks who were extolling Teddy's service in the Senate and telling how great and well respected he was in the Senate and nationally and so forth. This one guy with a VFW hat on stood up and said how he loved The Senator because he came through for regular people. This guy talked about how the Londonderry National Guard was having trouble getting back from Iraq and that this unit was due to be detained for a while in New York. Of course, the Guard troops wanted to go home. So, who did they call for federal help to untangle the paperwork? Not Judd Gregg or John Sununu, NH's Senators, but Teddy Kennedy, cuz some of those Guards people were from Mass. Teddy got that unit home. Constituent Services, my friend. (Teddy did another favor for the troops when he took care of a problem with wounded troops being put in hospitals away from Mass/NH. Again, not Gregg or Sununu, but Kennedy, the liberal, rich, out-of-touch guy, got them home.)

That's why The Greatest Senator Who Ever Lived is so loved by his constituents: he tends to love them back. There are a million Kennedy stories here like that. It's what matters. You need to know that when you have to call on the government for something that there will be someone there who understands and who responds. That what we need, more people like that.

[formernaderite]

27. Hillary is unelectable...but come on...in Mass McCain wins?

somehow I can't believe it, but bad news if true. Then again, McCain will have an uphill battle at winning the repub nomination anyway.

[dmosh42]

2. Not surprising

-Hillary and some of the top Dem possibilities Have almost followed the 'Bush' line. They hardly show any leadership, or originality. I don't think voters are looking for the people who want to be 'safe'. The individuals who have demonstrated some independent thinking, like Russ Fiengold or John Murtha, don't get the media attention. So this tells voters like myself that this November might not be a 'new direction'!

[Zodiak]

5. Well, then Mass voters will have to deal

with a Bushbot if they vote this way. One of the greatest myths in American politics is McCain's "maverickdom".



See?

Hillary isn't the best progressive, but McCain will ensure 4 more years of the same BushCo crap.

[WildEyedLiberal]

6. Fortunately, neither of them will be their party's candidate.

[high density]

7. I believe it

I know a hardcore liberal that says she would have voted for McCain in a Kerry vs. McCain contest. McCain has a very valuable (for him) cloud of media-generated bullshit that is bluring his true positions on issues.

[Placebo]

17. He's the MSM-approved "maverick" independent.

Which just proves how inaccurate and false the majority of the MSM's reporting is.

[leesa]

9. They are stupid enough to go for McCain??? Yikes. Sounds like they

need some remedial education programs there.

[LaPera]

11. Gee, for an election over 2 years away...who's leading in 2016?

[Solon]

12. Chelsea Clinton at 60%, Barbara Bush 40%. n/t

[Awsi Dooger]

13. I'll take Hillary and give 10%

And cruise. Give me a break. This is Massachusetts in a presidential vote, not gov. The anecdotes are meaningless. We're talking an election held at the end of a long campaign where little John McCain will be scrutinized and defined. These head to head matchup findings are meaningless. It's still a 50/50 polarized nation that will vote very similarly state to state as it has in '00 and '04.

[AX10]

29. True.

[doc03]

14. It doesn't matter who Massachusetts votes for,

it's the Red States and Hillary doesn't have a snow balls chance in hell of winning there.

[ndcohn]

18. irrelevent

mccain is inflated. If he is winning by less then 4-6 in a state, he is done in the long run. he is a bad campaigner, he is undecisiplined and he will be revealed as a conservative.

[Placebo]

16. Total inaccurate.

Hillary would win handily.

[AJH032]

20. "The numbers are identical for...McCain and Al Gore"

"The numbers are identical for a hypothetical contest between McCain and Al Gore (D)."

Do you guys really believe a poll that says that McCain would beat both Hillary Clinton and Al Gore in Massachusetts? Please!

[wyldwolf]

21. Just out of curiosity - why didn't you state the same of Al Gore?

This says more about McCain than it does Clinton or Gore.

[mrgorth]

24. Hillary will get annaihilated

by most of the thugs running. I don't know why you geniuses can't see this.

[calico1]

25. Isn't it a bit premature to determine the winner?

Or even who the candidates will be? :shrug:

[johnaries]

28. Rasmussen. Always 5 points or more biased to Repukes.

They were the only ones "right" about the 2004 Election. I rest my case.

[Douglas Carpenter]

30. my prediction if Hillary is nominted and I will bet money on it

1. Hillary will almost certainly lose decisively, although I hope I am wrong and would support her or almost any Dem in the general election; but not the primaries. She is an extremely polarizing figure to put it mildly and I do not believe that she could likely win the votes of many Republicans or independents and thus would not do well in battle ground states much less red states.

2. We will be hearing for the next 30-40+ years that she was the candidate of the "left" and she lost because she was just tooooooooo liberal and this is another example of how the left ruined things for the Democratic Party. In spite of of her hawkish tendencies and embrace of neoliberal economic ideology -- she is widely perceived in the mainstream media as a liberal/left figure. Thus I repeat my predictions above, she would likely lose and liberals and progressives would get blamed again for pushing someone too liberal.

2. (a) Whoever is the nominee of the Democratic Party in 2008 (even Gov. Warner) if they lose we will be hearing for the next 30-40+ years that they were the candidate of the "left" and this is another example of how the left ruined things for the Democratic Party

2. (b) Whoever is the nominee of the Democratic Party in 2008 (even Sen. Feingold) if they win we will be hearing for the next 30-40+ years that they won because they ran a centrist campaign and ignored the left.