Rasmussen Polls Again

Last week, Rasmussen Reports conducted a poll that showed Martha Coakley ahead with fifty percent. But the poll failed to make any mention of independent candidate Joseph Kennedy. Now, Rasmussen has a new poll that includes the independent libertarian. The new poll shows forty-nine percent in favor of Coakley, forty-seven percent in favor of Brown, and three percent in favor of Kennedy, with two percent being undecided.

For a history of IPR posts on Joe Kennedy, visit this page.

10 thoughts on “Rasmussen Polls Again

  1. d.eris

    Last week someone asked whether Rasmussen actually offered the choice of “some other candidate” rather than include Kennedy by name. In this article they state: “The results of this poll are not precisely comparable with last week’s results because this poll includes the independent candidate by name while the previous poll simply offered the choice of “some other candidate.””

  2. Ben

    It’s interesting to see where Joe’s votes come from:
    1% of conservatives, 3% of moderates and 4% of liberals support him.
    He also gets:
    2% of Republicans, 4% of Democrats and 3% of other.

    He gets 15% of those in the 18-29 age group. That warms my cockles, but it also tells me that his 3% may be from unreliable voters.

    Still, if the election is this close, a small vote for Kennedy will be noticed!

  3. Ben

    Morgan, a previous poll suggested the same thing – Joe Kennedy taking more votes from the D than the R.

  4. Mik Robertson

    I think there will be some small but significant bit of confusion among D voters with the Kennedy name. Despite the fact that it is emphasized over and over about Joe not be related to Teddy, some people will forget that part as the go in to vote.

    Kennedy should make sure he has signs with his name up at every polling place around Boston and Worcester.

  5. Coakley is not progressive

    Mik, you are correct that there are still plenty of people in Mass who have no idea who Joe Kennedy is or that he is not Joe for Oil.

    The thing is, this is a special election in the middle of winter in New England, and most of those people will be staying home. That is – they will plain and simple not vote. Shocking, I know.

    The people that will actually bother to get their butt to the polls on Jan 19 will by and large either be somewhat informed voters, or big party machine drones responding to scary robocalls and party machine door knockers. The latter will not be very smart, but they’ll be smart enough to remember who they are supposed to vote for, since that is the only reason they are there.

    Joe will definitely get some votes from progressives who can’t stomach Coakley, but it won’t be because of his name. In fact he will get more votes from them than he will get from conservatives who can’t stand Scott Brown.

    The only thing his name did for him was get his foot in the door.

    I know you have already seen the real reasons progressives will be voting for Kennedy but for benefit of anyone else reading who did not see the other thread:

    If Coakley had sensible policies like ending the wars now (including the drug war) she would have earned those votes, but some on the left have felt betrayed by Obama and don’t want more of the same.

    Will professional prosecutor Martha Coakley do anything to end marriage apartheid against our LGBT brothers and sisters?

    Does she support taxing and regulating marijuana, the safer alternative, like alcohol?

    There are many reasons for progressives to vote against Brown/Coakley.

    If the Independent/Libertarian is the only choice in the election for progressives who consider those issues to be the most important ones to them, they should vote for the Independent/Libertarian.

    The power elite does not serve the political or real world interests of grassroots progressives (or grassroots conservatives) – workers, mom and pop businesses, students, single mothers, the “regular people.”

    It pits them against each other by throwing out rhetorical red meat and failing to deliver.

    In the end, the power elite gets together, in function, as one party of power (and yes, it really is one big party for them in DC) and screws main street America in favor of Wall Street, K street, and the whole incestuous revolving door of the corporate and political elite.

    The only wasted vote is a wasted vote for one of the faces of the Janus-like Party of Power whether you call it Republocrat, Demopublican, or just plain Evil.

    Why are some progressives starting to wake up?

    It’s because the Democrats have the White House and both houses of Congress and our hope for change has been dashed.

    The troops are still in Iraq. More troops are going to Afghanistan. The US is still justifying and making excuses for torture, operating secret prisons where people are held without due process, and spying on its citizens, residents and visitors.

    Federal goon squads are still finding excuses to destroy and sieze medical marijuana gardens, even in states where the people voted for legal relief for the sick and dying. Sure, now they use the fig leaf that some other state laws were broken, but the reality continues to be the same.

    Instead of real reforms to make medical care more affordable, the Democrats have passed mandates for working class people and struggling small business owners to buy jacked up, low quality medical insurance from big corporations.

    The corporate bailouts have continued.

    Has anything really changed?

    It’s more of the same, and it’s only getting worse.

    THAT is why true progressives are supporting a Better Kennedy this time!

    LGBT couples are still treated as separate but unequal when it comes to marriage. And not only have the Democratic leaders not done anything about it, they are defending it in court.

    Just like they are defending the Bush era abuses of executive power, while continuing to engage in them and even inventing new bizarre excuses for q1uasi-dictatorship.

    All while failing to bring the Bush War Criminals to justice!

    I’m hoping for real change, really, for a change!

    A vote for Martha Coakley is a vote to ignore the people on legalizing marijuana. Come to think of it, it’s also a vote for torture because that is what medical marijuana patients experience when they are denied safe access to their medicine.

    http://goldmassgroup.com/diary/13/vote-for-martha-coakley-to-ignore-the-people

    Vote to stop torture. Vote for Joe. If you can’t vote for Joe, send him a contribution. If you can’t do either one, tell someone who can!

  6. Ben

    Mik, I’m guessing that there is minimal confusion among voters. The Rasmussen poll shows that Joe Kennedy gets only 2% of 65+ votes, compared to his 15% among 18-29 voters. These young voters are unlikely to even know who “the real” Joe Kennedy is, much less think that they MUST vote for him. It’s the 65+ voters who are known for mindlessly supporting the Kennedy name, but the polls are showing Joe to be rather weak with this group.

    For complete poll data:
    http://media2.myfoxboston.com/html/2010-senate-seat-rasmussen-reports-fox25.html

    Also realize that on election day, this is the only race. People will be single-mindedly turning out to vote for their guy/gal. This is a dynamic that will hurt Kennedy, a candidate depending on “throwaway” protest votes.

  7. Mik Robertson

    Polls and what actually happens in the election booth can be two different things. I’m not saying that a large percentage will be confused about who Kennedy is. All I am saying is that some will, and in a very tight race that can make a difference.

    If you think people can remember a name, you should see all of the different ways Mickey Mouse gets spelled, general election or special. There was even a song to remember that name.

  8. Ben

    Of course there will be some dopes who won’t know what’s going on, but I think this poll strongly suggests that their number just won’t be significant. Those voters who actually make it to the polls will be even better informed than those represented by this poll’s sample.

    BTW, I found these results surprising– I was sure there would be a small bump in the 65+ group.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *