Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Poll: Elizabeth Warren vulnerable in 2018

Poll: Elizabeth Warren vulnerable in 2018

Perhaps people are growing weary of her divisive politics

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tzI1k7eEc9Q

Elizabeth Warren always has been known for having sharp elbows.

She bullied her way through academia. It’s a trait that has carried over to her politics.

Warren’s first instinct always is to attack in very personal ways, then play victim when there is pushback.

I experienced a small example of that during Warren’s 2012 campaign against Scott Brown.

When Legal Insurrection continued to pursue the issue of Warren’s false claim for employment purposes to be Native American, Warren’s campaign apparatus tried to label me a “right wing extremist.” But Warren’s campaign never was able to point to a single fact we got wrong.

The Native American issue has dogged Warren. Her supporters may not care, but her refusal to admit to what she did and to apologize has become her political persona. It came up repeatedly in her Twitter fights with Donald Trump.

As Eric Fehrnstrom, a former Scott Brown strategist, recently wrote in The Boston Globe, The polarizing Elizabeth Warren:

A populist who claims to represent the common people. A habit of demonizing opponents. Late night Twitter tantrums. Donald Trump? No, Elizabeth Warren, who is just as polarizing.

When Warren announced her 2018 reelection campaign last week, she chose not to stand with friends and supporters in Massachusetts. There was no summary of her accomplishments. No testimonials from people she has helped….

Ad hominem attacks, claims of corruption, allegations of selling legislation for campaign contributions — Warren sprayed her accusations everywhere….

The bad news for Warren is that her act is losing its appeal. In a preelection poll by Morning Consult, Warren had the second highest disapproval rating among New England’s 12 senators, at 33 percent….

WBUR Poll: Republican Gov. Baker More Popular Than Democrat Sen. Warren

Over four years in office, Elizabeth Warren has staked her claim as the Senate’s liberal lion. And many Massachusetts voters like it — 51 percent view her favorably.

But according to a new WBUR poll, only 44 percent think Warren “deserves reelection.” Forty-six percent think voters ought to “give someone else a chance.”

“No one’s going to look at a 44 percent reelect number and think that that’s a good number,” said Steve Koczela, president of The MassINC Polling Group, which conducts surveys for WBUR. “No one’s going to look at it being close to even between ‘reelect’ and ‘give someone else a chance’ and think that that’s reassuring.”….

How could the state’s top Republican be more popular than its top Democrat? Steve Koczela says it’s about bipartisanship.

“When you look at Elizabeth Warren’s favorables, only 12 percent of Republicans have a favorable view of her,” Koczela said. “When you look at Baker, 60 percent of Democrats view him favorably. So he has bipartisan appeal where Elizabeth Warren really never has.”

The polling presents a dilemma for Warren. As she stakes out the position of lead attack dog against Trump to set herself up for a presidential run in 2020, she has to become even more vitriolic. But that may drive independent Massachusetts voters away.

Baker is up for reelection in 2018, and Dems are targeting him.

The WBUR article points out that Baker has campaign funds on hand for 2018 of $4.8 million, more than Warren has at this point (though liberal money will flow in for her from around the country, as it did in 2012). This shows that Baker has the ability to raise money.

But would Baker run to challenge Elizabeth Warren rather than for reelection now that it’s clear Warren is vulnerable? It would make that MA Senate race the race to watch in 2018.

https://twitter.com/JamesPindell/status/823519162983124992

[Note: An earlier link to a Politico article was removed from the post.]

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Polls this far out are basically hot air.

    natdj in reply to MikeE. | January 23, 2017 at 12:05 pm

    You are correct about polls this early and meaningless. Putting them aside and after watching her during the hearings, I would surmise that her demeanor actually make Hillary Clinton likeable. If the democrats nominate her in 2020, she will receive less of the male vote and the women then Clinton.

    Sen. Warren may play well in Massachusetts but I don’t see her style as attractive.

Popularity rankings can be good indicators whenever they run.

Princess Running Bare is a nasty scold, and nobody likes a nasty scold.

…only 12 percent of Republicans have a favorable view of her…

That’s the 12 percent that aren’t paying attention.

On Saturday an old man approached the White House from across Pennsylvania Avenue, where he’d been sitting on a park bench. He spoke to the U.S. Marine standing guard and said, “I would like to go in and meet with President Obama.” The Marine looked at the man and said, “Sir, Mr. Obama is no longer president.” The old man said “Okay” and walked away.

On Sunday, the same man approached the White House and said to the same Marine “I would like to go in and meet with President Obama.” The Marine again told the man “Sir, as I said yesterday, Mr. Obama is no longer president.” The man thanked him and, again, just walked away.

This morning, the same man approached the White House and spoke to the very same U. S. Marine, saying “I would like to go in and meet with President Obama.” The Marine, understandably agitated at this point, looked at the man and said, “Sir, this is the third day in a row you have been here asking to speak to Mr. Obama. I’ve told you already that Mr. Obama is no longer president. Don’t you understand?”

The old man looked at the Marine and said, “Oh, I understand. I just love hearing it.”

The Marine snapped to attention, saluted and said, “See you tomorrow, sir.”

The polling presents a dilemma for Warren. As she stakes out the position of lead attack dog against Trump to set herself up for a presidential run in 2020, she has to become even more vitriolic.

Elizabeth Warren is not going to run for President in 2020. While President Trump is now the oldest President inaugurated at 70 years, 220 days, Elizabeth Warren would be 71 years old on election day 2020.

Donald Trump is AMAZINGLY well preserved for his age. His work-schedule, his construction upbringing and his myriad business enterprises have forced him to multi-task and live on minimal sleep, but have also largely kept him moving all the time. Elizabeth Warren led the sedentary life of an lawyer-academic for at least the better part of several decades. It wasn’t just that Warren didn’t want to go up against Clinton or that she could see the writing on the wall regarding the Obama years. She didn’t have the physical build to be able to stand the pounding that a national campaign would entail THIS cycle, even if she wanted to. There’s no chance at all that she’ll be in the condition to withstand starting it three years from now, AFTER running what is likely to be a grueling Massachusetts Senatorial campaign for all of 2018.

She would effectively have to start her presidential campaign in May of 2019, if not earlier, and then be on the campaign trail for 17+ months. She would drop from exhaustion.

    “She would effectively have to start her presidential campaign in May of 2019, if not earlier, and then be on the campaign trail for 17+ months. She would drop from exhaustion.”

    It would not be long before the young Indian maiden would be forced to walk the Trail of Tears and without a reservation to go to she would be assigned to oblivion.

Another Voice | January 23, 2017 at 2:57 pm

The picture here is as many used of her, but also one she projects when on camera. I’ve seen “that look” she portrays of desperation and/or panic, but it was on faces of those I saw at the nursing home where my husband was, who suffered from dementia*.

*Dementia, also known as senility, is a broad category of brain diseases that cause a long term and often gradual decrease in the ability to think and remember.

Which may explain why she ‘believes’ she really is descended from a Native Indian tribe.

    “Which may explain why she ‘believes’…”

    She believes no such thing. She made it up and knows it.

    The picture here is as many used of her, but also one she projects when on camera. I’ve seen “that look” she portrays of desperation and/or panic, but it was on faces of those I saw at the nursing home where my husband was, who suffered from dementia*.

    No. THAT I do not believe of Sen. Warren.

    She is many things: misguided, misinformed, conniving, economically wrong (or purposely economically misleading), occasionally desperate depending on the topic she is discussing.

    But she most certainly is NOT suffering from dementia.

    Having studied her work as a requirement of my bankruptcy law class (she literally co-wrote the textbook that we used), I can tell you that her current state is not one of dementia. There’s enough of her commentary inserted into the writing that it is possible to tell that her current demeanor is simply the way she is.

    As for the Native American heritage thing: A.) I think she might truly believe it, regardless of what history and genetics says, and B.) even if she didn’t, she wouldn’t admit it because it’s too ingrained into her personality.

Taking a page from their own book of what not to do, they are writing a sequel about pollbait for Warren to try and emulate Trump’s underdog status as momentum.

I don’t think Fauxca can run as POTUS, but the far left would certainly let her get away with it. The question would be whether the rest of the left would.

Henry Hawkins | January 23, 2017 at 3:46 pm

To whatever extent Warren’s popularity and support have dropped, a large part of the credit goes to Professor Jacobson’s research, publication, and maintenance of files documenting her each and every wart, vis-a-vis ‘fauxcahontas’, financial shennigans, etc. HE built that.

Some in Massachusetts will vote for her regardless of what has happened over the previous six years, as elections in Massachusetts favor incumbent Democrats. More of the same and familiar however mediocre is sometimes preferred over the unknown and different.

What is essential is the strength of the Republican candidate that runs against her. A divisive Republican primary race may diminish the chances of the winner of the Republican primary.

Another factor – most Americans look with disdain on someone who makes claims that they are not entitled to and use those claims for personal gain. Claiming Indian heritage isn’t so bad, but she used that claim to get into college and for employment.

I like old guy jokes.

I went to the bar last night and saw a really big woman dancing on a table.

I said, “Good legs.”

The girl giggled and said, “Do you really think so?”

I said, “Definitely! Most tables would have collapsed by now.”

Cost me 6 stitches, but… when you’re seventy……………who cares?

Curt Schilling should run against her.

He’s been talking about it.

Would like to see a head to head poll of that…

In her first election against Scott Brown, I visited Massachusetts. Based on yard signs, white working class neighborhoods (both Irish and Italian) and Western Mass. were 100% Brown. Upper-class suburbs and ethnic minority neighborhoods were 100% Warren. I assume the battleground would be the ethnic minorities.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend