Charlie Baker's slim margin of victory..anyone else a bit surprised?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 02, 2024, 05:17:24 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Gubernatorial/State Elections (Moderators: Brittain33, GeorgiaModerate, Gass3268, Virginiá, Gracile)
  Charlie Baker's slim margin of victory..anyone else a bit surprised?
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Charlie Baker's slim margin of victory..anyone else a bit surprised?  (Read 682 times)
sg0508
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,062
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: November 08, 2014, 09:06:23 AM »

I think most of us here expected him to win and yes, it's MA...you know when you're the minority party you can't take anything for granted (i.e. Paul Davis in KS this year).  However, across the board outside of maybe MA and CO, Democrats seemed to be overpolled this cycle.  Coakley's loss was actually closer than many of the final polls predicted.  It could have been the "coming home" effect, but for a state that has consistently elected GOP governors since '90, I'm a bit surprised.  Even in the House, there was a shot for the GOP to win one or two of the seats this cycle and neither were even close. 

Anyone else a bit surprised by this? Did anything specific happen in the closing days or weeks that would have predicted this?
Logged
Maxwell
mah519
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,459
Germany


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: November 08, 2014, 10:59:14 AM »

My guess is, unlike some of the Massachussets prognosticators here said, the MA Democratic Party did the GOTV for Coakley.
Logged
Maistre
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 407
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: November 08, 2014, 11:28:37 AM »

My guess is, unlike some of the Massachussets prognosticators here said, the MA Democratic Party did the GOTV for Coakley.

But MA Democrats are so sexist!!!11!
Logged
tpfkaw
wormyguy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,118
United States


Political Matrix
E: -0.58, S: 1.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: November 08, 2014, 12:23:37 PM »

Not really, because the local media was flogging that ridiculous fisherman "controversy" for all it was worth in the last few days of the campaign. MA "swing" voters need only the smallest of excuses to vote for the Democrat.

My guess is, unlike some of the Massachussets prognosticators here said, the MA Democratic Party did the GOTV for Coakley.

Yes, everywhere but Worcester, where the Dem machine did in fact sit this one out.
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,019


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: November 08, 2014, 12:55:38 PM »

My guess is, unlike some of the Massachussets prognosticators here said, the MA Democratic Party did the GOTV for Coakley.

But MA Democrats are so sexist!!!11!

Too little, too late.
Logged
Pessimistic Antineutrino
Pessimistic Antineutrino
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,896
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: November 08, 2014, 01:33:34 PM »

Nah, I expected Baker to win but by less than the polls were suggesting. Democrats in MA have consistently overperformed polls by 2-6% in all major races since 2008. Baker won by 1.9% while RCP's polling average had him winning by 3.7%, so Coakley actually overperformed less than I expected her to, at slightly less than 2%.
Logged
New_Conservative
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,139
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: November 08, 2014, 04:26:07 PM »

No, the Democratic GOTV machine materialized in Boston, which helped keep the race extremely close.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.211 seconds with 10 queries.