PPP: MA Dems want Vicki Kennedy to run against Sen. Scott Brown (R)

[Tender Branson]

Vicki Kennedy is the first choice of Massachusetts Democrats as their Senate candidate for 2012, although there is no overwhelming favorite and a fair number of potential contenders have double digit support.

22% say they hope Kennedy will be their nominee. Barney Frank is next at 17%, followed by Mike Capuano at 15%, and Deval Patrick at 13%. Polling in single digits are Stephen Lynch and Ed Markey at 7%, Tom Menino at 3%, and Tim Murray at just 1%.

There is a pretty meaningful ideological split in the numbers. Frank is the first choice of liberals with 29% picking him to 16% who say Kennedy and 14% who want Capuano. There are actually more Massachusetts Democrats who identify themselves as moderates though and 26% of them go for Kennedy to 17% for Capuano and 10% for Lynch with Frank all the way back in single digits at 8%.

These numbers just serve to further confirm what we already knew- the nomination contest in Massachusetts is about as wide open as it could be. We didn't test Frank in the general election on this poll but we will the next time we take a look at the state.

The preferences of Republican voters in the state for their 2012 Presidential nominee are not surprisingly quite lopsided in favor of former Governor Mitt Romney. 47% of GOP primary voters say they'd like him to be the nominee to 12% for Sarah Palin, 11% for Newt Gingrich, and 10% for Mike Huckabee. There's not much else to say about that ...

http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2010/12/kennedy-tops-ma-dem-wish-list.html

[memphis]

Here we go again with the it's not the kennedy seat it's the people's seat and I am the people cuz I drive a truck. Surely there's somebody better. And not Barney Frank either.

[Brittain33]

I do wish Jim McGovern would consider switching from his House-member-for-life career path and run. Capuano is my former mayor so it would be awesome from a property owner's standpoint to have him in the Senate, but I have big worries that running an abrasive Boston-adjacent mayor allows Brown to run up huge margins in the suburbs and squeak into a new term. We need someone who can start off with a coalition in the cities and western Mass. and then add something extra to the mix to get over 50%. On paper, Coakley could have done that, but in person, she couldn't. Frank probably can't, Patrick shouldn't try, and I'm skeptical that Capuano can do it. There are potential candidates in Mass. who could do it.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Mike Cupiano should be the choice.

[Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese]

Enough with the Kennedys already, if people want political power to be handed down in the same family for decades they should get a monarchy.

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

Honestly, Vicki Kennedy is probably one of the few candidates Democrats could choose that wouldn't give Brown a race.

[Beet]

I think we need to see head to heads before we decide who would give Scott Brown a race. Coakley annoyed some people because she seemed to take the seat for granted. As long as Vicki Kennedy ran a real race, I'm sure she would be able to give him a run for his money. She's not a Kennedy by blood anyway, but the name does give her star power. I think Massachusetts has been missing that since Ted passed away.

[Lunar]

Honestly, Vicki Kennedy is probably one of the few candidates Democrats could choose that wouldn't give Brown a race.

The normal lesson for political campaigns is to draw clear contrast ... I have to wonder, could the Dems be helped more with a candidate whom Brown has a difficult time drawing contrast against than they would be helped by a candidate who could draw clear contrast against Brown?  

Or, to put it most simply, wouldn't they hypothetically be better served by nominating a [this person doesn't quite exist] blue-collar, quasi-Moderate, solid fundraising Democrat, as opposed to an aristocratic political newcomer, against Brown?

I kinda wanna write about this, it's an interesting thought exercise in terms of branding.

[Free_Eagle]

Scott Brown probably wants Vicki Kennedy to run against him, too.

I'm not sure why she would be considered a contender, other than her last name.

Out of the serious candidates, I would think that either Capuano or Lynch would pose to Brown the largest threat. Frank would put off working class whites the same way Coakley did in the special election. Patrick got re-elected, but he still isn't very popular and is probably not the Democrats' ideal challenger to Senator Brown.

[DrScholl]

She could win the seat if she runs a strong campaign, she would have the Presidential year on her side. Brown will not have an easy time here, regardless of who his opponent is, because the Democrats won't fail to nominate a credible challenger.

[Brittain33]

Is there any indication that Vicki Kennedy is a good campaigner?

We know that she is smart, was an excellent partner for her husband, and it seems like insiders think the world of her, but does that mean she can actually run against Scott Brown? The precedents with Niki Tsongas and (gulp) Caroline Kennedy are not promising.

[Free_Eagle]

Is there any indication that Vicki Kennedy is a good campaigner?

We know that she is smart, was an excellent partner for her husband, and it seems like insiders think the world of her, but does that mean she can actually run against Scott Brown? The precedents with Niki Tsongas and (gulp) Caroline Kennedy are not promising.

Realistically speaking, the precedents with Massachusetts' most prominent statewide Democrats aren't looking good for Democrats either, in the case of Scott Brown. Coakley had the right party designation and a typical Senate candidate resume; Vicki Kennedy simply has a party designation and the surname of her late husband.

Democrats are going to want to energize the liberal base in and surrounding Boston in order to defeat Senator Brown.

[Brittain33]

Democrats are going to want to energize the liberal base in and surrounding Boston in order to defeat Senator Brown.

I have to hope that Obama will do that for them. (If not, we're in real trouble.) My worry is the Democrats nominating someone who loses the suburbs and Cape in a landslide.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Democrats are going to want to energize the liberal base in and surrounding Boston in order to defeat Senator Brown.

I have to hope that Obama will do that for them. (If not, we're in real trouble.) My worry is the Democrats nominating someone who loses the suburbs and Cape in a landslide.

Even Coakley won the suburbs. Unless you're actually referring to exurbs or places way different Cambridge, Brookline, Newton and Somerville.

[Brittain33]

Democrats are going to want to energize the liberal base in and surrounding Boston in order to defeat Senator Brown.

I have to hope that Obama will do that for them. (If not, we're in real trouble.) My worry is the Democrats nominating someone who loses the suburbs and Cape in a landslide.

Even Coakley won the suburbs. Unless you're actually referring to exurbs or places way different Cambridge, Brookline, Newton and Somerville.

I don't think of those places as suburbs for psephological purposes, although Newton is debatable. They may not be within Boston city limits but Cambridge and Somerville are cities, full stop. Brookline is affluent but densely settled with old housing stock and almost completely surrounded by high-density Boston. If annexation proceeded here like it did in Chicago or New York City, Cambridge, Somerville, and Brookline would be part of Boston. Coakley did well in a set of suburbs northwest of the city with highly-educated, affluent voters--it's the main commuter highway into Cambridge--but that got drowned out by her performance everywhere else surrounding Boston.

I do think exurbs is better than suburbs for what I am thinking. But I would also say that we need a Democrat to do well in older suburbs on the South Shore and even close-in cities like Quincy to be competitive against Scott Brown.

[Free_Eagle]

Democrats are going to want to energize the liberal base in and surrounding Boston in order to defeat Senator Brown.

I have to hope that Obama will do that for them. (If not, we're in real trouble.) My worry is the Democrats nominating someone who loses the suburbs and Cape in a landslide.

Even Coakley won the suburbs. Unless you're actually referring to exurbs or places way different Cambridge, Brookline, Newton and Somerville.

I don't think of those places as suburbs for psephological purposes, although Newton is debatable. They may not be within Boston city limits but Cambridge and Somerville are cities, full stop. Brookline is affluent but densely settled with old housing stock and almost completely surrounded by high-density Boston. If annexation proceeded here like it did in Chicago or New York City, Cambridge, Somerville, and Brookline would be part of Boston.

I do think exurbs is better than suburbs for what I am thinking. But I would also say that we need a Democrat to do well in older suburbs on the South Shore and even close-in cities like Quincy to be competitive against Scott Brown.

Democrats in Massachusetts would be smart to find a candidate who has been able to deal with a strong Republican challenge previously. Probably something that will be hard to find in Massachusetts, though. I'd look to a prominent State Senator from the right geographic location as an alternative, one with solidly liberal credentials that can draw a sharp contrast to Senator Brown and keep up reasonably well with President Obama's re-election totals in the state.

[Brittain33]

Therese Murray would be good on paper for the reasons you cite. But I don't know if she wants that job, if she is acceptable enough to liberals, or if she can avoid the pitfalls that women running statewide in Massachusetts always hit. I hadn't thought about this before your post but I think we default to Congressmen as nominees in part because they're the only ones who have run the primary-general obstacle course on federal issues before.

[Free_Eagle]

Smart call on Murray, she could probably use a favorite-daughter advantage to cut down the nice margins Brown racked up in Plymouth County in the special election. Coakley just wasn't inspiring; here being a female had nothing to do with it. Though it could be a potential drawback for Vicki Kennedy, since she is just Ted's widow and hasn't really run for political office in her own right. Murray might just be the candidate Democrats need.

Another interesting throw: pro-life Democrat vs. pro-choice Brown. But I guess William Weld showed us how that tends to play out.