About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Claims of Mass. Senate race as "referendum on President Obama" undermined by poll

January 19, 2010 11:12 pm ET — 12 Comments

Earlier today, CNN anchor Kyra Phillips claimed that the Massachusetts special U.S. Senate election "has become the first public referendum on President Obama." But election night polling by Rasmussen Reports showing that 53 percent of Massachusetts voters approve of Obama's job performance undermines this claim, and Scott Brown himself has stated that the race was "not a referendum on Obama."

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED

From the January 19 edition of CNN Newsroom:

PHILLIPS: There's a much bigger picture here than Brown versus Coakley. This election has become the first public referendum on President Obama and health care reform.

Rasmussen poll of Mass. voters shows majority support for Obama

Fifty-three percent of Mass. voters approve of Obama job performance. In a January 19 post to his Twitter feed, referring to a Rasmussen Reports election night poll, Scott Rasmussen stated that "53% of Massachusetts voters approve of Obama performance." As Media Matters for America has documented, Rasmussen reportedly worked for President George W. Bush's re-election campaign and for the Republican National Committee in 2003 and 2004.

Even Brown himself stated that the election was "not a referendum on the president"

Brown's "Last Pitch": "It's not a referendum on the president. There are many issues." In his January 18 "Last Pitch" interview with Boston's ABC affiliate, Brown said of the race: "It's not a referendum on the president. There are many issues; you're talking about national security, taxes, spending -- the health care plan certainly is important."

Rasmussen poll also undermines Phillips' claim of election as referendum on health care

Numerous media figures have suggested that a Brown victory would indicate massive popular rejection of health care reform. But Rasmussen's polling indicates that a higher percentage of Coakley voters than Brown voters said that health care reform was the most important issue in determining their vote, with 52 percent of Brown voters calling it their top issue compared to 68 percent of Coakley voters.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by prosarahpalin (January 19, 2010 11:29 pm ET)
         
      ha! interesting how you all of a sudden find rasmussen relevant! you liberals have no honor. so you would agree then with rasmussen's polling that sarah palin polls even with obama overall and that she polls better on national security?

      everything brown ran on was EXACTLY what sarah palin has been saying all along: putting government back on the side of the people, stop giving terrorists constitutional rights, lower taxes, no earmarks, cut government spending.

      this was a victory for sarah palin!
      Report Abuse
    • Author by bluestate69 (January 19, 2010 11:57 pm ET)
      3  
      there is an energized block of voters out there, and the message of change is always powerful. the democrats were caught flat footed, and paid the price. however, there is 9 months until the next election, and there are no guarantees of a republican sweep. a lot can change in 9 months, or a day for that matter. there is plenty of time for the democrats to rehabilitate there image, and plenty of time for the economy to improve. defeat can also energize the "defeated", and fortunately for demcrats, they are still in a position enact legislation. what they do with that ability, will determine the 2010 outcomes. democrats never had 60 votes, but they suffered the consequences of "seeming" to have that threshold. with an extra vote in the senate, the republicans have more power, and in that position of power, they will be held that much more accountable. i don't believe that "no" will sustain the republicans until the midterms.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by fantagor (January 20, 2010 2:31 am ET)
      2 1
      This is a massive wake up call to the Democrats. Do NOT take the tea baggers lightly. Dig up dirt on them, expose their record and watch the voters shrink away.

      If Brown's record had been exposed back in November, instead of as an 11th hour last ditch effort to show Brown for the liar he is, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

      Randy
      Report Abuse
      • Author by bluestate69 (January 20, 2010 3:22 am ET)
        2 1
        i agree with you!! the democrats won the senate seat in north carolina in 08', and nobody saw that coming, especially with a popular incumbent like liz dole. however, the democrats picked up the seat, and it was with the same margin as brown's win. the thing we have to realize, as democrats and americans, is that the country is neither liberal or conservative. it's independent. the same electorate that elected bush in 04, is the same electorate that elected obama in 08. i think both parties misread big electoral victories. the win in mass doesn't mean that mass is now a red state, and the democrat win in n. carolina doesn't mean it's a blue state. we need to take on the tea baggers, and the ideology that they represent. they are polling better than republicans, yet republicans will benefit most from their cause. democrats would be wise to recognize the tea baggers as a separate party, legitimize them, and then attack them.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by snoopy (January 20, 2010 7:08 am ET)
        1 1
        It's a wakeup call, but not so much about the teabaggers as it is about democrats taking us lightly. It wasn't the teabaggers and there online supporters failedlib and cheney who gave them a majority and a mandate last election, it was us libs. Let the referendum be that just because we defend them against the lies and slander of the right it doesn't mean they can dismiss our wishes in favor of negotiating with the party of no. Republicans made it clear during the stimulus debates that no matter how many concessions you give them they will vote against it anyways out of spite. Coakley, like Reid, took it for granted that she would win, now she knows differently.

        But look on the bright side! It's gonna be fun today watching failedlib gloat and make wildly grandiose claims of a new referendum on republican family values as she twists and turns to explain how a nude posing teabagger with the values of a cockroach valiantly represents those values. Heck, I'm sure she'll toss in an insult or two with it, because after all, those "values" means never having to practice what you preach!
        Report Abuse
        • Author by fantagor (January 20, 2010 5:13 pm ET)
            1
          While I agree taking libs lightly was a strategic blunder, a little exposure on Brown's record would have energized the left to show up and vote. Coakley waving the victory flag two months ago disengaged the liberal public from the race. It all adds up to...41 GOP seats? Why is this even a topic of discussion WITH a Brown victory? Isn't the Senate a majority body, or did my civics teacher of 30 years ago lie to me?

          Randy
          Report Abuse
    • Author by wesley (January 20, 2010 8:00 am ET)
      1 1
      -- But election night polling by Rasmussen Reports showing that 53 percent of Massachusetts voters approve of Obama's job performance undermines this claim -- mmfa

      How quaint. mmfa uses Rasmussen polling to support their position...but only when they agree with the results. Here's what mmfa has thought about Rasmussen polling lately:

      -- Another awful Rasmussen poll
      January 15, 2010 8:58 am ET filed under Blog

      -- Another awful Rasmussen poll
      January 06, 2010 1:44 pm ET filed under Blog

      -- UPDATED: Another awful Rasmussen poll
      January 05, 2010 11:11 am ET filed under Blog

      -- Another awful Rasmussen poll
      January 03, 2010 11:07 am ET filed under Blog

      -- Another awful Rasmussen poll
      December 31, 2009 3:10 pm ET filed under Blog

      -- Another awful Rasmussen poll, cont'd
      December 04, 2009 11:08 am ET filed under Blog

      Laughable but expected...mmfa will sleep with anyone if it suits their partisan agenda.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by hoosier (January 20, 2010 8:08 am ET)
        1 2
        Spot on, wesley.

        This is the kind of hypocrisy and arrogance that got Dems their asses handed to them last night.

        Trash Rasmussen polls for being awful when in the end they clearly showed an accurate trend in Brown's favor, then hold them up when info can be used to support Obama. Trash Brown when he's the candidate, then use something he said as an olive branch in his victory speech.

        Low, even for this place.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by snoopy (January 20, 2010 9:56 am ET)
          1 1
          Nah, it was mediocre campaigning by Coakley who thought she had a liberal state gift wrapped and handed to her. But that's fine, because losing her seat means dems can stop thinking they need 60 votes to get anything done and start concentrating on how to act like republicans and pass legislation with 51 votes. So what if the opposition whines about it? It was legal when they did it, it's still legal now...
          Report Abuse
      • Author by broken cog (January 20, 2010 8:28 am ET)
        1 1
        No Wesely, MMfA is critical of Rasmussen's knack "really dumb, and misleading, polling questions designed solely to generate dubious "buzz." But even Rasmussen couldn't screw up a 'do you approve of the President's job performance' poll.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by fantagor (January 20, 2010 5:16 pm ET)
          1 1
          Yes, they don't get that the SAME pollster can conduct both fair and foul polls, and that some questions are so rudimentary that even an incompetent pollster cannot botch it up, such as "Do you approve of Obama's job performance?"

          Randy
          Report Abuse
      • Author by southerngal (January 20, 2010 11:17 am ET)
        1 1
        Thanks Wesley. More relevant perspective on just how not so sweet those cherries are that MMfA selectively picks and feeds to the loyalists here.

        Perhaps if they picked from the whole tree now and then the bitter ones would leave such an awful taste in the mouths of babes. just sayin'

        :)
        Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.