The non-story of Elizabeth Warren's Native American ancestry
It is quite amazing how often the media run hard with a story only to discover that the voters really don't care much. Such, apparently, has been the case with the whole to do about whether Elizabeth Warren used assertions of Native American ancestry to benefit her career.
The story has been everywhere over the past while yet, in a new Suffolk University/7News poll, Warren has pulled into a virtual tie with Republican incumbent Scott Brown for the Massachusetts Senate seat, as reported by The Boston Globe.
At this point, Warren, the presumptive Democratic nominee, sits at 47% support, compared to 48% for Brown.
Back in February, Warren trailed Brown by a margin of 49% to 40%.
73% said they were aware of the controversy surrounding Warren's heritage, although 69% said it was not a significant story. Only 28% said they believed she was not being honest about her heritage. 45% said they do not believe Warren benefited by listing herself as Native American in a law school directory.
Suffolk's pollster, David Paleologos, said that "voters do not appear to be punishing her for it" and that "it's considered a non-story."
Seems to be much ado about nothing.
One set of numbers at the bottom of the Globe story, which might carry great significance, indicates that President Obama is crushing Mitt Romney in Massachusetts by 25 points, 59% to 34%.
In addition to what it says about how Massachusetts voters feel about their former governor, it could signal a margin of victory for Warren as that many more Democrats surge to the polls in November.
But in the long march to the general election, some stories matter and others don't. This Native American heritage thing would seem to fall into the latter category.
Now, can we get on with the discussion of issues?
(Cross-posted at Lippmann's Ghost.)
The story has been everywhere over the past while yet, in a new Suffolk University/7News poll, Warren has pulled into a virtual tie with Republican incumbent Scott Brown for the Massachusetts Senate seat, as reported by The Boston Globe.
At this point, Warren, the presumptive Democratic nominee, sits at 47% support, compared to 48% for Brown.
Back in February, Warren trailed Brown by a margin of 49% to 40%.
73% said they were aware of the controversy surrounding Warren's heritage, although 69% said it was not a significant story. Only 28% said they believed she was not being honest about her heritage. 45% said they do not believe Warren benefited by listing herself as Native American in a law school directory.
Suffolk's pollster, David Paleologos, said that "voters do not appear to be punishing her for it" and that "it's considered a non-story."
Seems to be much ado about nothing.
One set of numbers at the bottom of the Globe story, which might carry great significance, indicates that President Obama is crushing Mitt Romney in Massachusetts by 25 points, 59% to 34%.
In addition to what it says about how Massachusetts voters feel about their former governor, it could signal a margin of victory for Warren as that many more Democrats surge to the polls in November.
But in the long march to the general election, some stories matter and others don't. This Native American heritage thing would seem to fall into the latter category.
Now, can we get on with the discussion of issues?
(Cross-posted at Lippmann's Ghost.)
Labels: 2012 elections, Democrats, Elizabeth Warren, Massachusetts, polls, Republicans, Scott Brown
posted by Richard K. Barry at
4:07 PM
1 Comments:
Well, I suppose one can take the position that this SHOULD BE a non-story, but the position that it IS a non-story seems to fly on the face of hundreds of newspaper, website and televion stories about it.
By
Anonymous, at 10:26 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home