Have any of you Noticed that there is little data on how badly Coakley's run her campaign?

Just a short question with much larger answers: For the last few days I've been looking closely at the special election in Massachusetts and how Scott Brown is practically coming out of no where to challenge Coakley. But one thing I noticed was a decisive lack of info on just how badly Coakley screwed up her own campaign.

The thing is, I only came to realize this when I came across a graph showing Brown's rise and Coakley's fall. I googled "Brown Coakley poll data" and other variations of that, and found no graphs, no nothing before this January. In fact, looking up 'Brown Coakley poll data' on google images nets an odd amount of pictures of Coakley and not Brown.

Has anyone else noticed this, or am I just going nuts?

[edit on 19-1-2010 by ineverknew]

This is a comment from another thread.

Do a google search once on Massachusetts and see if you notice what I noticed. The first 4 entries are pictures of Obama with Coakley and the first time Brown is mentioned is an article on how conservatives are bamboozling voters. Coincedence? How much has Google been paid for advertising I wonder? Don't believe me? Try it. Go to the news breakdown tab.

I was looking for info on Massachusetts and the first thing that comes up at about the Massach.. point brings you to senate race.

Give it a try folks. Must be because the Coakley campaign is so good. What a joke.

S&F by the way. Good, I am not just seeing things. China Google has arrived in the US.