Final ARG poll in the Massachusetts Senate race conducted Friday through Sunday shows Scott Brown leading Martha Coakley by seven points, 52 to 45.  Brown's support improved four points versus ARG's previous poll taken on Tuesday-Thursday of last week, while Coakley's support remained unchanged.

According to ARG, two percent say they will vote for the Independent candidate, and two percent remain undecided.

A new survey from Research 2000 (500 LVs, 1/15-17, MoE +/- 5%), this time for the Daily Kos, shows that Martha Coakley's 8-point lead has been wiped out in just four days.

Special Election Matchup
Brown (R) 48 (+7 vs. last poll, 1/12-13 )
Coakley (D) 48 (-1)
Kennedy (I) 3 (-2)
Und 1 (-4)

Some key differences with a PPP (D) survey last night. First, independent candidate Joe Kennedy (no relation) is tested. Secondly, there's a wide swing in Coakley's favorable rating -- it was just 44 percent in the PPP survey. And third, Coakley gets a bigger share of Democratic votes -- nearly 90 percent, compared to 77 percent in the PPP survey.

Independents side overwhelmingly with Brown, by a margin of 65-29 percent.

Favorable Ratings
Coakley 58 / 31
Brown 51 / 30
Kennedy 38 / 44

One of the final arrows in the quiver: Attorney General Martha Coakley (D) launches a TV ad with footage from her rally Sunday with President Obama:

Here's where things stand: four polls released in the last 48 hours all show Scott Brown leading Martha Coakley by anywhere from three to ten points. (UPDATE: Daily Kos just released a survey from R2000 conducted Fri-Sun showing Coakley now tied with Brown at 48% a piece. Putting that in context with R2000's survey for Blue Mass Group taken last Tuesday and Wednesday, Coakley has lost one point and Brown has gained seven.)

But there's still quite a bit of variance in the polls, including two surveys conducted in the last week showing Martha Coakley leading by either two or eight points.

Among the issues involved in using polls to assess the state of the race are that a couple of the polling firms are brand new, and a handful of the surveys were conducted on behalf of partisan affiliated organizations.

For example, the Democratic Blue Mass Group's poll, conducted by Research 2000 (who conducts all of Daily Kos's surveys) shows Martha Coakley up eight points. (See update above...)

On the other hand, the Democratic firm PPP - which had a very good track record in the 2008 cycle - shows Brown extending his lead from 1 point last week to five points this week. And the conservative media outlet Pajamas Media has a poll by the Republican firm CrossTarget showing Brown up 10 points - though that represents a five point decline for Brown from their survey last Thursday.

So is Brown extending his lead? Or is his lead shrinking? Or does he even have a lead in the first place?

Variance in the polls primarily comes from pollsters making assumptions about the following two questions: How many people will turnout on Tuesday and what will the composition of the electorate look like. Obviously, those assumptions become much more difficult in the case of a special election  - and more difficult still in a special election that has been suddenly nationalized in the final 10-14 days of the race.

But - and this is probably the most salient point of all - ALL of the polls have one thing in common: they all show support for Martha Coakley is under 50%. Even the most favorable poll for her in the bunch - the aforementioned Blue Mass Group survey - shows her at 49%.  That is a critical sign of weakness for her candidacy in a state where Democrats outnumber Republicans by a three-to-one margin.

That is why inside the Beltway handicappers like Charlie Cook moved this race to a toss up late last week - and Stuart Rothenberg went a step further just this morning moving the race to lean Republican takeover.

Could all of the polls and pundits be wrong? Of course they could (see, New Hampshire, Democratic Primary 2008). But the preponderance of available evidence, including the public polling data and most of the anecdotal information flowing out of the Bay State, suggests that Scott Brown has an edge heading into tomorrow's vote.

Follow the RCP Blog on Twitter.
Become a fan of RCP on Facebook.

As Don Rumsfeld once famously declared:

"As we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns -- the ones we don't know we don't know."

President Obama appears to have come up with a fourth category: "unknown knowns."  This involves claiming no knowledge of certain subjects but then making statements about them anyway.

Obama's first "unknown known" involved the arrest of Louis Gates Jr. last year when the President declared in one breath that he 'didn't know all the facts'  of the case and then declared in the next that the Cambridge police had acted 'stupidly.'

The President came up with another "unknown known" yesterday at his rally for Martha Coakley in Boston. Obama said of Brown:

And I don't know him, he may be a perfectly nice guy.  I don't know his record, but I don't know whether he's been fighting for you up until now...

And in the very next breath President Obama displayed detailed knowledge of Brown's record:

Now, as a legislator, he voted with the Republicans 96 percent of the time -- 96 percent of the time.  It's hard to suggest that he's going to be significantly independent from the Republican agenda.

Obviously, the problem with an "unknown known" is that you're either A) lying about having no knowledge of the subject in question or B) you really don't have any knowledge about the subject in question but you speak out on it anyway.

That cheaters never win.

A new Public Policy Polling survey out Sunday night (1,231 LVs, 1/16-17, MoE +/- 2.8%) shows state Sen. Scott Brown (R) holding on to a lead over Attorney General Martha Coakley (D) ahead of Tuesday's special election for Senate in Massachusetts.

Special Election Matchup
Brown (R) 51 (+3 vs. last poll, 1/7-9)
Coakley (D) 46 (-1)
Und 4 (-2)

Some troubling signs for Democrats: one-in-five Obama voters now say they'll back the Republican nominee. Brown's supporters are also more enthusiastic about their vote, with 4-of-5 saying they're "very excited" about voting Tuesday, compared to only 3-of-5 of Coakley voters saying the same.

On top of that it's Coakley who saw a greater drop in favorability this week, when Democrats thought their onslaught would bring down Brown's strong numbers. His favorable number dropped just one point, from 57 to 56 percent, while Coakley's dipped from 50 to 44 percent.

PPP also points out: "The likely electorate for Tuesday's election continues to express skepticism about the Democratic health care plan with 48% saying they're opposed to 40% who support it. President Obama's approval stands at 44/43."

Democrats had hoped that the final deluge of attention on the race from their surrogates, including President Obama himself today, has slowed or stopped the Brown surge.

There's been a raft of polling out from various outfits all week, some more trusted than others. But in this final weekend, several have shown Brown with leads outside the margin of error. We expect another survey Monday from Research 2000, and perhaps continued leaks from the campaigns' internal numbers.

I've been hardly alone in noting that many of the older folks with tea bags stapled to their hats already enjoy nationally guaranteed health coverage through Medicare. And if they didn't, they'd be on the other side of the barricades.

Similarly, the less-than-overwhelming enthusiasm in the commonwealth for the reforms coming out of Washington reflects the fact that Massachusetts now has universal coverage, courtesy of the state (and former Republican Gov. Mitt Romney). That's why you read all those polls showing Massachusetts residents overwhelmingly in favor of their state program, while skeptical of the national one. This line from The New York Times, quoting a Scott Brown supporter, tells it all:

“It's not perfect, but why should we have to pay again when we have health care?” said Ms. Grenham, who works as a physical therapist.

Unlike the legislation in Washington, the Massachusetts health plan made no effort to curb spending. That's why it is enormously expensive, and the state is urgently looking at ways to change the delivery of care. Nonetheless, the Massachusetts health plan, which includes an individual mandate to obtain coverage, remains more popular than ever among the people.

Blue Dog Democrats, take note.

www.fromaharrop.com

"I want to be a role model by showing by example that no job is undignified." - Forty-six year old father of three Don Gould, who has an MBA and was making 6-figures beforing losing his job and now works as a bag boy at a Publix grocery store to make ends.

Welcome to our new era of post-racial politics, as practiced by Boston Mayor Tom Menino:

Boston Mayor Thomas Menino has told a largely black congregation that if Democrat Martha Coakley loses the U.S. Senate race in Massachusetts, it will be a victory for people who want President Barack Obama to fail.

If Coakley loses it couldn't possibly have anything to do with, you know, legitimate issues like voter angst over health care and one party rule in Washington. Maybe Menino should go talk to Massachusetts lobsterman Bernard Feeney, who voted for Ted Kennedy all his life but says this time around he's voting for Scott Brown because "I just think the Democrats have forgotten the working man." Clearly Feeney is one of those folks Menino believes is motivated by nothing more than a desire to see our first black president fail.

You know the Democrats' panic in Massachusetts has reached new heights when the Mayor of Boston is willing to play the race card and insult roughly half the electorate two days before people go to the polls.

Meanwhile, Martha Coakley and her allies appear to be throwing the kitchen sink - and just about anything else they can find - at Scott Brown in the final days, including this outrageous mailer saying Brown wants to turn away all rape victims from Massachusetts hospitals. As you can probably guess, that claim is a gross distortion of Browns position that bears virtually no resemblance to the truth.

This is ugly, desperate stuff - which is another indication of just how high the stakes are in this race.