I’ve kind of been taken aback by the recent right-wing hatred of polling. I mean, I knew they always trusted the Rasmussen push polls, but it really feels like they are going all in on the attac on political polling. I know they have systematically tried to destroy every institution that blocks their alternative reality, but I guess watching them take on statistics and polling really takes it to a new level. Here is unrepentant lunatic Hugh Hewitt (do I even need to bother at this point pointing out that he is… a lawyer):
It remains a 1 point race according to Rasmussen’s saily tracker –tied if “leaners” are included in the numbers.
But MSM must play its games, and today it is the Washington Post’s turn to put out absurdity dressed up as “polling.”
This is truly a dog bites man poll, and an embarassment to the Washington Post. If they sampled 100% Democrats, the lead would be even larger for Obama, but of course then it would be obvious what they are doing with the sample. A 7% D over R advantage among likely voters skews the results badly, especially when one considers the sweep of the Buckeye State in 2010 by the GOP.
Further undermining confidence in the WaPo results is another new Ohio poll from Gravis Consulting that shows a one point Obama lead, despite its sample screen including a 10% edge for Democrats over Republicans.
Ed Morrissey rounds up the back-and-forth between pollsters and their critics. The pollsters increasingly sound like arrogant alchemists who must not be questioned, and their insecurity as well as their refusal to confront the real problem of using the 2008 turnout model increases doubt in their alleged “professionalism.” Real professionals answer questions with confidence and clarity. They don’t spin and hide.
I guess it would be a cheap shot if I linked to this 2007 appraisal of Mitt Romney, before Rmoney lost to that old cranky dude who chose Snowflake Snooki as his running mate:
Mitt Romney’s “Faith in America” speech was simply magnificent, and anyone who denies it is not to be trusted as an analyst. On every level it was a masterpiece. The staging and Romney’s delivery, the eclipse of all other candidates it caused, the domination of the news cycle just prior to the start of absentee voting in New Hampshire on Monday –for all these reasons and more it will be long discussed as a masterpiece of political maneuver.
Far more important than all of that, however, was the content of the address, which was a brilliant explication of the American political theory of faith and freedom. Romney used the moment to defend not just himself but the American tradition of faith in the public square, of vigorous and valued religious plurality, and, crucially, why that tradition has allowed America’s role in the world to be so unqualifiedly good.
Hugh Hewitt- the number one radio pundit in the Glenn Reynolds demographic.
So, I have three theories why they have decided to avoid polling data.
Theory #1- Victimhood is so much easier and far more soothing than objective reality. They can scream about how every polling outlet is against them and affirm the “left wing bias” of the media. Ed Henry and Chris Wallace are giggling right now.
Theory #2- They know they are going to lose, so they are just poisoning the well, trying to nullify the impact of an Obama victory. For Republicans, this is a viable strategy. For Democrats. this seems kind of silly, since anyone with a pulse knows that Jim Demint and the teahadists are going to spend the next four years sabotaging Obama regardless, much like they have for the past four years.
Finally, there is option #3- the point of claiming the polls are wrong is to provide cover for Republican governors to throw the election:
Nine Republican governors have the power to put Mitt Romney in the White House, even if Barack Obama wins the popular vote.
With their secretaries of state, they control the electronic vote count in nine key swing states: Florida, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Iowa, Arizona, and New Mexico. Wisconsin elections are under the control of the state’s Government Accountability Board, appointed by the governor.
In tandem with the GOP’s massive nation-wide disenfranchisement campaign, they could—in the dead of election night—flip their states’ electronic votes to Romney and give him a victory in the Electoral College.
Thankfully, resistance has arisen to the disenfranchisement strategy, which seems designed to deny millions of suspected Democrats the right to vote. The intent to demand photo ID for voting could result in some ten million Americans being disenfranchised, according to the Brennan Center at New York University. Other methods are being used to strip voter rolls—as in Ohio, where 1.1 million citizens have been purged from registration lists since 2009. This “New Jim Crow”—personified by groups like True the Vote (New York Times Article)—could deny the ballot to a substantial percentage of the electorate in key swing states.
This massive disenfranchisement has evoked a strong reaction from voting rights activists, a number of lawsuits, major internet traffic and front page and editorial coverage in the New York Times.
Yeah. I know a bunch of you will attack me for linking Truthout and BuzzFlash, and call me a conspiracy theorist. Does it really sound so crazy that a party that has spent four years disenfranchising voters in swing states RUN BY REPUBLICANS, working to change voting rules, and basically openly trying to fix elections, all with a nascent uprising of “tea partiers” funded by ultra-rich corporate sponsors, would maybe have an astroturf campaign to invalidate polling in order to steal an election?
Fifteen years ago I would have laughed at this assertion. Then I saw Bush V. Gore. Then I saw aluminum tubes convince me and others to invade some random country. Then Terri Schiavo. Then Citizens United.
So fuck off, anyone who wants to call me a paranoid crank.