For the last two weeks we have been treated to the narrative that Barack Obama is surging at the polls, Mitt Romney is in trouble and unless there is a massive change in direction it is all over.

Simply put this is a lie.

Of all the polls you have seen, there is one poll that has gotten no attention, it is a poll that has been taken monthly, it is a poll that Doug Ross spotted and promoted on his site. It is the Rasmussen Poll of party identification.

They have party identification results online dating back to 2004. Here are the 2012 numbers through August

That shows a GOP advantage in registration this year but you might say: “Hey, Datechguy, you’ve been hitting polls all year, why can’t THIS poll be wrong?”

That’s a good question, we can answer it by asking another question: Does this poll of party identification correspond with the results of national elections?

Lets take a look:

2004 George Bush wins re-election

The closest the Republicans come to democrats in registration is Sept at a .6 in September. On election day Democrats had a registration advantage of 1.5. Yet not only did George Bush win re-election with that disadvantage but the GOP took 3 senate seats and 3 House seats over 2002.

2006 Midterms Revenge of the left:

In January the GOP was the closest they would be .6 off but by November the Mark Foley scandal was still big news and on election day Democrats had a spread of 6.1 points. This carried them to a net gain of 31 house seats & 5 seats.

2008 The coming of Barack Obama

The year of hope and change. The closest split was 5.6 in January & in September after the Palin Pick but by election day not only was the split 7.6 for Dems but for the first time (Feb) A party had identification over 40%. The Democrats kept that number over 40% 8 out of 12 months that year reaching a high of 41.7% the largest number in this 9 year sample for either party. With these figures it’s should be no surprise that Barack Obama win but Democrats picked up 8 seats in the Senate & 21 Seats in the house.

2010 Midterms The Rise of the Tea Party

2010 proved conclusively that timing is everything for the first time in the nine years, the GOP took an advantage in poll registration from -2.9 to plus 1.3 in one month, and that month was November.

Additionally the 37.0 figure for the GOP was the highest for the party since Dec 2004. At the very same time the 33.7 figure in December was the lowest figure for democrats EVER.

Correspondingly the GOP gained 6 Senate seats (not counting the Jan Scott Brown Race) and in the house picked up 63 seats more than democrats picked up in 2006 & 2008 combined.

These results since 2004 seem to indicate the poll is reliable. So what has it said lately, lets start with 2011 lets look at 2011

This is the year of the great fights between the GOP House & the president and it’s the most interesting year of the lot. The lead changes hands 6 times during the year as the country tries to figure out what it wants and for the first time EVER Other was in the lead, (Aug) tied with the GOP (33.5) ahead of democrats (33.0) other was ahead of the GOP 3 times in 2007.

Now lets look at that 2012 chart again:

At no time during the year do the Democrats have a registration advantage vs republicans, the gap closes in July & re-separates in August. The low point for the GOP was July for 34.9 and the high August at 37.6 For democrats the high was 34.0 in June & July the low was 32.4 in Feb

What does this mean for November? It means a lot.

The Democrats won 2 election in this period 2006 & 2008 with a 6.9 advantage in 2006 & a 7.6 advantage in 2008.

There is no example of the Democrats winning since 2004 with an advantage less that 6.9.

The GOP won two elections in this period 2004 with a -1.6 disadvantage & 2010 with a 1.3 advantage. This means the GOP has proven it can win with not only a small lead but with an actual disadvantage. Additionally with an advantage of only 1.3 they pulled off the biggest house swing in my lifetime.

Can these number change? Well the biggest 1 month swing I’ve seen is 4.2 Oct-Nov in 2010 the biggest 3 month swing was Dec 2007-Feb 2008 6.9 in favor of Democrats at the rise of Obama.

Tell me with the economy in the tank, and the new trouble in the Middle East, what is the prospect of a swing of that size to the Democrats happening again right now? Moreover even if that record registration swing repeated itself right now this would give democrats an advantage of only 2.6 points.

I’ve covered a lot of national polls on this site over the last year and all those polls ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX have one thing in common.

Not a single one of those polls had a sample with a GOP advantage.

As Rush would say: Zip, Zero Nada.

Not only have none of these polls had a GOP advantage but the closest we saw was a D+4 poll.

Doug Ross via (@NumbersMuncher & @AriFleischer) has a great chart on his site that I’ll reprint here:

In every single poll showing Barack Obama ahead on this chart the sample is at least D+4 Even if the biggest swing in history takes place in the next 3 months toward the left that is 1.4 points above what the party split will be.

All of the figures I’ve cited are from a source publicly available. The Media know these figures, the left knows these figures and the Networks know these figures.

Yet they are still using polls with huge democrat samples and representing them as real.

I don’t know what that tells you but I sure know what it tells me

“Ride right through them, they’re demoralized as hell”!

The election of Barack Obama was the biggest con ever perpetuated on the US Public, the polls the media is reporting these days is a close second.

Update: CBS belowns itself, D+13 REALLY?

Update: I stayed up late tweeting this out and had this tweet from a leftist named Mr. D who made this incredible assertion:

 

Being not only fair-minded but also sane and rational I asked for some data, the exchange was….interesting

 

Oh I’m now not only a bigot but it’s as clear as proving the sky is blue so who needs data?

 

Hey I can take a photo of the sky to prove it’s blue, if all these polls skew GOP you would think you can produce at least 1 to show it, but not this is the left I’ve said it so it MUST be true.

Talk about hide the decline.

Update 3: Great example of my point in the PPP Virgina Poll. Poll claims Obama up 50-45. Poll Sample +3 Dem

Actual registration split in Virginia? GOP +3

Update 4: I should stress that none of these figures are an argument to be complacent, to not make the calls, to not engage and to not fight for every vote out there. The registration trends are in our favor but apathy is fatal. Be cocky but not lazy.

Update 5: Instalanche Thanks Glenn & Powerline picks today, thanks guys.

Update 6: Linked by Hillbuzz, Ace, Neoneocon, Best of the Web, Before it’s news, polipundit, Evil Blogger Lady and I’m told mentioned on the air by Rush Limbaugh.

Thanks to you all, welcome to all the new readers and check out the site, the radio show (latest episode available by clicking on my fedora above) Nice to have you here.

Update 7: BTW for those who don’t know I like Rush have been arguing all the objective data shows the Democrats are not only losing but “Demoralized as Hell” click on the words “Ride Right Through them They’re demoralized as hell” for the full series and if you are a Rush fan you will want to read this or the short version here.

Update 8:  My disdain for skewed polls is not limited to polls shifted to favor candidates I oppose.

Update bottom: One more thing. The MSM will pay Politico & the Morning Joe people to put out this stuff, my stuff is only possible because of you, any help is appreciated




Glenn Reynolds and Steve Den Beste are both commenting on the press’ and Obama, Den Bestie whose long essay’s I’ve missed says the forbidden word

What I found particularly interesting about Murphy’s article was the word that wasn’t there. It’s the word that no one wants to say. But I don’t give a damn, and I’ll say (or write) it:

“Black”.

He elaborates:

And so, when in 2007 it became clear that Obama had a genuine shot at becoming president, no left wing reporter or news outlet (which is to say, pretty much all of them) wanted to become known as the one who shot Obama down and ruined his chances for election.

Obama got a free ride from the press because he is black. That’s what no one wants to admit. He is the ultimate example of affirmative action.

I think it’s actually more than that, it wasn’t just a question of affirmative action it was a question of the press living their “dream” of making a difference.

Yesterday in Lexington Andrew Breitbart talked about how once the press were a lower middle class group that hung in a neighborhood bar, now they are upper class who graduate from elite universities and believe themselves smarter.

Because of their “education” in the wrongness of America many of them entered journalism to “make a difference” and Barack Obama was the ultimate expression of this.

This was the moment that by their actions the press would change America, it would fundamental transform the way the country dealt with race, this would be the Jackie Robinson moment not for Major League Baseball but for the whole country.

The Robinson image and moment is venerated in the press, and the media wanted to play the part of Branch Rickey, but unlike Rickey they didn’t practice due diligence.

Rickey took his time to find the right player, the person not only with the baseball skills necessary but with the temperament and heart to succeed.

The mainstream media not being Branch Rickey instead acted with their heart and instead of finding a candidate with the qualifications and the temperament, instead found a candidate it could sell to the public.

I’ve suggested in the past that Obama is Pumpsie Green and but was sold to us as Jackie Robinson, but on reflection I think it goes deeper than that.

I think the press had Pumpsie Green in front of them but saw Jackie Robinson. They deceived themselves and moreover wanted to be deceived. As far was the press was concerned their desire for the political equivalent of Jackie Robinson blinded them to the point where any semi-qualified black candidate became Jackie

So naturally when some of us on the right objected to a person who was totally unqualified for office the press went wild, because it directly challenged their illusion and cried racism when it was just the opposite.

We on the right saw not a black man, but an unqualified inexperienced Chicago pol who just happened to be black. The press meanwhile saw not an individual but a symbol, it didn’t actually matter who he was, it mattered that he was. Or to put it bluntly, they couldn’t tell Jackie Robinson from Pumpsie Green because “they all looked alike to them.”

If Branch Rickey had done this in 47 the majors might still not be integrated.

Now the blinders are off, the press sees a .230 hitter with a little range that is there instead of an all-star with one of the best baseball minds in the game and an incredible desire to win.

The question now is, when do they bench him or do they wait till they are eliminated because of their emotional investment?

As I’ve said that will be the story of 2012.

Update: Should have linked to the base story here.

Yesterday I found myself after I got home surfing through the free movie channel from Comcast and noticed The Verdict a movie I remembered from 1982.

It was a great picture with Jack Warden as Newman’s friend who arranged an easy settlement case for the down and out drinking lawyer played by Newman. There is a sequence in the film that is one of the turning points. Ambulance chaser Newman is being offered a settlement on the case and the following exchange takes place:

Frank Galvin: How did you settle on the amount?
Bishop Brophy: We thought it was just.
Frank Galvin: You thought it was just?
Bishop Brophy: Yes.
Frank Galvin: Because it struck me, um, how neatly ‘three’ went into this figure: 210,000….

eventually he thinks it over and decides he can’t settle, he dramatic speech ends thus:

…I came here to take your money. I brought snapshots to show you so I could get your money. I can’t do it; I can’t take it. ‘Cause if I take the money I’m lost. I’ll just be a… rich ambulance chaser. I can’t do it. I can’t take it.

Just a reminder to the young, you could live pretty good for a couple of years on $70k in 1982.

What does this have to do with Sarah Palin? Just this:

There are a lot of people with their hands out waiting for Sarah Palin to run. They are political consultants, staff folk etc , people who make big money as consultants pocketing the contributions that ordinary Americans and rich donors make to campaigns. Sarah Palin has made more money in the last two years then she did in the time before the 2008 elections. If she runs she will draw an incredible amount of campaign donations from people who love her and these guys are looking at those figures and dividing by 3.

I want Sarah Palin to run not because she is the only great choice to be the president this country needs, (Herman Cain and Michelle Bachmann would certainly qualify as well) but I think she is the best choice as a leader to take the country in the right direction. That’s why I’d like her to run.

Unfortunately I suspect a lot of professional consultants, including some close to her, want her to run because they see a meal ticket that will keep them in cigars and whiskey for years.

Nobody who doesn’t have a healthy ego considers running for President. I’m sure she has a healthy ego and is confident in herself and her ability and I’ve already predicted she will run and win, but as she makes her final decision, I would hope she takes this piece of advice from an admirer:

Make sure you are running for yourself, not for those around you. You are a young woman and the White House will still be there for many years and if you choose to wait. None of us will think any less of it.

Above all pray on it and make sure the voice you hear whispering in your ear is the one you think it is.

Good Luck and God bless.

As Roxeanne pointed out yesterday Peter Durant won YET AGAIN in the Worcester 6th district this time by practically a landslide, 56 votes!

If I was a more cynical man I’d say this was the the deciding factor:

With observers from the U.S. Department of Justice in Southbridge looking to ensure the integrity of the ballot process…

Additionally people from the secretary of state’s office, Empower Massachusetts,and the Tea party were on hand to keep an eye on what was going on.

Democrats only had a single seat in play, as opposed to races that they were worried about up and down the ballot so a clean election isn’t expensive, but consider; even with two ringers independent candidates in the race Durant wins by 56 votes as opposed to 1.

Republican Peter J. Durant of Spencer last night ended state Rep. Geraldo Alicea’s tenure at two terms with an apparent 3,325-to-3,269 victory in a special election for the 6th Worcester District House seat.

Independent Peter J. Boria of Charlton placed a distant third with 1,275 votes, but finished second in his hometown. Independent Robert J. Cirba of Spencer had 71 votes.

I suspect the Telegram story concerning the Southbridge city clerk easily cost Alicea enough votes to lose, but if you really want to find the difference in this race it’s this figure:

6,587

That’s each candidate’s total vote in November.  That means that 5234 fewer votes were cast than last time around.

Now I suspect there was some funny business going on last fall, but I’m pretty sure that it didn’t amount to 39% of the total vote.

Even if we rashly assume that every one of the votes for the two ringers independent candidates would have gone to Durant that means that 1916 Durant voters didn’t show up and 3309 Alicea votes didn’t show up.

If you are a democrat unhappy with this result but didn’t vote yesterday, blame yourself.  If you are a Durant supporter who voted in November but stayed home yesterday all I have to say is, you’re damn lucky.

Well it took a lot of lawyers, cracked and broken election boxes, and some interesting handling of ballots during a recount but the Democratic machine managed to get the result they were looking for:

A Worcester Superior Court judge is ordering a new election for a contested Massachusetts House seat after ruling the November contest ended in a tie.

The ruling by Justice Richard Tucker means Democratic incumbent Geraldo Alicea of Charlton will again face off against Republican challenger Peter Durant of Spencer.

An earlier recount of had placed Durant one vote ahead.

But Tucker ruled a single uncounted vote for Alicea should be included in the official tally, ending in a tie.

Of course the democratic legislature might just choose to steal the election outright:

Representative Michael T. Moran, a Boston Democrat who co-chairs the Legislature’s Election Laws Committee, said the judge’s ruling would now be reviewed by a special House committee of two Democrats and one Republican.

The committee will make a recommendation about next steps to House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo, he said. “The strongest option is to have a reelection,’’ Moran said. “But you have to look at everything.’’

“It’s fair to say this is extremely, extremely rare, and it poses a whole set of different issues and problems,’’ Moran said.

Red Mass. Group:

The correct answer for Moran would have been, “we have asked the Secretary of State to schedule the election for as early a date as possible.” He did not say that. Leaving the door open to the seating of Alicea.

Speaker Deleo and the rest of the Legislature should know that we the people of Massachusetts will march on the State House if they pull this again. As recent events in the Middle East have shown 2011 is a whole lot different than 2000 or 2001. Through the internet we can easily organize demonstrations, and they will be held.

This is what happens when you have a one party state. Remember we have done this to ourselves.

According to this fellow something that he accuses of Durant doing 10 years ago (that has no basis in reality) proves that Durant is trying to steal an election that he has been ahead of in every single count. This is even though in every city where Mr. Durant won, the recounts were held in a professional manner and matched exactly to the counts of election night.

Meanwhile in Southbridge you had a ballot boxes cracked open, one box not tied, no controls on the people in the area of the recounts and (by an odd coincidence) you have two extra votes for the democratic candidate (recall that the initial reported lead for Durant’s was 2 votes) and the town clerk happens to be the cousin of the democratic candidate. Yet this gentleman sees nothing odd here.

Let’s remind this gentleman that the judge who heard this case a decade ago took all of five minutes to decide that arguments of the lawyers opposing Durant had all the credibility of the candidacy Alvin Greene of South Carolina.

However who needs that when you have this:

Keep in mind Howard Potash told me that over 200 dead voters voted in the Great Recall Election

Tell me did Mr. Potash tell him that the Moon is populated by Mice with spiked haircuts? I suspect if he did this gentleman would believe him since apparently the arguments made before a judge in a court of law can’t compare to hearsay told to a blogger by a lawyer in a losing case not under oath.

Ya gotta love the left, they are never more fun than when they are in panic.

Michael Barone is always worth reading but something this week caught my eye:

Around 100 years ago Finnish immigrants flocked to the mines and woods of the country around Lake Superior, where the topography and weather must have seemed familiar. They’ve been a mostly Democratic, sometimes even radical voting bloc ever since. No more, it seems. Going into the election, the three most Finnish districts, Michigan 1, Wisconsin 7 and Minnesota 8, all fronting on Lake Superior, were represented by two Democratic committee chairmen and the chairman of an Energy and Commerce subcommittee, with a total of 95 years of seniority.

Wisconsin’s David Obey and Michigan’s Bart Stupak both chose to retire, and were replaced by Republicans who had started running before their announcements. Minnesota’s James Oberstar was upset by retired Northwest pilot and stay-at-home dad Chip Cravaack.

So here’s a new rule for the political scientists: As go the Finns, so goes America.

Barone may not be aware of this but so many Finns settled in Fitchburg that there is still a Finish Consulate in town. The town went big for Scott Brown and if I’m not mistaken narrowly for Bill Gunn in the last election.

Dare I say as Fitchburg goes, so goes the nation?

…at least that’s what David Broder thinks:

Palin has conducted a vendetta against the Murkowski family, and she became governor four years ago by upsetting Lisa’s father, Frank Murkowski, in another low-turnout GOP primary.

I understand the political class feels privileged and entitled but I didn’t realize that running again Frank Murkowski and defeating him constitutes a vendetta. Take it from a Sicilian American Dave, you don’t know from vendetta.

Before he left office, Frank Murkowski appointed Lisa to a vacant Republican Senate seat only to see her lose the nomination this year.

So let me get this straight, Murkowski’s seat was given to her on a silver platter by her father and this is not a problem? Imagiane how different the piece would have been if said appointment had been made by a governor Palin or Bush.

When she lost the primary, that was expected to be the end of her. Miller settled in for an easy race against a little-known Democrat in his Republican-leaning state. But Murkowski, with some notable help from anti-Palin elements and parts of the energy industry, decided to try a long-shot write-in campaig/

Hold on, are you saying that anti-Palin elements drove this campaign, and the energy industry, you mean big oil etc? I thought people like Palin were supposed to be in the pocket of big oil?

The second funniest line of the piece is this one:

The demographics required that Murkowski seek support from Democrats

Let’s see democrats who absolutely loathe Sarah Palin and hope to bring her down have a choice between voting for a democrat who has no prayer or helping to defeat a candidate endorsed by Palin knowing the MSM will jump all over her for it. That must have been a real tough choice for partisan democrats. I’m sure that Broder gives that fact a lot of weight in the results, doesn’t he?

“I think that’s what voters are looking for. I don’t think that most are looking for somebody that is going to follow the litmus test of one party or another, and never deviate from it. I think they want us to think, and I think they want us to work cooperatively together. So, that’s my pledge to all Alaskans, regardless of whether you are the most conservative Republican or the most liberal Democrat, I’m going to try to find a way that we can find common ground to help the state and to help our country.”

Want to know what the election was about? That’s an authoritative answer.

So a three-way election with a turnout about the size of the turnout of MA-4’s congressional race giving where the incumbent had an incredible financial advantage and the backing of both anti-Palin forces and big energy is what the election was all about. Call me a naif but I’d guess those 60+ seats including Ann Marie Buerkle and Renne Ellmers and Allen West and the tea party movement might have a tad more to do with things.

The media is desperate to change the narrative of the last election before the next one, expect a lot more of this for a while.

More to add-on to Saturday’s topics

My first meeting with Ann Marie Burekle was the day that Syracuse Post-Standard declared that she was down double digits. The poll itself was suspect but as my friend Robert Stacy McCain often says Polls aren’t elections. (this is what I constantly remind those who say Palin can’t win due to a poll that the election isn’t held today) That day Ann Marie said this:

(UPDATE video added)

Now forgetting that the poll was…shall we say interesting all that poll proved in the end was one (or both) of two things.

The Syracuse Post-Standard had an agenda

Ann Marie Buerkle worked incredibly hard and managed to turn it around in two weeks

I thought of that last night when I saw this story that leftist blogs have been jumping on:

New poll undercuts GOP claims of a midterm mandate

By Steven Thomma | McClatchy Newspapers

A majority of Americans want the Congress to keep the new health care law or actually expand it, despite Republican claims that they have a mandate from the people to kill it, according to a new McClatchy-Marist poll.

I don’t know Steven Thomma, he may be a good writer and a nice guy and kind to animals but I know this much. He is trying to BS me and the left blogs are doing the same.

We just had an election where Republicans running against Obamacare won more seats than anyone has seen in over 50 years and you are trying to tell me there is no mandate because of your poll? As I left in comments:

Yeah all those 63 or 64 congressional seats mean nothing next to a POLL

how stupid do you think we are?

Apparently they think we are pretty stupid. Lucky for people who are not suckers we have Robert Stacy McCain at the American Spectator who isn’t buying it. His piece is called The Republican Mandate:

Those people did make a difference, and in the process made laughingstocks of pundits who said they couldn’t do it, chief among them E.J. Dionne of the Washington Post.

“It will be very hard for Republicans to take the House if they don’t break the Democrats’ power in the Northeast — and they still have to prove they can do that,” Dionne wrote five weeks before Election Day, in a column that featured this quote from Dan Maffei: “When we do retain the majority… people are going to look at the map and see that the Northeast held.” Dionne predicted: “Absent a Republican wave of historic proportions, [Maffei’s] seat now seems out of the GOP’s reach.”

Unfortunately for Maffei and Dionne, that “Republican wave of historic proportions” came crashing ashore Nov. 2 with enough power to flip six seats in New York into the GOP column. In addition to Buerkle’s hard-fought win in the 25th District, Republicans also captured previously Democrat-held seats in the 13th, 19th, 20th, 24th and 29th districts. New York’s six GOP pickups was the most of any state. Republicans gained five seats in Ohio and Pennsylvania, while adding four seats in both Florida and Illinois. If such widespread victories are not a mandate for House Republicans to oppose the Democrats’ liberal agenda, whatever could be?

How did two guys in fedoras know to visit Ny-25 in October when EJ Dionne who unlike me doesn’t have to go door to door to business to pay for his radio show? We went there any saw for ourselves!

If you choose to believe Steven Thomma and McClatchy that is your prerogative. Just don’t expect us to believe or trust your opinion

And yes this will be a topic on Saturday.

Update: Put the actual video in