The Gaylord National Harbor is a pretty big place so just like Last year there are several other events, conventions, even an NFL players event, overlapping either fully or partially with CPAC 2018.

Last year you might remember I conducted a few interviews (and had a memorable intellectual confrontations during DaTechGuy’s midnight court) with such folks. This year since I drove down there was no chance of running into the folks from various conventions in a shuttle, but when I went downstairs to the lobby trolling for interviews I spotted a woman working between the bar and front desk where I held my midnight court events last year and being who I am approached her to see if she was there for CPAC.

She was not, he name is Lea (or Leah, I should have asked but it was near midnight and I was pretty bushed from the long day and drive) and she was here for an event with the National Association of Developmental Education. Her primary focus is math and how to get students entering college up to speed on it if they are behind. This is a pretty worthwhile issue and she consented for an interview

Parents I’d take her advice on the subject of how to keep your kids up to speed in math, it’s one of the most important disciplines they can have as it’s completely grounded in reality and given what we see in colleges and society today, anything that promotes objective reality is to be encouraged.

Funny footnote #1. when my sons and I were checking in and heading to dinner Lea was at that front area she spotted me and pegged me as a math person thanks to the Doctor Who scarf, she was quite right as the quote goes: “Only in mathematics shall we find truth.”

Funny footnote #2 While I was interviewing Lea Indefatigable Kira Innis came by on her way to an event at the private club upstairs, (my interview with Kira from last year is here if you can’t wait). It turns out Lea had sat down with Kira and had a pleasant conversation with her earlier that night.

DaTechGuy at CPAC 2018 The story so far

If you don’t want to wait or my blog posts my youtube channel is here.

Wed Feb. 21st

Voices at (or near) #cpac2018 Lea from National Association of Developmental Educators We talk Students and Math

DaTechGuy at CPAC 2018 The Calm Before the Storm and What I’ll be Asking

Full CPAC 2017 list (for those who feel nostalgic) is here

If you’d like to continue to support independent journalism, help defray the $140 a month extra I’ll need for my new hosting site) and think my CPAC 2018 reporting is worthwhile please consider hitting DaTipJar here.

Consider subscribing. 7 more subscribers at $20 a month will pay the monthly price for the new host/server.

Choose a Subscription level

Finally might I suggest my book Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer makes an excellent Gift.

There are many reasons why one should not fall for the insanity of climate change panic, the unwillingness of those who claim it’s a crisis to act like it’s a crisis, the massive amounts of money spent to massage a particular answer and the simple question of who has benefited from the vast amounts of cash generated by grants and subsidies for those who are most deeply invested in this nonsense.

But for my money the best reason is illustrated by these paragraphs from this story on Tropical storm Irma (emphasis mine).

As of late Thursday morning, Irma was a category 2 storm packing sustained winds of 100 mph and was located more than 3,000 miles away from Florida. The storm is headed west toward the Leeward Islands.

U.S. and European computer models show Irma heading in different directions.

“The American models take it to the Carolinas by next Sunday (Sept. 10). The European models have it going to Cuba and possibly threatening South Florida,” News 6 meteorologist Troy Bridges said. “It’s just too early to tell.”

Now consider these words for a second.

At this moment our understanding of Hurricanes is more advanced that at any time in human history and our knowledge continues to grow.  Consider this bit from the Earth Sciences page of Carlton College about studying Hurricanes:

Why Study Hurricanes?

Hurricanes are life-threatening, building-flattening, property-flooding storms. They are complex natural phenomena that involve multiple interacting processes, offering real-world reasons to understand concepts such as air pressure and heat transfer. When a hurricane is occurring, the human connection to our planet is real and immediate: land, water, air, and life are all whirled about by these intense storms.

Like scientists, you’ll study hurricanes in satellite imagery and visualizations, and do some hands-on experiments. You’ll also explore over 150 years of storm data to find out when and where these storms occur. If you’re studying hurricanes during hurricane season, you’ll be able to monitor the position and status of storms in real time.

So when it comes to Hurricanes we have exact data that can be gleamed in real time of every aspect of a storm as it happens to add to the various computer models.  Additionally we have live data dating back to the mid 19th century that has been studied by experts in the field for a century and a half to tell us how hurricanes have acted in the past including information made by first hand observation by the most advanced instruments available at the time.

Furthermore the computers now being used are leaps and bounds over machines of just a decade or two ago and unlike the mid 19th century we many venues all over the world that are a source of training in this information and an even larger pool of potential meteorologists available to allow those tasked with making these predictions to choose the very best.

Yet even with all of this, two weather services each with all the advantages listed,  have 850 mile gap between where they think this storm will go over the next 72 hours.

Now as a person familiar with both mathematics and computer science, this variation is not odd, in fact it’s completely understandable. After all a computer model is based on the best possible guesses from the available data and hurricanes are “complex natural phenomena that involve multiple interacting processes” so there is nothing at all odd about there being a 850 mile variation as to where it will it.  As we get closer to Sunday and we have true data to input the variation in the models will correspondingly decrease.

Now apply this to climate change models telling us we face disaster in 100 years.

You aren’t dealing with a single “complex natural phenomena that involve multiple interacting processes” you are dealing with EVERY complex natural phenomena that involve multiple interacting processes that exists on the earth. Every single additional item you add increases the variation of the data models. Furthermore you are also dealing with variations in the sun, variations in the orbits of the earth, its moon and more.

And that’s just the variations in natural phenomena, imagine the variation in industrial output on the entire planet for a period of 50 or 100 years.

Think of the computer modeling and tracking of that single hurricane and apply this thinking to the climate of the earth as a whole. How accurate that model is going to be over 100 years, 50 years, 25 years or even ten years?

Would you be willing to bet even your short term economic future on it, would anyone in their right mind do so?

And as you are pondering the answer to that question consider the most important distinction between the NGO’s and Institutions pushing the “climate change” models and those advancing competing hurricane models.

Neither the Americans whose model says Irma will hit the Carolina nor the Europeans who claim it’s heading to Cuba have any financial incentive or social incentive to vary their models to conform with the other, which is why you don’t see the folks at the National Hurricane center point to their European counterparts calling them “Irma Deniers” or vice versa.

Update: Instalanche, thanks Steve, Hi folks take a look around not only at my work but the latest each week from DaTechGuy’s Magnificent Seven Writers:

Jerry Wilson (Thursday Evenings) Of Woody Woodpecker and Natural Disasters
JD Rucker (Thursday afternoons and Sunday Evenings) Letting DACA lapse would be the President’s best move so far
Fausta Wertz (Wednesday and Friday Afternoons) A Call or sanity in the Wake of Harvey
Juliette Akinyi Ochineg (Baldilocks) (Tuesday and Saturday evenings): Stinking Facts
Chris Harper (Tuesday afternoons): A Guide to “Offensive” Statues
Pat Austin: (Monday Afternoons) Report from Louisiana: Hurricane Harvey, the Cajun Navy and Biblical Floods
John (Marathon Pundit) Rubbery: (Sunday Afternoons): Chicago’s ruling class thrives amid city’s decline
RH (NG36B) (Saturday Afternoons): The Bishop’s Junk Mail
Zilla of the Resistance (Friday Evenings): #WarOnStatues: Catholic School Removes Jesus and Mary

Your subscriptions and tip jar hits pay them each month

And Don’t miss our Part Time Riders either
Ellen Kolb (1st & 4th Wednesday Afternoons each month): Thoughts on a Torn Poster
Jon Fournier: (3rd Wednesday Afternoon each month) Why do the media insist on distorting the political spectrum?
Michigan Mick: (1st & 3rd Monday Evenings each month) Red Century story makes me see red
Tech Knight (2nd Wednesday Each Month) President Trump Six Months in

If you like what you’ve seen here and want to support independent journalism please consider hitting DaTipJar to help me secure a full paycheck for the week I have to take off (I’ve just been called back to my job starting today Update: and believe it or not just relaid off AGAIN) while Stacy McCain is here ($460) please hit DaTipJar below.

Please consider subscribing, Not only does that get you my weekly podcast emailed to you before it appears either on the site or at the 405media which graciously carries it on a weekly basis but if you subscribe at any level I will send you an autographed copy of my new book from Imholt Press: Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer

Choose a Subscription level

by baldilocks

Around the time of 9/11, during one of my many sojourns into higher education, I was in a CAD program–which I regret not finishing. One of the required courses was Algebra and I did well, out of 100 achieving a 96 average — math being one of my favorite subjects.  And, most heartening, in an admittedly chauvinistic way, the only other person who did better than I did in the subject was also a black woman. (We were the only women there of any coating.)

By no means were the men in that class either stupid or ungifted. However, they were uniformly very young—at least they seemed so to my then forty-year-old self.  One of the things that they marveled at about me was that I could do simple arithmetic in my head.  When one of them asked me how this came to be, I explained that I was born well before the advent of the calculator and was taught at home to memorize multiplication tables.  Another of the young men made some joke about my age and a slide rule and, though I laughed, I realized how archaic that device had become. Following on the realization that I hadn’t seen one since the early 1980s, I was impressed that the guy even knew of the tool.

Being around so many innately very intelligent young people who had been—as far as I could see then—short-changed by the very same type of technology that they were learning to manipulate to make a living, made me a little sad. However, now I know that those men—and that young lady who kicked my behind in Algebra–are the blessed ones. They had the desire to know — something that is all too rare.

I still plan to return for my B.S. in mathematics.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng blogs at baldilocks. (Her older blog is located here.) Her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game, was published in 2012. Her second novel tentatively titled Arlen’s Harem, will be done one day soon! Follow her on Twitter and on

Please contribute to Juliette’s JOB:  Her new novel, her blog, her Internet to keep the latter going and COFFEE to keep her going!

Or hit Da Tech Guy’s Tip Jar in the name of Independent Journalism!

One of the Favorite phrases of Tip O’Neill was “I’ve always known how to count.” indicating that he had a clear idea of if a bill had the votes to pass or no or if a candidate had a path to win an election.

That keeps coming to mind as we repeatedly hear that the winner take all states spell Doom for the Trump candidacy.

Now as a Ted Cruz supporter who proudly cast his vote for him and continues to urge others to do so I have hopes that some of the closed primaries coming up in the next week Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana and Maine for example and have written on the subject but I also know that there are quite a few open primaries coming up as well.

To wit:

March 8th Mississippi poll Trump plus 24 proportional
March 15th Illinois poll Trump plus 15.5 Winner Take all
March 15th Missouri poll Trump plus 12 (old) Winner Take all
March 15th North Carolina poll Trump plus 10.3 Open
March 15th Ohio poll Trump plus 5 Winner take all
April 5th Wisconsin poll Trump plus 10 Winner take all
May 10th West Virginia poll Trump plus 20 Direct Election
June 7th Montana poll Cruz +6 (old) plus 15.5 Winner take all
June 7th New Jersey poll Trump plus 18 Winner Take all

There are also two states with open primaries that there are no polling for
April 26th Rhode Island Proportional
May 3rd Indiana poll Winner take all

Trump is leading 8 in states with a total of 431 delegates
Cruz is leading in one state with 27 delegates
two states with no polling are worth 76 Delegates

And frankly there are in the closed primaries Trump is polling pretty good too. There are six closed primary states with 385 delegates where trump is polling at LEAST +10.

Right now Trump has 319, Cruz 226 and Rubio 110 with 1237 delegates to win.

Trump needs 918 more delegates, The 14 states I’ve mentioned are worth 816 delegates. If he only manages half of those delegates in these states where he has the advantage he is down to 510 delegates.

And that’s not even counting the 25 more states that we haven’t talked with 900+ delegates.

No matter how you slice it the odds are with Donald Trump, and no matter how you slice it the only shot to stop him, is the junior senator from Texas, not the senator from Florida.

That’s why Lindsey Graham is talking alliances with Ted Cruz It doesn’t matter what your opinion on Donald Trump is, it doesn’t matter if you think he’s the second coming of Reagan or Obama the Math is the Math and it has to be faced, that is if you’re interested in reality.

Yesterday all over the web and on TV shows everywhere (even from sane folks like Jake Tapper) about the horrible terrible news that your bacon will be the death of you.

The WHO findings were drafted by a panel of 22 international experts who reviewed decades of research on the link between red meat, processed meats and cancer. The panel reviewed animal experiments, studies of human diet and health, and cell processes that could explain how red meat might cause cancer.

But the panel’s decision was not unanimous, and by raising lethal concerns about a food that anchors countless American meals, it will be controversial

That’s the Washington Post, at Yahoo they say this:

Each 50-gram (1.8-ounce) portion of processed meat eaten daily increases the risk of colorectal cancer by 18 percent, the agency estimated.

A 50-gram portion would be the equivalent of eating one hot dog or two slices of bacon. Americans eat about 21.7 grams of processed pork per day, according to a 2011 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey.

Right now a lot of lawyers are licking their chops and a lot of members of the food Gestapo are preparing to demand changes in school heath programs, school diets etc etc and I can feel the sheer panic among shoppers at whole foods from here.

And the reason why this is coming?  Well there are two:

  1. Americans are really ignorant about math
  2. What are the actual odds of getting colorectal cancer?

Question #1 matters because while most people hear the words “18% increase” and think that their odds of getting this disease have gone to better than 1-5 the reality is that means the odds have gone up 18% from what they actually were.  For example if something has a 1% chance of happening if you increase the chances of that thing happening by 18%  the new odds are not 19% as some would think but 1.1%  (1/100) * (118/100) or 118/10000 = 1.1%

And Question #2 matters because we can’t find out what the actual new odds are for a particular event until we know what the old odds are, how will we know what number to multiply by 118/100?

Well the answer to question 2 is available online at  Going by their charts men have a lifetime risk of developing colorectal cancer of 1 in 21 or 4.84% and the odds of a woman catching the same disease is 4.49 or 1 in 22

So even though we know that according to the stats given we eat only 43.4% of a hot dog per day on avg let’s assume for the sake of argument that you actually eat a hotdog every single day for your entire life. what does that do to your cancer odds.

Well if you do the actual math and multiply 4.84/100 by 118/100 it mans that 18% increase makes a man’s odds of getting colorectal cancer  go to 5.7% .  For a woman that 4.49/100 multiplied by 118/100 the woman’s odds go up to 5.2%

In other words, if this study is absolutely positively spot on correct eating that hotdog every single day for your entire life raises your odds of catching colorectal cancer by nearly but not quite….1%.

Or to put it another way if you’re a gamer if you eat that hotdog a day then your odds of catching colorectal cancer go from being about the odds of rolling a 1 on a D20 to about the odds of rolling a 1 on a D20.

Now when you put it that way, if you told a guy that giving up bacon decreases your odds of getting cancer by less that 1% most people would decide those odds aren’t worth panicking over and would rightly consider such panic as idiotic.

Which is why newspapers that make a living off of scary click bait, tv shows that make money off of scary click bait, NGO’s that make money off of scary panics, and pols who get big contributions from NGO’s after they get taxpayer-funded grants and colleges who get funding from taxpayer and NGO’s to study these things, and lawyers who make money off of suing successfully profitable businesses, like for example the meat industry aren’t going to show you the math I just did.

It doesn’t fit the meme and there is no profit for them in it.

To be fair, there is absolutely nothing wrong if person decides that 1% increase warrants decreasing one’s intake of processed meats, if an individual thinks the increased risk isn’t worth it it’s their life and their choice to make.

But if you do make that choice do so on the actual evidence not due to panic and deception.

Update: Two Instalances & a hotair headline thanks Sarah Ed & Ed While you’re here in addition to my appeal below check out my election coverage including my exclusive interview with Ted Cruz last week.


There unfortunately isn’t a lot of profit from letting people know they’re being played. The only pay I get for this work comes from you. My goal for 2015 is $22,000 I’m a full 17k shy as of today.

Given that fact and the discovery that the repairs needed for my car that failed inspection will run between $500-$1000 I would ask you to please consider hitting DaTipJar.

Olimometer 2.52

That gets all the bills paid. Consider Subscribing 100 Subscribers at $20 a month will get the job done and then some.

Choose a Subscription level

Additionally our subscribers get our podcast emailed directly to them before it show up anywhere else.

I know you can get the MSM for nothing, but that’s pretty much what most of them are worth.

This week will be full of debate on who has the advantage in this week’s Superbowl.  The relative strengths and weakness of the teams involved.  The defensive and offensive matchups, the coaching styles, the various player comments etc etc etc.

While all of these things are very debatable matters there is a question that I want answered.

Why Superbowl XLIX?  Why not Superbowl IL?

The Roman numeral standard is pretty straightforward  I = 1  V=5 X=10 L=50 C=100 D=500 and M= 1000  Thus 8 – XIII  (5 + 1 + 1 + 1)  When the values are in descending order the number are all added.

When you have a letter that is of a lower value preceding a higher one that number is subtracted, Thus XLIX = Ten (X) subtracted from fifty (L) =  40  plus 1 (I) subtracted from Ten (X)9 for Forty Nine.

But hold on if you can subtract the first letter from the second why not use the following system IL instead since IL = one (I) subtracted from fifty (L) thus…49.

You save two whole letters considering that the Roman system can get kind of messy for example 1988 is MCMLXXXVIII why not use that method to save some carving in your marble when you can?  Why wasn’t the year 1999 MIM (1000+ 1 subtracted from 1000) instead of MCMIX  (1000 + 100 subtracted from 1000 plus 1 subtracted from ten)?

Yea this is slightly less important that the scourge of “manspreading” but if the City of New York can invest actual tax dollars into combating that dreaded scourge someone can tell me why I can’t get a Superbowl IL shirt if I wanted one.

Not that I actually want one, after all, it’s not like it’s something actually important…

…like baseball.

One of the things about a free society as opposed to say China is a person has the freedom to have a family as large or as small as they choose.  So if Amanda Marcotte doesn’t want children she does not have to have them,

While as a Catholic I object to artificial contraception as sin, as long as long as she doesn’t force me or other religious people to pay for it against our conscience it’s her call to make and none of my business, provided of course she is not actually killing her child (abortion).

It should also be pointed out that when Ms Marcotte talks about what having children involves other than the use of the word “monsters” this paragraph quoted by Stacy McCain is pretty accurate:

“They are loud and smelly and, above all other things, demanding. No matter how much free day care you throw at women, babies are still time-sucking monsters with their constant neediness.”

That’s pretty much true and the neediness doesn’t end all that quick when they grow up, nor does your worrying about them.  My sons are both over twenty & I worry about their future, their health, and their happiness.  Children are a task that really never ends.  My mother worried about all of us till the day she died.   Having children changes your life forever if Ms. Marcotte doesn’t want her life changed so be it, that’s her call…

…however I am shocked Shocked that she would let down the radical feminist sisterhood so.

By choosing not to have children, she is conceding the future to people like the Dugger family

For those of you who don’t know the Duggers,  Jim Bob & his wife Michelle have 19 kids between the ages of 26 & 4.  (I briefly and unknowingly encountered some of the family at CPAC this year).

No matter what you think of the decisions of Ms. Marcotte vs Mrs. Dugger concerning procreation those choices have a practical effect politically.

As of today Ms. Marcotte & her husband represent two votes in any election.  Meanwhile as of today Michelle Dugger & her husband & voting age children represent nine votes, by-election day 2014 it will be ten.

That’s an electoral radio of 5-1.

Ms. Marcotte decision is giving the forces opposed to her an advantage for generations to come.  For true believers in feminism that amounts to a selfish betrayal of her sisters in the  movement.

And that doesn’t even consider outside influences.  Every person that Amanda Marcotte inspires with her feminist argument against children decreases feminism’s voting power while every person inspired by the 21 Duggers to have more kids does the opposite.

While at 36 Amanda Marcotte is eleven years younger than Michelle Dugger it’s likely too late for her to make a big difference but for the sake of argument lets say she reconsiders and decides to have a child this year for the sake of the sisterhood.

That child if carried to full term would be born in December of 2014 and assuming no change in voting laws, will be eligible to vote for the first time in a general election in 2032.

By that year all 22 current Dugger children and grandchildren will be of voting age, but at least Ms Marcotte will have reduced the voting ratio in favor of the Duggers to 8-1 by that year instead of 12-1 that it would be if she remains childless.

While there is no guarantee that all the Duggers and their descendents will vote the same way in the future the decisions of Ms. Marcotte and her disciples assure us that as time goes by the influence of their philosophies will fade in the US until they like the Shakers become a footnote in history.

I’m 15 years older than Ms. Marcotte but if I’m lucky enough to make it to my aunt’s current age of 92 and Ms. Marcotte is still around at 77 (much more likely) we’ll both live to see that.

Only one of us will be smiling at that result.

Update: RS. McCain links and comments on Ms. Marcotte’s “Darwinian fate”

The proximate cause of Marcotte’s anger — although she’s so perpetually angry she does not really need a reason to begin ranting like a lunatic — was a post by “pro-life humanist” Kristine Kruszelnicki offering non-religious reasons for protecting the innocent unborn. Among other things, Kruszelnicki pointed to opinion polls showing that 1-in-5 atheists are pro-life, a percentage that doesn’t quite square with Marcotte’s “nearly all” claims about the pro-abortion views of “non-believers.”

Facts and logic can never persuade the ideologue, and Marcotte’s beliefs are clearly rooted in emotions that are deeply irrational and intensely personal. No one who does not already share her radical feminist ideology could be persuaded by Marcotte’s arguments. She is losing, and she knows it: 50% of Americans are pro-life, compared to 41% who are pro-abortion, and the trend toward a pro-life majority is one of those facts which are incompatible with Marcotte’s worldview

Stacy McCain is no Jim Bob Dugger but even if Ms Marcotte changes her mind about concerning a child and gives birth in December of this year by the time said child is of voting age the Marcotte Clan will still be outvoted by the McCain clan by a ratio of 3-1.


Olimometer 2.52

It’s Thursday and the tip jar sits at $101 for the week.

Only 10 $25 tip jar hits necessary to make the weekly goal and give us a good jump into the final week of the month.

Let us know we’re doing the job, please consider hitting DaTipJar below.


With 61 more $20 a month subscribers this site will be able to cover its bills for a full year.

I would ask that you do subscribe by hitting the button below.  If your finances allow it, consider choosing Hat level or better.  A subscription comes not only with exclusive commentary, but on a weekly basis you will have the opportunity to get direct access to me by phone to provide feedback or suggestions to make sure this site is worthy of your financial support and patronage.


There is a ton of crowing on the right and worry on the left based on the new PEW poll showing President Obama’s +8 lead turning into a Mitt Romney 4 point lead in just 30 days.

Granted the debate was devastating but even no, especially with polls one finds encouraging, it is VITAL to see if there is some hanky panky going on with the sample.

Last time I hit the PEW poll because the sample was D+9 when I saw the D vs R sample number on this poll I saw something I have never NEVER seen before in a national poll:

A +4 R sample in a national poll? Say What!

That is a 13 point sample swing, 13 points. if you compare this to the Rasmussen numbers this poll slight oversamples the GOP by 1.4 pts. I have never EVER seen a national poll do his and neither have any of you.

So what happens when you skew the sample 13 points in the other direction? Lo and behold the results…move in the other direction.

“But DaTechGuy” you say, How do we know both samples aren’t right? Can’t this isn’t just more people saying they are Republican because they NOW support Romney, you know following the crowd and all that?”

Glad you asked my boy, glad you asked.

Remember last month when I looked at this poll I looked at the numbers concerning who the sampled voted for in 2008, saw the ridiculous gap in the figures and said this:

That’s a 15 point Obama edge in an election that Obama won by 7.2 but it’s even worse because those numbers are based on 86. if you do the full percentages based on 100% of voters it comes out Obama 54.6% (+1.7 over 2008) and McCain 37.2% (-8.6 under 2008) in this sample.

Now you might think Obama is ahead but does anyone ANYONE believe he will do 1.7 point better than 2008. Does anyone ANYONE believe Romney will underperform McCain by 8.6?

Maybe that will fool Talking points Memo, Firedoglake and the like but it won’t fool anyone who can, you know do MATH.

I looked at that same Obama vs McCain question in the new poll. In this sample the 15 point edge is down to 5

And lets do the math again to turn those who voted into the proper percentages

Obama 52.9

(pct of Sample that voted Obama)=42 (obama 08 voters)/85(number who voted)

McCain 43.5

(pct of Sample that voted McCain)=37 (obama 0 8 voters)/85(number who voted)

Ok in this sample the Obama sample matches his 2008 figure EXACTLY, while the McCain sample is under by a mere 2.3 points. Unless all of these people were lying about who they were voting for last time and suddenly got religion we have a sample that is within 2.3% of the actual vote in 2008

So what does this mean?

It means that when you have a poll that closely reflects the actual GOP vs Dem split (within 1.4 points of it if you believe Rasmussen) you get a result that accurately reflects what is going on rather than a Democrat fantasy.

Much as I hate to give solace to Andrew Sullivan, public opinion didn’t swing 12 points in a week, Pew simply took a sample that almost matches the American electorate and we are seeing what was already there, only more so.

Postscript: I follow memeorandum on twitter and as I was finishing this post I saw this jaw dropping tweet:

I followed that tweet to this story at the Washington Post:

If either Pew or Gallup kept their “sample balance” constant, there would be far less of a shift in their headline numbers. Poll watchers need to closely assess both trend-lines as the election draws near.

That’s exactly right but wasn’t that the same argument I’ve been making right along? The argument that got all of us called Poll “Truther” and poll “Deniers” and “Conspiracy Theorists”?

All I have to say is Pew, welcome to Realville!

Exit Question: Is this sample Pew’s attempt to correct itself pre-election or will see a new poll just before the day re-skewed to try and create the Obama comeback?

Update: Twitchy notices

After screening out respondents who are unlikely to vote, Pew was left with a sample of likely voters that was R+3, according to Chuck Todd.

If the sample in the Pew poll is skewed toward Republicans, it probably is not off by much. A month ago, Rasmussen reported a 2-point edge for Republicans in party ID. In Wisconsin’s recall election a few months ago, the partisan breakdown was R+1, according to exit polls. Party ID was tied 35-35 in 2010.

But we’re glad to see liberals acknowledge that polls can be skewed and that it is possible for a sample to over-represent members of one party or the other. Maybe Obama supporters won’t call us insane the next time we question a D+13 sample.

Chuck Todd? Chuck Todd is now a poll truther? I didn’t see him at the meeting, does he know the secret handshake?

Update 2: Althouse watches Sully’s meltdown and figures it out:

Sorry, but it’s hard not to see this as a lot of posing. A set up for the big announcement that Obama is back. If Obama is any good at all in the next debate or the one after that, we’ll be told the man is a miracle.

Update 3:
That new Pennsylvania Poll that has Romney down 2 pts has some interesting splits:

If you include leaners then it’s one point closer.

As for registration

I don’t have a lot of faith in Pennsylvania, there will be plenty of walking around money in the cities and the suspension of the ID law for this election means the left has one last chance to do what they do best. 2016 will be different but I don’t have high hopes here.

As for Michigan the internals of that poll aren’t out yet but the last one was D+5 be very interested to see what this one is.

Update 4: Michigan internals are now out here is the sample:

So the sample is D+5 has Barack Obama up 3 48-45. Last month when the numbers showed Obama up 10 47-37 the sample was….D+5

be afraid Democrats, be very afraid.

Update Bottom: Oh and a reminder, the Washington Post is a multi-million dollar corporation and the people they pay just figured out poll samples matter.

I am a guy who since the Obama years makes his entire living from Ads and Tip Jar hitters and have been saying this for months. If you think that my analysis of polls that the Washington Post finally has figured out, is worth something I would be most grateful if you were to hit the DaTipJar to help keep this stuff coming

And of course Tip Jar hitter get the codes for my Subscriber only videos the newest once comes out tomorrow.

%d bloggers like this: