6 Reasons to Ignore RedState

28Oct08

RedState’s Dan Perrin is happy in his reality and fact-free zone and has generated this wonderful set of conclusions on why McCain and Republicans have nothing to be worried about besides the looming landslide:

Here are the six other reasons McCain-Palin will win:

The Gallup poll after Labor Day has historically been a predictor of the winner of the Presidential election. The person leading in that poll wins the Presidency. The Republican convention, pushed onto Labor Day by the Summer Olympics muddied the waters on this historic fact, but the Gallup poll a week later showed McCain ahead of Obama, predicting the McCain victory.

Uhm, where’s the data first of all – what specific poll, where’s the data, how long is its streak? Second of all, homeboy is confounding all kinds of stuff into is ridiculous statement. Finally, his hedges liken themselves to jungle underbrush: “The one after labor day except for the fact that we don’t count that one but the one after the convention so that the bounce is there. And then ignore all the polling from every other organization since then.” Just keep this one around to laugh at on the 5th.

There are six states that since 1972 have voted for the winning Presidential candidate. These are predictor states. They pick winners every time. McCain will win every one of the following six states: Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Missouri, Ohio and Tennessee.

Of course he’s forgetting non-Southern and thus non-reliably Republican swing states like Nevada (95.8% accuracy this century), New Mexico (92%), and Delaware (86.7%). He correctly identifies Missouri, Tennessee, Ohio, and Kentucky, but I don’t know where the hell Arkansas and Louisiana are coming from because these Jim Crow states were all in with Democrats until ’72 which really undercuts the bellwether argument. If we go to the polls, FiveThirtyEight has Delaware (100%), Ohio (84%), Missouri (59%), Nevada (77%), New Mexico (96%), Ohio (84%) for Obama and just Arkansas (100%), Louisiana (99%), and Tennessee (100%) for McCain. So really, the only bellwether McCain has in his corner is Tennessee. That’ll definitely bring in the 270 EVs.

Elderly and some other Jewish voters were already uncomfortable about voting for Obama, but the recent comments by Farrakhan that when Obama speaks, the Messiah is speaking, or that Obama’s victory will do great things for the Nation of Islam, or the statement by Jesse Jackson that there will be “fundamental change” in America’s foreign policy, especially with regard to Israel – is causing a hemorrhaging of Jewish support.

Do you just talk out of your ass or actually look at any data? Gallup (those rabid MSM Obamacons!) has this old (October 23, 2008) and confusingly-titled (Obama Winning Over the Jewish Vote) poll that states: “Jewish voters nationwide have grown increasingly comfortable with voting for Barack Obama for president since the Illinois senator secured the Democratic nomination in June. They now favor Obama over John McCain by more than 3 to 1, 74% to 22%.” Please next time, just type in “jewish presidential poll” before you make shit up.

Women who feel Senator Clinton was treated unfairly by the Democratic Party, by the media and by Senator Obama — who did not even vet Senator Clinton to be his running mate – will remember. This voting block, you will recall, lay in the weeds in the pre-New Hampshire primary polling. The win by Senator Clinton was a shock, undetected by the polling. And these were Democratic Party voters who were undetected – not the other voters Obama will face November 4th. Obama’s youth vote will not post to the polls, they never do. The young think: the media says Obama will win, so why should I vote? But the 40 and 50 and 60 something women voters who voted for Senator Clinton have three alternative plans to make sure they get to the polls, regardless of a hiccup in their work or child care responsibilities. They will vote, and they will vote against Senator Obama.

Again, no data presented or even an attempt to spin data. Just lumping pollsters in with the news media as apparachiks of the vast Obama machine. Oh, and more baseless and unsubstantiable assertions flying in the face of prevalent coverage and data to the contrary. Pew data from today: “a growing percentage of his backers now say they support him strongly. Currently, 74% of Obama voters say they support him strongly, up from 65% in mid-September.” Miami Herald and Dallas Morning News (likewise Obama collaborators) point out that the PUMAs are no where to be seen months after the convention and primary battles.

Today’s unstable world does not bode well for Senator Obama. The instability in the stock market and related job and mortgage fears do not equate with voting for the ING (Inexperienced New Guy.) In an affirmation of Mark Penn’s observation that the strong leader almost always wins the Presidential election, a mid-west hairdresser with no party affiliation told me the country has very serious problems, and that is why she is voting for the strongest leader.

Yawn. Again, no data just baseless assertions. The aforementioned Pew data along with a raft of other polling outfit data (Gallup, Gallup again, Ramussen) clearly demonstrates that Obama’s polling has remained strong and constant over the past month despite the Election rhetoric and imploding economy. People already see Obama as a strong leader and is trusted on more issues (AP/Yahoo).

Finally, the reason that the world and the media incorrectly will tag as the reason for McCain’s victory (despite the foregoing six other reasons) will be the Wilder or Bradley effect. Simply put, Asians, Whites and Hispanics have and will lie to pollsters about their intention to vote for Senator Obama. According to the Associated Press, this will cost Obama six points at the polls. The AP estimate could be low. In the case of Bradley and Wilder, the spread between a “lead” in the polls and actual votes cast was in the low double digits.

This makes no sense on its face, why would these groups have any reason to lie to a pollster? The notion of the Bradley effect contributing to a sudden loss on election day has already been discredited by serious people on both the left and right, non-partisan journalists, and even FOX News suggested Obama may benefit from a reverse Bradley effect.

If you want a better top 6 or 7 list, read this excellent piece by Mike Madden and Walter Shapiro on the failure of the punditocracy’s themes throughout this election for both sides.

Advertisements


3 Responses to “6 Reasons to Ignore RedState”

  1. 1 jakester

    Just wondering why the New Hampshire PUMAs are so crucial to this theory, but the Missouri PUMAs (a state Obama won after trailing in the polls) are nowhere to be found.

  2. Nice job. My favorite thing about the predictor states is that Virginia and Colorado are not on the list because when they erred, it was exclusively to the right.

    Not to mention the infinite irrelevant rules you can invent about Democratic victors since 1976, since it was only 2 people.

  3. Republicans: For when you just don’t have any need for logic or reason any more.

    Seriously, I went to that posting from a hilarious link at Fark.com and man was I not disappointed.

    I came for the ridiculous expert status attributed to a mid-western hair dresser and stayed for the comments where people talk about actually being inspired by Palin. It’s pure entertainment!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: