Does this mean that Tom Barrett has already won, then?

by folkbum

Via iT, I see that Rasmussen has gotten back around to dipping its polling proboscis into the cheese, and they've offered results on our governor's race:

The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of likely voters in the state shows both candidates earning 46% of the vote if [Tom] Barrett runs against former Congressman Mark Neumann. Given that match-up, four percent (4%) prefer some other candidate, and five percent (5%) are undecided. The other GOP hopeful, Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker, also attracts 46% against Barrett, while the Democrat draws 44% of the vote. Three percent (3%) prefer another candidate, and seven percent (7%) remain undecided.

This is a poll of a November match-up conducted in April; as such, it's almost worthless anyway, except to tell us that the state's Republicans are likely to vote Republican and the state's Democrats are not. But on all things polling I defer to Nate Silver, such as:

[Rasmussen] is something of an outlier and would reflect a house effect of about 6 points when measuring the net difference between Democratic and Republican preferences. [. . .] Meanwhile, an increasing number of pollsters have begun to publish results among likely voters in their take on the Congressional generic ballot. [. . .] Note that the house effect here, again, is about 6 points.

As much as I do not put great stock in an early poll like this, I do put stock in Silver's comparative assessment of pollsters, which, as you can see, puts Rasmussen about +6 in the R column--which could put Barrett ahead in Wisconsin by a good ten points. Maybe. We'll see what the next slightly less partisan poll shows.

I would like to retract part of my Oklahoma post from last week

by folkbum

I stand by a lot of what I wrote in that post last week: There is inherent value in empowering workers and in educating our children well, and that a better-educated workforce is more likely both to be organized and to be good at what it does.

However, I cited in that post the results of a survey done by the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs suggesting that Okie high school students are impossibly dumb. The impossibility of that should have made me more skeptical--indeed, I quote my wife's incredulity--and I regret using the results, especially given some new information.

The survey was contracted out to an outfit called Strategic Vision LLC, a polling and public relations firm that, among other things, does a lot of polling in Wisconsin, too. However, it seems that Strategic Vision has been coming under fire lately for its lack of transparency (Mark Blumenthal at Pollster.com has a good rundown of the matter) and Nate Silver at fivethirtyeight.com has come close to suggesting that Strategic Vision just makes up its numbers out of thin air.

Yesterday, Silver also went after that Oklahoma survey I used in that post:

When I first saw these results a couple weeks ago, they really got my spidey sense tingling. Forget about the overall level of knowledge being low -- what I found strange was that there were no students, out of 1,000, who answered as many of eight out of the ten questions correctly. Isn't there some total nerd in Tulsa, some AP Honors student in Stillwater, who was able to answer at least eight of these ten very basic questions correctly? The distribution seems to be too compact.

[glossing over the part with math and graphs]

I'm not sure if there's any a priori way to know what the underlying distribution of responses "should" be. [. . .] It seems quite strongly possible, nevertheless, that the students polled for this survey don't exist anywhere in Oklahoma but instead on a hard drive somewhere in Atlanta. This is a valuable exercise undertaken by the OCPA. But they owe it to the hardworking students of Oklahoma to make sure that their contractor, Strategic Vision, didn't flunk its own citizenship test.

Strategic Vision is often described as a partisan (Republican) pollster and it does a lot of work for Republican candidates and conservative causes. I would be very concerned, if I were a conservative in Wisconsin relying on Strategic Vision for anything, about whether or not I was getting real results--or just something the pollster made up.

Obama's lead in Wisconsin NOT a statistical tie or anything like it

by folkbum

A Research 2000 poll done for a Madison TV station and released yesterday shows Barack Obama winning Wisconsin over John McCain, 49%-43%. The poll, with its margin of error of +/-4%, might suggest to the ill-informed or hopeful McCain fans that the state remains in a "dead heat" or a "statistical tie" since the difference between the two--6%--is less than double that margin.

However, that's not how polling works, as Kevin Drum explains here:

In fact, what we're really interested in is the probability that the difference is greater than zero — in other words, that one candidate is genuinely ahead of the other. But this probability isn't a cutoff, it's a continuum: the bigger the lead, the more likely that someone is ahead and that the result isn't just a polling fluke. So instead of lazily reporting any result within the MOE as a "tie," which is statistically wrong anyway, it would be more informative to just go ahead and tell us how probable it is that a candidate is really ahead.

By those standards, Barack Obama has a 93% likelihood of being ahead in the state. A mere 7% chance that McCain is really even or ahead of Obama is hardly enough to suggest that this is a dead heat or a statistical tie right now.

In fact, if you look at the Pollster.com composites, you can see that early May was the last time any polling firm found McCain to be ahead in Wisconsin, when Rasmussen Reports noted a 47%-43% split in McCain's favor. Every poll of the state since, even during McCain's convention bounce, shows Obama leading. The current average at the site is Obama 48.3%-McCain 43.9%. That's a 4.4-point difference, over what must be thousands of respondents. Using the same math as above, that means there is a greater than 99% chance that Obama is currently winning Wisconsin. We are not in a dead heat or a tie, and to pretend as much is ridiculous.

(Usual caveats apply--don't get complacent, don't forget to give to Obama so he can fund his GOTV here, and so on.)

Doyle breaks 50% in a poll

Via the UW Dems, I see that the last pre-election poll from WPR/St. Norbert College is out, and Jim Doyle looks good in the head-to-head:

The poll was conducted by Wisconsin Public Radio and the St. Norbert College Survey Center and showed that 51% of respondents said they would likely vote for Doyle, compared with 38% who favored Green. Green Party candidate Nelson Eisman was the choice of 1% of respondents, 4% favored another candidate and the rest weren't sure.

The telephone poll surveyed 400 likely Wisconsin voters from Oct. 9 to 16 and has a margin of error of plus or minus 5 percentage points. [. . .] The random sample also included more Democrats than Republicans, [poll director Wendy] Scattergood said.

The possible oversampling of Dems slightly worries me. However, I haven't seen any polling on self-identification in the state lately; the results of the primary in September showed more Dem turnout, and the national trend of late is for more people to self-identify as Democrats. They may just be accounting for those factors. And I found this explanation compelling:

Scattergood said that in the St. Norbert survey, participants have their phone numbers randomly drawn by computer, and they are asked if they are likely to vote in the election. If not, the interview is ended.

She said the latest poll came out with a slightly higher percentage of Democrats in the sample, which could have some effect on the results but might show some Republicans weren't as definite about voting when they were contacted.

"Maybe they're a little bit disaffected and more likely to be staying home," she said. "If that's the case when we're contacting people and saying how likely are you to vote, they may be saying they're less likely." But that won't be known until Election Day, she said.

Moreover, this news reinforces what I've been saying all along: Mark Green just isn't pushing Jim Doyle below the same approximate level he's been at for more than a year. While this is the first time I've seen Doyle over 50% in a head-to-head, there's no question that the results match what we've basically been seeing in the race. (Also, as of this morning, pollster.com hadn't included this poll, so I expect to see the five-poll average inching back up for Doyle.)

Other results from the poll (here's the memo): Kathy Falk is up on JB Van Hollen, 44-38. The anti-gay-marriage-and-civil-unions-and-any-other-substantially-similar-legal-arrangement amendment is passing 51-44 (c'mon, people!). And, perhaps most surprising, the death penalty advisory referendum is up just 50-45; I've been dreading that it would pass easily, but that's really quite encouraging.

No doubt there will be more polls before the important one on November 7. Until then, you can still help Doyle and Falk and the other deserving candidates through their own sites (see the sidebar) or through my ActBlue page.

We interrupt these endorsements for some random items of interest

• I always appreciate it when the federal government sees fit to declare my birthday a holiday. That's right; today I turn 29 for the fourth time. How much more famous to I need to be to get on this list? And how can I get into Damon Wayans's party? 'Cause, you know, it's probably better than what I got planned.
  
  
• Some sad news:
  • Lucy the Elephant was euthanized last week.
    
  • The Crocodile Hunter was killed by a stingray earlier today. Crickey.
  
  
• Apparently Mark Green is going to court in an effort to keep a bunch of contributions that would have been illegal at the time had they been made to his state campaign. Instead, they were made to his federal campaign by PACs not registered in Wisconsin, something the elections law requires now--and required when those conrtibutions were made. Tom Barrett seems to have been able to get away with that violation in 2002, and Green's team thinks the double-standard gives them a good case. Bill Christofferson, who was managing Doyle's 2002 campaign, says they should think again:

  Congressman Mark Green's campaign, incensed that the board told him this week to follow state law, keeps complaining that then-Congressman Tom Barrett was allowed to transfer his federal money, and Democrats thought that was fine, the Greenies say.
  
  Actually, a check of the record shows: (1) that George Dunst, the board attorney Green's people now cite as the authoritative source (because he seems to agree with them), said in 2000 exactly what the Elections Board said to Green this week: You can transfer the money, but it has to comply with state law, and that means the PACs have to be registered in Wisconsin. (2) that the Doyle campaign, including yours truly, took the same position about Barrett's money as it has taken about Green's money. [. . .]
  
  It appears that Barrett transferred the money anyway, with no enforcement action against him. That does not change the law.
  
  What has changed is the membership on the Elections Board, which has taken a tougher posture.

  It is true that the governor appoints some of the members of the elections board (though by no means not all). I asked this question of a Republican partisan blogger this morning: What does it mean that the Thompson-McCallum appointees were more lax with the law than the Doyle appointees? How does that fit into your spin of Doyle and the Democrats being corrupt?
  
  Seth at In Effect wonders why Green doesn't just give up the money, arguing it would be win-win:

  The only explanation I can think of is that Green sees this as a way to finally rally the base, which is something his campaign has been largely unable to do thus far. Perhaps they feel taking the position of an abused underdog will help generate support from those who don't want to see a Dem in power, but care even less for a Dem "pushing around" a fellow conservative.

  Personally, I don't see energizing the base as the strategy Green needs right now.
  
  
• Pollster.com--a new site by the old Myster Pollster and the guy behind Politcal Arithmetik--just rocks. This is their page on the Wisconsin governor's race, showing the moving average of all the polls done since April. You can see the graph to the right there, with the trendline firmly up for Doyle and Doyle consistently ahead even in the confidence intervals. The average of the last five polls, including the Strategic Vision poll showing a one-point race, put Doyle up by six. The last ten polls put Doyle up by seven. You can also see how clear it is that the SV polls are outliers, so, my dear R friends, don't pin your hopes to that Republican firm's results.
  
  Chris Bowers at MyDD has a summary of Pollster.com's close US Senate race polls:
  • Washington: Cantwell (D) 51, McGavick 40
    
  • Pennsylvania: Casey (D) 49, Santorum (R) 40
    
  • Minnesota: Klobuchar (D) 49, Kennedy (R) 40
    
  • Ohio: Brown (D) 46, DeWine (R) 40
    
  • Montana: Tester (D) 47, Burns (R) 44
    
  • New Jersey: Menendez (D) 43, Kean (R) 40
    
  • Rhode Island: Whitehouse (D) 42, Chafee (R) 40
    
  • Missouri: Talent (R) 47, McCaskill (D) 45
    
  • Tennessee: Corker (R) 46, Ford (D) 42
    
  • Virginia: Allen (R) 48, Webb (D) 42
    
  • Arizona: Kyl (R) 48, Pederson (D) 37
  I like those numbers, especially given Allen's coming self-destruction.

G-berries Makes Amazing Progress

By grumbleberries

Grumbleberries is over a month old and according to the latest Zogby poll of Dems, I've made tremendous progress. I am no longer part of the lunatic left fringe! Now I don't know if I changed or the country has changed but according to the latest poll:

1. 78% of Democrats are pleased with the primary election results in which Ned Lamont defeated Joe Lieberman.
2. 62% feel that the CT election will have national ramifications.
3. 70% feel that the CT primary has made the Democratic party much stronger or somewhat stronger.
4. 62% feel that the primary increased the chances that Democrats will take over one or both houses of Congress.
5. 62% are more optimistic than 30 days ago.
6. 78% want Democratic candidates to oppose the war in Iraq.
7. 68% disagree that the Democratic Party has been taken over by the far left. (Only 16% agree)

Even when I consider the margin of error, I am still well within the thinking of most of the nations democrats! Imagine that!

The unification of the "disorganized" party must have come as a terrible shock to Republicans who, despite claiming that they are not driven by polls, fired up the great Wurlitzer on terrorist threats again this week. One cannot argue that they are extremely good at making noise!

Other things the Republicans are extremely good at:

1. Lying
2. Attacking the opposition.
3. Distraction
4. Fear mongering
5. Hiring incompetent cronies
6. Securing tax breaks for those who do not need them
7. Yelling privatization at every opportunity
8. Add your own favorite

The truth is the Republicans "got nuthin" left with the possible exception of attacking Iran. (I have serious doubts whether that would win people over.)Observe the evidence that they have nothing left:

1. All national polls have the Repugs at their lowest point.
2. Polls have Dems at their highest point.
3. The Red Terror Alert, although the focus of the past few days MSM, hardly slowed down passengers. Think of it, if you were really concerned during a RED alert, would you get on an airplane?
4. All the political commentary from the right wing is warning the dems that they have gone off the left wing cliff. Take this as an indication that we are indeed doing something correctly!
5. The Democratic Leadership is starting to usher itself to the front of the parade!
6. The Republican taking heads are hysterical!

The hysterical scare mongering is only going to get worse from now until the November elections. We are winning and the louder it gets from the right, the more likely we are to win in the fall. When we hear the noise from the Wurlitzer, we should realize that they are playing our song!

Update, within minutes of my post Georgia10 at DailyKos posted this.