Canter Gone, so is the Senate

[Savannahmann]

32. How do you use poll numbers from all the organizations

How do you use poll numbers from all the organizations, and somehow spin the numbers to the RW? I'm curious, because when there is one that is odd, in other words, doesn't go with the pack, that one is included too. So how does math that factors in all the polling get spun to the RW? I'm not talking about the so called news links, just the collection of the polling data. Polls from Rethug sponsored firms are listed with an R after their name. Polls from Democratic Party sponsered firms are listed with a D after their name. But take a look at the long term numbers below the graph.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2014/senate/nc/north_carolina_senate_tillis_vs_hagan-3497.html

North Carolina.

Civitas (R) 5/20 - 5/22 600 RV 46 41 Tillis +5
PPP (D) 5/9 - 5/11 877 RV 41 41 Tie
Rasmussen Reports 5/7 - 5/8 750 LV 45 44 Tillis +1
Magellan Strategies (R) 4/14 - 4/15 804 LV 43 43 Tie
NY Times/Kaiser 4/8 - 4/15 900 RV 40 42 Hagan +2
PPP (D) 4/3 - 4/6 740 RV 41 43 Hagan +2
SurveyUSA 3/27 - 3/31 1489 LV 46 45 Tillis +1
PPP (D) 3/6 - 3/9 884 RV 43 45 Hagan +2
CEA/Hickman Analytics (D) 2/17 - 2/20 400 LV 41 45 Hagan +4
American Insights (R) 2/11 - 2/15 611 RV 35 38 Hagan +3
PPP (D) 2/6 - 2/9 708 RV 42 40 Tillis +2
Rasmussen Reports 1/22 - 1/23 500 LV 47 40 Tillis +7
PPP (D) 1/9 - 1/12 1384 RV 43 42 Tillis +1

Democratic leaning firms, Republican leaning firms, and firms linked with news organizations all bounce fairly close on the time line. A year ago, Senator Hagen was winning hands down. Now, depending on the poll, is going to win, or lose, by a rather narrow margin.

That can safely be said, no matter who is reporting it, to be a close race, a toss up. Now, what can happen to change it? The Rethug might do us a tremendous favor, and melt down under the spotlight and say something blatantly sexist/racist/homophobic. But we can't have as our main plan to win the election the hope that the Rethug will screw up. That outcome is handy when it happens, but not something you can count on. That's sort of like winning the lottery if you get my meaning. You might win the pick 3 in your state, you have the odds of 1 in a thousand. But that isn't exactly a dependable plan.

Option two, we can pour money, and expertise into North Carolina, and fight as if we can't afford to lose the race. Because we can't afford to lose the race. Or we can pour money into long shot candidates. People like Senator Walsh. The only thing that is going to save Senator Walsh is one of those miracles, where the Rethug is caught on camera ranting in a way that the people of Montana will reject. No amount of money is going to overcome the twelve point advantage of the Rethugs, at least not realistically speaking. That's the problem with Wendy Davis. The disadvantage is so large that it would take a ton of money to make a dent in that deficit in a statewide race.

So how is it that the numbers are somehow slewed to the Rethugs? Because if we aren't going to use polling to get the people's mood, and the snapshot of the attitudes, then that's fine. But we have to ban all polling on DU, because even the Democratic leaning companies have Senator Walsh losing in Montana. The Democratic leaning companies have Senator Hagen at or close enough to a tie that it will be a close race unless we do something to turn the opinions of the people around.

I'm not saying a miracle can't happen, or won't happen. I'm saying we can't base our plans and actions on that hope. Because it does happen, but not in every race.