Another Rigged Poll from the Washington Post and ABC

This week, a Washington Post/ABC poll showed the Democrats gaining some ground as we near Election Day. Oh boy! The Democrats are making their BIG COMEBACK!

But there is a slight problem with the poll. It is rigged by an indefensible sample:

And how did the Democrats manage this rather remarkable comeback? Well, the WaPo/ABC pollster managed to find their usual sample gap. They went from a 31/25/39 D/R/I split in September in the general sample and 31/26/37 among registered voters, to 33/23/29 in the general sample and 34/25/37 among registered voters. That nine-point advantage to Democrats among RVs is almost twice what it was in the previous sample.

To believe that this represents the electorate, we would have to believe that (a) Democrats have had a big month in attracting voters to their banner, (b) Republicans somehow lost a bunch of voters in the same period, and (c) Democrats now have an advantage outstripping their 2008 situation when they won the presidency by seven points in the popular vote.

In short, the sample and hence the poll results are absurdly rigged.

And there is really no question about that. The only question is why did the Washington Post and ABC rig their poll? I can think only of two feasible explanations.

1. They intentionally rigged it to help the Democrats. Yes, that explanation is a bit conspiratorial. No, I do not wear tinfoil hats. But one would have to be naïve indeed to think the “mainstream” news media has never tried to influence elections. But I am no mind reader and do not presume to know if the rigging of this poll was intentional. I am more sure that . . .

2. Their liberalism makes it difficult for them to do a good poll, much like it makes it difficult for them to report fairly and accurately.

A good analogy of this difficulty would be refereeing in certain situations in sports. Sometimes, the atmosphere can be so biased that even the most conscientious referee or umpire can fall victim to it and help a team. I consider the 2006 Super Bowl a classic example.

The Big Story was that the Pittsburgh Steelers were returning to the Super Bowl. Even the NFL itself fanned that story. Little was said about it being the Seattle Seahawks going to their first Super Bowl. They were bit players. Pittsburgh was the story and was just supposed to win (not unlike Obama in 2008?). And I think that atmosphere affected the reffing and the outcome.

Of course, if a referee himself is biased, say, if he’s from Pittsburgh, the difficultly increases greatly.

The atmosphere and bias in the midst of the “mainstream” news media is so left of center, I think it is as difficult for them to do a fair poll as it is for someone from Pittsburgh to call a fair game when the Steelers are in the Super Bowl, even if they are trying their best to be fair. . . . And that’s a big “if” in the news media's case.

In any case, this poll is rigged indeed and a disservice to political discourse.


Housekeeping: I hope you did not miss me too much yesterday. My internet was down most of the day.