Dick Morris is living in fantasy land. Not only is Romney's 47% remark killing his campaign, it is also filtering down to the senate and congressional races.

 

RealClearPolitics - 2012 Election Maps - Electoral Map

 

Disclaimer : I am a Gary Johnson supporter.

I've been voting for 25 years and have observed polling places at several locales across the state. Not once have I ever seen a line of more than 3-4 people.

 

I have never had to wait either, which makes early voting (other than absentee) even more ridiculous. Early voting just makes no sense.

It's hard to believe, but KY - even the aberration that is NKY - is just a bit different than Miami or New York or Philly or Chicago or LA...

 

Personally, I think that's a good thing. But KY is not exactly a microcosm of how things are across the country.

In 2008 I arrived with my daughter @ 5:45am and waited in line. We were two.of the first to vote. By the time we left the queue was easily a half an hour to 45 minutes.

I saw some decent lines in Louisville and Lexington. I always lived real close so I'd monitor it and just go vote when they were shorter.

Dick Morris's Hilariously Dumb Misunderstanding of the "Incumbent Rule"

 

 

The funniest prank that Fox News plays on viewers occurs every other night, when freelance strategist Dick Morris -- a former Clintonite who now despises Democrats -- lurches in front of a camera and explains that Republicans will win everything. In 2010, Morris used his multiple media platforms, including the stages of Tea Party events, to ask for donations to his Super PAC for America. Give him enough, and "we could win an additional 50 seats, giving Republicans 100 new seats for this Congress!" (Read Brad Plumer for more about this. It was hilarious.)

 

 

This morning I gave a link to Morris's latest Fox News appearance, but I somehow missed out on his latest long treatise on why the polls are wrong and Mitt Romney's going to win. The knee-slapper comes when Morris describes the "incumbent rule."

 

Almost all of the published polls show Obama getting less than 50% of the vote and less than 50% job approval. A majority of the voters either support Romney or are undecided in almost every poll.

But the fact is that the undecided vote always goes against the incumbent... an undecided voter has really decided not to back the incumbent. He just won’t focus on the race until later in the game.

So, when the published poll shows Obama ahead by, say, 48-45, he’s really probably losing by 52-48!

Got that? According to Morris, literally 100 percent of "undecided" voters will eventually vote against Barack Obama. Leaving aside how the theory ignores spillover to write-ins and third-party candidates, this is one of the stupidest things I've ever heard. Nate Silver, bless him, has already explained why the "incumbent rule" doesn't actually exist. "The challenging candidate has typically been underrated by head-to-head polls when he is still engaged in a heated primary battle, when his name recognition is low, or both," wrote Silver. "These effects seem to evaporate by April of the election year or so, when the result of the nomination process is likely to have become clear and when the presumptive nominee is likely to have become widely known to voters."

 

That deals with the pre-election polls. The exit polls tell us the rest of the story about how undecided voters feel about incumbents. In the last presidential race with an incumbent on the ballot, 2004, we can define "undecided" voters as the ones who made up their mind in the polling booth. In 2004, only 52 percent of these people chose John Kerry over George W. Bush.

 

Back to Morris. There's literally no evidence that undecided voters will break the way he says they're breaking. But he's telling an audience of voters -- and more importantly for him, potential consumers -- that the media is covering up how Mitt Romney's winning the election. It's silly, and at the same time it lays the ground for endless paranoia if Romney doesn't win.

 

The liberal righteous indignation (read hypocrisy) is amusing when the situation is fllipped and someone in the media puts out information - propoganda or not - in the favor of the republicans.

The liberal righteous indignation (read hypocrisy) is amusing when the situation is fllipped and someone in the media puts out information - propoganda or not - in the favor of the republicans.

 

Call it righteous indignation if you will but basing a case on the eroneous assumption that 100% of undecideds are going to break for Romney is fantasy land. I simply posted an article in response to Bluto's full throated endorsement of Dick Morriss's claim which is just wrong.

Call it righteous indignation if you will but basing a case on the eroneous assumption that 100% of undecideds are going to break for Romney is fantasy land. I simply posted an article in response to Bluto's full throated endorsement of Dick Morriss's claim which is just wrong.

 

And I respect your opinion, this makes for good debate!

I have never had to wait either, which makes early voting (other than absentee) even more ridiculous. Early voting just makes no sense.

 

As I said, it's for people who can't be at the polling places on Election Day because of work or other issues. In that regard it makes complete sense.

I find the notion that the "GOP field organization is better" to be debatable.

I have never had to wait either, which makes early voting (other than absentee) even more ridiculous. Early voting just makes no sense.

 

So because it never happened to you in this highly populated area, long polling/voting never happen anywhere?

 

Have you seen the Florida voting cards. 8 pages long with lots to read. Is Florida more heavily populated than Kentucky? Is it possible that there may be hours of long lines in Florida? Yes. Do we want everyone to vote? Yes. Then what is wrong with voting early?

 

If I remember correctly, they turned several people away in 2000 in Florida who were in line when the polling station was still open.

 

My mantra - "Vote early and often".:lol:

So because it never happened to you in this highly populated area, long polling/voting never happen anywhere?

 

Have you seen the Florida voting cards. 8 pages long with lots to read. Is Florida more heavily populated than Kentucky? Is it possible that there may be hours of long lines in Florida? Yes. Do we want everyone to vote? Yes. Then what is wrong with voting early?

 

If I remember correctly, they turned several people away in 2000 in Florida who were in line when the polling station was still open.

 

My mantra - "Vote early and often".:lol:

 

Isn't that the Democratic Party mantra? Vote early and vote often, whether dead or alive.

So because it never happened to you in this highly populated area, long polling/voting never happen anywhere?

 

Have you seen the Florida voting cards. 8 pages long with lots to read. Is Florida more heavily populated than Kentucky? Is it possible that there may be hours of long lines in Florida? Yes. Do we want everyone to vote? Yes. Then what is wrong with voting early?

 

If I remember correctly, they turned several people away in 2000 in Florida who were in line when the polling station was still open.

 

My mantra - "Vote early and often".:lol:

 

Except for the "often" part. I find my self strangely in agreement with Ace.:scared:

So because it never happened to you in this highly populated area, long polling/voting never happen anywhere?

 

Have you seen the Florida voting cards. 8 pages long with lots to read. Is Florida more heavily populated than Kentucky? Is it possible that there may be hours of long lines in Florida? Yes. Do we want everyone to vote? Yes. Then what is wrong with voting early?

 

If I remember correctly, they turned several people away in 2000 in Florida who were in line when the polling station was still open.

 

My mantra - "Vote early and often".:lol:

 

Depends on your definition of "we".

Call it righteous indignation if you will but basing a case on the eroneous assumption that 100% of undecideds are going to break for Romney is fantasy land. I simply posted an article in response to Bluto's full throated endorsement of Dick Morriss's claim which is just wrong.

 

While your "full throated endorsement" of Morris' critics is right?

 

Hmmm.