Member of the reality-based community of progressive (not anonymous) Massachusetts blogs
I think this is a feather in the cap of both the unions involved, as well as the Governor.
I wonder if his (eventual) Republican opponent in the race will give him any credit for this negotiation which yielded the state tens of millions savings and will stave off some of the layoffs which would hurt services?
(That was a rhetorical question. We all really know the answer.)
[powered by WordPress.]
43 queries. 0.795 seconds
March 10th, 2010 at 1:45 pm
have you seen the Rassmussen poll
thats out today on the governers race
deval has soom real problems, all self made.
March 11th, 2010 at 12:06 pm
Hate to burst your bubble dude, but Rassmussen is known for leaning conservative and having their polls proven wrong.
March 11th, 2010 at 12:13 pm
See:
Here.
Here.
Here.
They overpoll Republicans proportionately to Democrats or leaners.
March 14th, 2010 at 1:14 pm
Rassmussen has a pretty good scam going. They skew their samples in order to get results that are more Republican-friendly in the months or years leading up to an election, and then at the last minute, they tweak their results to make them more consistent with everyone else’s. When pundits look at pollsters’ records, they look at their final polls, and compare them to the election results, so Rassmussen ends up looking good - and they are good…in the week before the election.
Now, maybe I’m wrong. Maybe John McCain really was leading or tied with Barack Obama throughout the presidential campaign, and nobody else noticed it. And then, maybe there really was a huge last-minute swings towards Obama in the last 10 days of the race, a swing that nobody else noticed.
Maybe that’s what happened, but I can think of a more likely explanation.
March 15th, 2010 at 5:44 pm
Yeah, I’d be fine if there was a real disagreement on the demographics of who will vote what way - in any given election year, you have to guess who’ll be more enthused to show up to vote, and how the indy’s will break. However, to CONSISTANTLY overpoll conservatives and then as you say pull in the methodology nearer the election to be in line with the rest of the models shows it’s not about them readjusting some assumptions they wind up discarding; it’s obviously a consistent and deliberate attempt to skew the storyline of elections by constantly having an outlier that shows a “different more conservative outlook” even if it’s made up and bull.
After all, if they find they consistently overpoll conservatives in several election cycles, you’d think the next time around that would change their methodology on who to poll.