Go ahead, blame Rove!

A mostly political Weblog.
Nov. 13 2006 4:06 PM

Go Ahead, Blame Rove!

He didn't make small mistakes.

(Continued from Page 10)

Missouri: Talent's in much bigger trouble that it seems. The poll's are close, but he's the incumbent, and he only has 46.5% in the RCP average.

Montana: Burns is in less good shape than recent reports would indicate. Sure, he's surging. But he's still around 45%.

Virginia: Allen is a goner. The polls are neck and neck, but they're neck and neck at 46%

Michigan:Stabenow's at over 52%--she'll win.

Rhode Island:Chafee at 40%? See ya!

The Incumbent Rule, in short, gives the three closest Senate races in which there's an incumbent, plus Michigan and Rhode Island, to the Dems. Looks like a Democratic Senate. ... But wait--what's this:

New Jersey:Menendez is leading by 7, but he's still at 48.5%. Not so fast!

Again, this isn't what I think will happen. It's what the Incumbent Rule thinks will happen. It could be right.  ... One reason it might be wrong, in addition to those cited by Mystery Pollster, is, yes, the Feiler Faster Thesis. Given the increased speed of information processing by the voters, even challengers seem old and familiar--like incumbents--by the end of a typical, interminable statewide election campaign. The basic principle of the Incumbent Rule--that voters will take a fresh pig-in-a-poke over an incumbent they don't like--no longer applies. By next Tuesday voters in, say, Montana might have heard so much about John Tester that he seems like an incumbent, not a fresh unknown. ...

**--For an example of Morris invoking the incumbent rule in the unlikeliest of circumstances, see this summary of a Hannity & Colmes appearance11:47 A.M. link

Advertisement

Thursd ay, November 2, 2006

Kaus Silent as CNN's Zahn Fails to Crucify Coulter! Media Matters  sleazily quotes the anti-Kerry things I said on CNN Wednesday while excising the anti-Bush things. (Here, via Atrios, is an uncut transcript.) ... 9:20 P.M. 

All Hands on Deck: With a week to go before a close election, the New York Times continues to move beyond Democratic cocooning (though it does some of  that  too) in the direction of flat-out misrepresenation. Kate Zernike's Kerry story not only doesn't ever get around to telling Times readers what Kerry actually said--it leaves the clear impression that what Kerry said was something different (and more benign) than it was.** Patterico prosecutes. ... P.S.: Kerry's comments aren't a scandal, let alone a three-day scandal. ("KERRY SAYS SOMETHING STUPID"--is that news? It's Kerry!  He's our national doofus. Dog bites man.) But the startling deterioration of the NYT is a scandal, maybe. [Via Insta]

Update: Maguire says Zernike's a repeat offender. ...

**--If Kerry had just dropped "a single word" from his prepared text--what Zernike identifies as the problem--he wouldn't have generated any controversy. The problem is he dropped that word plus the whole next sentence, leaving the distinct impression that he'd misread the passage to fit with an Early Vietnam-era view that those who don't do well in college wind up serving in the military. 11:27 P.M.

This anti-Burkle item in the L.A. Weekly doesn't add much, but does serve as a reminder: Are the feds ever going to actually bring charges against Jared Paul Stern, the now-ex-Page Six writer secretly taped by Burkle allegedly shaking Burkle down with a cash-for-coverage offer? It's been 7 months since the incident, Alan Mittelstaedt notes. ... P.S.: At this point, does Burkle even want an indictment, which could have the side effect of putting his name back in the headlines about the time his non-bachelor buddy Bill Clinton's wife is running for President? [Thx to alert reader Jared Paul Stern] 7:21 A.M.

  Slate Plus
Slate Picks
Dec. 19 2014 4:15 PM What Happened at Slate This Week? Staff writer Lily Hay Newman shares what stories intrigued her at the magazine this week.