Wednesday, November 20, 2019

MU Law Poll has a hilarious, unbelievable RW shift. Toss it

I noticed there was another Marquette University Law School Poll dropping today, and given the events going on in DC and Wisconsin's bellweather status, this seemed like kind of a big deal. And then I read the topline numbers and started laughing.
Support for impeachment has slipped in Wisconsin, according to Wednesday's Marquette University Law School Poll.

And for the first time, President Donald Trump has surged ahead of all four top Democratic rivals in potential head-to-head matchups....

In head-to-head matchups, Trump led former Vice President Joe Biden by 47% to 44%, within the poll's margin of error. In August, Biden led the president by 51% to 42%.

"Call it a small advantage to Trump," Franklin said.

Trump led U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, 48% to 45%, and had a lead of 48% to 43% over U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts.
That defied any kind of common sense, given recent events. So I immmediately went to the crosstabs for both October and November to see what might have changed.

At first glance, there’s not necessarily a huge shift in the (self-described) ideological breakdown of the MU Poll from last month. But it still went further right than the last poll, and that was already out-of-whack with who voted in Wisconsin 4 years ago.

Ideology of those answering, MU Law Polls vs 2016 exit poll

You add 2.8% conservatives and pull away 2.4% of liberals from the electorate and Trump does better. I’m shocked, SHOCKED!

Which explains a lot, because when you look at the head-to-head matchups, moderates didn’t change much at all in their preference for president between the two Marquette polls, with the exception of Joe Biden, who morphed down into “generic Democrat” in this poll.

2020 potential presidential matchups, Marquette Poll

Oct 2019 Biden 61-33
Nov 2019 Biden 54-35

Oct 2019 Sanders 54-36
Nov 2019 Sanders 52-36

Oct 2019 Warren 52-38
Nov 2019 Warren 53-35

Oct 2019 Buttigieg 51-35
Nov 2019 Buttigieg 47-34

But it’s not just the weighting, as some of the preferences of certain groups make NO sense when given the sniff test. For example, after a month’s worth of stories about Trump corruption and meltdowns, are we to seriously believe that “True independents” are now switching to TRUMP in big numbers?

That doesn’t ring remotely true. Neither does this break down of alleged “liberals”, who were allegedly less likely to want to see Trump voted out after the last month.

Oct 2019 Biden 92-5
Nov 2019 Biden 83-7

Oct 2019 Sanders 94-3
Nov 2019 Sanders 91-8

Oct 2019 Warren 95-2
Nov 2019 Warren 85-10

Oct 2019 Buttigieg 89-4
Nov 2019 Buttigieg 79-10

Methinks Chuck Franklin got catfished by some righties thinking they were clever enough to hide what they really believed in when they were demographically screened. That's the nice version of what I think happened (the mean one is that he gave the Bradleys a result they wanted).

There’s one other finding that makes zero sense, and that involves the answers from ages 30-44. This is largely the Milennial generation that hates Trump, and many people in this age group voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016. But the November MU Poll says they have changed a lot in the last 3 years…and in the last month.

Age 30-44, Wisconsin
2016 exit poll Clinton 55-37

Oct 2019 Biden 53-44
Nov 2019 Biden 42-47

Oct 2019 Sanders 49-42
Nov 2019 Sanders 42-50

Oct 2019 Warren 47-42
Nov 2019 Warren\ 41-51

Oct 2019 Buttigieg 43-44
Nov 2019 Buttigieg 34-45

Does anyone honestly think that Milennials and Gen Xers under 45 have turned toward Donald Trump by 10-15 points in the last month? HELL NO. It's an absurd number, and even the MU Law Poll seemed to admit it, if you read between the lines.

The impeachment part of the MU Poll is equally absurd, but I'll get to that at a later point. I'll just say that the numbers that came out with today are literally unbelievable, and should be thrown in the trash. But that won't stop our lazy media from reporting a Trump "gain" that is highly unlikely to exist in the real world.


  1. The purpose of MLP is to catapult propaganda to justify unverifiable, proprietary, and fradulent elections. Walker can be mathematically demonstrated to have stolen 2 (Doyle really was a putz and Walker didn't need to steal that one. Right-wing propaganda and Doyle's record did that).

    The only value of MLP is that it indicates when the fix is in. And that is what this most recent garbage from Franklin is. 2020 will make 2016 look like child's play.

    1. I do worry that BS polls allow the opening to have elections rigged/stolen, in addition to the meme-setting that it does in the media.

      Dems really need to answer with their poll figures if they counteract what Chucky F. and other Bradley Boys were reporting today. Because too many will accept it as reality, and get biased as a result of that.

  2. Keep it up, Dems. Impeachment and Medicare For All, cops for none... You're gonna WISH you had Hillary back! MUAAHAHAHAHAHAHAAH!!

    1. It must take the effort and mental capacity of a watermelon to be this dimwitted as you are. Troll.

    2. In fairness, WashCo's paycheck is dependent on being that dimwitted.

  3. Many who follow election analysis of Scott Walker's recall and then next election looked at Richard Charnin's "Cumulative Vote Share Analysis".

    Today, Charnin is pro-Trumper and uses that analysis to claim Democrats are now the perpetrators of election fraud. You should know that in summer of 2016 he met with Roger Stone as tRump's campaign knew Charnin was building a reputation as the "go to" guy for election fraud. Charnin does not want anyone to know this -- I have this from a well-placed source that is exceptionally qualified to know this and was told about Stone's request first-hand.

    I won't provide a link to Charnin's blog, as it has become a pro-Republican talking point. Richard always demanded money from anyone that wanted to share his work -- Stone must have paid Charnin well and this would have had to have been dirty Russian money.

    There are other analyses of election fraud that are much more sound than the Cumulative Vote Share work that Charnin's. He is also now using his bogus probability of deaths associated with JFK assassination against the Clintons.

    This tired old attack is based on the false assumption that you can cherry-pick some deaths and then apply mortality rates to a sample that was specifically selected because of death.

    I share because I appreciate that Jake is willing to take a stand about election integrity -- this topic is banned at many self-proclaimed progressive blogs and sites. Tony Evers did not defeat Walker because non-transparent, unverifiable, and proprietary voting systems honest.

    Rather, Walker's attacks on the public he had a sworn-duty to serve became so oderous that shifting 3-4% of votes (resulting in a 6-8% swing) were not enough to steal victory.

    Self-admitted "divide and conquer" elected executives are not possible in free, open, transparent, and verifiable elections. Election fraud, however, needs a narrative to distract attention away from improbable or impossible vote totals.

    And this is the role Marquette Law Poll plays in the process.

    1. Not sure I buy into all of this, but bad polls certainly open the door to people justifying their stealing if ekections. And we have seen a number of statewide races have GOPs do "surprisingly well" in the last few years after no prior indications that they had a chance

  4. Huh, the poll doesn’t survey approval ratings for Vos and Fitzgerald. How many conservative-leaning respondents even know who these One-Percent Waterboys are, much less be capable of citing the ways in which they have obstructed economic recovery in Wisconsin?

    Rather than proffer a survey which provides substance worthy of debate in the marketplace of ideas, MULS serves up froth calculated to comfort the comfortable. It also comforts the delusional. Far too many Wisconsinites remain in the fog. They’ve seen change of all kinds in their communities, change they did not anticipate, engage or desire. Much of that change cloaks loss, loss of economic buying power, loss of choices in seeking higher education, loss of career and job opportunities, loss of infrastructure and public services, loss of retirement security and coverage of health care expenses.

    Facing this creeping and constant change, and the Republicans’ laughable and toxic mis-characterization of the causes and remedies for said change, these already-disengaged Wisconsinites choose to react from the reptilian centers of their brains, as opposed to reacting the way adults can.

    The poll is a sad reminder that a high percentage of Wisconsin voters remain poorly informed, and that their Republican Representatives in the legislature are too stupid or too ideologically constipated to serve their needs.

    The poll also signals yet again that the Bradleys’ meddle in social matters far beyond their comprehension while ignoring their own need for psychotherapy to address and their generations-long dysfunction.

  5. Has it struck you, Jake, how much WashCoRepub needs you? He is psychologically very frail...

    1. Most Republicans are. They care a lot about getting the attention of others vs self-respect and pride. Which is why they're Republican, I suppose.

  6. "Marquette University Law School seeking new patrons, releases "poll" to curry favor among wealthiest Wisconsinites."