Periodically (it seems more often these days, actually), I come across some really silly political stuff that screams out for attention. Here are four examples. Caveat emptor!
Exhibit No. 1: A Feb. 17 survey of 500 likely Wisconsin voters by Rasmussen Reports.
Rasmussen is an automated poll that does not include live interviewers, and, as anyone who follows polling knows, its highly controversial, in part because of the large number of surveys conducted by the firm and the widespread belief that the firm favors Republicans.
The numbers in the Wisconsin survey that stuck out like a sore thumb were the favorable and unfavorable ratings of Republican Senate hopeful Dave Westlake. According to the survey, 33 percent of those polled had a favorable view of Westlake, while 31 percent had an unfavorable opinion of him.
Whats so weird about that? Well, Westlake isnt exactly a public figure.
The self-described entrepreneur and small businessman went to West Point and earned an MBA from the University of Chicago, but as far as I can tell, he has no political experience and hasnt spent any money to get known. His year-end Federal Election Commission report showed that at the end of 2009 he had raised $33,000, spent $31,000 and had less than $3,000 in the bank.
Dave Westlake probably is a nice guy, and I wish him well. But there is no way that two out of three likely Wisconsin voters know enough about him to have an opinion of him (unless Rasmussen provided other information, such as party). And thats what the favorable/unfavorable question is intended to produce information about the persons name identification and image.
In November, Public Policy Polling, a Democratic polling company, surveyed the Wisconsin Senate race and found Westlakes ID at 2 percent favorable/9 percent unfavorable. Could Westlakes name ID have skyrocketed from 11 percent to 64 percent from November to February? No, not without a statewide media blitz.
Exhibit No. 2: A Feb. 8 e-mail from Colorado Senate candidate Andrew Romanoffs campaign touting his standing in recent Rasmussen polls.
Romanoff, a former Colorado Speaker, is challenging appointed Sen. Michael Bennet in this years Democratic primary, and given the political environment, anything is possible.
But there are two things about the e-mail that are ridiculous. First, Democratic strategists spend a good deal of time discrediting Rasmussen as a Republican pollster whose results rarely reflect reality. Yet, here is the Romanoff campaign basing its entire argument about Romanoffs alleged electability on two Rasmussen surveys. Incredible.
And second, the argument that Romanoff is the stronger general election candidate because of the Rasmussen polls comes from Romanoff consultant Celinda Lake. Since Lake is herself a pollster, youd think that she might refer to one of her own surveys, rather than the survey of another pollster. She doesnt.
Exhibit No. 3: Rep. Joe Sestak (D) claims the White House offered him a job to get him out of the Pennsylvania Senate race.
Hillary Rodham Clinton, center, along with former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, right, and Annette Tilleman-Dick, left, wife for former Rep. Tom Lanots, D-Calif. Clinton was honored with the Tom Lantos Human Rights Prize during a ceremony last week at the Cannon House Office Building. Previous winners include the Dalai Lama and Elie Wiesel.
Each year since 1990, CQ Roll Call has reviewed the financial disclosures of all 541 senators, representatives and delegates to determine the 50 richest members of Congress. This year's report, derived from forms covering the calendar year 2012, shows it took a net worth of $6.67 million to crack the exclusive club.