Remember back in the ’60’s when JFK was losing to Nixon in a close race – – and somehow, magically, a whole bunch of JFK votes just “appeared” in the middle of the night in Chicago?
Given the now-very-well-known input the M O B had in JFK’s campaign and Chicago’s notoriously squeaky clean political landscape, it’s only a snicker and a suppressed snort to suggest that somehow … just somehow … election fraud (No!) occurred.
Of course, the media lapdog reporters, dutifully doing the stories their editors want them to, can spin any such fraud right off the billiards table.
So it’s with a similar snicker and snort I read this piece by Gary Langer of ABC News on the mysterious reason that ALL the polls were so far off in New Hampshire.
Somehow … just somehow … ALL the polls were off. Way off. How could it be? ! ?
Before our memories get overrun by all the spin, think back 24 … 48 … 72 hours.
On primary day itself, the Daily Presidential Tracking Poll on the Rasmussen Poll’s own website told us “In New Hampshire, the final Rasmussen Reports poll shows Obama with a seven-point advantage over Clinton.”
The Evans-Novak Political Report, dated one day before the primary: “New Hamphire Predictions: Obama Blowout, Romney Rallying.” A blowout!
And two days before the primary, the WMUR/CNN tracking poll in New Hampshire showed Obama at 39% with Clinton at 29%.
I listed just one article from each of the past three days — there are hundreds more, but you get the idea. Everyone from everywhere was polling Obama with at least seven points on the former first lady.
And now ABC’s Langer is telling us the polls were all wrong. Snicker. Snort. How come all the polls on the Republican side of the ballot were right on the money? Repub polls accurate – Dem polls VERY far off. Um, no.
I might consider Langer’s argument if it were just one or two polls that were off … but not all of them.
Ladies and gentlemen, I don’t believe for a moment that the polls were wrong. Granted, Slick Willy will wag his finger at me and insist I produce evidence, and he’ll have me — because I don’t have any. And Langer will sputter and choke as he tries to justify his job at as Director of Polling at ABC. But this primary smells to high heaven.
It smells an awful lot like Clinton’s “superior get-out-the-vote effort” (Langer’s words) was, in reality, getting votes out of thin air.
The king-makers want their leading lady at 1600, and two 2nd place finishes (especially the possibility of a 10-point deficit in New Hamphsire) was not going to put her there. Besides, it would have been way too embarassing for their media-darling Bill, and WAY too much credibility for the junior senator from Illinois.
Engage the memory. Think back to JFK’s middle-of-the-night win with votes magically appearing in Chicago. And think back 24, 36, and 72 hours to when ALL the polls had Clinton coming in a distant second place.
Mr. Langer can spin it however he likes (or however he’s told), but I don’t believe for a minute that the Dem polls were wrong while the Repub polls were right. No, it’s something else that’s wrong.
Very wrong.
Op-Ed Central 
I was watching both CNN and Fox News this morning going back and forth about this and what blew me away is that it seems that all the major news networks are trying to attribute this swing in the vote to the fact that Clinton “almost cried” at a meeting the other day. If that is the case then my hope for American Democracy just dropped a notch.
bc3263827 — Amazing, isn’t it? Anything but the possibility of votes appearing out of thin air.
The corrupt rigged the NH election so Hils would stay alive…- At least for now, while they flip like fish looking for a candidate that the general populace can stomach. They need some time, and they need Hilary to motivate their base to give money. It’s obvious, and it’s evil, but it IS what it IS.
If Obama lays down for this, without so much as a question mark, then he will be down for the count as of now.
Pingback: Associate the Clintons with voter fraud? NOOOOO! « Op-Ed Central