When did I say McCormicks women went to Barnette?
Did you read what I wrote at all?
I pointed out very distinctly that the gains both Barnette and Oz got didn’t add up to the total that the other candidates lost and the undecideds went up.
Committed went from a total of 86% in the trafalgar poll last week, to 73% in the sus poll... that Oz went up 3, Barnette went up 5, everyone else’s totals went down, by a total of 21%... giving a net jump in the undecideds of 13%.
Where in any of that did I say McCormick supporters all jumped on Barnette or Oz or anyone else? I pointed out an interesting data point... not sure what got you all riled up, but maybe you should investigate eating more fiber.
"Just deplaned a long plane fight" is the tipoff. Think about it. Anyway...
An MoE of 5% puts Barnette potentially further behind Oz than she was in the Trafalgar poll. Oz's 4-pt lead over Barnette, in a 3% MoE poll a month ago, could now actually be larger, in this inept 1-pt 5% MoE.
In Trafalgar's 17% Undecided, which was nearly 50-50 Men/Women, it is impossible to even sustain the remote possibility that all of those women, and all of McCormick's women, all went to Barnette, which is what it would have taken for her to win. ALL of the Undecided women and ALL of McCorkmick's women.
Given (a) Oz is going to win because of women (TV show ... GOP women ... hmmm ... Trump endorsement ... TV show ... GOP women ... hmmm) and (b) Oz has gained women since Trafalgar, in both this nonsense JL flash poll and the Emerson.
I don't dislike Barnette and I don't particularly like Oz, but my history of deconstructing agitprop pollsters -- particuarly when they intentionally $hit up the works with election eve flash polling -- is well-known and goes further back than Zogby's 'special sauce'.
And yes I do know that you know more than the average Freeper when it comes to polling and politics and political elections.
As for fiber, I eat Raisin Bran every morning and have since I was a mere wiz kid.