It’s my contention that the Star/Tribune “Minnesota” poll is, and has been for two and a half decades, less a “public opinion” poll and more an instrument of DFL propaganda. I’ve supported that contention with a raft of circumstantial evidence; proof that the Minnesota Poll underestimates GOP turnout – especially in races that are perceived to be close; it showed Mark Dayton with an absurdly huge lead over Tom Emmer, and Al Franken with a four point lead over Norm Coleman, while guessing the Klobuchar/Kennedy race fairly accurately.
It’s my contention that this is to leverage the “Bandwagon Effect” – to discourage Republicans and conservatives from going to the poll.
But this year’s race presents a dilemma for the editors who – I’m being half-hyperbolic here  – plan the results of these polls. On the one hand, you have the Voter ID initiative which is likely to win in a blowout. To skew that poll enough to encourage Democrats and opponents of the amendment, the Strib would need to skew the poll to an absurd extent. As in, assume conditions that are the same as in 1976, after Watergate.
On the other hand, you have a Senate race between Amy Klobuchar and Kurt BIlls that is widely perceived to be a pretty safe race for the incumbent. Skewing the sample too far to the left would make the results look completely implausible.
The answer, if you’re the Strib? You see it in this weeks’ Minnesota Polls; this is their old buddy Jim Klobuchar’s daughter we’re talking about here! Of course they’ll do what it takes to make her re-election as epic as possible – why, everyone on Editor’s Row remembers Amy when she was just this tall, dagnabbit!
Beyond that – and more germane to the propaganda organ – they know that the voters the DFL needs are the “low-information” voters. The ones that rarely get past the headline, much less the lead – forget about looking at partisan breakdowns. The ones that still believe the Strib is anything but DFL shills, or don’t care either way.
The Strib is showing a 57-28 lead for Klobuchar, with 15 percent either undecided or voting for someone else. As we’ve been showing every day this week, this is based on a sample that includes 41% Democrat/28% GOP turnout.
Now, if we assume it’s more like 38/34 – which is more in line with Rasmussen’s figures, which have been traditionally vastly more accurate – and multiply the changes by the support each candidate gets within their party…
…well, that’s bad for Bills, if you believe the Strib. While 90-odd percent of Dems say they’ll vote for A-Klo, the Strib claims only 2/3 of Republicans will vote for BIlls. While the nomination battle was a bruising one in the GOP, and left a lot of bad blood, Republicans are much more suck-it-up-and-support-our-guy than that. This strikes me as dubious – the “stink test” is crying “BS!” – but I’ve got no hard evidence to the contrary just yet. Absent that, let’s run with the Strib’s numbers.
So if we subtract 3% from the Democrat split, multiplied by 90%, we get a net loss of 2.7% for Klobuchar, taking her down to 54.3%.
Adding 6 to Bills – times the 66% support in the party, naturally – leads to a four point rise, to 32.
54-32 still isn’t close. But it’s not the 2:1 humiliation…
…that, I contend, the Strib wants Republicans to believe is coming, on top of all the other “bad news” they’ve brought us this week.
So what does all this mean?
 – However, I’ve learned that my half-hyperbolic jokes end up being accurate amazingly often. And that’s not a good thing.