Reply #18: let's try to look at this clearly

[OnTheOtherHand]

First of all, in ordinary English, one can't get from "an incumbent who does not clearly lead loses" to "Kerry was the leader of the pre-election polls." I think you know this, and that is why you are doing all this hand-waving about "common sense," and complaining about people being "prickly."

If you want to make an argument that the pre-election polls indicated that Kerry was more likely to win than Bush, that's fine. Some people agree, some people disagree, but it's a defensible position.

To say that "We know Kerry led the pre-election national polls" -- not so defensible. As I said above, I don't think election reform activists should be offered that as a talking point, certainly not without an iota of justification.

I have no idea what you are doing to reclaim the country, you probably have no idea what I am doing to reclaim the country, and it actually has no bearing whatsoever on whether "We know Kerry led the pre-election national polls." If you want to say that, hey, maybe it will work. I will continue to caution people that it is incredible. And when people make bad arguments about the exit polls, I will caution about those, too.