Some posit, there is a zero percent lead by either Democratic candidate as the polls close in Pennsylvania. The Senators Clinton and Obama are presently neck and neck.
The certainly of the polls from yesterday, are not so clearly certain tonight.
Perhaps that’s because there appear to be entrenched myths can that hamper insightful analysis of office seekers
the one with the most ad money, wins
the one who is the nicest, wins
the one who polls best, wins
the one who is the most phlegmatic and pragmatic, wins
the one with the most super-delegates of this moment, wins
the one who is least unliked, wins
the one who is most aggressive, wins
the one who is most experienced, wins
the one who has the most women, men, young, hobbits, wins
Maybe. But, perhaps not.
Too much coverage of the campaign seems interchangeable with sports handicapping and bookie talk before a contest.
What and who is left out as all the analyses are pouring in?
The young, who do not answer land lines
The older people who would rather tell you their social security numbers before they would willingly break their cultural customs and reveal who they really voted for
The people from the working class who fall way below the radar of pollsters; they dont answer phones; they’re working three jobs
Huge numbers of brand new citizens who have been naturalized and who often have had more civic education than people born in the US, and these new citizens are deeply commited to voting
Most often dividing people by race, class, education, income, or other efforts, making divergent groups seem homogenous… instead of characterizing them by importance of issues to each, seems it can skew poll results…
which in turn can influence some.. to vote… or not vote, especially when one candidate looks like a lock-in.
There are additional voting groups which have not been added in to the polls summations. Sort of like leaving one foot off the bathroom scale when one weighs oneself.
There’s a uneasy sense that the dial has not been giving just weight for some time.