Longtime Cantor adviser Ray Allen, in his first interview since Cantor was stunned by little-known professor Dave Brat (R), told The Hill that he believed Cantor was a victim of meddling from Democrats who crossed over in the primary to vote against him.Of course, there's no evidence of this. Reality:
George Mason University professor Michael McDonald, a vote modeling expert, has crunched the precinct-level data on what happened and said it was highly unlikely that enough Democrats turned out to swing the election, noting that turnout increased more in heavily Republican precincts than heavily Democratic precincts this year, much less cover the 45-point difference between the poll and the actual result.Huh. Seems pretty cut and dry. The facts are clear! But for Republicans, that's no problem.
"I don't need the New York Times analysis," Allen scoffed when asked about precinct-level analysis that proved his claims dubious. "I'm down here, I know what happened. It's not the whole story but it's a big hunk of the story."Ah yes. Stick your head in the sand and avoid reality. Works so well when talking about the ACA. And global climate change. And the glorious PNAC victory in Iraq. It is your Grade A conservative delusion, and this guy is a master. I mean, how deluded is he? THIS deluded:
Allen defended his pollster, John McLaughlin, who less than two weeks before the race conducted a poll that found Cantor up by a 34-point margin. Brat ended up winning by 11 percentage points, a 45-point swing.I don't know. Actual scientific polling might've seen it coming. But hey, this kind of delusion keeps McLaughlin employed with Republican campaigns, and that's nothing but awesome for Democrats. The worse informed they are, the better for us.
Calling McLaughlin "one of the absolute best in the business," Allen said there was no way they could have seen this coming from normal polling methods.