Media pundits and reporters have a wonderful ability to repeat nonsense often enough so as to start to believe it. Here are some examples.

How the public feels about the safety net

Myth: The Ryan plan to end Medicare as we know it just needs to be explained better.

Reality:



Source: Kaiser

The idea that you can buck 90% of the voters and ram through what 10% want with better messaging is possibly the most delusional idea I have heard this election season (the only thing that competes with it is the idea that since Ryan's Republicans only want to screw future seniors (under 55) in this round, greedy geezers from coast to coast will abandon their family's best interests and their own better judgment and vote Republican in 2012.) But it's what conservatives want to believe:

Is that really so hard to explain to the American people? Well, it is if you’re gnashing your teeth and figuring out how to distance yourself from the one responsible effort out there. The good news: 40 senators stood their ground yesterday in voting for the Ryan budget. Now they (and every member of the House who has voted for Ryan’s Medicare plan) need to explain why.

They do need to explain why. On that, we agree. But in the end, the Ryan plan fails for three reasons, none of them messaging and all of them core issues (outlined by Steven L. Taylor , non- progressive):

• The Plan does not promise the same level of benefit that the current program does

• It fails to deal with the cost issue

• Medicare is a wildly popular program, amongst Democrats and Republicans

You can't message your way around that.





The Republican field

Myth as stated by National Journal's Josh Kraushaar :

The reality is that the Republican field is hardly as weak as advertised, both by their own merit and by historical standards. Nature abhors a vacuum, and so does politics



Kraushaar's argument seems mostly to be that 1) they are Governors and b) they are Republicans so that iii) they have intrinsic merit. Jay Cost has a handful of others here including a) "cross-over appeal" and 2) "no gotcha votes in Congress" as if the primary won't pull them hard right and as if Ryan's Curse isn't an albatross for every Republican in 2012 (see the saga of Newt Gingrich, who didn't vote for it or against it but still got knocked out of the race by it.).

Reality from Gallup:

Should Palin follow suit and not enter the race, Romney would be the clear front-runner, but arguably the weakest front-runner in any recent Republican nomination campaign.

A top goal of the nation’s most influential national Tea Party group is to stop Mitt Romney from winning the Republican nomination for president.

Ah, but Gallup simply means this isn't a lock for Romney, right? That's very true and yet misleading, since Romney's money and positioning still puts him as the favorite (he's at 28 on Intrade as an example, with Pawlenty at 21.) However, should he win, Romneycare will severely hurt him with his own party , a factor that contributes mightily to the idea that this is a weak field:The bottom line is that any field that Romney leads is a weak field.

And who says this is a weak field, anyway? The correct answer is "everyone". For that, let's go to the video that never gets old:

As to how they fare against Obama, we have Reuters-Ipsos to back up the idea that the field is weak (caveats about the inaccuracy of early polling and the final results, but it is what it is right now):

In a new CNN poll, GOP primary voters are pining for the fjords more so than for the current candidates:

Out of the dark-horse candidates on the sidelines, 48 percent of Republicans say they would like to see Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) run, 45 percent want New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) to run, 40 percent would like Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) to run and 39 percent want former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) to enter the field.

Does that mean we have won and that Obama is a lock? Nope. The economy will perhaps determine the election (see below), and there's a long time between then and now (see John Sides.) But does Obama as of this writing look to be in trouble against a strong Republican contender? Nope, again. Not only does the field look weak, but the Republican brand (aka kill Medicare as we know it) is lookin' a little shaky there. As Rich Lowry puts it:

As their field emerges into the cold light of day, Republicans are desperate to be surprised.

But the biggest piece of baloney in the whole sandwich is that only the Very Serious candidates Romney, Pawlenty and Huntsman are running, we can ignore Bachmann and Cain, Republicans aren't pining for Someone Else, Gingrich never spoke the truth about Ryan's Curse, Sarah Palin won't be heard from again, and Donald Trump never happened. As for how great and wonderful it is to be a GOP Governor these days, well, that's our next segment...

Popularity of Republican Governors

Myth: Chris Christie, Scott Walker, John Kasich and other GOP governors are both effective and popular.

Reality from WSJ:

Wisconsin Anti-Union Law Goes Down In Flames [WI Judge] Sumi’s ruling comes two days after New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R), another proponent of fiscal austerity, lost a high-profile battle with the New Jersey Supreme Court and was ordered to restore $500 million in funding for poor school districts that had been previously cut. Christie, who had threatened to defy the court if it ruled against him, told the media that he was furious that unelected judges were making law from the bench. Despite his anger, Christie says he will comply with the ruling. Critics of austerity have been emboldened by their victories in Wisconsin and New Jersey.

Here's Christie's latest poll numbers, all of which represent a drop compared to the previous poll:It's okay to say Christie is popular with Republicans, because that's still true. But popular with the general voter, or popular in NJ? Tain't so, McGee

And given that the hard right GOP agenda is either stalled or subject to repeal, don't let's use these Governors as GOP success stories. Kasich's approval is at 38, Walker is at 43 and would lose a recall vote, Rick Snyder was at 33 in March and and Rick Scott in FL is the worst of the lot with an approval of 29.

Margie Omero has a great summary at pollster.com:

Voters across the country have buyers' remorse about the Republicans they elected to office. The big stands House Republicans have taken so far--defunding Planned Parenthood, keeping tax breaks for the wealthy, nearly shutting down the government, and ending Medicare as we know--have all been wildly unpopular. Even with Republicans. In upstate New York this week, Democrat Kathy Hochul won by running a campaign focused on the Republican Medicare plan. Seeing the writing on the wall, the next day five Senate Republicans defected and voted against it. And don't even get me started about the paucity of the GOP presidential field despite the 2010 "shellacking."

There's a chill wind blowing if you're a Republican. The poor performance in the polls by the new GOP Governors stateside, just as much as the resentment of the public about Ryan and the Republicans tampering with Medicare and Medicaid in DC, are contributing to the idea that the GOP wave has peaked. That is a major factor to the Oval Office wannabe field feeling weak. Another is the heavy coverage of the sideline candidates, such as:

Rudy for President

Myth: Congressman Peter King suggests Rudy Giuliani might get into the 2012 race.

Reality: As outlined in TIME, Rudy is pro-choice. The idea that a pro-choice Republican will be acceptable in IA, SC or any part of the Republican party in 2012 when he was unacceptable in 2008 (he didn't win a single delegate, iirc) is absurd. The idea that anyone including donors has any interest in Rudy is a different kind of absurd, but at least he has name recognition. And as my colleague David Waldman notes, the GOP isn't exactly "woefully short of candidates with funky relationship problems" and therefore looking for more.

So when you see stories like this, built around name recognition:

"Giuliani has the top spot in a 12-candidate field, but he doesn't generate a lot of enthusiasm. Only about a quarter of Republicans nationwide said that they would be enthusiastic if Giuliani won the nomination," said CNN Polling Director Keating Holland. "But he's not alone — only a quarter would be enthusiastic if Palin got the party's nod, and only one in five would feel the same way if Romney became the GOP's standard bearer in 2012."



Palin for President

don't get carried away, even if Rudy does.

Myth: From the NY Times: Signs Grow That Palin May Run. If only we could be so lucky. She's going to be on visible tour this week, which is a sure sign she'll get some media folks to gush over her.

Reality:





Lawrence O'Donnell did a wonderful smackdown of this idea Friday night on his MSNBC show. Why a candidate without a senior strategist and without a pollster should in the modern era be considered a candidate for higher office is beyond me. That she wants to be more visible? Check. That she wants the GOP field to move right? Check. That's she's too lazy to do the work that actual running entails? Check. That she will never give up the big bucks? Check. That (as O'Donnell points out) she and Huckabee still work for Roger Ailes while Santorum and Gingrich don't? Check.

Oh, and one more thing about Ms. Incompetence. She's showing up for the Rolling Thunder Memorial Day event because the optics would be terrific and they are her kind of people, except for one thing—they didn't invite her.

"She wasn't invited. We heard yesterday she came out with a press release she was coming to Rolling Thunder," Ted Shpak, national legislative director of Rolling Thunder, told "Andrea Mitchell Reports." Shpak is one of three members of Rolling Thunder's current leadership who says he had no idea Palin was coming until it was posted on her website.

Rick Perry for President

But, hey, it's Sarah. They'll just have to adjust to her outsize presence and learn to live with it, just like they did in Alaska.

Myth: As a Southerner in the race, Rick Perry jumps to the top.

Reality: Of the three speculative candidates, in my view Perry is a more likely "go". But if he's in it, that doesn't mean he wins it. Charlie Cook:

However, there remains, particularly after Huckabee’s departure from the field, a vacuum in both the social and the tea party brackets in this tournament. Unless former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin proves naysayers wrong and enters the race, watch for Rep. Michele Bachmann and/or Texas Gov. Rick Perry to enter the fray and fill that void. Although it is doubtful that either could win the nomination, they could change the dynamics of the contest in a significant and potentially unpredictable way. Politics, like nature, abhors a vacuum, and there certainly seems to be one on that side of the GOP equation.

Only 4% of Texas Republicans say they'd vote for Perry if he were to make a bid for the Oval Office, a new University of Texas/Texas Tribune poll shows... Texas is a critical state for any GOP presidential nominee, as it holds more delegates than any state in the nation except California. Texas is the biggest reliably red state in the country. It's also important for Perry, who would likely be embarrassed to finish any lower than first in his home state's primary.

The survey says Do we think Perry wants to embarrass himself? He was ready to tout secession , so why not?

From the invaluable Perry Watch at chron.com:

As we’ve often said, the only country Perry wants to be president of is the Republic of Texas. But some wags interpreted this as a Freudian slip exposing the gov’s subconscious desire to be president of the United States.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry acknowledged Friday that he will consider a bid for the GOP nomination for president. But do Republicans think he should join the fray? A CNN poll released Friday found that 40 percent of Republicans and GOP-leaning independents would like Perry to run, but 50 percent prefer he stay on the sidelines.

Perry told reporters Friday that he’s “going to think about” seeking the White House once the Legislature adjourns next week — a departure from earlier assurances that he won’t run. “He’s seen what everybody else has seen,” said Matthew Dowd, campaign strategist for George W. Bush. “There’s a field that’s not coalesced around anyone, that’s very unpredictable at the moment and that doesn’t have a candidate who seems to speak to a majority of the party.” In conversations with friends in recent days, the Republican governor has complained that the GOP field is weak and hasn’t excited enthusiasm in the Republican base.

It's the economy, stupid

In any case, the reaction to Perry within the GOP is not overwhelming Unlike Palin, we're pretty sure Perry reads newspapers (especially Texas newspapers.) Still, that Perry would even consider running is another blow to those trying to make the case that the current GOP field is just fine:He knows what we know, which is why any or all of the above trio might let ego win out over reason, but it doesn't make the field stronger just because they show up.

Myth: The economy, Republicans keep telling themselves, will decide the election and not the Republican debacle on Medicare.

Reality: The myth might be true, but not in the way people think. From the Newshour:

The running assumption in the media is that next year's presidential contest will be waged around the economy. There's good reason to think that and also good reason to think that the unemployment rate will remain uncomfortably high. But the current mood in Eagle [CO] may be telling. After some very hard years the measure of improvement for voters may not be what unemployment was in 2008 or some random number assigned by analysts, but simple improvement or something else. "People here aren't angry anymore as much as they want answers," Hanson said. Candidates, in other words, may have to give voters a reason to choose them beyond frustration. They will need to offer solutions. And unlike anger, solutions are not easy to find.

Do it yourself baloney sandwiches

Take a look at Rudy, Palin and Perry, or even Pawlenty and Romney and ask yourselves what solutions they propose other than cutting taxes, which contributed mightily to the deficit without creating jobs. That's why in the Politico/GWU Battleground poll , Obama did so well despite an economy that no one is happy with.

Want to serve some baloney that you've come across? Just drop it in the comments and we'll discuss it over lunch. And while you think about it, here's this:

"Overwhelmingly, Americans find President Barack Obama to be the most likable and lunch-worthy date compared to any of those hoping take his job in the 2012 election," said Ron Sachs, president of Ron Sachs Communications. "There is no baloney in this simple truth: The 'lunch pal' poll very likely reflects the significant advantage President Obama enjoys heading into his re-election against a party that has no 'candidate du jour.' " Even 25 percent of Republicans chose Obama as their top lunch mate, while 5 percent of Democrats picked Palin. One in 10 voters nationally would prefer to dine alone.

That's why the public thinks Obama will be reelected

But remember, no one serves baloney like a professional pundit.

Study: Pundits Wrong Most Of The Time, Just Like You Always Imagined

After all, if it's good for the Democrats, it must be good for John McCain



