Math Facts vs. Mouth Foam

I sometimes worry that I just don’t “get it.”

Why have so many critics gone so far past the boiling point on hating this Bush guy? I didn’t vote for him, but he doesn’t send me off the deep end. And I like his plan to kill as many islamo-fascists as possible.

Today comes a subtle reminder, via Paul Krugman of the NYTimes, that NO, it’s not a matter of my “not getting it.” That’s a phrase equivalent to someone saying, “Hey, I’m your family member, please don’t testify at my felony trial, because, y’know…the DA just doesn't get it.”

No, I get it, alright.

When the far left can’t, or won’t, show their math, you know that there is no secret truth that eludes you.

Anti-Bush mouth-foamer Paul Krugman distinguishes herself today, in claiming that the polls show that Kerry is ahead, and thus any Bush victory will be the result of nefarious vote tampering.

The Krugman spittle:

"If the election were held today and the votes were counted fairly, Senator John Kerry would probably win. But the votes won't be counted fairly, and the disenfranchisement of minority voters may determine the outcome."

The Actual Math:

Bush + 2
Bush + 1
Bush + 6
Bush + 1
Bush + 7
Bush + 5
Bush + 2
Bush + 8
Bush + 1
Bush + 6
TIE
TIE
Kerry + 3

Via 13 polls, the real math shows Bush up by an average 2.8% over Kerry (albeit, a close race, at or within the sampling error.) Kerry leads in only one of 13 polls.

Bush up 2.8%, vs. the Krugman math: “If the election were held today and the votes were counted fairly, Senator John Kerry would probably win.”

Look, I know that mouth foam is the money shot, and Krugman's fans like a good money shot, and Krugman does good mouth foam. But her polling math is as inaccurate as her vote-tampering calculus.

It's just mouth foam. I get it.