Comments for Fayard claims head-to-head lead over Tucker at http://www.theind.com , comment 1 to 11 out of 11 comments http://www.theind.com Sun, 19 May 2013 04:48:24 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.theind.com/news/indreporter/8852-fayard-claims-head-to-head-lead-over-tucker#comment-21091 Caroline: What does the Edwin/Buddy team think of your chances to win an elected statewide office? - Howethicaldoyouthinksheis Fri, 19 Aug 2011 10:13:32 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/indreporter/8852-fayard-claims-head-to-head-lead-over-tucker#comment-21063 I 2 point "lead" aginst only one of the annouced candidates, wihtout the incumbent in the poll, is about the most irrelevant polling stat I have ever heard of. How desperate is Ms. Fayard to appear relevant? Is this the best the Dem Party has to offer in a state wide race? - LawyerDan Fri, 19 Aug 2011 05:29:30 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/indreporter/8852-fayard-claims-head-to-head-lead-over-tucker#comment-21006 written by eiswright "if my daddy had money he was willing to part with I'd use it too. I don't fault her for that at all." -------------------- I did not say fault; was making an observation. Many, if not a majority of elections, are financed by a candidates personal or family funds. On the positive side this results in a private economic stimulus. Costing the taxpayer nothing. Resulting lighting the purse of the egoists. These are wonderful results; thank God for Democracy :-) - Anthony Boudin Thu, 18 Aug 2011 07:57:01 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/indreporter/8852-fayard-claims-head-to-head-lead-over-tucker#comment-21004 One of the priorities of the Democrats is to take over as many Secretary of State positions before the Presidential election in 2012. Think back to how state results affected the Presidential outcome (Bush v. Gore in Florida) and how Secretaries of State have interjected themselves into determining the outcome. We don't need an Obama supporter as SofS in Louisiana!!! - north LA man Thu, 18 Aug 2011 07:40:59 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/indreporter/8852-fayard-claims-head-to-head-lead-over-tucker#comment-21003 Do you think she still thinks I eat my children? What a loser. - Who Cares Thu, 18 Aug 2011 06:57:55 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/indreporter/8852-fayard-claims-head-to-head-lead-over-tucker#comment-20977 Do you think she's waiting to see the outcome of the ethics claims made against her and the sealed ethics lawsuit filed on her behalf before she makes an announcement about her intentions to run or not? - Howethicaldoyouthinksheis Wed, 17 Aug 2011 15:38:32 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/indreporter/8852-fayard-claims-head-to-head-lead-over-tucker#comment-20972 I have to respectfully disagree with the comments above regarding the poll analytics. Based on her vote totals and her whirlwind campaign last time, I have a feeling someone with Ms. Fayard's "sophistication" and "money" knows exactly what they are doing... and I would assume that would include her pollsters. - Howdumbdoyouthinksheis Wed, 17 Aug 2011 14:10:54 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/indreporter/8852-fayard-claims-head-to-head-lead-over-tucker#comment-20940 http://dailykingfish.com/diary/2014/fayard-touts-own-poll-in-support-of-secretary-of-state-run - RCajunrunner Tue, 16 Aug 2011 15:58:14 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/indreporter/8852-fayard-claims-head-to-head-lead-over-tucker#comment-20939 Mrs. Fayard and/or her campaign staff must not be versed in the art of polling and poll analyzing. From the LEFT-leaning Louisiana blog - Daily Kingfish: "Unfortunately for Fayard, this is the worst grade of information. Without posting methodology (or even survey date), it's hard to tell what this actually means. According to her poll, she leads a heads-up contest 36-34 against "Tucker or a similar candidate," whatever that means. Was Tucker's name even used in the survey? Or was it, just a Fayard or other? If so, garnering 36% against a phantom candidate is not very hot. Also, were party ID's used in the questioning, i.e. "Democrat Caroline Fayard" or "Republican Jim Tucker"? Second, since we can only guess at the margin of error (perhaps 3-5%), the results really mean Fayard is tied with a "Tucker or similar candidate." Considering her recent statewide run, and the fact that the electorate will likely be at least 31% African American who vote overwhelmingly Democratic, being at 36% is not exactly a sterling number to begin with. Without more details, it's hard to tell much of anything. More importantly, the simulated vote result is basically useless as a barometer since it allocates undecideds by "party affliation" and we all know that although there are many more Democrats in Louisiana than Republicans, many of those registered as D's are really just vestigial registrations from the time when Louisiana was a one-party state. Many Democrats DO NOT vote Democratic anymore, for their own reasons. It is a nother conversation about why Louisiana voters are voting against their economic interests by voting Republican. Nevertheless, throwing undecideds into a column by party affliation is misleading and corrupts any data you might actually have. Hence, allocating those undecideds in this manner is USELESS as a predictor of performance. So we should ignore that "simulated vote" entirely." If even the liberal Democrat operatives in the state are calling the press release from her recent poll BS, imagine what it must really mean for Mrs. Fayard's real current standing amongst voters. - RCajunrunner Tue, 16 Aug 2011 15:42:03 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/indreporter/8852-fayard-claims-head-to-head-lead-over-tucker#comment-20931 Boudin - if my daddy had money he was willing to part with I'd use it too. I don't fault her for that at all. - eiswright Tue, 16 Aug 2011 13:42:26 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/indreporter/8852-fayard-claims-head-to-head-lead-over-tucker#comment-20925 "Fayard came virtually out of nowhere last year to secure a spot in the runoff for the lieutenant governor’s job" --------------------- Yes she did, on Daddy's money. - Anthony Boudin Tue, 16 Aug 2011 12:33:41 +0100