Arnold Kling notes that exit polls show that 52% of those who voted have an unfavorable opinion of the Democratic Party and 53% have an unfavorable opinion of the Republican Party. Arnold comes up with this conclusion:

People with an unfavorable view of Democrats went 88-10 for Republicans, but people with an unfavorable view of Republicans only went 76-22 Democrat.

That was the difference in the election. The “unfavorables” on net broke Republican. The way I would spin it is that there is a large block of voters who are negative on both parties, the Republicans captured a larger share of that block, and that block swung the election.

Via Captain’s Quarters, in response to the Rasmussen poll question

Did Bush know about the 9/11 attacks in advance?

allegedly 35% of American Democrats answered “yes” and another 26% said they are not sure.

If that’s accurate, America’s system for communicating facts and ideas is seriously broken. I’m wondering if that breakdown might be related to the following dilemma. If you are a liberal elected official or opinion maker who is shown evidence of such massive delusion, do you (a) try to correct it, or (b) try to exploit it?

I can’t pass up this opportunity to brag about another one of my former students– Matthew Kahn says that Derek Neal would make a good president.

Matthew’s right.