Over at NLS, Ben points out what can only be described as lunacy. Lunacy #1: the Connolly campaign is quoted by Washington Post reporter Amy Gardner as claiming the poll which showed Leslie Byrne leading by 10 points to be a "push poll." Is that like Connolly calling Charlie Hall a "Republican" because he met with Tom Davis -- someone Connolly probably has talked to or met with dozens if not hundreds of times?
What really angered me about Gardner's article, however, was this (Lunacy #2):
And then there's this question: In a general election matchup between Leslie Byrne and U.S. Rep. Thomas M. Davis III (R), who wins? Interesting that Byrne's publicly released memo didn't provide the answer."
Again, WTF?!? Why on earth would a Democratic primary poll test for a general election, especially when we DON'T EVEN KNOW WHO THE REPUBLICAN NOMINEE WILL BE? But even worse, what's with the "interesting" comment? Is that supposed to imply that there were nefarious motives involved here, that Byrne's polling really showed her getting creamed by Tom Davis (who probably won't even run) so she's hiding it? If not, then why is it interesting that "Byrne's publicly released memo didn't provide the answer?"
The Washington Post continues its steady, sad decline into irrelevance.