The Birmingham News‘ Kevin Scarbinsky has developed an interesting idea. While thinking about the usual bitch-fest that comes with preseason college football polls, he thinks it’s wrong that only about half of the Football Bowl Subdivision get to vote in the USA Today Coaches’ Poll, and there’s no allowance for priority given to long-tenured coaches or waiting time for new head men. Those are just ways to ameliorate the No. 1 problem with the poll to begin with.

Who out there really thinks that head coaches in major college football take the time to appropriately evaluate teams? The open secret is that the poll gets pawned off on a lower-level staffer, but even if that staffer does pay more attention — sees other games, reads the news, blogs and the like — it’s goes against the point of the poll. These coaches are supposed to be intelligent enough about the game and skilled of their competition to do more than your average yay-hoo going on to ESPN to do a fan poll.

Then there’s the problem of the BCS formula. As one-third of the formula, it has significant impact on who will play for the national championship and at-large bids. The Harris poll, a grouping of retired coaches, athletic directors and any number of people affiliated with college athletics who are both knowledgeable and have the time, is actually a better setup. That’s another third. And there are the computers, of course.

Despite how the Associated Press may feel about the BCS, it would be a significant advantage to eject the coaches’ poll and bring back the sportswriters. Even though they’ve had their own problems with their poll, writers are professional observers. An observer is likely to have a better grasp of the national picture than someone who is basically a 24/7 participant.

And no, a playoff isn’t the answer. There’s polling further down the ladder in college football and every other college sport we know of. A poll, in and of itself, isn’t the problem. We just need a better poll.

This probably dominated cable news yesterday, but considering that we haven’t watched CNN. MSNBC or Fox News on a regular basis for two years, this one seemed to us like a major earthquake in Siberia. Markos Moulitsas of DailyKos fame pretty much dropped a bomb on the polling world when he divorced himself and his operation from firm Research 2000.

We were kind of surprised when Kos began cosponsoring polling, but on one hand, it made sense. Why not branch out and extend the brand? Evidently, it has not worked out well. He’s basically accusing the firm of fraud and according to a Politico story, is filing suit.

“We were defrauded by Research 2000, and while we don’t know if some or all of the data was fabricated or manipulated beyond recognition, we know we can’t trust it.”

[...]

“While the investigation didn’t look at all of Research 2000 polling conducted for us, fact is I no longer have any confidence in any of it, and neither should anyone else. I ask that all poll tracking sites remove any Research 2000 polls commissioned by us from their databases. I hereby renounce any post we’ve written based exclusively on Research 2000 polling.”

[...]

“At one point, they claimed they couldn’t deliver [data] because their computers were down and they had to work out of a Kinko’s office. Research 2000 was delivered a copy of the report early Monday morning, and though they quickly responded and promised a full response, once again the authors of the report heard nothing more.”

R2K, as it’s apparently known in the biz, seems to not be all that well-respected. No less than polling porn purveyor Nate Silver said it was one of the least accurate firms in the business. Though it says that Kos is doing all this because he didn’t want to pay the invoices for the polls, the consensus seems to be on the blogger’s side on this one.

GOP pollster Chris Wilson, who recently worked on the Utah Senate primary for Republican nominee Mike Lee, said if proven true, the charges pose challenges to new media organizations who are desperate for fresh numbers about elections across the nation.

“The organizations that have been implicated in these scandals – the R2K and Strategic Visions of the world – have sprung up over the last decade to service the needs of these kinds of clients,” said Wilson.

But he also said it should serve as a warning to those scanning the plethora of pollsters out there, attempting to separate the cream of the crop from the illegitimate.

“You can’t forge a live operator survey. That’s why live operator is the gold standard. Any legitimate pollster will be happy to tell you where their call center is located, will let you listen in on interviews via telephone and will send you their raw data set. Anyone using a pollster who won’t do these things should be concerned,” he said.

We like to kid the teabaggers. When we went to the rally at the State House on April 15, we hadn’t seen that many angry, old white people with the exception of a canceled Skynyrd concert. But with turnout expected to be light tomorrow, the motivated make the decisions. And angry, old white people can be pretty motivated.

Consider the recent survey by Public Policy Polling (yes, we know they lean Democratic, and Rasmussen leans Republican and blah blah blah — get over it). About 29 percent of people responding said that they self-identify as Tea Partiers, and Rep. Nikki Haley and Curtis Loftis, both Tea Party/S.C. Club for Growth candidates, are benefiting.

From what we’ve been hearing, this is holding true in races across the state. Candidates with distinct financial disadvantages, who should have no chance in hell of being competitive, much less winning, have chances to be and do just that. Conventional wisdom — something we live by as students of history and lovers of trends — is getting a swift kick in the twig and berries.

The big news today is the latest Rasmussen poll on the Republican gubernatorial race, showing that Rep. Nikki Haley is in the lead with 30 percent, followed by Atty. Gen. Henry McMaster at 19 percent, U.S. Rep. Gresham Barrett at 17 and Lt. Gov. André Bauer showing up at 12 percent. Haley’s Tea Party supporters are wetting their pants at this news, but we have a word for this sort of thing: “boomlet.” You don’t go to fourth to first in a week without that support being very, very weak.

Sorry to burst your bubble, kids, but the reason these sort of things happen — a fairly unknown candidate getting a big gain — is because that candidate gets a lot of earned media without being properly challenged or having their record adequately questioned, and voters can project whatever they want on that candidate. You see it all the time in presidential primaries.

There’s about three weeks until the primary. If Haley even makes it into the runoff, much less pulls anything like 30 percent, we’ll eat a bowl of improperly-cleaned chitlins.

The other Haley news of the week is how her campaign — wait, ReformSC — was totally pwn3d in court on Wednesday as a judge ordered the Sanford shell organization to pull their ads that are basically campaign ads for Gov. Mark Sanford‘s hand-picked successor.

Circuit Court Judge J. Mark Hayes II said in his temporary restraining order that the allegations from Barrett and three donors to ReformSC, which funded the ads, indicate — if true — a “coordinated scheme” that appears to be “intentionally designed to unlawfully evade accountability measures required by South Carolina law.”

The cherry on top of this cupcake of wonderful is that the attorney for the plaintiffs was none other than former Rep. Scott Talley, who encountered such coordinated schemes among the Sanford cabal to back his opponent for the GOP nomination for Senate, Sen. Lee Bright. So, it’s not hard to say that he knew exactly what he was doing and how to do it. The real damning part is that three ReformSC donors (Dan Adams, Jim Agostini and Russell Phelon) came forward to be a part of the suit. If it’s anything like it was when we looked into the organization a couple years ago, it only has so many couples, and a few individuals, providing it with its cash.

In granting the injunction, the judge writes something particularly pertinent: “As such, while this Court acknowledges the political setting from which the allegations arise, the Court cannot ignore the significance of the alleged unlawful conduct and evidence rendered by the Plaintiffs in this matter. Simply stated, a judge’s failure to act when he should act can be an abandonment of his duty, as Chief Justice Roberts analogized, as the referrer of justice. More importantly a judge’s failure to act due to the power or influence of those associated with alleged unlawful conduct is never acceptable in a society governed by the rule of law. As one commentator has recently stated ‘Justice is blind and no one is above it.’”

When will these Sanford jokers ever learn? Oh, right — they don’t think the rules apply to them.

An AP story from Monday presents an interesting idea. A poll was done of 500 black voters in each state of South Carolina, Arkansas, Missouri and Indiana. Two-thirds of those responding said they were closely watching electoral politics this year and between 3/4 and 4/5 of all respondents said they intend to vote this year. The collective sigh you just heard was from Democratic strategists who are considering that November may not end up as bad as anticipated.

In South Carolina, like the South in general, politics are racially-charged. You can run whatever naive line of thinking you want, but in the states of the old Confederacy, the Democratic party is very black and the Republican Party is very white. That’s just the way it is. Hence, unprecedented black turnout in North Carolina and Virginia in 2008 helped President Barack Obama win those states — something a Democrat hasn’t done in decades.

The last time Dems did anything worthwhile around here, 12 years ago, a well-coordinated and motivated black electorate got to the polls and made it a good year for the donkeys in the Palmetto State. We’re still thinking it will be a big year for Republicans, in this state and nationally, but if there is any truth to this poll, the races in the general election could be a lot better than anticipated.

A new poll coming out of George Washington University, Tarrance Group and Lake Research Partners gives Republicans a slight edge on the generic ballot, though the edge is slim enough — 42-40 percent — that it can be considered a tie. The same goes for favorability ratings, which give the Democrats a close lead at 43/49 and the GOP at 41/46.

The other polling numbers, reflecting the desire for the want of divided government and approval ratings for President Barack Obama also show a general split on voter sentiments. What can be ascertained is there is not a widespread sentiment of a Republican takeover of Congress next year. However, historical trends still give the edge to GOP challengers in competitive districts.

The past week has seen some interesting polls put into the field, one by the Republican-leaning Rasmussen and one by the Democratic-leaning Public Policy Polling. Depending on who you believe and what you believe, you’ll come out from looking at the polls with your own idea about South Carolina’s U.S. senators.

The Rasmussen poll took a look at the dichotomy between U.S. Sens. Jim DeMint and Lindsey Graham. For almost five years, it’s been pretty clear that the Palmetto State’s representatives in the nation’s most deliberative body are fairly different fellows. You can explain it this way and that, but it comes down to this: DeMint won’t compromise with Democrats. Graham will. Everything beyond that is spin for whichever side you support.

According to the poll, which has a 4.5 percent margin of error and a sample of 500 people, 38 percent want the S.C. Republican Party to be more like DeMint. About 32 percent want it to be more like Graham. The balance doesn’t know or doesn’t care. The favorability/unfavorability ratings for both men are about the same — which is to say, they’re both a little more than 60/30 positive, with the difference between the senators being within the margin of error.

According to Real Clear Politics, that looks good for DeMint keeping his seat in next year’s election.

DeMint’s favorable rating in this survey is 63 percent, while 25 percent have an unfavorable view. That number is certainly in the range where incumbents can be considered safe.

But hey, PPP is giving Democrats some hope. That poll had a margin of error of 4.1 percent and a sample size of 570 people. The rub here is that President Barack Obama, DeMint and Graham are all below 50 percent approval (O: 46, D: 44, G: 43). The real difference is that Obama’s negatives are pegged at 49 while the GOP senators have much lower negative ratings (D: 29, G: 35). Also, support for the Democratic health care plan is just getting hammered here, 53-35 against.

Democrats looking for a positive outlook could play up the 47-38 advantage DeMint has over a generic Democratic opponent. That gets donkey types breaking out their “The Candidate” DVDs to analyze the McKay-Jarmon race. We’re still extremely suspect of any chance a Democrat has of defeating DeMint next year. The “generic Democrat” number is bolstered because Democrats really don’t like DeMint, and there’s an anti-incumbency vibe going down (like ’92, ’94, ’06 and ’08).

Unless there’s a seriously game-changing event in this race, we’re still putting the over/under at DeMint by 10.

It’s doubtful that anytime in the modern era of college football there have been six undefeated teams, ranked Nos. 1-6, going into the final week season (not counting Army-Navy on Dec. 12). As such, not much changed, even after a run of upsets. There remains the distinct possibility of four undefeated teams topping the polls when all is said and done. That would require the winner of the SEC Championship to win the national title game, Cincinnati to beat the loser of the SECCG, and TCU and Boise State to be victorious in their games. If such a thing happens, the issue will probably dominate ESPN for a solid week.

BCS Standings
1. Florida (.9868)
2. Alabama (.9513)
3. Texas (.9282)
4. TCU (.8689)
5. Cincinnati (.8547)

USA Today Coaches’ Poll
1. Florida (53)
2. Texas (3)
3. Alabama (3)
4. TCU
5. Cincinnati

Harris Poll
1. Florida (82)
2. Texas (15)
3. Alabama (12)
4. TCU (4)
5. Cincinnati

AP Poll
1. Florida (46)
2. Alabama (7)
3. Texas (7)
4. TCU
5. Cincinnati

The only real changes came in the first place votes. In each one of the polls, Texas and Alabama lost votes to Florida, while TCU collected one more in the Harris Poll. The computers like Florida and Alabama equally, as the two are tied at No. 1. More or less, the computers and the human polls are looking pretty similar at the top, though the ones and zeroes types have Cincinnati in the No. 3 spot with Texas at No. 4 and TCU at No. 5.

Hey, look — mainframes! It’s hard not to think of these behemoths, and their sleeker ’90s counterparts, when thinking of the bank of computer polls being used as a third of the BCS formula. This week, for whatever reason, the computers were near-unanimous in picking Alabama as No. 1. Only the Anderson & Hester index didn’t, but since the top and the bottom polls are thrown out, Bama rolled to a perfect 1.000 average among the silicon set.

The human polls see it differently, so the Top Five looks the same.

BCS Standings
1. Florida (.9664)
2. Alabama (.9614)
3. Texas (.9263)
4. TCU (.8699)
5. Cincinnati (.8591)

USA Today Coaches’ Poll
1. Florida (47)
2. Texas (4)
3. Alabama (8)
4. TCU
5. Cincinnati

Harris Poll
1. Florida (78)
2. Texas (18)
3. Alabama (15)
4. TCU (3)
5. Cincinnati

AP Poll
1. Florida (36)
2. Alabama (13)
3. Texas (11)
4. TCU
5. Cincinnati

Yeah, that’s the same as last week, with some first-place votes moving around. TCU took one each from Texas and Alabama in the Harris Poll, while the Tide took one from Florida in the USA Today Coaches’ Poll. Frankly, with most of the major races in the country already decided, the only think that can flip the script is a spectacular upset. Of course, Alabama and Florida will play in the de facto national championship play-in game, Texas and Nebraska meet in the Big XII Championship Game, Georgia Tech and Clemson will play in the ACC title tilt, Oregon and Oregon State play for the Pac-10 championship, Cincinnati and Pittsburgh go for all the marbles in the Big East and Ohio State has already locked up the Big Ten.

Certainly, the next two weeks will decide conference winners, BCS bids and where everyone else goes in the major bowls. All you can pull for now, beyond those planned eventualities, is straight-up chaos. Texas, Alabama and Florida all lose to lesser rivals. Pitt beats Cincinnati, but TCU and Boise State advance to the national championship game. The Fiesta gets Texas, the Sugar gets the Florida/Bama winner and — surprise! — the SEC runs out of bowl spots and Carolina gets to shop for an at-large bid.

The Mountain West-WAC smackdown in Pasadena gets a decent amount of viewers. For five minutes. It then becomes the lowest-rated national championship game in years. Gnashing of teeth. People shooting their televisions. A parody of parity. Texas versus Iowa in the Fiesta and Alabama/Florida against Pitt don’t get many eyes, either. People swear off college football.

Floods.

Droughts.

Locusts.

Before you throw yourself out the window, we’re still probably going to see two hyper-talented, powerful teams meet for the national title. And that’s a good thing.

Barring some very bizarre events in the next three weeks, we’ve got your Top Six and guarantees for the major bowl games. Alabama, Florida, Texas, TCU, Cincinnati and Boise State will all likely head into the first week of December undefeated. Either the Crimson Tide or Gators will play Texas for it all, and the “BCS busters” will also make BCS games with unblemished records.

BCS Standings
1. Florida (.984)
2. Alabama (.952)
3. Texas (.923)
4. TCU (.862)
5. Cincinnati (.858)

USA Today Coaches’ Poll
1. Florida (48)
2. Texas (4)
3. Alabama (7)
4. TCU
5. Cincinnati

Harris Poll
1. Florida (78)
2. Texas (19)
3. Alabama (16)
4. TCU (1)
5. Cincinnati

AP Poll
1. Florida (36)
2. Alabama (14)
3. Texas (10)
4. TCU
5. Cincinnati

Because it’s unlikely that TCU, Boise State or Cincinnati will play each other, that means we could well end up with three undefeated teams after it’s all over. One title will go to the BCS champ. The AP could run with another team, but since Florida, Alabama and Texas have topped the rankings for so long, the winner of the title game will probably get the AP behind it, too.

Bowl’d
So, here’s how it stacks up.

BCS National Championship Game
Alabama or Florida v. Texas
Fiesta Bowl
Iowa v. Boise State
Sugar Bowl
Alabama or Florida v. Cincinnati
Orange Bowl
Georgia Tech v. TCU
Rose Bowl
Oregon v. Ohio State

The SEC now has nine teams that are bowl-eligible, including five of six teams in the SEC West. If Tennessee beats Vanderbilt or Kentucky, the Vols will make it 10. And, with two BCS teams, everybody moves up a slot.

Capital One Bowl
LSU v. Penn State
Outback Bowl
Ole Miss v. Wisconsin
Cotton Bowl
Arkansas v. Oklahoma State
Chick-fil-A Bowl
Georgia v. Clemson
Music City Bowl
Tennessee v. North Carolina
Liberty Bowl
Auburn v. SMU
Independence Bowl
Kentucky v. Iowa State
Papajohns.com Bowl
South Carolina v. West Virginia