Okay, I’ll admit, I’m no stranger to getting angry at how voters can seem to be pretty poorly informed. In 2004, I was frustrated by surveys that said that Bush supporters were far more likely to answer questions about his policy positions wrong. However, I find the idea of a site claiming that Obama won due to ignorant voters hilarious.

Unsurprisingly, at the core of the complaint is a survey that says voters didn’t accept the Republican talking points. For example:

88.4% could NOT correctly say that Obama said his policies would likely bankrupt the coal industry and make energy rates skyrocket

No, that was how some pundits interpreted the quote. People who actually looked at what he said interpreted it differently.

And then there’s the anger that

86.9 % thought that Palin said that she could see Russia from her “house,” even though that was Tina Fey who said that!!

Yeah, the outrage. Because what Palin actually said:

They’re our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska.

Has a totally different meaning. Kinda like how Katie Couric filled her interview with tough “gotcha” questions like “What newspapers do you read?” (And if you’re perusing a faux-folksy image, how the @#$% are you not prepared to turn that question into a tribute to small town newspapers, how you still read the Wasilla Daily Journal because you want to keep in touch with your roots?)

Actually, what I find really funny, here is that surveys conducted late in the campaign showed that people were hearing these narratives but weren’t believing them. That horse is dead, put down that horsewhip.

Ooooh, and even better, the guy behind the survey is doing his best BillO impression.

Any chance we can work in a conspiracy theory about Obama nefariously getting Star Trek’s Jeri Ryan to put those sex club stories in her divorce papers so that her husband would have to drop out of his race against Obama? We could spend the next four years talking about that sex scandal.