Via lefty Greg Sargent, who insists this is a good-faith assessment by a labor-backed analyst and not a thinly veiled attempt to lower media expectations and scare the left into higher turnout. My strong suspicion is that … it’s a thinly veiled attempt to lower media expectations and scare the left into higher turnout. But I want you to see it anyway because it’s a big, big deal if accurate. Scott Walker and the GOP have done reasonably well in Wisconsin in the aftermath of their collective bargaining reform but Kasich has taken a beating in Ohio over his. His job approval in Quinnipiac’s poll published two days ago was 36/52 while public support for repealing his big collective bargaining reform in November 8’s referendum stood at 57/32. This is, in other words, a looming Waterloo for the state GOP and an energizing moment for big labor.

Or is it?

An internal memo from a key labor-backed group in the state is flatly warning that the polls are “flawed” and that a big win for labor is not even “remotely possible.” It adds that the right’s messaging has “worked,” and that there’s good reason to suspect that a “massive amount of voter confusion remains,” suggesting the fight could still go either way…

“Modeling turnout for an off year ballot initiative is notoriously difficult,” the memo continues. “This is especially true in a state like Ohio where polling on ballot initiatives has been very unreliable.”…

[T]he memo warns that the question wording in the two polls is so flawed as to be unreliable, because neither poll used the language voters will see on the Issue 2 ballot. “Keep in mind, neither of these polls tested the actual ballot language,” the memo says. “It’s a safe bet, if the actual ‘Issue 2’ language were polled that the margin would have been substantially narrower.”

The memo also points out that public polls on three previous Ohio ballot initiatives — a 2004 same sex marriage ban; a 2005 election reform initiative; and a 2009 measure to build casinos — were all off by wide margins.

What they’re saying here, essentially, is that the ballot language is so vague that voters who aren’t paying close attention might inadvertently vote the wrong way. When Quinnipiac polled Ohio, they asked people flat out, “Do you think this new law which limits collective bargaining for public employees should be kept or repealed?” Crisp, clear, straightforward. Compare and contrast with the ballot question:

Issue 2

Referendum

A majority yes vote is necessary for Amended Substitute Senate Bill No. 5 to be approved.

Amended Substitute Senate Bill No. 5 is a new law relative to government union contracts and other government employment contracts and policies.

A “YES” vote means you approve the law.
A “NO” vote means you reject the law.

Most voters will put two and two together and realize this is the question dealing with the collective bargaining law, but some won’t and instead will end up checking “yes” as a default without giving it a moment’s thought. Are there enough confused/easily distracted union supporters out there to push SB5 over the top? A cheap win’s still a win, my friends, especially given the panic defeat would sow among top Democrats who know how important Ohio is to The One next year. If you live there, take Sargent’s post as encouragement that, contrary to what you may have heard, it is indeed worth bothering to vote two weeks from now.

Speaking of winning, here’s a nifty video from the MacIver Institute via the Right Scoop on the success of Walker’s collective bargaining law. Exit quotation from talk-show host Charlie Sykes: “I’m being told that Obama folks tried to talk Wis Dems out of costly, uphill recall of Gov. Scott Walker. Local activists blew them off.”