We know the big winners and losers in Wisconsin’s primary. Obamarama trounced Billary as badly as McGruff beat Huckleberry. And Huck’s supposedly a dead duck.

So Hillary, who revealed for the first time a few days before the primary that she was a duck hunter, couldn’t do any better than a dead duck Republican.

Other Badger State notes:

Worst Wisconsin polliing award.

No polling firm covered itself with glory, with most polls giving Obama only a slight edge and no one forecasting anything like the blowout that occurred.

However, the American Research Group was in a class by itself.

Even while every other poll had Obama slightly ahead, ARG had Clinton ahead, first by 9 per cent and later by 6 per cent two days before the primary. Then, in what must have been the biggest overnight change in political history, it went from Clinton up 6 to Obama up 10 – a 16 point swing in two nights.

It makes you wonder whether they do any voter interviews or simply write down some guesses. (Or decided at the last minute to cover their butt.)

No one’s always right, but this firm, based in Manchester, NH, isn’t just a little off. When it’s bad it is horrid. And it’s been especially bad in its home state.

Just 20% said they consider it a positive description to call a candidate politically liberal while 39% would view that description negatively. However, 35% would consider it a positive description to call a candidate politically progressive. Just 18% react negatively to that term. Those figures reflect a huge swing, from a net negative of nineteen points to a net positive of 17 points...

There are, of course, huge partisan differences for each of these terms. Among Democrats, 32% consider the description liberal as positive. That number jumps to 42% for the description of a candidate as progressive. Among Republicans, just 7% say the term liberal is a positive description, but that number jumps to 26% for the term progressive.

-- Rasmussen Reports.