Stuart Rothenberg, of the Rothenberg Report, is swinging back against accusations that he doesn’t know what he’s talking about. Last week, Politico’s Dylan Byers reported on DNC spokesperson Brad Woodhouse taking on Rothenberg over his comments regarding the relationship with Democrats and the state of North Carolina, the site of the Democratic National Convention. Woodhouse reacted to Rothenberg by saying, “With all due respect, I don’t think Stu Rothenberg has any idea what he’s talking about.” At the time Politico wrote the story, Rothenberg declined to comment.

Then, later in the week, Rothenberg angrily fired back. His biggest issue seems to be in an “Update” to the original Politico piece that says,

UPDATE: A colleague, siding with Woodhouse, forwards the following Rothenberg prediction for the 2010 elections:

“But there are no signs of a dramatic rebound for the party, and the chance of Republicans winning control of either chamber in the 2010 midterm elections is zero. Not ‘close to zero.’ Not ‘slight’ or ‘small.’ Zero.”

In Rothenberg’s piece, he says Politico has the dates all wrong. He made that assessment in April of 2009. 18 months before the midterm election and he argues that it was “accurate at the time.” He points at that as the midterm approached, his assessment changed to reflect a Republican blowout and his prediction turned out to be “the most accurate of projections.” As for Politico’s update to their piece, Rothenberg says, “Printing that “update” from an unnamed “colleague” — it’s unclear whether it was a colleague of Woodhouse or of the Politico reporter — was atrocious journalism.”

SHOT FIRED! “Atrocious journalism?” Rothenberg may have a point. It’s not clear WHERE this update is coming from? A colleague of Woodhouse? A colleague of Byers?  Neither Byers nor Rothenberg were willing to comment for this story.