My views are what they are--my views. The word "political" was indeed redundant, I stand admonished!. As far as my take on the GOP side of convention-mania, it's hard for me to listen to the same rhetoric by uninspired speakers (applied to both conventions, but the GOP especially so), the same stale ideas, and the same off-loading of responsibility, and...you get the picture....

I have to concur with you about the President's speech. A lot of time energy, and money have been spent by the neocons to blur the boundaries of responsibility and incite the electorate into viewing all government as an evil socialist tool. His lauding of the American people for accomplishments achieved under his watch was especially effective.

Kevin, on a national level, I believe independent voters will be a huge factor in this election. I believe that racist undercurrents will be trumped by our growing diversity and that true perspectives will displace the misinformation about the causes and responsibility for the financial meltdown, who made the efforts to correct it, and the values of salvaging of the auto, banking, and insurance industries. The renewed attempt to squelch voter’s voices this year shows just how much traditional conservatives fear those voices.

Kevin, Rasmussen by itself does not constitute an average of all of the polls. The fact is you conceded the point when you quoted Rasmussen to make your case.means you agree that the internal data of most polls is skewed and to a certain degree you think I'm right. Real Clear Politics does not take into account the internals of the polls.

BTW, Obama is losing ground in New Mexico, just like i predicted....

http://muddypolitics.blogspot.com/2012/07/obamas-sinking-in-new-mexico.html

Tom,

A few words of advice.

1) Learn how to post your replies in the proper place, so as to not confirm people's assumption you are a moron.

2) I didn't mention Rasmussen's to make a case I agree the internal data of most polls is skewed and to a certain degree I think you are right; Quite the opposite. I mentioned Rasmussen to show a 5 point Obama spread came from a poll hardly anyone could accuse of being biased towards Democrats. In essence, I was arguing against your position.

3) Wipe the foam from your mouth and think before replying to my postings.

and by the way...the fact that you are quoting a poll published back in July on New Mexico shows you have no clue what's going on in the overall race. But just to humor you, the current RCP average for NM has the President ahead by close to 9 points. In addition, Nate Silver's 538 blog model has the President's chances of winning NM at 97%. Please get a life or a decent education.

Kevin, take the beam from you own eye first and take your own advice...BTW, Does it matter what I think? If I lived in Hawaii i wouldn't be wasting my time on a message board arguing and arguing, get a life! .. In the grand scheme of things there are more important matters, it doesn't matter who's wrong or right, life goes on..Peace!

Tom,

You chose to comment on my posting, so don't get snippy just because I made you look like a moron.

In the case of the upcoming election, being right on this one matters a great deal. It’s quite clear Mitt would simply be a repeat of GWB.

Kevin,If you look back on the conversation I was answering Joe and Hookerman. You addressed me in my responses. I guess being right for you on a meaningless comments section is a big deal. Have at it...

If the two candidates are so far apart in their ideologies, why is Mitt now admitting that he is going to keep parts of Obamacare???

http://news.yahoo.com/romney-says-keep-parts-obama-healthcare-law-155146420.html

Perhaps now that Obama’s poll numbers have gone up, Mitt is now saying; “ok, I guess everything Obama did is not so bad”.

This is so funny to watch. Mitt is in such a squeeze on this issue.

Not surprised, and I'm not a Romney supporter. However, I'm voting for him because I'm voting against Obama. I'm not concerned about Obama's post convention bounce, pollsters over sample registered Democrats and skew questions to get the results they desire. The election is not over. I expect the polls to shift form side to side before the election. The only poll that counts is the one taken on election day. keep in mind, John McCain was ahead of Obama at this time in 2008.

Tom,

Your statement about Democrat oversampling would have a lot more validity if Rasmussen wasn't one of the pollsters showing the President with a 5 point lead. Try again.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/

If you fall for Hope and Change once, its understandable. If you fall for it a second time, there's no reaching you...

Here is what I fell for:

1) An economy no longer contracting at a rate of 6% a quarter

2) The end of 860K monthly losses losses and 29 straight months of private sector job growth

3) An automoble industry alive and profitable

4) 30 million Americans with an opportunity to obtain health insurance

5) OBL's body on the ocean floor

6) The end of Don't Ask Don't Tell, a shameful practice of discrimination

Can't wait to fall for more of this over the next 4 years!
...

Tom,

Another great example of you trolling and simply cutting and pasting without reading and understanding your quoted source. Anyone with a decent education can see the flaw in the analysis conducted to reach the bogus $89K production cost assigned to each vehicle. Allocating the full R&D costs across the initial limited production runs is a joke.

But then again I did say decent education, so it's no wonder you fell for this.

I use sources to support points that I make. Other than repeat the false conclusion in the article you linked, what insight did you provide? None!

Btw...I did comment on the merits of the article. It's totally bogus for attempting to allocate full R&D costs across initial production runs.

Lastly, I'm not "focused" on you. You just happen to say a lot of stupid things.

Kevin, You dis and dismiss anything that doesn't support you liberal, fantasy, bubble- world, even when presented with the facts. What are you afraid of, superstitions?

What facts are you talking about?

Newsflash: The President is elected based on winning a combination of individual states where the total of Electoral College votes equals or exceed 270. What combination of states are you now willing to go on the record as saying Romney will win that puts him at or over the 270 EC threshold? If you can't do this, then please don't waste anymore of my time.

Hey Kevin , we did this already, here is my prediction how Romney will win the electoral college.

http://wtschools.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Presidential-Prediction-2012.bmp

The joke is on you. Hope and change has turned into despair and disappointment.

I guess you haven't been watching much news this week. From the way the GOP is moaning and groaning, sounds like you are describing the Romney campaign.

Funny how you didn't name the poll, which appears to be from Rasmussen. Everyone knows their polling tends to lean Republican. A more neutral poll from Gallup has the President increasing his lead to 7 points. Read it and weep:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/150743/Obama-Romney.aspx

Fanatasy world Kevin. Gallup is not a neutral poll, Rasmussen is known for being accurate, you quoted it yesterday. There is more than one path to the White House for Mitt. Pennsylvania is in play...

Tom,

1. I refererenced Rasmussen as a poll some consider to be right leaning.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/04/rasmussen-polls-were-biased-and-inaccurate-quinnipiac-surveyusa-performed-strongly/

2. On what basis is Gallup not a neutral polling firm?

3. What makes you think PA is in play?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/pa/pennsylvania_romney_vs_obama-1891.html

This would be a lot more interesting if you did some synthesis and analysis prior to your moronic postings.

Well no Republican has won the Presidency without winning Ohio in quite some time. Unfortunately for Mitt, his chances don't look good:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/oh/ohio_romney_vs_obama-1860.html

Tom,

Who committed this "act or war" you speak of ?

You need to keep up with the news. Mitt is getting slammed for his politicalization of what resulted in the death of our ambassador in Libya.

There was no apology from the administration.

Romney is getting pounded!!!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-insiders/post/romney-repeatedly-unsteady-on-foreign-policy/2012/09/12/f74b0eac-fce0-11e1-98c6-ec0a0a93f8eb_blog.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-insiders/post/romney-made-foreign-policy-gaffe/2012/09/12/7145e940-fd16-11e1-98c6-ec0a0a93f8eb_blog.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-death-of-an-ambassador/2012/09/12/ed3b719e-fcfa-11e1-b153-218509a954e1_story.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/13/us/politics/behind-romneys-decision-to-criticize-obama-on-libya.html?_r=1&hp

http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/12/the-romney-routine/?ref=politics

http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/12/the-good-the-bad-and-the-palin/

http://live.wsj.com/video/noonan-romney-looked-weak-today/B8B3D9D4-3880-4382-8FEB-917038CCC7EA.html#!B8B3D9D4-3880-4382-8FEB-917038CCC7EA

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0912/81103.html

I could go on...but I think you get the point.

Romney getting pounded in the media?!?!?!? Nice!!!! Obama 2012!!!!!

One more!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dana-milbank-mitt-romneys-bucket-brigade/2012/09/12/1aa4fde0-fd2c-11e1-8adc-499661afe377_story.html?tid=pm_opinions_pop

Your head is far up in the clouds you don't even know when an attack on an American Embassy is an act of war?

Turns out there's intel that says the state dept knew about these attacks a week ago. The murder of Ambassador Chris Stevens was planned as a retaliation by Al Queada for the assassination of their number two man Atiyah Abd al-Rahman, a Libyan who in the last year had taken over as Al Qaeda’s top operational planner.

The rest of your links are opinion pieces criticizing Romney, I'm not buying. Romney statement defending American values was right. Obama is showing how weak he is and Maureen Dowd has become unhinged.

Tom,

Maureen Dowd didn't author any of the stories referenced in the links I provided. Lashing out at someone who has nothng to do with this discussion seems "unhindged", don't you think?

Stop whining, JE.

Domino,

Last time I checked this is a blog, not a paper. Beyond that STFU!

JE translate to Jello Ear, a dastardly thing to call someone. And STFU means Sit, Talk, Feel, Underwear. Also a not so nice comment.

Pai Mei, STFU stands for Shut The F*** Up and JE are the true identity initials of domino.

So how does all of this translate into recent polling results for three critical swing states showing the President kicking Mitt's hindpots?

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/09/13/13848313-polls-obama-holds-the-edge-in-florida-ohio-and-virginia?lite

Tom,

Why do you make such bold announcements based on a right leaning poll?

Here's a snapshot of several polls that should the "bounce" is alive and well:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html

Even FOX has the President up by 5!

Also, here is a posting outlining the worthlessness of Rasmussen polling:

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/04/rasmussen-polls-were-biased-and-inaccurate-quinnipiac-surveyusa-performed-strongly/

No one takes Rasmussen seriously.
...

Tom,

The link speaks to Rasmussen's FINAL poll was among the most accurate with respect the actual result in 2008. A broken closk is right twice a day. This has nothing to do with the conventional wisdom Rasmussen polls tend to lean right, which is the point of the 538 blog link I provided.

I didn't quote Rassmusen. I referenced it as a poll many consider to be right leaning. You have made this mistake twice, proving your'e not that bright.

Kevin, CELL PHONES DON'T VOTE!! When the data from the Reuters/Ipsos poll is unskewed, Romney is leading by 10 percent, 54 percent to 44 percent over the president.

http://www.examiner.com/article/mitt-romney-double-digit-lead-unskewed-data-from-reuters-ipsos-poll-1

My God, you’re right Tom, cell phones don’t vote. Then again, LAN phones don’t vote either. That means all phone polls are worthless since PHONES DON”T VOTE!!! How could we all have been so stupid to miss that???

Hookerman, You sound like you're becoming unhinged. If you had read the NY times story, the author points out that the reason Obama s going to win big is because people on cell phones choose Obama by a wider margin than people on landlines.But the article doesn't mention if the people questioned in the poll were registered voters. BTW, are you member of the bandwagon effect? Which is a well documented form of groupthink?

http://www.examiner.com/article/commentary-the-mainstream-media-polls-are-skewed-for-a-reason?fb_action_ids=10151090150487408&fb_action_types=og.likes&fb_source=other_multiline&action_object_map={%2210151090150487408%22%3A10151162867910996}&action_type_map={%2210151090150487408%22%3A%22og.likes%22}&action_ref_map=[]

Tom,

What article were you reading? Nate Silver didn't say the President was going to "win big" because cell phone users favor him by a wider margin. Nate's article merely explains the polling differences that appear to exists in polls that include cell phones verses those that don't. As usual you took this and formed an opinion that missed the point.

Kevin, I didn't miss any points, maybe I shouldn't have used the words "win big" but Nate Silver is projecting a win on Nov. 6th because Democrats do much better when people are polled on cellphones vs. landlines. Here's a couple of quotes from the article.

"Either way, we also detected a tendency for polls that include cellphones to show better results for Democrats in both 2008 and 2010." and "Thus, his chances of winning the Electoral College are just 61 percent, as compared with 83 percent in the polls that do include cellphones.

The only "morons and idiots" who should and will be ridiculed are those who chose to defame the President while expressing a preference for Mitt.

In the end it's not about being right. It's about making the right choice. In this case, the choice just happens not to represent the Right, right?