2012 Polling Update – Romney Lead increasing – Alfred E. Smith Dinner – Romney and Obama – both entertaining – Romney’s Sense of Humor – Hysterical.

Mitt Romney on the Campaign Trail - the Romney Surge image Washingtontimes

General update on polls and links to polls as they stand as of the morning of October 19, 2012:

Gallup :Romney 52, Obama 45

PennsylvaniaRomney 49, Obama 45(Washington Times)

North Caroline Romney 52, Obama 46(Rasmussen Reports)

Wisconsin Romney 49, Obama 48 (Romney 11 point swing in two weeks), Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

More polls as well as the electoral college map prediction on Real Clear Politics, shows Romney Leading in Electoral college for first time on that site Real Clear Politics – Romney Leads Electoral College

The Alfred E. Smith Dinner was held last night in New York City:

Mitt Romney – Hysterical



Full Video of both Govenor Romney and President Obama at Alfred E. Smith Dinner



Although there are still three weeks before America votes, Mitt Romney appears to have the momentum, as polling is beginning to indicate. If one takes into the account that these polls are weighted towards the 2008 election results, and the oversampling of Democrats as a result of that methodology, then one understands that this race, is indeed, going in Govenor Romney’s Direction.

On polls, this blogger has been wondering why Massachustts is being polled so frequently on the Presidential Race – There have been published PPP polls, but the other polls appeared to be internal – A note, if outside firms are polling Massachustts more than once in generations, then that gives one pause. Moreover, New York is being polled – go figure.

Both New York and Massachusetts are considered “safe Democrat”, as they were in 1980.

On the Alfred E. Smith Dinner – Romney is, indeed relatable, and rather than stiff, a man that can relax and dish out one-liners with the best of them – he was indeed funny. President Obama, as has been noted on this blog in the past, is a fine comedian – and that may be his second calling, but what was of interest, were his closing remarks, conciliatory, and deferring to Governor Romney. One would think, in watching the video (above), that should (and it appears that way) Romney be the next President of these United States, President Obama would like to make some inroads now, and be invited to the “party” of past-presidents on occasion – like Bill Clinton, rather than James Carter, who rarely has appeared with other Presidents (past and present) since 1980.

2012 Update: Mass 6th Hampden District Debate, Lincoln Blackie (I-MA) versus Mike Finn (Incumbent-D) – Blackie Hammers Finn On Record and Issues

Lincoln Blackie – Independent Candidate for MA 6th Hampden District - Image: Lincolnblackie.com

The Massachusetts State House and Senate, is, for the most part, controlled by the Democrat Party with a stunning majority, although the Commonwealth ‘s party affiliation if made up of over 51% unenrolled, or “Independents”, a fact that is often overlooked or downplayed. The two-party system that exists in most states does not give an Independent a great deal of encouragement to run for public office, however, in Massachustts that may not be the case. Lincoln Blackie, , an independent, and first time candidate, is running for the Massachusetts House, 6th District seat, against incumbent, Michael Finn (Mike Finn) a party line Democrat.

The debate, sponsored by the West of The River Chamber of Commerce, was characterized as a bit contentious by the Springfield Republican (MasssLive)which headlined the debate as follows: “State Rep. Michael Finn, challenger Lincoln Blackie trade knocks in 6th Hampden District debate”. The Blackie campaign issued a press release on the candidates’ positions and issues addressed during the debate -issues facing the 6th Hampden District and the Commonwealth as a whole (excerpts follow):

“Blackie pressed Rep. Finn on jobs, taxes, education, local aid and wasteful spending

Blackie supports cutting taxes, reducing regulations and providing incentives to make Massachusetts more attractive and for businesses to grow and create jobs.

Asked about the impact of a gaming casino on area communities, Finn said voted for it because it would create jobs, and referred to various reports on the impact to crime, demands on infrastructure, services and housing.

Blackie who has a degree in public administration and another in regional planning, cited a case study he did at Westfield University stating, “casinos are not a job creator.” Most of the good jobs are a one-time shot and the jobs created are not middle class jobs. The effect of a casino on area small businesses and jobs over time has a negative impact.

Blackie asked Finn about the unemployment rates in West Springfield, Chicopee and Springfield. Mr. Finn said he did not know. Mr. Blackie told the audience the rate for West Side was 7.1 percent, Chicopee 7.8 percent and Springfield was over 11 percent and that the area had lost 3000 jobs in August. Blackie also cited a local businessman who told him he only needed one license twenty years ago when he started his business, but today needs ten licenses and ten licenses for each of his employees, which is a hurdle to hiring people.

Blackie asked Mr. Finn why he had not filed any legislation after voters in the district overwhelmingly voted for a 2010 ballot question supporting lowering the sales tax to 5%.

On the question of education, Blackie who attended West Side public schools says he supports teachers using their judgment and creativity to adjust to their students and not be forced into a box teaching to a test. Blackie asked Finn why he voted to cut education funding by $70 million while in state tuition rose by $400 a year. Finn stated he did not know where those numbers were coming from. Blackie referred to the state budget.

Blackie also questioned Finn on accepting donations from lobbyists. Finn responded by saying you need money to get your message out to voters and dismissing the notion donations from lobbyists and special interests would affect his voting.

Blackie pressed Finn on the issue of real cuts to education, local aid and claiming to balance the budget after taking into account spending money coming from one-time stimulus funds and withdrawing four hundred million dollars from the stabilization fund.

Blackie questioned the focus of legislators in Boston when spending on transportation and economic development tends to be on projects east of Route 495 including a $49 million bailout of the MBTA. Finn said he was against the bailout before he voted for the final package. Blackie criticized the wasteful spending and abuse of the Authority and said every dollar wasted could have gone to real improvements.”

Lincoln Blackie’s question of Mike Finn on the filing of Legislation in support of the referendum to cut the sales tax, that was widely supported in “Taxachusettts”, was of note – The official Massachusetts Legislature Page for Mike Finn depicts a State Legislator who is not quick to sponsor bills, having sponsored (written) two – the two bills, Finn has written as well as those he has supported (co-sponsored) are available here at www.masslegislature.gov.

In addition to Blackie’s questioning of Finn’s knowledge and vote on the FY2013 Budget, (as well as the tendency for State Rep. Finn, to vote the party line – Finn was involved with the budget process throughout, and the roll call (here in PDF) supports Lincoln Blackie’s assertion.

Those who are living in Massachusetts understand the chance is, at times, rare to be able to vote for a non-Democrat, an Independent is more of a rarity, as those Libertarian and Independents tend to run as either Republicans or Democrats in order to take advantage of the party identification. Lincoln Blackie, as an independent, would bring a sense of balance to the Massachusetts State House.

For more information on Lincoln Blackie’s campaign for the Massachusetts Legislature, Hampden 6th District, visit: < a href="http://lincolnblackie.com/">http://lincolnblackie.com

Gallup Polling – Romney 51 – Obama 45 – Likely Voters - MSNBC Post Debate Focus Group – Romney Appears to Have Edge - Analysis

Mitt Romney - Polling and Focus Groups indicate likely win in November -image Flagler.edu

Gallup Polling’s most recent ‘likely voter’ pollhas former Massachusetts Governor, Mitt Romney leading President Obama by a margin of 51 to 45 as of October 16th The polling firm has used a model of likely voters, and includes those undecided voters that “lean” towards one candidate or the other. In reviewing Gallup’s final poll numbers versus the actual election results, (full history here at www.gallup.com), the pollster has been within the margin of error (under 4 points in predicting the winner) in sixteen of the last 19 U.S. Presidential elections.

From this perspective, there are few, if any, undecided voters left at this point, those who are now tuning in, are most likely voting party line and unlikely to be swayed either way. The number one issue remains, across all demographics, the economy and job creation, and it appears that Romney absolutely has the go head in that arena. MSNBC, not considered a right or moderate cable channel, hosted a focus group after the debate this week – the video appears below. The Focus group consisted of undecided voters – most of whom appear to be leaning towards or have decided upon Romney after this second debate, one undecided wanted to look at the final debate before drawing any conclusions. The size of the focus group appeared to be somewhat smaller than the Frank Luntz pollster group. Participants in the Luntz Group trended towards Romney. The fact that focus groups from both the left of media and the right of media appear to be leaning Romney coincides with Gallup’s findings, as well as the findings at the University of Colorado which has predicted Romney will win 330 of the electoral college votes, and now predicts there is a 77% change Romney will also win the popular vote. The analysis, using economic models, has accurately predicted the outcome of each race since the election of 1980.

The final debate on foreign policy will be held on October 22nd and available on all networks, cable and national affiliates, One might anticipate that the nod would go to the President, whose foreign policy has not exactly been stellar, yet, is being promoted as a plus over Governor Romney, due to the virtue of being in the Office. Romney, however, despite the media, has a sound and reasonable take on foreign policy and one would anticipate this area will give Romney the opportunity to at the least, tie the President (as in the second debate) or best him in light of the situation in the Middle East and elsewhere (especially Syria at this point).

With polling indicating a 4 point or better lead in Gallup and including the Colorado Study (among others such as Pew) at this late date, it may be impossible, if not improbable that the President will be able to overcome this deficit.

MSNBC Focus Group

Frank Luntz Focus Group Video Clip – Full Story with videos in two parts at www.realclearpolitics.com

2012 Presidential Debate – A Draw – Neither Candidate Moved the Bar - Both smacked down by Candy Crowley – Romney Points on Leadership – Obama More Aggressive

Mitt Romney Looked Directly at the President when making a point, however, the President appeared not to make direct eye contact with Romney at any point during the debate - see video below - Image the Las Vegas Sun

The second of three debates as held last night at Hofstra University in Long Island, Candy Crowley of CNN was the moderator - A poll, by CNN/ORC gave President Obama the nod by a margin of 46 to 39, among registered voters. Obama received points for being more aggressive, and a 7 point advantage on being more likable, while Romney held an 18 point advantage on the economy, “Other questions showed little daylight between the two candidates among debate watchers on some key characteristics. Romney had a 49%-46% edge on which candidate seemed to be the stronger leader and 45%-43% margin on who answered questions more directly, while Obama had a 44%-40% advantage on which man seemed to care more about the audience members who asked questions.”. The poll included 33% Democrat and 33% Republican, assuming that the balance were Independent voters, as that is not addressed in the CNN article. Of note, most post debate polls appear within ten minutes from the end of the debate, this particular poll took over a half hour to produce, giving one the impression that the pollster was hard pressed to find registered voters who were watching the debate.

Romney for his part, when answering a question and dishing up a pointed barb towards President Obama, consistently addressed the President directly – while the Obama, when taking shots at Mitt Romney, did not. Romney appeared more direct, and Presidential. There were several moments when Obama appealed directly to the moderator for help – while attempting to interrupt Mitt Romney, which may have gone Romney getting points for leadership. Additionally, Romney gave President Obama deference while he was speaking, waiting until he has completed his thoughts before attempting to rebut. That said, the style of the debate, gave no time for rebuttal, and Romney had plenty of items on the table to refute. The President, on his part, was more aggressive, and also played fast and loose with the truth. Romney’s alleged miss-speak was in noting that the President did not address the Libyan Embassy attack immediately, rather he was off campaigning. In fact, the President did, after speaking at length in the rose garden about the video, mention that acts of terror would not go unanswered. The manner in which the President vaguely mentioned terror would give Romney, as well as anyone watching transcripts of the Press Briefing, a bit of a pause. Candy Crowley, for her part, did as best she could to moderate, but appeared more deferential to the President. Crowley, but that may have been due to his consistent interruptions, and speaking over Crowley and appealing to her directly.

Regarding the Press Conference on September 12th, 2012, a video directly below from ABC News, the President spoke at length about the embassy staff, about working with the Libyan government to track down the “killers” of the embassy staff. This was followed by a statement on September 11th, and then that there was an attack in Libya, At the 6 minute mark, the President speaks about making sure that justice would be done, again referring to the “attackers”. The ABC clip below of the entire conference does not appear to show the President addressing the situation in Libya as a terrorist attack, rather that there were “attackers”. Apparently, Romney watched this version of the Press Conference.

ABC Video Press Conference Immediatly Following Embassy Attack



As to addressing women’s issues, again the President played fast and loose with the facts as they pertain to Governor Romany, and his own work for women. The Lilly Ledbetter Act does nothing to address enforcing the law enacted in 1963 by President John Kennedy, known as the Equal Pay Act. The problem with the Equal Pay Act is that it is ignored and more so by those employed in the government than in the private sector. Romney did indeed include more women in his administration than any other Governor had, nationwide. In addition, many of those in Romney’s cabinet were also Democrats. The fact that Romney worked tirelessly to balance a budget while facing down a state government that is 86% Democrat, was not noted. He also raised no taxes in four years, and although this Bay Stater may have resented fees put in place under Romney’s governance, the fact of the matter is that he accomplished everything and then some for Massachusetts, and never took a dime of salary.

When the President refers to Romney being against Contraceptives for women, he’s misleading, as Romney was against the Obama Administrations force of government over the Catholic Church, demanding that they not only supply contraceptives, but abortion as well to their staff. One might, if one reads the constitution, find that the President overstepped. The Catholic Church has brought suit against the Federal government.

Romney has a record upon which to stand in Massachustts as Governor, which lends to his overall leadership qualities, as opposed to the President, who appeared to forget that he had a majority rule for the first two years of hid administration, which led to the 2010 rejection of policies and historical leads by Republicans in the Congress. In that time, the President could have addressed Immigration, and a host of issues, but he did not.

If one were scoring the debate on opening, closing and point on point questions and answers, Romney would take the debate hands down, it is called a tie by this blog, merely because the President was, as indicated by all news outlets, at the least more awake and at the most, more aggressive. However, it comes down to a matter of trust as to who is best equipped to represent the United States. That goes to Romney, as he is forthright, direct and confident. He did not stumble when addressing audience members by name, ensuring that he was correctly pronouncing their names as he address individuals. What was evident was that Romney was irritated with the President, who on the flip side, appeared angry whenever Romney made a point that was irrefutable.

What will tell the tale in the end will be the release of final viewership for this second of three debates. The first debate drew one of the largest audiences, surpassing the 2008 debates, while the VP debate drew half the audience as the 2008 debate. The fact that CNN lagged in finding viewers to poll, also suggests people were not tuning in, perhaps watching TLC or another cable network, rather than the Debate. One might find that viewership for the second debate has declined. Those numbers will be out between today and Friday. It is also follows that most of the debate watchers both Republican and Democrat along with the Independents have already made their decisions as for to whom they will cast their vote. This may also be the reason that the Democrats appear to be in a bit of a panic and required a more “aggressive’ but not necessarily strong performance by the DNC party head, President Obama. Unfortunately he came across, once again, on screen, as arrogant and slightly petulant, especially is asking the moderator for “help”.

It was a contentious debate, which made it more interesting for those heavily vested in the political arena, however, for those who were not, one suspects the channel was changed after the first two series of questions. Neither candidate, from this point of view, performed up to par, Romney, true to character, deferred to both the Moderator as well as the President and let many a false charge go unanswered, perhaps being the more diplomatic of the two, and appeared to have to constrain himself from being overly aggressive at times.

The President’s performance can best be summed up by a quote from the Vice Presidential Debate: Joe Biden: “Who do you trust?”, from this point of view, although answering the questions at length, and aggressively, sometimes stumbling over his words, the President appeared to be trying to sell the audience a bill of goods.

Best Quote: Obama “When I was President”

The debate in its entirety courtesy of the New York Times

Twitter Threats to Riot – Campaign Directed? – Twitter Members Post To Start a Riot if Romney Wins Election – Real or Desperate Campaign Tactics?

The above screenshot from Infowars.com, consistent in the language and message

Yesterday, the website info war, ran an article entitled “New Threats to Riot if Obama Loses Election”, the gist: twitter has recently seen a spike in both death threats to Candidate Mitt Romney as well as promises to riot in the event that President Obama loses the election. (Worth the read and available at www.infowars.com). That said, taking nothing for granted, when one searches Twitter for “Romney-Riot” there are hundreds of tweets suggesting a riot should take place if the incumbent is not reelected. The Twitters appear to be from a broad background, more anarchist than racial in tone – and the messaging is all so very similar. It is the similarity that is what is at question. Would thousands of individuals come up with the same idea and words to suggest a riot as a result of the outcome of a Presidential race?

Although one might point to the rhetoric of Luis Farrakhan, suggesting that race is the motivating factor to elect, Mitt Romney President. The aging “Nation of Islam” leader is backing the President as he did in 2008, using race as a factor. (McClatchy). That said, the “tweets” following the theme of alleged anarchy, possibly in the hopes of national media attention, rather than someone expressing what might be an actual sentiment (a la Susan Sarandon’s threat to leave the country if Bush was elected – she stayed), or as most individuals express either disappointment or outright depression if their chosen candidate does not win. It’s worked a bit, and made the Drudge Report Headlines, linking to the InfoWar site.

When one looks at who’s “tweeting” about a Romney win riot – it appears there are approximately thirty or so that pop up, but the repetition and the colloquial don’t “jive” – given the popular “hip hop” slant on some of the messages, while the others are somewhat “suburban housewife”. One might almost think that the “tweets” are part of a last ditch campaign strategy, a team with an alleged lock on only ten states, less than a month before the election, has to know that there is no way to crawl back into “first”. There’s something about the final waning moments of a Presidential campaign, where that point starts is now, in mid-October. That is the time when those die-hard partisan’s and supporters, no matter how much they wish things were different realize the game is over. Not unlike football, there is the final two minute warning, the quarterback has been sacked too often to be useful, the defense is falling apart, and when the special team is called in to stop the bleeding, they implode into giggles and grins. The opposition has the ball, they know how to run out the clock and there is nothing one can do but sit there and watch the final field goal (or touchdown in this case). Sometimes the losing team will try to Psyche out the opposition or its’ supporters, and with the David Axelrod at the helm of the campaign, looking for frazzled by the day, stammering in news conferences, and frustrated, one can imagine a last ditch of “threaten a race riot, and they either won’t vote, or they’ll not want to be labeled a racist” tactic. After all, race and division have been the one contestant them of this administration since day one, therefore that lends to the obvious question: how many were paid to tweet, and how many are jumping on the bandwagon as an actual excuse to riot – that might be difficult to tell.

One might take this with a grain of salt, or as an incentive to vote for Romney, especially if one is an independent and sick of the division.

The riot as part of election strategy might be a bit of a stretch – however, one would expect that the “angry” twitters are not down and out to the point where they have no iphone, or ipad, or similar device to post these tweets. Therefore, one might be tempted to think: these are either party operatives, or students, or sympathizers who are so vested in a candidate that they are expressing their feeling about rioting, simply because they are not Susan Sarandon and have no passport to take them elsewhere, or that might be “passé”. Understanding from Infowars that some were concerned about losing their government assistance – would not someone how knows how to work the system for government assistance be aware that partaking in a riot, as a criminal offence, would facilitate that loss? Or again, it goes back to the “campaign” – example from the Infowars article: Tweeter Pat 47% Entitled, suggests: “if every action IS met with an equal and opposite reaction .what should workers do to employers if Romney's elected? #Riot in the streets!!” That is not a racist sentiment, that is a union sentiment. Going back to the losing team for a moment – If one is reading internal polls that tell them even Massachusetts is in play, then one has nothing left but to start a division. However, one can bet the house, that if Romney is elected, the general public, just as when Reagan and Bush were elected, suffer no consequences, and the riots? They will be nothing more than a tweet, as the community organizers and union members get back to the business of organizing for the next election. Of course, the above is strictly hypothesis; however, given the pattern of not quite up to Machiavellian standards used in the past by this campaign, it might not be out of the question.

2012 Presidential Debate – Part 2 – Bar Set High for President Obama – Both Campaigns Challenge Moderator Role – The Close Election? – Maybe-Maybe Not

Mitt Romney on the Campaign Trail - image Washington Post
The second of three Presidential debates will be held tomorrow night, and the expectations for a rebound by Incumbent President, Barack Obama, are high. The media suggests that the President must appear more energized than he did in the debate in Denver, especially after the performance of Joe Biden in the Vice-Presidential Debate, which by reasonable standards, was a draw, giving the base of the Democrat party some enthusiasm, while V.P. GOP Candidate Paul Ryan tended to appeal more to the independent voter. The Hill is reporting that both GOP and Democrat “insiders” anticipate the President will do “better” in the second debate: “But Washington insiders of all ideological stripes concur that Obama is too competitive a man and too gifted a politician to slip up so dramatically for a second time, when the candidates go under the spotlight at Hofstra University in Hempstead, N.Y., on Tuesday.” That may be true, however, Romney has the recent experience of participating in a long series of GOP debates held over the summer, so many that viewers were beginning to develop “debate fatigue”. In retrospect and reviewing the debate tapes, the protracted primary debates strengthened Romney in any format and arena. The onus, therefore, is on the President to out-Romney Mitt Romney, and that is a high bar, indeed. Romney, over a period of campaigns, has honed his town hall –style debate, the question of Romney’s ability to connect in a Town Hall Style debate was asked and answered by Scott Conroy of Real Clear Politics>: The style poses a challenge for Romney, but: “But over the years he appears to have improved his ability to connect with voters on a personal level. For one thing, Romney is no stranger to question-and-answer sessions, having handled thousands of inquiries from mostly partisan voters in his four political campaigns over almost two decades. In fact, aides to Obama say the town-hall format is strength for their Republican opponent because of this experience.

During his 2008 presidential run, for example, so-called “Ask Mitt Anything” events were a staple of his time on the stump; some days he would often hold four or five such town-hall meetings. And during his 2012 primary campaign, particularly in the nation’s first voting state of New Hampshire, Romney did more of the same.”

One might suggest that the expectations are so high, that should the President appear more confident, it will indeed help his base support – given the fact that in the V.P. debate, one member of a focus group (CNN), gave the win to Biden because he did “better than Obama” in the Denver debate.

One may also suggest, that if the viewership is low for the second Presidential debate, those 80 individuals chosen to participate in the town-hall style debate, that are “undecided” (Selected by Gallup polling for this debate) may be a rarity as to the individuals who have or have not yet made up their minds as to for whom they are voting. The moderator, Candy Crowley of CNN, has even drawn a bit of pre-debate criticism for suggesting she might ask follow-up questions during the debate – Time Magazine discucsse the fact that both the Obama and Romney campaign attorney’s have concerns that the debate format calls for little to no questions from the moderator deviating from those posed by the participants. However, one would hope that Crowley would stick to her guns and, should a question require a follow-up, she might open the floor for a little more debate on any given subject by asking a question or two of the candidates that are relevant to the original questions asked. The format will be similar to the one held between then Candidate George W. Bush and Democrat Candidate, Al Gore in 2000. The format gives both candidates the ability to speak directly to the audience, and answer the questions posed by individuals. This is where, from viewing the previous debate clips that Romney does indeed, excel, while the President in the last round of debates in 2008, appeared at times to ramble.

Although the media is now calling this debate a “draw”, which along partisan lines, it very well may be, there should arise a clear winner – however, it will depend a great deal on not only the ability to “connect” with the audience, but the ability to clearly state and answer the question at hand. To call this debate a draw before it happens, as did the Boston Herald, albeit, in a sarcastic way (given the support for Romney by the author, Holly Robichaud), the fact of the matter is, even if Mitt Romney “clean’s his clock” as suggested, the media will, most likely, if Obama appears more confident, call it a tie.

The Washington Post is billing the Presidential Contest as “tight”, given their most recent poll which gives the President two points over Romney, or a statistical dead heat. That said, Real Clear Politics, and has painted a picture, using a combination of all polls taken, state by state, whereby Romney appears to be in the driver’s seat for the most part. They offer an electoral college map that gives an overview of states that, at this present time, are either solid, leaning, likely or tied (by the combined polls), and selects a state for either Romney or President Obama, depending on the outcome of the polls used. At the present time, the scenario appears to be that the President has a lock on ten states, (those are automatically given the candidate due to the percentage lead in polling being “out of reach” for the other candidate).

The likely and leaning states are then included in the total, and the balance are listed as “undecided” – as of today, the polls show the President with 201 electoral votes, and Mitt Romney with 191, and 146 are “toss-ups”. That said, when one looks at the polling data, in say Massachusetts, which is a given for the President, the polls used in the survey : here, show Obama with an average of 20plus point lead. The last poll on the boards was done by Public Policy Polling, taken October 10 and 11th, whereby the President has a 14 point advantage in the Bay State. This advantage is discussed by the pollster here where it is suggested that the President’s support had eroded in MA, Romney’s likability was up:

In the Presidential race Barack Obama's seeing the same kind of decline in Massachusetts that he is nationally. He leads Mitt Romney by 14 points, 55-41. That's down from an 18 point lead last month, and it's the smallest advantage we've found for him in the state all year. The big shift over the last month in Massachusetts has been among independent voters. They now support Romney 53-40, after giving Obama a 47-44 edge last month.

In further reading the poll marginals, one finds that the pollster used a sample of 41% Democrat, 16% Republican and 43% Unenrolled or Independent. The actual makeup of the electoral in MA as of 2010 (and before) Unenrolleds, 52%, Republican’s 12% and Democrats, 33% (others listed Green, Libertarian, etc., make up the balance). Therefore, without the proper sample based on the actual electorate, one might be hard-pressed to mathematically agree that the above poll simply adds up. For example there is an 8 point difference between the actual Democrats registered to vote and those taking the poll, there is 4 point plus for Republicans, and there is a 9 point deficit for “Independents” – therefore, if one were to take that 14 point lead, minus 8 points for oversampling Democrats – brings that to a plus 6 for Obama, plus 4 for over sample of Republicans, gives Obama a plus 10, and then minus 7 points (giving 2 points to Obama due to the % of Independents suggesting they are supporting the President in Massachusetts, which brings the final closer to an Obama plus 3, or a tie in the Bay State. Understanding that no poll is perfect, the fact that most of the polls in the Real Clear Politics combined methodology used a 2008 voter model, and/or are not closely aligned with the makeup of the states electorate to boot, then one might suggest the President has an inflated advantage in the polls.

Finally, one might also suggest if this is the case, then the electoral map may end up being a lot more red, than blue, with the exaction of 10 or so states (if that). Therefore, with the polls taken, the undecided’s, more likely at a lower percentage than 8 points, one might suggest there is little or nothing, this far into the game, to suggest the debate will count one way or another, regardless of expectations. Of course, no one has a crystal ball as to what will actually occur on election day in November.

Bridgeport, CT Dem Mayor Bill Finch to Dem Senate Candidate – No Problem on Election – Video – Déjà vu 2010

Screenshot of Google News, and post election questions regarding Finch and the 2010 results

From the Weekly Standard (A conservative magazine) come a You Tube video of Bridgeport CT May ,Bill Finch, joking to the Democrat Senate Candidate Chris Murphy, about insuring he would win, even if it took “days” to count the ballot. (Video Below). Of course, this is nothing new, in 2010; there was chaos in the election especially in Bridgeport. From reports of voter fraud, to the sudden appearance of a bag of ballots, the fun began (Hartford Courant). Connecticut had, for the most part, been one of those states that could go either Republican or Democrat in any given election, however, when one looks in Google archives for ”ballots Bridgeport” a list of referring to the Bridgeport Mayor appears, all from 2010, all suggesting that something was up in the 2010 election and Bridgeport’s return of ballots. Of course, if one looks at the Archive list of dates on the left side of the screen, results for the same term appear from 1930 onward! Go figure!!

From the Massachusetts perspective, questionable returns are nothing new, which could explain why Massachusetts is generally a “blue state”, and why neighboring Connecticut has, over the past few decades, become the same –it would be no surprise if, after the votes are in, and the polls have closed in Connecticut this November, that a close race will be decided once again, by “found ballots”, lack of ballots resulting in the use of photocopied ballots, lost ballots suddenly appearing, ballots found on I-91, and so on. What is needed in both states, are independent poll and ballot watchers – living in Connecticut, not unlike Massachusetts, one does get to cast their vote, but there is a question of whether or not it will actually count – given the fact that ballots can magically appear, as well as “extra” voters, in the final hours or days after a campaign. Massachusetts is known as the “people's republic”, (reference to Totalitarian Communist State), and why Connecticut, it appears, should have the same moniker.

Video Bridgeport Mayor to Senate Candidate – Joking about Ballot Fraud