In 2008, Obama won key swing states such as Florida with a +4 Democrat turnout. In 2010, Republicans won such states as Florida and Ohio with a +4 GOP turnout. The polls are using a model that assumes not a 2010 turnout which favors Republicans, or even a 2008 model that favors Democrats, but a +9 turnout for Democrats. It’s just insane.

That said, I have learned that it is NOT a good position to be in to be trying to explain why your candidate isn’t ahead in the polls.

Frankly, I’m not worried about riots by either side. Of course, as you know, if and when there are riots, YOU CAN COUNT ON THE FACT THAT IT WILL BE LIBERALS WHO START THE RIOTING.

It’s not just the lesson of history – that the socialist left is and always has been the ideology of violence – just look at the peaceful Tea Party versus the vile OWS movement.

All I care about is the actual election on November 6.

I’m not in the know here, given that I had not heard that a Soros-tied Spanish company was going to be tabulating the election vote count. I’ll have to look that up.

I find it interesting that the Obama “Justice” Department sued Gallup and suddenly all the polls started skewing Obama. I also find it interesting that a couple of days ago Obama couldn’t possibly meet with world leaders (including Netanyahu) because he was so busy campaigning -

Mr. Obama was scheduled to attend a reception for world leaders at the United Nations on Monday night. But a campaign adviser acknowledged privately that in this election year, campaigning trumped meetings with world leaders. “Look, if he met with one leader, he would have to meet with 10,” the aide said, speaking on the condition of anonymity.

But now all of a sudden he’s got such a huge lead that the election is a slam dunk and he may as well just coast to his second inauguration. And if critical swing states like Ohio are out of reach for Romney and Romney can’t win without them, then why the hell can’t Obama take a break from campaigning long enough to meet with one or TEN world leaders???

I mean which is it? Both of the above can’t be right. And I submit that Obama’s internal polling recognizes this election is hardly a sure thing for him.

My own view is that the media is trying to create a self-fulfilling prophecy; they want to dishearten and deenergize Romney supporters – particularly campaign donors – and thus influence the election.

I found an article here on this Spanish-owned company. I guess all I can say is I hope our guys are able to keep their guys from being able to steal the election, but….

… THE BEAST IS COMING.

Let’s talk about elections. I was listening to Rush yesterday and he put forth the notion that these political polls are purposely skewed towards Obama for the purpose of provoking riots in the advent of a Romney win. I tend to the think the opposite, that this skewing will be cover for the STEALING of an election. Those in the know understand that election results will be tallied and/or verified by some company in Spain, a company with ties to George Soros. After the outrage and seeming impossibility of a Obama win the liberal media will simply point at all these fake polls and say ‘Look! Why are you so upset? All of the polls pointed to his win!” And when real patriots start to riot in response to this obvious usurpation (the 2nd, since he was never eligible to be President in the first place) the polling data, among other things, will provide cover for the administration to further clamp down on the remaining shreds of liberty that we have left. Any thoughts on this?

surefirewizard