When I look at polls-of-polls that throw everything into the ‘snapshot’, or ridiculously precise models using data that has enormous error bars, I am reminded( as any good aerospace engineer is) that precision is not always a sound goal. It is at times more important (and defensible) to  understand trends and envelopes and not waste time on mythical precision.  How well I think I can nail a number within in +/- Margin of Error (MoE) of 3% or greater (some like Nate Silver think he can get this down to a 0.1%) is a waste of time. I would be chasing ghosts in the sample noise.

Understanding the dynamics of the system must come first, before you attempt precision. And in political polling, the dynamics of what is being sampled (the electorate) is very poorly understood.

Continue Reading »

Update: The comments are flying over this news at Hot Air, with the expected frustration with the nonsense this has become:

If I understand the White House’s Benghazi narrative in its current form, it boils down to this. There was no protest, but the attack was still kinda sorta spontaneous insofar as it was inspired by what was happening at the embassy in Cairo. And it wasn’t an official Al Qaeda or Ansar al-Sharia operation, even though members of AQIM and Ansar al-Sharia — including the founder of the latter group — were on the scene and/or participating. Essentially, the White House wants you to believe that members of two prominent jihadist paramilitary groups were kicking around on September 11 when one of them turned on the TV, heard about the Mohammed movie from coverage of the Egyptian embassy assault, and decided to quickly pull together a complex, heavily-armed attack on the local U.S.

Like I note below, what kind of panic caused this idiotic plan?  – end update

The media and left is wondering what happened to the campaign of Obama 2008. They flail about wondering how the “One” – who promised the waters would recede and a bright economic future would arrive – is not evident here in the waning weeks of the 2012 election. They rush to their mental holes of denial and blame white-hooded racism, rural morons, and bible thumping zombies….

When the answer is right in front of them.

Incompetence

Incompetence is taking Team Obama down and has been for some time now.

Drudge has a headline out “He Knew”; meaning the White House and President knew the day of the attacks in Benghaiz they were coordinated and from an al Qaeda affiliate. The evidence for this was overwhelming. And yet they ran to some dumb-ass cover story about a video (which, truth be told, there is NO evidence for this canard). The attack happened on 9-11 for Pete’s sake – guess what the high probability cause is???

What happened in the White House? An attack on the our Ambassador and Consulate would create a rally around the President. It always does. So why go dumb ass and blame a video? I am still scratching my head on this. Politics 101, rally around the flag.

Incompetence

For months the consulate was under attack. For months the Ambassador was begging for more security (apparently there were more critical budgetary needs in Europe, Japan, etc). The British pulled out because they saw the warning signs (and yes, they communicated why and when they were pulling out – standard protocol among allies). Libya was a fragile experiment in Bomb-Based diplomacy, proving once again you cannot control events on the ground without boots on the ground for some period. It was the Team Obama’s shining example the post Bush diplomacy.

Libya is the result of Incompetence. So is Egypt and Syria. But anyone could ride out the story through the election by standing up and promising to get the murderers. Why the big whiff?

Incompetence led the liberals in 2009 to put all their political chits in the one bag of government trickle-down economic priming – in the form of the Stimulus bill. Sadly the only thing stimulated was massive, generational debt and long term unemployment. Economic Incompetence.

Debate prep for the Snoozer in Denver? Complete bust and incompetence

Managing a national reelection campaign? Obama and the Dems are out of money and fumbled the strategy by going full smear all summer and not discussing policy plans until it was too late. Glenn Thrush at Politico provides the biting analysis.

Even when faced with the location of Osama Bin Laden, Obama faltered and hesitated – then totally screwed up the post event messaging by dissing the special forces and trying to claim all the credit.

And of course, now we have the Horses and Bayonets misstep, which demonstrated the arrogance and ignorance of the left in bright clarity. When it comes to the military, this group’s knowledge is limited to TV sitcom caricatures.

Then there is the Gun Walker fiasco, where it is hard not to conclude the idea was to spill blood through gun violence so the left could try and use that violence to curb gun ownership. This one disturbs me the most because it was a knucklehead idea to create conditions that could be exploited for a political agenda item.

Incompetence

Benghazi is a real question mark. Why would you leave such an obvious target exposed coming up on a major election and the 9-11 anniversary? Here’s my nightmare scenario. What if the whole idea was to create the conditions for a rally-around-the-flag incident leading into the elections? Given this administration’s penchant for brilliantly dumb ideas (billions to green energy failures run by political cronies???) sadly I cannot get this idea to go away. Months of warnings and pleadings dismissed, for what purpose? We had the money. The security was there and was pulled out!

I keep trying to find some rationalization that supports the counter argument that no one is that stupid. But then again, look at how this administration has dealt with the Fort Hood attack, the underwear bomber, etc? Maybe they truly are naive to the threats we face from Islamo Fascism?

Something about the consulate attack spooked these people to run away from the rallying cry and run towards a dumb ass video story.

Sadly, I cannot think of any scenario that is not based on one common foundation….

Incompetence

Tags: Benghazi, Emails, White House

Update: I really like this post at Hot Air on the multidimensional screw up this incident really is.

Update: Breitbart also notes the damage Obama did in VA (H/T Hot Air)

Update: Someone from across the pond (in the UK) saw it the same way I did:

Well, governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets because the nature of our military’s changed.” The audience laughed, Obama laughed, I laughed. It was funny.

But here’s why it was also a vote loser. For a start, Twitter immediately lit up with examples of how the US Army does still use horses and bayonets (horses were used during the invasion of Afghanistan). More importantly, this was one example of many in which the President insulted, patronised and mocked his opponent rather than put across a constructive argument. His performance was rude and unpresidential. Obama seemed to have a touch of the Bidens, wriggling about in his chair, waving his hands dismissively and always – always – smirking in Romney’s direction. By contrast, Romney sucked up the abuse and retained a rigid poker face all night. He looked like a Commander in Chief; Obama looked like a lawyer. Who would you rather vote for?

For the record, with family and friends in the military, I did not laugh. – end update

Mitt Romney made an important comment last night, one that apparently went right by a sadly ignorant nation (given this morning’s glowing response to President Obama’s snarky retort). It goes to the “Bayonets & Horses” comment of Obama, which in its full context also noted ships upon which aircraft land called “carriers”, and ships that go underwater called “submarines”. I felt I was back watching Sesame Street again.

This retort tracked well with some of Frank Luntze’s undecided voters – which also sadly exposed the ignorance of the electorate on history, technology and the military.

Trust me, the snarky comment did not go over well in Navy-heavy Virginia – home of all the services and the Pentagon – nor military-heavy Colorado. Both states have large communities well versed on the topic so flippantly dismissed by the current Command in Chief.

Romney’s point was Obama plans to cut the military to early World War I levels (1916). At this point in our history we could barely protect ourselves. Roughly  year later America mobilized a lot of men to die in Europe without the military technology and weapons that could save them for dying for Europe’s freedom. Our tanks were joke.

By the beginning of World War II we had invested in more military capacity, but it was not nearly enough. The German’s and Japanese started the war with much better tech – across the board. They could not produce our numbers, but at the War’s start their ships, planes and tanks were superior and killed 100’s of thousands of Americans. US Tech won the war, but brutally. We did not toss a horse or bayonet at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

If our forces were equipped and sized like they were coming out of World War II, Germany may not have (who can tell with a mad man), and Japan more than likely would not have initiated their plans of global conquest. Proof is in the cold war, where Stalin (another insane mass murderer) was contained along with his brutal successors. Once America was well enough equipped, the world stopped the World Wars and was faced with regional conflicts (until madmen like Saddam Hussein built up a military to rival China’s).

Peace through strength. It is not a cheap slogan. Our fire power and resolve to use it keeps much of the world’s hot spots from becoming regional or global. The reason we have the largest military compared to the next 10 nations is because all the European nations have shrunk their military capacity down to nothing. It is why the US deploys 80% of international and UN forces when actual fighting is required.

Russia too has slimmed down their forces. We are the largest in The West because we are the last ones capable of policing the world when called.

But not China. China is now building aircraft carriers (only a handful of nations can afford them, let alone staff them). Obama said we would be the Pacific naval power – but his military cuts don’t add up anymore than his deficit cutting does. He will expose us to an aggressive China who may feel like experimenting with US resolve. This is very dangerous.

The Horse and Bayonet line, while I guess funny to some, was arrogant and ignorant. First off, Romney was not asking for horses (and yes, we still use bayonets in the Marine Corp).

Romney wants to make sure we have enough of those fancy carriers and submarines to project the peace. And we need updated modern tech, since the rest of the world is not using horses any more either. We need more of these (click to enlarge):

And more of these:

These fast, powerful and stealthy ships will protect our forces, our allies and all civilians by projecting accurate and deadly force where and when we need it. It is this ability to reach out and tap someone like a Bin Laden that keeps many frustrated people from becoming the next Adolph Hitler.

This subject – what is our role in the world and how much military fighting power do we need to perform our missions – is not a laughing matter. Protecting people overseas in harms way, disaster relief after tsunamis, wars are all deadly serious business. This is not a game of Battleship.

See the difference?

Also note how snark is easy and useless when it comes to serious matters.

While I grant most citizens are woefully naive about this important community of defenders in our nation, that does not mean they are not out there, listening and turned off. Colorado and Virginia are epicenters of national defense. And the military’s extended family (families of soldiers and contractors) is massive. We have an enormous capacity to secure the world because we have an enormous work force doing the job..

It is quite clear people who serve should be proud of their service and sacrifice. I doubt that American pride translates to those now serving on Obama food stamp programs. I know which service I would prefer.

Tags: 3rd Presidential Debate, Boca Raton, Military Budget, Obama, Romney

The Battle in Boca!

If I had to make a prediction before things get going I would say I expect the best Obama can do is come to another draw, and not stop the current trajectory of this race. The worst he can do is implode over Benghazi and the lack of enhancing security after:

• Numerous prior attacks
• The UK pulling out due to the danger
• Ignoring many, many pleas for security from the murdered Ambassador
• Not paying attention to the threats in the daily briefings he was skipping out on

If Obama is to derail this fiasco, he has to keep the discussion on the post attack spin and not let the discussion go into the negligence of the pre-attack malaise. If Obama get’s rattled or disparate, this will be over quick. Romney simply needs to exceed expectations, which were set low by Team Obama.

Update 11:21 PM Eastern: Snap polls don’t show a big shift. CNN focus group had a lot of changed minds, but CNN would not tell us which way it went! Easy conclusion: not good for Obama.

Luntz focus group also looks to lean Romney. Obama did not deflect the trajectory of the race, and he looked the desperate challenger and not the President. CNN poll results show 60% thought Romney passd the C-in-C test.

Update 10:56 PM Eastern: CNN focus group already up and discussing horses and bayonets. Independent voters not impressed with that line.  Apparently loving teachers bothered one independent voter (not sure why).

Update 10:52 PM Eastern: Post Debate: Fox News just noted that Ronney’s facts check out – on government guarantees in the managed bankruptcy of Detroit AND even with bayonets – which the US Marines still use.

Guess Obama needs to learn how the military needs to work – backlash coming

Update 10:35 PM Eastern: Body language: the Obama’s looked deflated the Romney’s smiling and laughing…

Update 10:32 PM Eastern: Romney’s final statement more up beat and positive. I liked the statement about cutting food stamps not by cutting funds but through more jobs. That resonates.

Update 10:31 PM Eastern: Obama says the last for years have shown progress? And he goes back to that crappy class warfare. As someone noted, why does he need 4 mores years to keep his promises from the first 4? No sale. No change in dynamics. No serious damage on Romney. Platitudes and promises…..

Not again!

Update 10:29 PM Eastern: Yawn… Obama is still trying his failed talking points and out right misrepresentations. Interrupting, snarky and out of ideas. Romney nails Obama on the last 4 years and this president’s failures. Obama name calls, Romney proposes  new direction. Obama is getting anxious, and feels it slipping away.

Update 10:15 PM Eastern: Still no knock outs, no big discriminators. Can’t wait for this to be over…

Update 10:11 PM Eastern: No gap between Romney and Obama on Afghanistan. I felt Romney’s comment Pakistan is our next focus so that nuclear country does not fall apart. Obama wants vets building roads (not sure that is what most vets want to do), while Romney is noting we have some more work to do with our allies in Pakistan. Good answer.

Update 10:00 PM Eastern: Romney dodged a dumb question from Schafer by noting the President does not get calls as an attack is unfolding. That will give him some gravitas

Update 9:53 PM Eastern: So, do we want four more years of Obama’s snark to reasonable questions and counter points? That is the sum question of the debate. Can we take 4 more years of Sesame Strett explanations on what a submarine is….

Update 9:52 PM Eastern: Not sure there is any traction for either side here. Iran is tough, ME is tough, world is tough. Obama not making any major hits, thought I think the snark will get him big time. Lots of military families who vote out there….

Update 9:45 PM Eastern: Obama lost it with that bayonet and horse line, along with the condescending comment on submarines and aircraft carriers. That was un-presidential and insulting to voters. Yeah, it wins the snarky liberal vote, but he has that vote already. That will not poll well with the focus groups – guaranteed.

Update 9:40 PM Eastern: Schafer has lost control…. I may send folks to Hot Air for debate discussions.

Update 9:39 PM Eastern: If I make it to 10 PM Eastern I will  be surprised….

Update 9:37 PM Eastern: OK, Obama just laid an egg. If you want to know how to help small businesses you ask teachers? Teachers don’t run payrolls or  keep people employed. Romney missed it big time. ZZZZZZ…..

Update 9:36 PM Eastern: I may need to point everyone to Hot Air because this discussion is pretty boring, lots of name calling, and no big hitters. Seriously, I have some TV shows on the recorder that are more interesting than all this rehash….

Update 9:32 PM Eastern: Romney making good but obvious points. Not a single concept is in debate. While he nicked Obama here and there, but where’s the difference. Obama is putting way too much on the war on terror (when most people do not see us winning, just keeping ahead of the threat). We need a strong economy? Duh. That was the last debate. The “batttle” is a “snoozer”. If they were going to make a big point, why not in the first 30 minutes????

Update 9:28 PM Eastern: ZZZZZZ…. I think Obama claimed he wanted to force Egypt to recognize other religions, give women equal rights, to raise their families, then he tore into nation building? If we are shaping policy in Egypt isn’t that nation building? Boring debate…. Ready to flip channel

Update 9:22 PM Eastern: Romney answers well on Syria (no military intervention). That removes a lot of Obama’s ‘reckless’ claims. Romney goes back to the fact Syria has been a basket case for a year with nothing closer to closure.

Update 9:21 PM Eastern: Romney nails Obama for leading from behind (the UN and Russia). And Obama confirms it with a lame ‘Friends of Syria”. Who the hell is that? The Mullahs?

Update 9:19 PM Eastern: Romney bringing up the 30,000 dead in Syria really puts him to the center of Obama. Both agree we don’t want get tangled in the quagmire, but Romeny is on the right path and Obama does not have much distance from Romney.

Update 9:17 PM Eastern: Syria answer by Obama is OK, but all I hear is the ME is complicated and tough. Well, duh.

Update 9:15 PM Eastern: Obama is really warping Romeny’s views, which will be easy to fact chrvk. but I think Romney nailed the President by noting attacking Romney is not a foreign policy.

Update 9:10 PM Eastern: Obama loses some high ground by going after Romney, leaving Romney an easy opening. Romeny did not go after the President but instead agreed with him. Obama has to go hard, and Romney can stand back and be above the politics. The President is in a huge bind here as he has to shake the debate up, but also has to walk a controlled line.

Update 9:07 PM Eastern: Romney’s first answer is balanced and respectful. Good start. President’s first answer is balanced, but focused on Afghanistan initially.  Seems like a lot of punch pulling so far. Then he went through the talking points. So far, nothing new.

Update 9:05 PM Eastern: First observation, the President is looking at Governor Romney, much better than the first snoozer.

Tags: 2012 elections, Boca Raton, Live Blogging, Presidential Debate

Update: Another poll out with Obama at 47% – end update

One reason I feel confident Romney will win this year is the poll standing for Obama. As I have posted many times, Obama seems to have hit a ceiling and is now highly likely to lose on November 6. While some focus on the gap between the two, the real story is on Obama’s ceiling.

Let’s just focus in on one major polling group, Gallup, and see where the President stands relative to the magic 50% level:

This is the Gallup poll from October 20th, 2012. More importantly, it covers both ‘registered’ and ‘likely’ voters’. While the political world is focused on the ‘likely voter’ numbers, the real news here is where Obama is sitting and the fact he is at the same level in both models.

I found this quite stunning, that Obama is stuck at 45-46% in both models. This is the point of no return for an incumbent, especially for the US President who has maximized name recognition and policy positions.

Does the 2% lead for Romney with ‘registered voters’ mean less than the 6% lead with ‘likely voters’? Not really, because these numbers are just exploring the size of Romney’s probable win. It is the fact a sitting president appears to have a ceiling at 45-46% (in an election where undecideds break late for the challenger) – that is the news here.

In fact, if you look at the RCP average Obama has not been able to get above 47% recently.

While some people are obsessed with the gap, they miss this big news:

That method estimates that Mr. Obama would win the national popular vote by 0.8 of a percentage point in an election held today.

I understand Nate Silver’s statistical prowess, but his models sometimes are not connected to reality. For one thing, the election is not today.

To take an Obama ceiling of 45-57% and project a fractional win (well inside the margin of error of all polls)  is to ignore the dynamics of incumbents, late deciding voters and the unique factors of this election (a historically poor economy and a voting block that is monolithic in its opposition to government solutions). If you look at the trends at 538, you see Obama sinking and Romney rising.  That momentum does not appear to be something his statistics can reflect, because he always has Obama winning instead of truly projecting a path. He is focused on ‘if the election were held today’.

Well, we shall see if abstract math or the more insightful human analysis is more accurate in predicting this election. With state polls in VA, FL and OH trending Romney in a serious way, I am feeling pretty good about the numbers going forward.

I still say the 2010 insurgent voter (Tea Party, Libertarian) has been sitting on the sideline, resisting being sampled in polls, until it was time to act. The first debate triggered the start of the serious part of the campaign, and then these voters appears on pollsters radar. And the pollsters are still trying to understand the dynamics. If their models are inflexible and too tied to historical trends, they will miss what is happening in the electorate.

Tags: 2012 elections, Galllup, Obama, Poll, Romney

Update: Math error in this rushed post this morning. It is not $5m per person, but $50K. Fixed the math – still too much to afford. – end update

I have to admit, the Alfred E Smith speeches by both candidates last night were fun. And I actually think Obama had the slightly smoother delivery. But as we all know it was the supposedly Grinchy Romney who came out best due to the low expectations left by the muck raking summer Obama campaign.

Note to all pols: don’t over do the demonizing, because when your plausible and pleasant opponent shows up you get a big backlash! Besides, demonizing is the lazy way out.

The title of this post comes from the zinger that seems to be the one that will stick. It is a multi-faceted dig that Romney did deliver very well, including the comment Big Bird did not even see the straw man coming. It was brutal, because it sticks and is simple.

The $16,000,000,000,000 debt (trillions, for those who become comatose when faced with too many zeros) is the scariest number in this election. There are only around 300,000,000 men, women and children in the US, so we all owe over $50,000 $5 million to the government now.

Yes, $50,000 each. For my family of 6, that sums to $300,000. Trust me, I don’t got it.

And I won’t have another $300,000 if Obama gets another shot at his uncontrolled spending.

Libya is bad and will put the nail in Obama’s election hopes in the last debate. But the debt he blindly and cruelly racked up while failing to produce a course-corrected economy is proof enough the man needs to retire as soon as possible. We literally cannot afford 4 more years of this.

Seriously

We may be seeing the beginning of a harmonic resonance (or feedback loop) where a tipping point has been hit that builds upon itself and sends this race to one side. And that is the ever more depressing Gallup poll results (if you are a Democrat, Liberal and/or Obama support).

Today (10/18/12) Romney leads 52-45% among likely voters. For an incumbent US President that is a near 100% guaranteed loss.

This will depress Obama voters, whose intensity will drop off.

Which should result in ever worse poll numbers.

This will depress Obama voters, whose intensity will drop off some more.

Rinse and Repeat.

This is a harmonic feedback that arises once a tipping point (here the confidence for the left leaning voters) pulls the system (here the electorate) out of the stability of a dead heat and into a one sided win.

The question is, if this is the case, where is the bottom? If we look at a recent Michigan poll, it could be historically bad:

Usually, an incumbent who can’t get to 50% in pre-election polling is in trouble.  An incumbent who can’t get to 45% is almost certain to lose, especially with less than three weeks to go, as undecideds are already disinclined to support the candidate they know best.  What does it mean when a poll from a firm linked to Democrats in a key Democratic state can’t produce anything better than 44% for a Democratic incumbent and a virtual tie with a Republican challenger?

This indicates the Gallup number may not be an outlier as much as leading indicator. It also means that if Blue Michigan is this bad, nationally it could be a route. Could Obama drop to low 40% on election day? It’s possible.

W need more polling to see for sure, but early next week we will know the answer.

This is generating some great commentary at Hot Air, as the Obama era looks to be coming to an end.

Queue the lunatic fringe and Occupy Wall Street nuts:

As we reported yesterday, in addition to threats by Obama supporters to riot if Romney wins, innumerable Twitter users are also making direct death threats against Romney.

The primary reason given for Obama supporters wanting to see Romney dead is the fear that he will take away food stamps.

If the tables were turned and conservatives were making death threats against Obama in these numbers, it would be a national news story.

Well, we can see that no matter what the left tells pollsters, they know Obama is in deep, deep trouble. You don’t go all postal (sorry postal workers, I did not make up the term) like this unless you are  desperate (and emotionally unhinged).

Contrast that with the Libertarian, Tea Party behavior. Tea Party rallies were like family picnics, studded with signs and symbols of biting humor (something you would think Bill Maher would spot easily). 2012 will be the last hurrah for far left liberalism, as Frank Rich surprisingly noted:

All this evidence is misleading. As one conservative commentator, Doug Mataconis of Outside the Beltway, wrote during the GOP convention, it means nothing that Republican leaders don’t mention the tea party anymore. “In reality, of course the Republican party of 2012 is pretty much the tea party at this point,” he wrote. “One need only look at the party platform and listen to what the speakers are actually saying to recognize that fact.” He saw the tea party as “likely to see its influence increase after the November elections regardless of what happens to the Romney/Ryan ticket”—and rightly so. Though the label itself had to be scrapped—it has been permanently soiled by images of mad-dog protesters waving don’t tread on me flags—its ideology is the ideology of the right in 2012. Its adherents will not back down or fade away, even if Obama regroups and wins the lopsided Electoral College victory that seemed in his grasp before the first debate. If anything, the right will be emboldened to purge the GOP of the small and ideologically deviant Romney claque that blew what it saw as a “historic” opportunity to deny a “socialist” president a second term.

History tells us that American liberals have long underestimated the reach and resilience of the right, repeatedly dismissing it as a lunatic fringe and pronouncing it dead only to watch it bounce back stronger after each setback.

…

Such is the power of denial that we simply refuse to concede that, by the metric of intractability, at least, conservatives are the cockroaches of the American body politic, poised to outlast us all.

Rich has seen the light. The ‘right’ (his cockroaches, my backbone of the country) is typical American families living on Main Street and going to their place of worship as they raise their kids. Quiet, resolute and unbowed, the Right of Center Libertarian core that loves to fly the “Don’t Tread On Me” flag always rejects over reach of government, which means they always reject Liberals if they are unleashed (like they were in 2008).

Rich’s piece is interesting, because it identifies the total futility in trying to convert the USA into the EU. There is no road to Greece from here.

Update: This is rich coming from Rich:

For all their qualms about stimulus spending and Obamacare, perhaps voters still prefer the party of modest government activism to the party of no government.

Modest activism? $1.5 trillion per year deficits is not modest!  Especially when it is the voters’ money! And of course, the GOP is not for ‘no’ government but limited government and results for the money.

CBS Poll: No clear winner in CBS poll, so I would say the best Obama got is a tie. But the Luntz group is not even close. So which is it? Polls his week will tell.

CNN Polll:  Registered voters? Obama supposedly won by 7%, but I am not sure this plays well with which person they want! Won verses want….. Hmm, a difference?

Luntz Focus Group: Holy Cow! Voters are smarter than CNN reporters (no surprise there)! Romney is going to win big. The Luntz group showed almost all former Obama voters moved to Romney. It is only the few liberals in his group pushing Obama. Big loss for Obama,

Post Debate Update:Before the insta-polls come out, I don’t see what the inside-the-beltway types saw, which was a small Obama edge. But even if true, Obama cannot survive a small edge. Romney connected better. Obama was policy wonkish and being to cute by half. Romney’s strongest point was promises made and not kept. Obama had not answer to failed results. And in the end, that is the vote on the last four years and whether we can survive 4 more.

10:46 PM Eastern (10:37 Debate Time): I just did not see anything from the President that moved the needle. He ended on fairness (wealth distribution) and class warfare. Veterans are not going to Obama. Out of work college grads aren’t going for Obama. The military is not Obama. He is trying to drill a dry well.  No momentum change here.

10:42PM Eastern (10:34 Debate Time): We run a small high tech company, and I will tell you Obama’s comments missed the mark 100%. I would not be opposed to Obama if we could grow and expand. But we are facing more and more regulation, more and more paper work and with Obamacare more and more costs. Obama is not a small company friend, and so that is not selling here in NOVA.

10:39PM Eastern (10:31 Debate Time): I am still not getting Obama’s answers. How do small businesses send jobs overseas????

10:34PM Eastern (10:26 Debate Time): What is Obama going on about now? How did he go from gun control to math and science? Did I use the term ‘rambling’??? Obama is trying to be assertive, but he is just lost, and Candy had to bring Obama back. Obama is just trying to put in a sound bite, not address questions. Bad move in a Town Hall format.

10:27 PM Eastern (10:20 Debate Time): I still don’t see Obama gaining in all this. He runs off topic, he makes tenuous connections to the questions. His responses are not clear. And he cannot come to a draw and change the trajectory of this election. Yes, he is pushing back harder, but it is nowhere near enough and Romney is still holding his own if not a bit ahead.

10:20 PM Eastern (10:12 Debate Time): Romney starts with a good and measured response. Why did we not know after 5 days. I said it last week, Biden set Obama up for a fail on this question. The campaigning by Obama was a huge mistake…..

10:18 PM Eastern (10:10 Debate Time): The Libya question – who denied security. Obama dodges for a bit, but what is the answer?  Obama missed the point, why was the security denied PRIOR to the attack? Obama did not answer. Obama is talking about everything but the question!  Epic Fail

10:15 PM Eastern (10:07 Debate Time): The self deportation issue was handled well. And now he nails Obama on investments overseas.

10:12 PM Eastern (10:05 Debate Time): Romney comes back and nails Obama on e-verify was the model. Where is the result of Obama?

10:11 PM Eastern (10:04 Debate Time): Obama has some good points (go after criminal illegals – and I know he meant violent criminals). But Obama says these folks will come here and build small businesses, but of course the second part of that is to then be taxed for being successful!

10:08 PM Eastern (10:00 Debate Time): Romney hits a good note on immigration. No amnesty, but compassion for those trying and caught up in the process (i.e., kids). And it is great Romney pivots back to Obama promises made and not kept.

10:04 PM Eastern (9:55 Debate Time): Romney’s list of promises made and never kept was devastating. The record is horrible, and Obama cannot dodge it because it is his four years.

10:01 PM Eastern: Just a note: paused the debate for 10 minutes so from here on I am on a 8 minute delay. I will use the wall clock for the time of the update, but subtract 7 minutes to know “when” the comment applies.

9:51 PM Eastern: Obama is not making headway. Cheap tires??? Obama is defending Bush???? What is this dude smoking? Obama has no standing on debt and deficits.

9:48 PM Eastern: Romney just recast the GOP by noting the Bush years were for Big Business, and the new GOP is for small business. That is huge and it resonated. And it is why Obama’s soak rich schtick is so out dated and misplaced.

9:44 PM Eastern: Obama is rambling… Contraception is connected to equal pay??? Talk about off topic!  He just lost the woman vote, unless you are voting with your uterus. Most professional women, vote with the salary and standing.

9:37 PM Eastern: Candy’s question are fair and pointed. Fair and tough. Romney is nailing Obama on promises not kept. Road to Greece – Great Line!

9:34 PM Eastern: Obama is more aggressive, but he is not denting Romney. And now we have the 14% claim, let’s see how it works.  Obama’s 90 billion to bogus green company is hanging out there!

9:22 PM Eastern: Ouch! Romney just sat the President down! So much for Obama being alpha male!  Obama’s gas price argument is lame, as is his pipe line distance. We have laid enough fiber to go to the moon and back many times over. That does not mean it is enough!

9:18 PM Eastern: Round 2b (new normal on gas prices): Even if Obama is aggressive, he is not cowering Romney. So far we have a tie, and that means nothing for Team Obama. Production up – Prices up!  What is Obama talking about.

9:15 PM Eastern: Round 2 (not lowering gas prices): Romney nails Obama on where the gas and oil is coming from? Not Obama! Ouch, Obama not getting it because he is tied to left wing policies and won’t even pretend to be for typical energy sources.

9:14 PM Eastern: Round 2 (not lowering gas prices): Did Obama agree Romney had the gas part right? What an opening for Romney.

9:13 PM Eastern: Round 2 (not lowering gas prices): Wow, what a tough question to Obama – do you agree with your Energy Secretary to not lower gas prices? Obama dodged it….

9:11 PM Eastern: Round 1 (jobs): Did Obama offer a college graduate a job on bridges, road and the car assembly line?

Good note by Romney that Obama did bankrupt Detroit.

And is this only about soaking the rich? How is that kid suppose to get a job by soaking? Tax collector for Obamacare?

9:22 PM Eastern: Ouch!

Major Update 2: A 2nd body-blow poll out from Gallup:

Romney 50%, Obama 46%, and that means certain defeat if it holds.

Major Update 1: A body-blow poll out from KOS:

The candidates for President are Democrat Barack Obama and Republican Mitt Romney. If the election was today, who would you vote for?

Obama 46 (47)
Romney 50 (49)

At a time when other polls are moving back in the president’s direction, our own weekly poll by Public Policy Polling saw the opposite—a two-point Romney gain. Per day:

Friday (38%) Obama 47, Romney 49
Saturday (39%) Obama 49, Romney 47
Sunday (24%) Obama 43, Romney 55

That Sunday sample, about a quarter of the total, was entirely responsible for Romney’s favorable numbers.

Ouch!  As I have said since Saturday, if Obama is at 45-46% and Romney is at 49-50% this race is over barring some miracle. There will be a great discussion on this at Hot Air, no doubt. – end update

Bad polls for team Obama popping everywhere. Yesterday I noted this brutal swing state poll from USA Today/Gallup

With Romney at 50% and Obama at 46%, that spells defeat is the most likely outcome in these key states, which in turn would lead to an Electoral College win for the GOP.

Here is another poll from NPR with bad news:

The random cellphone and land line poll of 600 likely rural voters in nine battleground states Oct. 9-11 has Romney at 59 percent among the survey’s respondents. Obama’s support is now down to 37 percent among rural battleground voters, a plunge of 10 points from the actual rural vote in those states four years ago.

No surprise here. Rural area economies are built on family farms and businesses. Small business owners turning on Obama? Whodathunkit!

And this poll indicates Romney is trending towards a win in PA:

Gov. Mitt Romney has narrowed a 12-point gap with President Barack Obama and now trails the president 50 – 46 percent among Pennsylvania likely voters, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.

This compares to a 54 – 42 percent Obama lead in a September 26 survey by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University.

Poll trends are very important now, and all show a bad November for Democrats. If PA has moved 8 points towards Romney in a month, with 4 point left in the gap, then a month from now PA could easily be in play.

Tags: 2012 elections, Polls, President