Why Biased Polling Is Underestimating Romney Vote

Dick Morris - Republicans are getting depressed under an avalanche of polling suggesting that an Obama victory is in the offing. They, in fact, suggest no such thing! Here’s why:
1. All of the polling out there uses some variant of the 2008 election turnout as its model for weighting respondents and this overstates the Democratic vote by a huge margin.
In English, this means that when you do a poll you ask people if they are likely to vote. But any telephone survey always has too few blacks, Latinos, and young people and too many elderly in its sample. That’s because some don’t have landlines or are rarely at home or don’t speak English well enough to be interviewed or don’t have time to talk. Elderly are overstated because they tend to be home and to have time. So you need to increase the weight given to interviews with young people, blacks and Latinos and count those with seniors a bit less.
Normally, this task is not difficult. Over the years, the black, Latino, young, and elderly proportion of the electorate has been fairly constant from election to election, except for a gradual increase in the Hispanic vote. You just need to look back at the last election to weight your polling numbers for this one.
But 2008 was no ordinary election. Blacks, for example, usually cast only 11% of the vote, but, in 2008, they made up 14% of the vote. Latinos increased their share of the vote by 1.5% and college kids almost doubled their vote share. Almost all pollsters are using the 2008 turnout models in weighting their samples. Rasmussen, more accurately, uses a mixture of 2008 and 2004 turnouts in determining his sample. That’s why his data usually is better for Romney.
But polling indicates a widespread lack of enthusiasm among Obama’s core demographic support due to high unemployment, disappointment with his policies and performance, and the lack of novelty in voting for a black candidate now that he has already served as president.
If you adjust virtually any of the published polls to reflect the 2004 vote, not the 2008 vote, they show the race either tied or Romney ahead, a view much closer to reality.
2. Almost all of the published polls show Obama getting less than 50% of the vote and less than 50% job approval. A majority of the voters either support Romney or are undecided in almost every poll.
But the fact is that the undecided vote always goes against the incumbent. In 1980 (the last time an incumbent Democrat was beaten), for example, the Gallup Poll of October 27th had Carter ahead by 45-39. Their survey on November 2nd showed Reagan catching up and leading by three points. In the actual voting, the Republican won by nine. The undecided vote broke sharply — and unanimously — for the challenger.
An undecided voter has really decided not to back the incumbent. He just won’t focus on the race until later in the game.
So, when the published poll shows Obama ahead by, say, 48-45, he’s really probably losing by 52-48!
Add these two factors together and the polls that are out there are all misleading. Any professional pollster (those consultants hired by candidates not by media outlets) would publish two findings for each poll — one using 2004 turnout modeling and the other using 2008 modeling. This would indicate just how dependent on an unusually high turnout of his base the Obama camp really is.

QE3 10 Shocking Quotes That Will Help Destroy America

Michael Snyder
The American Dream
Saturday, September 15, 2012
Ready or not, QE3 is here, and the long-term effects of this reckless money printing by the Federal Reserve are going to be absolutely nightmarish.  The Federal Reserve is hoping that buying $40 billion worth of mortgage-backed securities per month will spur more lending and more economic activity.

But that didn’t happen with either QE1 or QE2.  Both times the banks just sat on most of the extra money.  As I pointed out the other day, U.S. banks are already sitting on $1.6 trillion in excess reserves.  So will pumping them up with more cash suddenly make them decide to start lending?  Of course not.  In addition, QE3 is not likely to produce many additional jobs.  As I showed in a previous article, the employment level did not jump up as a result of either QE1 or QE2.  So why will this time be different?  But what did happen under both QE1 and QE2 is that a lot of the money ended up pumping up the financial markets.  So once again we should see stock prices go up (at least in the short-term) and commodities such as gold, silver, food and oil should also rise.  But that also means that average American families will be paying more for the basic necessities that they buy on a regular basis.  The most dangerous aspect of QE3, however, is what it is going to do to the U.S. dollar.  Most of the rest of the world uses the U.S. dollar to conduct international trade, and by choosing to recklessly print money Ben Bernanke is severely damaging international confidence in our currency.  If at some point the rest of the world rejects the dollar and no longer wants to use it as a reserve currency we are going to be facing a crisis unlike anything we have ever seen before.  The real debate about QE3 should not be about whether or not it will help the economy a little bit in the short-term.  Rather, everyone should be talking about the long-term implications and about how QE3 is going to accelerate the destruction of the dollar.
The following are 10 shocking quotes about what QE3 is going to do to America….
#1 Ron Paul
“It means we are weakening the dollar. We are trying to liquidate our debt through inflation. The consequence of what the Fed is doing is a lot more than just CPI. It has to do with malinvestment and people doing the wrong things at the wrong time. Believe me, there is plenty of that. The one thing that Bernanke has not achieved and it frustrates him, I can tell—is he gets no economic growth. He doesn’t do anything with the unemployment numbers. I think the country should have panicked over what the Fed is saying that we have lost control and the only thing we have left is massively creating new money out of thin air, which has not worked before, and is not going to work this time.”
#2 Peter Schiff, CEO Of Euro Pacific Capital
“This is a disastrous monetary policy; it’s kamikaze monetary policy”
#3 Michael Pento, The Founder Of Pento Portfolio Strategies
“This is the nuclear option for them. This is a never-ending weapon that is being fired at the middle class”
#4 Donald Trump
“People like me will benefit from this.”
#5 Economist Anthony Randazzo
“Quantitative easing—a fancy term for the Federal Reserve buying securities from predefined financial institutions, such as their investments in federal debt or mortgages—is fundamentally a regressive redistribution program that has been boosting wealth for those already engaged in the financial sector or those who already own homes, but passing little along to the rest of the economy. It is a primary driver of income inequality formed by crony capitalism. And it is hurting prospects for economic growth down the road by promoting malinvestments in the economy.”
#6 John Williams Of Shadowstats.com
“That’s absolutely nonsense.  The Fed is just propping up the banks.”
#7 Marc Faber
“I happen to believe that eventually we will have a systemic crisis and everything will collapse. But the question is really between here and then. Will everything collapse with Dow Jones 20,000 or 50,000 or 10 million? Mr. Bernanke is a money printer and, believe me, if Mr. Romney wins the election the next Fed chairman will also be a money printer. And so it will go on. The Europeans will print money. The Chinese will print money. Everybody will print money and the purchasing power of paper money will go down.”
#8 Mesirow Financial Chief Economist Diane Swonk
“I think this will end up being a trillion-dollar commitment by the Fed”
#9 Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke
“I want to be clear — While I think we can make a meaningful and significant contribution to reducing this problem, we can’t solve it. We don’t have tools that are strong enough to solve the unemployment problem”
#10 Credit Rating Agency Egan-Jones
“[T]he FED’s QE3 will stoke the stock market and commodity prices, but in our opinion will hurt the US economy and, by extension, credit quality. Issuing additional currency and depressing interest rates via the purchasing of MBS does little to raise the real GDP of the US, but does reduce the value of the dollar (because of the increase in money supply), and in turn increase the cost of commodities (see the recent rise in the prices of energy, gold, and other commodities). The increased cost of commodities will pressure profitability of businesses, and increase the costs of consumers thereby reducing consumer purchasing power. Hence, in our opinion QE3 will be detrimental to credit quality for the US….”
We have reached a major turning point in the financial history of the United States.
It would be hard to overstate how much damage that QE3 could potentially do to our financial system.  If the rest of the world decides at some point that they no longer have confidence in our dollars and our debt then we are finished.
Sadly, the mainstream media does not seem to understand this, and most Americans gleefully believe whatever the mainstream media tells them.
So what do you think about QE3?  Please feel free to post a comment with your opinion following this article….

Middle East Analysis: WWIII Light Has Been Lit

Doug Hagman - After extensive investigation and analysis of the events on September 11, 2012 in Libya and Egypt, there is only one conclusion I am able to reach: the official narrative of the details of these attacks, provided by U.S. officials and parroted by a complicit, unquestioning media, are being deliberately misrepresented with regard to what actually happened.
Simply put, we are being lied to. But it’s much deeper and much more sinister than a simple lie, and it’s not over yet. In fact, what we are seeing is just the beginning.
Since early Wednesday, I have received numerous e-mails asking why I have failed to report about the murder of a U.S. Ambassador and the other attacks at our embassy in Cairo. After all, nearly all other columnists, especially those on the conservative side, have already written pages upon pages of material about the “tragic” events. Some with hysteria, others with rage, but all blinded by partisan politics and emotion that prevents them from seeing the larger agenda at play, which is exactly what the power players want. Meanwhile, the unsettling truth eludes all but a few.
The following represents a summary of my investigative findings, followed by what I suspect will happen next. The timing of the future events is anyone’s guess, and such events could even be modified or stopped completely by exposing the agenda of those who are actually behind the scenes.

Libya & Egypt attacks: Well planned & coordinated

The attacks against the U.S. embassies in Libya and Egypt were planned far in advance by the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and in the U.S.  It would appear that the Egyptian president had, at the very least, foreknowledge of these attack plans. The White House and State Department were warned of impending attacks on or about September 4, 2012, a full week before the attacks were carried out. A logical question to raise is why, then, was nothing done to prevent or at least mitigate the effects of these attacks? The answer is not as simple as the question, and not what everyone appears to be asserting.

The Obama-Carter comparison

Nearly everyone is using the warnings and subsequent lack of preparation as an indication of the incompetence of Obama and his people, even comparing Obama to former President Jimmy Carter, and September 2012 to November 1979. While such comparisons can be made, they are not completely correct and deliberately limit the scope of analysis. Carter’s activities were much more passive and overt with regard to the 1979 embassy crisis and the events leading up to it. (For historical purists reading this, additional information can be obtained by researching Iran’s ex-president Abolhassan Bani-Sadr role in the hostage crisis).
Obama, by comparison, is actively engaging in reshaping the geo-political structure of the Middle East, creating an Islamic caliphate from North Africa to Syria. The goal is to isolate Israel and push that nation into a confrontation with its Arab neighbors. Therefore, comparing Obama to Carter and 1979 to the present is not only naive, but dangerously so.

Obama, lies and videotape

         
According to the official government narrative perpetuated by news reports, the motive behind the embassy attacks is an obscure film called Innocence of Muslims. Investigation of that production by an alleged Israeli-Jew finds that the film was produced in such a fashion that it was never intended for any other purpose than to be used as a stage prop and fodder for media consumption.
Originally, erroneously but deliberately linked to an “Israeli-Jew,” this low budget video is itself a lie. According to an analysis of the trailer, the video was hastily created on a low budget with bad costumes and fake backdrops. According to cast members, they believed the film to be about something entirely different than their lines portray - lines they never said. The offending audio was dubbed over.
Tentatively, the creation and “distribution” of video has been linked to three people: Nakoula Bassily Nakoula, 55, an Egyptian native on conditional release from prison, 65-year-old Alan Roberts, and outspoken Florida pastor Terry Jones. The controversial Jones appears to be the most vocal supporter of the film.
It is interesting to note that the film itself possesses certain features are notably similar to some of the old Osama bin Laden videos circa 2003-2006. As my investigation into this is continuing, further information about this production and others who might also be associated with it will be withheld - for now.
My investigation determined that the film, which remains accessible on You Tube despite its alleged volatility,  could not possibly have been the motive for the 9/11 multi-national embassy attacks. The fact that it remains accessible on You Tube suggests something so sinister that I will refrain from going there - for now. Using the Danish cartoons and other similar controversies that led to violence as a historical template for comparison, all elements reviewed were inconsistent with previous incidents of provocations and subsequent violence.
At this point, all investigative evidence suggest that this film is not the motive behind the initial violence, yet it continues to be used by members of the U.S. government and the media to point the masses away from the real motive. It has served its intended purpose well, and will ultimately result in conforming our First Amendment rights to a larger UN body. All criticism of Islam will eventually be illegal on a global scale.

The Obama motive(s)

The reshaping of the geopolitical structure was done at the hands of Obama by design. To understand the reasons behind it, one must understand exactly who Obama is, understand his roots and origins, his proclivities and biases, which will then reveal not only his motives, but the intentions of the people who groomed him to take the seat of U.S. power. As everyone knows, we’ve got a major problem with this as the American people have been denied access to the most basic documentation about Obama’s past, from his actual birth certificate to his college and passport records.
It is important to understand that the reason for sealing off Obama’s past is to prevent people from seeing the larger agenda of the man and the people who rose in an inexplicable meteoric fashion to the highest levels of public office - and entities and people behind him. Not only have we been denied the most basic access to his records and background, the top levels of our government have been concurrently infiltrated by both members of the Muslim Brotherhood and card-carrying members of the Communist Party USA (CPUSA) under his watch and with his imprimatur. While this did not begin under his watch, the process was exponentially and even overtly increased to unbelievable levels the minute he assumed office.
Lacking his bona fides, compliments of both sides of the false right-left political paradigm, we can learn much about Obama from the company he keeps, such as his advisors and associates. Valerie Jarrett, Obama’s most visible handler, has a personal stake in the outcome of Middle East events to the point of actively shaping them.
I have previously written and spoken about Obama’s 2012 contingency plans, and we are seeing them play our before our very eyes. The fuse for WWIII, as well as societal chaos in Western nations - and soon coming to urban areas in the U.S. has been lit. The question is whether the plan will be exposed for what it is, or whether the facilitators and those complicit in this morass will continue their activities as instructed.
The future of the civilized world hangs in the balance.