Well, I don't agree that the polls are off, but I can see how the republicans are using the weaknesses of these polls to try and discredit them. Right now, almost all the polls do not weigh political identification (i.e. democrat, republican, etc.) Instead the polls focus on groups of voters like latino, african american, women, income, etc. and match those findings to the makeup of the states. Now, if the pollsters do their jobs right, political i.d. shouldn't matter which is why I believe these polls are correct. The problem that republicans have is that more people are claiming to be democrats then they used to, so these polls appear to over sample democrats. Most of the polls have samplings of democrats anywhere from 4 to 10 points higher than democrat turnout in 2008. Now, it doesn't seem likely that Obama would get that much support this time around, but that is what the polls are showing.

The raw data isn't displayed. That's my point. Where is the inclusion of the breakdown of Republican, Democrat, Independent voters? Without this, the statistics are meaningless.

And the pollsters do get it wrong, quite often, actually. Look at the polling services rankings from 2008. Some projections are hilariously incorrect. I think Rasmussen was most reliable.

Yes, they are delusional. There is a guaranteed win for Obama unless he screws up badly in the debates. Obama now has Ohio pretty strongly and Republicans have never won without Ohio. Republicans are keeping a positive face because they have to when everything is showing they will lose and probably badly.

First debate in Colorado hopefully swings us to the left more as Colorado has shifted more liberal in the last two elections with two Democrats as governors and having the legislative branch being controlled by liberals as well.

Could help Obama's chances in Colorado if he redirected the DEA on the medicinal marijuana thing.

This here's the answer. There's always a disconnect between polls and the vote, and it's not just a matter of the margin of error. Just because somebody is willing to answer a simple question when phoned up doesn't mean they're willing to take time out of their day to cast a ballot.

Turnout is always an issue, and it tends to favour conservatives, but there's no easy way to measure how "energized" voting groups will be on election day. Pollsters have probably already factored in the typical conservative bias between intent and action, and the Republicans are grasping at straws.

My favorite part in all of this was hearing Fox News have to defend its polling -- which showed Obama leading -- against charges of bias by Republicans.

Mike from Morgantown

Well, the issue is probably not big enough here that if he changed his stance on the issue it would be worth it. He probably would lose favor in other states and even here MJ legalization is still not supported by a huge majority, though it is supported by a majority. It will only pass if people who believe it should be legal actually do vote and a lot of Women vote yes. The funny thing is this probably would be an issue that would get Obama votes amongst many I know

Can't wait to rub this post in your face. Carter/Reagan all over again. The polling services, as has been mentioned in other post, are oversampling democrats which is skewing the polls. Rasmussen, the most accurate polling service for the past 25 years has Obama leading, but by a mere 1%. If you feel so confident in an Obama victory, I challenge you to stay home on election day.

Because hope springs eternal, that's why.

It will not happen and if it does and you do I will try to get you banned.