I know it is true. The problem is he makes it sound like it is a shift that means Obama is doomed. He also shows no sources and just makes statements. If you look at the political maps Obama is still ahead in most of the swing states and Romney is already behind in states with a guranteed vote. People that support Romney fail to look at these maps and aknowledge Obama is largly ahead in early voting. He has a ton more money in each state with his people encourging supporters of Obama to vote early. This is one reason Obama won the first time.

Oh, ok I agree with that.

It's very sad how people tend to use polls that sample probably less than a fifth of the U.S population and use it to indicate how close a race is or isn't..

What really matters is that the Romneys pretty much control Hart Intercivic....
S o a few % behind here and there won't really matter.

Just because he didn't bother to cite his findings doesn't refute their truth. Check out realclearpolics for instance. Electoral map has Romney ahead by a slight margin. Gallup has Romney up by 7 points with likely voters nationally. Rasmussen has Romney +3 in the swing states. The list goes on and on. This will be the election when Americans realize just how much a propaganda machine the media is. And I cannot wait.

OT: I predict mixed reviews on a winner to this debate. It would be nice to hear some answers about Libya, despite it being an ongoing investigation.

Being that this is on foreign policy, I think Obama is at a huge disadvantage ...

In the wake of the Benghazi consulate attack where multiple warning were ignored, lack of security resulted in the death of an ambassador, and then the government denied that it was a terrorist attack for weeks even though there was evidence from day 1 that it was an organized attack, the Obama administration looks very weak. When you add to this the government refusing to call the Fort-Hood shooting a terrorist attack a pattern starts to emerge.

Beyond that, the Fast and Furious scandal, the Keystone oil pipeline, telling Russia that "he can't speak openly about his plans because of the election", and growing unrest in the middle east can't help Obama much.

On polling ...

Over the past several years I have seen multiple elections with results that were drastically different than the polling was predicting; and (as a result of this) I would say that people are over-estimating the accuracy of the opinion polls.

Quite true. However, every single candidate that was over 50% in late October in the Gallup poll has gone on to win the election. That person is Mitt Romney.

Yes it does if your doing it like intellectuals at universities do. Read my first post I already mentioned most of what you bring up here and I do not just mention polls that favor my viewpoint.

ppp polls from last week:
nh: romney +1
oh: obama +1
va: obama +2 (improved on second poll result, but with smaller sample)
va: obama +1 
wa: obama +5
co: obama +3
ct: obama +2
ia: obama +1 (improved on second poll result, but with smaller sample)
ia: romney +1

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/

This will be a tough one for Romney.

Most of the best criticisms of Obama come from the left.

If mitt Romney let his mormonism show a bit more and was a bit more honest about what his presidency would like he'd probably be a lot better off then he is now trying to cast Obama as weak on terror... when in reality Obama turned just aboute very thing a liberal hates about Bush on foreign policy to 11.