Don't Believe the Polls, Here's Why

Traveling recently through North Virginia, it was clear that the area is no where near as pro-Obama as the media would have you believe. It reminded me of the CNN reporter in North Carolina who just days before had said on air that while the polls gave Obama an edge in that state, John McCain seemed to have a clear advantage on the ground.

Then there was early voting in Florida. I stood in line for over an hour in left wing Broward County, in what is a very diverse part of it. Broward Republicans only try to carry a third of the vote in the county. If they meet that mark, they know the rest of the state will go well. As such, Republicans and Democrats for McCain here tend to stand quietly when at the polls. This was especially true on that day, as Democratic campaigners for local races worked the polls, being allowed to mingle with voters more than 100 feet from the actual polling station.

During the wait, someone with a certain temporary and minor physical disability pulled up in a car with a McCain bumper sticker. She saw the line and thought of coming back the next day. Several people who had been waiting for over an hour made way for her. No one objected. After she had been escorted into the polling station, a number of them quietly mentioned how they only let her in because of the McCain sticker. Included in these silent McCain enthusiasts were some in very Democratic leaning groups, and I don’t mean Jewish or Catholic.

Our volunteers in Florida are greater in number than the GOP had in 2004. The enthusiasm is there. It may be subtle, but it is widespread. In all, things look good for John McCain.

So what’s happening? Why are the polls wrong?

80% OF THOSE ASKED TO BE POLLED REFUSE TO RESPOND

Now most people who are asked to respond to a poll refuse. But that number has traditionally been about 66%. Most of those are Republican and the increase in that number can be attributed almost exclusively to McCain supporters. When the media portrays a candidate as being hip and labels all kinds of accusations against all who refuse to support him, those who aren’t supportive will be incensed and will rally to vote against him, but they will keep it to themselves.

Many who are phoned also wonder whether the dialer is really a polling firm. They are apprehensive, especially given the heavy handed tactics employed by the Obama campaign and by its supporters (see below).

EXIT POLLS WILL HAVE THIS EFFECT ON AN EVEN WORSE LEVEL

There’s another reason why people are hesitant to answer polls. Obama’s supporters seem especially crazed this year. They are made up of more loud and threatening college activists, wannabe hippees and the like than in any year since ’72. Even during the primaries, there were reports of physical fights between Obama supporters and those who supported Clinton. Add to that the heavy handed tactics that Obama himself has used against opponents (canceling ads on TV stations that pressed Biden, removing reporters for certain news outlets from his campaign jet, his goon squad of prosecutors and sheriffs in Missouri who threatened to go after people or groups who aired ads that they deemed “untrue,” his threat of litigation against TV stations in Pennsylvania for airing negative ads while his campaign busily airs blatantly false ones at the same time, and so on).

This has nothing to do with race. Many of my Black friends, most of whom vote Democrat, have crossed over and an actively supporting McCain. They simply do not believe the hype about Obama, and are offended by it.

America is not racist. If Democrats had nominated Harold Ford, Jr., or anyone else who eschewed the overbearing tactics of the Obama campaign, polling discrepancies would have been no different than in any other election. The rabid support of some Obama supporters, the frenzied pushing past security guards and out of place hero worship is what scares people. This has nothing at all to do with race and to say it does is a tremendous disservice to everyone.

The refusal of McCain supporters to respond to exit polls will have everything to do with the heavy handed tactics of Obama supporters, including the incessant demeanor many of them portray when canvassing neighborhoods and asking people to put up yard signs.

Generally speaking, don’t expect mild people to be tremendously vocal. But do expect them to turn out the vote.

IN THE END WE’LL WIN – EVERYTHING LOOKS THAT WAY ON THE GROUND

In 2004, pretty close to the end, Zogby predicted 311 electoral votes for Kerry. He does not predict anything greater this year for Obama. Exit polls in 2004 were taken in urban areas and were 60% female (there is a gender gap, which should be a factor in honest polling). It was surprising that the real returns differed by only 5.5%. Expect it to be larger this year because of all of the tactics listed above.

The large and unusual amount of McCain supporters I was privileged to witness at early voting were almost all quiet or hushed in their support. Most would probably be apprehensive about announcing their selection in public, which is exactly what you do when responding to an exit poll. Many of these polls are conducted within earshot of voter lines and people worry about a few of the frenzied Obama supporters, like the ones we see shoving past security guards on televised rallies. Many were canvassed by pretty insistent Obama workers and some would just rather avoid any possibility of an argument. For these reasons, exit polls will be meaningless.

As the night goes on, it will be clear that the real votes do not match the polls. John McCain will win. This has nothing to do with race. If one campaign has student activists/other activist types and puts them at the forefront, the public silence, but private opposition, are commonplace. What materializes is not to that campaign’s liking.

We will pray and do everything we can to ensure that the better candidate prevails. And on the ground, the situation is the exact opposite of how the media’s portraying it. John McCain is winning.

Obama Plan Would Hurt Seniors First and Foremost

The media would have you believe that the Obama tax plan calls for income tax cuts for all who earn under $250,000 a year. Sen. Obama has changed that figure many times and his voting record shows a desire to raise taxes on those earning just $42,000 a year. But the worst part of his plan is his attack on seniors, a detail that the mainstream media has conveniently chosen to ignore. This comes in the form of an increase in the capital gains tax rate, a measure that Barack Obama has strongly advocated since the beginning of this campaign.

Let there be no mistake. While a capital gains rate increase would hurt American corporations, and therefore American jobs, by lessening the total amount of money invested in them, the most devastating affect would be on the seniors of our nation. Seniors who have spent a lifetime accumulating some form of savings and seniors who rely on their IRAs as their main source of income would all see their taxes go up under the Obama plan, no matter how meager or sorely needed their savings may be. Why the media hasn’t made more of an issue of this scandalous situation is anyone’s guess.

There are other economic reasons to support John McCain. It is no secret that our economy faces some serious tough times and that concrete, well thought out real results are needed. It is therefore crucial to examine the economic platform of each candidate.

The following points, in particular, should lead one to support John McCain for President:

In his unwavering battle against reckless spending, Sen. McCain has often fought the leadership of both parties in Congress and has never backed down from a fight.

It should be emphasized that Sen. McCain’s abhorrence of spending should not be viewed lightly. According to non-partisan federal budgetary agencies, the United States faces falling into a junk bond credit rating within the next 15-20 years should we not take aggressive measures to curb spending and promote growth. John McCain recognized the dangers of wasteful spending well before most others did and is one of a select few members of congress to consistently take aggressive action to put government spending on the right path.

Central to his economic proposals is the fact that he recognizes the need to reform corporate tax rates. US corporations are taxed at a higher rate than in any other industrialized nation except for Japan. If this situation is not rectified, more and more American corporations will move their headquarters to other countries. John McCain’s proposal to reduce corporate tax rates in a responsible way is something that members of both parties can rally around. It is a measure that is clearly needed to save jobs here in the United States.

John McCain is also the only candidate who can work with both parties in Congress to actually achieve economic change. He enjoys wide respect that crosses party lines. This is largely because his proposals are reasonable and widely recognized as being needed.

Furthermore, under the Obama plan, payroll taxes would increase for those earning slightly over $100,000. Those earners may still be relatively wealthy, but that’s a far cry from his claim not to increase taxes on anyone earning under $250,000 and should lead you to question just how far he’ll go now that his previous commitment (to make $250,000 the threshold for a tax increase) is off the table (it also challenges his honesty). In the past, Sen. Obama has proposed tax increases on anyone earning over $42,000. His plan to increase the minimum wage by almost 50% would also destroy small business and cause mass layoffs among low wage earners. In short, his plan would bring joblessness and unemployment to the impoverished while doing more to hurt business than any administration in recent memory.

In short, based on his 25 year consistent record of fighting wasteful spending, the fact that his economic program is innovative and hits on all major economic issues facing America and the fact that his opponent’s platform penalizes seniors first, it is in the interest of the nation that Sen. John McCain be elected President.

America Is Better Than All That

The media, however, isn’t. How can they turn a blind eye as Obama has a team of prosecutors and sheriffs in Missouri threatening to prosecute anyone who airs ads against their candidate which they deem to be untrue? Note that Obama has taken great liberties to try to distort statements made about him by McCain as being untrue. His objection to anything unfavorable as being “false” is a prelude to what he and his team would go after in their quest to stifle debate. Can there be a bigger challenge to free speech?

It is also worth mentioning that their call to action comes at the same time as the Obama campaign is airing ads throughout the Northeast saying that McCain and Palin would ban all stem cell research. I’d point out that no one wants to “ban” “all” stem cell research. In fact, President Bush, someone considerably to the right of McCain, is the first president to fund any embryonic stem cell research at all. President Clinton deferred the issue over possible moral objections, leaving it to the current administration to determine proper ethical grounds. And the current Administration did not “ban” research on existing lines, they just did not allocate grants for it.

The Obama campaign is threatening to sue television stations in Pennsylvania if they air negative ads about him. And what is the reaction of Chris Matthews, who is looking to run for the US Senate in Pennsylvania in 2010? Well, don’t ask him. He’s too busy offering sickeningly vivid renditions of how Obama makes him feel. Here’s a message to Chris: If you can’t stand up for free speech and against what can only be called thuggery, then you have no business even being a reporter. Forget about holding public office.

And it doesn’t stop there. Just this morning the Obama campaign removed reporters for three newspapers from its campaign. The three papers, the NY Post, the Dallas Morning News and the Washington Times had all endorsed McCain. If McCain pulled a similar stunt he’d be left without any of the mainstream media, who have sold whatever journalistic integrity they had left as they fight for their beloved orator of the Greek Temple.

Can we believe that this is what journalism has come to?

As for the news media themselves, certain reporters with a conscious have been able to examine the dangers of the wholesale sellout to Obama on the part of their industry. Notable thanks goes to Michael Malone of ABC who has shown himself to be a true journalist, and therefore writes that he’s embarrassed by recent media coverage to identify himself as same.

A free press allows for access to information. A press that turns the other way as freedom of speech is run roughshod over endangers the public. The effect upon the public interest can be devastating and we have a moral duty to stand up against this.

And here’s what the McCain campaign needs to do:

In the last days, go after Obama’s insane attack on civil rights and on free speech. Make an issue out of his supporters’ attacks on Joe the Plumber, an average man who dared to ask Obama a question he did not like. Expose the thuggish tactics of his so called “Truth Squad” in Missouri and his threats upon the free press in Pennsylvania.

Then point out that the capital gains rates under the Obama plan would first and foremost affect seniors who are living on their meager retirement savings. Capital gains rates do affect the middle class. McCain-Palin: Expose the Obama pipedream for what it is, in ways that the public can understand.

Note: In recent days I’ve had the opportunity to visit several key battleground areas first hand. The situation on the ground is far more pro-McCain than the media would have you believe. Things look good for our side.

McCain Won the Debate, Hands Down, No Contest

Here’s a prediction: If the networks are still around in all their glorious gory (sic) in four years, the winner of the first presidential debate will be the Democratic nominee. He or she will go on to win the second and the third debate, this streak being interrupted only by the victory in his/her own right of the Democratic vice presidential nominee during of ’12 veep debates.

And here’s another prediction. If the pompous cast of liberals at ABC are still made up of the same group of clueless windbags in 2016, the Democrats will be the hands down winners of the entire debating season. In fact, if Robert Byrd, Barney Frank, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi ever form their own baseball team, you may as well cancel the World Series, as the outcome will be a foregone conclusion, at least in the eyes of the media. Indeed, who needs Roger Clemens at the mound when you can have Charlie Rangel?

Among the past debates that Democrats “won,” at least as far as the talking heads were concerned, was the second Reagan-Mondale debate, the one in which President Reagan decided “not to capitalize on the youth and inexperience of (his) opponent.” That debate is legendary now, and not exactly as a smashing success for Mondale. But at the time, the network pundits declared Fritz the winner.

Here’s another debate that the talking heads once saw fit to award the Democrats: The 1980 debate between Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter, the “there you go again” debate. Yes, I’m serious. No, I’m not drunk. Neither were they. They’re just media liberals.

The agenda driven crowd also gave Al Gore the win in all three debates in 2000, and this great victory helped Al Gore go from plus 8 in the polls to minus 4 during the same time period. In 2004 they rightly awarded the first debate to John Kerry, but then wrongly awarded the last two to him as well. Their analysis that year is even more shocking than their 1980 call when one watches the third debate in that series (the one in which Kerry attacks Cheney’s daughter as Bush delivers the funniest line in recent presidential sparring history).

Which brings us to last night’s debate:

McCain rocked the house.

Yes, he could have done more. He should have exposed Obama’s “tax cut” to 95% of Americans as the lie that it is. Yes, the marginal rates would be cut under the current incarnation of Obama’s proposal, but anyone earning slightly over 100K would see a 6% tax increase on part of their earnings and who knows how much seniors and anyone who owns stock would have to pay on their investment savings. Families selling their primary home after less than two years would also face higher taxes. And that’s just the beginning.

Similarly, when Obama made the outlandish claim that that McCain’s $5,000 tax rebate for purchase of health insurance amounts to “one hand giveth and the other hand taketh” or some other spin, McCain should have told Obama that he was “almost as funny and as big a distortion as your economic package is, Senator,” or something along that line. It is spin. The McCain plan gives people $5,000 to purchase $2,000 or so of insurance. Only the most elaborate plans in the nation would receive a net negative. The average American would save thousands. Of course, expect Obama to try to block that in the Senate, assuming he isn’t offered a more attractive position from his friends in the Weather Underground.

All in all, McCain’s attacks need to be sharper and more on point, especially when countering those lies with the simple truth. And yes, he must strive to do so in the last debate. After all, it’s not “simple truth” if it’s not simple.

But that doesn’t change the following:

- McCain was sharper, livelier and more pronounced at all times than Obama, the latter giving off the impression that someone had been short on Nyquil the night before (though even Obama looked positively vigorous compared with Biden last week, who also “won” his debate according to ABC - which he did if his goal was to drag his ticket down, as shown by the CBS poll conducted in its aftermath)

- McCain, not Obama, hit hard on foreign policy and came across as a real Commander in Chief. Add to that; one who shows understanding and caring for our soldiers on the ground

- McCain, not Obama, was the only one to offer anything of substance on the economy. Even the talking heads marveled over this fact, saying that McCain’s new proposal would be tomorrow’s headlines. Of course, they still saw no irony in giving the night to Obama

- McCain was in touch with voters while Obama’s performance was more robotic than even the general demeanor of his Obamaton followers, assuming that such a thing is possible.

All in all, McCain was in control, had clear ideas and connected with voters. Obama, in turn, allowed chronic insomniacs to get a good night’s sleep. And that was his only accomplishment in last night’s debate.

As for the media, don’t worry. If Dan Quayle had been a Democrat in 1988, Lloyd Bentsen would have been said to have “blown it” with “an over the top attack” in “one of the worst displays of presidential politics.”

At least the media is finally getting their act together. In 2000 and 2004 they awarded 5 out of 6 debates to Bush (all but the 1^st in 2004), only to change their minds hours later. This year, they know that the Greek templed one must not be denied his (perceived) victory for even one minute. The trouble for them is that no one is paying attention to their amateurish analysis antics any more. And that’s good news for America.

Marion Thorpe, MD, Congressional Opponent of Alcee Hastings, Derides the Bailout

Exclusive Statement by Marion Thorpe, Congressional Candidate for FL-23 to MythDebunker

Late last week, members of both parties saw fit to set aside $700 billion to bailout banks and other financial institutions that had acted recklessly. To be sure, some of their actions were caused by improper interference on the part of the government to begin with, prompting them to issue reckless loans that in the end did nothing to help people save money nor accumulate wealth. Categorically, the banks that are now in trouble far exceeded their mandate and, as such, their problems are in large part of their own making.

As an active Republican within the African-American Community, I have often preached the need for (and benefits of) personal responsibility. My message has been simple and straightforward: Self-reliance is the duty and birthright of every American. As such, I am shocked and dismayed by the wholesale bailout of financial institutions that have not placed this basic tenet above of their own survival.

Throughout America, there are many individuals and small businesses that have enjoyed far less privilege than those entities that will benefit most from this bailout. If the government, Democrats and Republicans alike, are so enthralled with the notion of bailing out faulty corporations at any cost, perhaps they should start with small businesses that are the bedrock of jobs, and often of family life, in our nation.

While the Republican additions to the initial legislation provided at least some benefit to the middle class, and are a great improvement over the original proposal, the entire philosophy behind the bailout is flimsy and highly unlikely to produce substantive outcomes. Most importantly, we must ask ourselves what this action will teach our children.

The answer is easy to deduce, as follows: The message that this bailout sends to our youth indicates that personal responsibility no longer matters. I am profoundly disappointed that my opponent, the Honorable Alcee Hastings, who has claimed to represent the interests of his constituents since first being elected in 1992, is a strong proponent of the bailout, including the original Democratic bill which was full of insidious measures that helped large corporations but did nothing for the middle class.

The people of US Congressional District 23 need a clear signal that our government will heretofore facilitate conditions that promote the success and independence of hard working families, not bail out large banks that make bad decisions. While the Democratic proposal was shocking, and Republican support for it constitutes an unfortunate act of folly, Mr. Hastings’ support of both bills is unfathomable.

Having immersed myself in District 23 for the last 5 years, I know the real struggles facing our community. For this reason, I highly support and promote personal responsibility as the soundest method of correcting the multiple deficits of our community. You have my word that my Congressional vote will be cast in a manner that helps small family businesses in the district survive during tough times while simultaneously ensuring that my people thrive in all parts of US Congressional District 23.

See more at www.marionthorpe.com.

Gov. Palin Was Great, Now Some Pointers For McCain

Despite the talking heads, who would have awarded the night to the pompous, condescending, finger wagging Sen. Biden had he spent the entire night doing a rendition of Porky Pig (which would have been characterized on TV news shows as “down to earth and in touch with all creatures of the world”), Gov. Palin blew her opponent away. When one talking head read off a script that had either been penned or at least planned before the debate had even taken place, George Stephanopoulos was visibly surprised and almost demanded an explanation. Of course, that was right after the debate, before he and other media men will have had a chance to “see the light.”

The media will play back supposed “highlights.” They will play up Biden’s best line and Palin’s worst. Yet even then, the two will be almost on par. Any fair analysis shows Biden as whipped, beaten and ready for a starring role in an arthritis pain commercial, and Palin connecting with voters, sharing their concern and having the facts on her side. But don’t expect a fair analysis coming from the Obama war room known as the network editing division.

What will also be interesting is whether media “fact checkers” who’ve taken great delight in twisting some of Palin’s truthful statements while ignoring those of the Obama camp will give Biden a pass not only on his wild assertions that Obama didn’t vote to defund the troops, that he shares McCain’s record on taxes and that he hadn’t advocated a kumbaya dinner with Ahmadinejad or his ludicrous assertion that Obama had been anything but opposed to the successful and needed surge, but also on his outlandish claim that the Vice President has no authority as presiding officer of the Senate except in the case of a tie vote.

While it’s well known that the Vice President can only cast a vote in the case of a tie, this has no bearing on his or her constitutional duty as presiding officer of that body. In fact, the President pro tempore is given that title because his presiding role over the Senate is only temporary, i.e. when the Vice President is absent. After 35 plus years in that body, Biden knows this. Otherwise he’s too ignorant to serve. Yet he even needed to distort that fact in an attempt to play a cheap game of gotcha, albeit one in which he came up being the fool.

If one thing is clear it should be this: If John McCain had chosen a modern day saint for the vice presidency, the selection would have been attacked by the media as the mixing of religion and politics. By contrast, if Barack Obama had chosen Charles Manson as his running mate, the media would have heralded his compassion and belief in the self growth of man. But that said, I didn’t actually expect Obama to pick the worst senator out of 50 or so crabby men, a former presidential candidate whose campaign disintegrated after he was found to be plagiarizing speeches of then UK Labour leader Neil Kinnock and a known friend of Iranian mullahs or for McCain to pick the governor with the highest approval rating in any state of the nation and a reformer who took the ax to her party’s establishment and to their pet projects. But those were the selections and true to form, the media acts as if the opposite had occurred.

So it’s no wonder that some of the talking heads have decided to give the night to Biden. What is amazing is that many others felt they couldn’t, and for good reason. By any standard Palin won the debate hands down.

Yet there’s still more she could have done (as even the best performance can be improved on) and John McCain can learn from these in his future debates:

Palin could have, and McCain should, go after Biden and the Democrats on Freddy Mac and Fannie Mae. Gov. Palin did mention the Democrats’ attempts to block regulation of those agencies, but neither she nor anyone else in the campaign have yet painted the clear and truly accurate picture of how as far back as 2003 Republicans tried to reign in these two agencies, both largely run by prominent Democratic political retirees, and how Democratic senators blocked these attempts at reform.

Palin mentioned her experience as a business leader and as an oil and gas regulator. That was great, but she could have gone even farther with that one. Again, paint a picture. Mention how Washington is full of oil lobbyists. Mention how Democrats have blocked energy independence and drilling legislation for 14 years, first with stall tactics while in the minority and then with outright refusal to act when they became the majority. Mention how Palin took oil companies to task and made them fight competitively, forcing them to compete along the lines of what’s best for American consumers.

Stress Palin’s (and John McCain’s) real experience as a reformer. Few new faces have been able to topple a party establishment. Cite real examples of ethics reform passed and proud accomplishments. The gubernatorial plane on ebay is a great starting place and McCain’s own accomplishments (fighting tobacco, being a lone voice for campaign finance reform, etc.) play well to undecideds.

When Biden made that planned emotional play (and as tragic, terrible and unfortunate as his experience was, as deserving of our personal prayers as he is that he be spared from any further sorrow, mentioning his tragedy was a planned and politically calculated move, it being his last card in a debate in which he performed terribly), Palin should have countered with her own touching life story. That said, she did well in not responding directly to his emotional play. But she would have gained by bringing up her own story a few minutes or a few questions later.

That said, Palin did an excellent job. Her mention of the fact that she is the first governor of any state to form a special sub-cabinet on climate change is true and will go over well with independents. On all other matters the McCain-Palin campaign needs to paint a bold, clear and concise picture of what they have done in the past and what they will do in the future.

Unlike their opponents, both McCain and Palin have accomplishments and facts on their side. They just need to articulate them well (and point to the true record of the other side). Last night was at least a good start.

Wow! What a speech!

Well, suffice it to say, Sarah Palin just did to Barack Obama what Jesse Jackson said he wanted to do (don’t be surprised if the “I’m Barack Obama and I approve this message” line is a little high pitched in upcoming commercials).

Hope everyone noticed how ABC cut into shots of the teleprompter twice, something that is never done. But even they saw how impressive she was.

Folks, John McCain just won the election tonight.