How the Liberal Media Is Coping With Trump's Historic Level of Black Voter...
Here's the Part of Dr. Phil's Trump Interview That Would Probably Make Libs...
Progressive Commentator Tried Attacking Trump Over His Age. It Blew Up in His...
How Could the Democrats Dump Biden If He Somehow Got Even More Senile...
Climate Lunatics Vandalize Stonehenge
You Owe $100,000!
Democrats Turn Lawfare Into a Campaign Ad
'What a Joke': Republicans Blast NY Magazine Cover Story on GOP Women
Dem Strategist Fact-Checked Live on CNN and It Was *Chef's Kiss*
Hawley Grills Boeing CEO in an Exchange Even the Left Is Praising
Is Biden Responsible for Alvin Bragg's Prosecution of Donald Trump?
'Truly Unprecedented': Human Smuggling Attempts Are Escalating in This Unlikely Sector
Blocking Biden’s Transgender Mandate on Schools
Something Fishy at House Intel Committee
Deconstructing the Lefty Magazine 'The Nation'

Just for the Record . . .

Yes, yes, I know about all the polls that show a lead (in some cases, sizable) for Barack Obama.

But it's also worth pointing out that the IBD/TIPP poll shows just a two point lead for Barack
.  Note also that TIPP was the most accurate pollster of the 2004 election season.

How can you account for the disparities in polls?  As Todd Eberly explains over at National Review, two important factors include weighting for party identification, and the treatment of "leaners."  The results you get out depend on the numbers you put in.

Which poll(s) are most accurate?  It's impossible to know until after election day.  But like Ronald Reagan, I don't believe in a fate that falls on us no matter what we do.  I do believe in a fate that falls on us if we do nothing.

Allowing worrisome poll results to dampen our enthusiasm or our turnout would make predictions of an Obama landslide a self-fulfilling prophecy.  It's neither inevitable nor, to put it mildly, desirable. 

Join the conversation as a VIP Member


Trending on Townhall Videos