I do hope you are right, but the SCOTUS is usually not concerned with that kind of thing. It is 4-4 with Kennedy being the tiebreaker. I don't think he will be concerned with throwing our system into chaos as it is already there. Most people in Allied Health could write their own books on this matter.
You always were a sly one Maxine, have you ever thought about my feelings and how am i going to live without you for 3 whole months..
You have to look at the difference in polls between "registered voters" and "likely voters." Polls of registered voters usually give an advantage to democrats (vs reality) because democrats are statistically more likely to register and then not vote. I disregard any and all polls of "registered" voters or polls of people who identify themselves as "supporters" of a particular candidate because 30-50% of this group don't show up to vote. I only look at polls of "likely" voters. Following is a link to an article from Gallup that explains how polls of registered and likely voters can be quite different. http://www.gallup.com/poll/110272/registered-voters-vs-likely-voters.aspx Excerpt from the article: Here's an example. Gallup's final poll before the 2004 election showed the following: Registered voters George W. Bush 46% John Kerry 48% Likely voters George W. Bush 49% John Kerry 47% Kerry was ahead among registered voters by 2 points, while Bush was ahead among likely voters by 2 points. The final election result? Bush won the popular vote over Kerry by about 2.5 percentage points, almost exactly what our likely voter estimate predicted. Had we reported only registered voters, we would have estimated a Kerry victory. In other words, had all registered voters turned out in 2004, Kerry would have been elected president. But all registered voters didn't turn out. There was a Republican advantage among those who did turn out. And Bush won.
there were links after I posted that which explained that the lefties are increasing the democrat sample size in some of these polls.
You know where else Obama got a double-digit lead? In the polling sample. In 2008, when Democrats surged to the polls after eight years of George W. Bush, CNNâs exit polls showed a seven-point advantage for Democrats, 39/32, which mirrored Obamaâs seven-point victory in the popular vote. In 2010′s midterms, CNN exit polls showed a 35/35/30 split. By contrast, the previous WaPo/ABC poll in March had a D/R/I of 31/27/36, which undersampled both parties relative to independents but left Democrats with a 4-point advantage â perhaps an arguable model for 2012 turnout. Todayâs has a D/R/I of 34/23/34, adding seven points to that Democratic advantage and presenting a completely unrepresentative, absurd model for the 2012 turnout. What happens when you switch from a D+4 to a D+11 in measuring Obamaâs standing? Suddenly, his job approval goes from 46% to 50% â actually, a rather weak gain given the sampling distortion in the poll. Not coincidentally, the last time Obama hit 50% in this poll was in February, which also had a D+11 sample, after Januaryâs D+7. Adding seven points to the Democratic advantage impacted Obamaâs performance in all areas, although perhaps not as much as the editors had hoped:
So now if we look at both ideas.. Dems are being over sampled and dems are more likely to not show up. The composite score has Obama down by 6. Economy sucks Obama has no plan Food prices up Gas prices up Jobs down His approval rating is in the basement election today... obama loses by a wide margin.
Evangelicals will not vote for a Mormon over status quo. as the election draws near, they will get cold feet. Primaries where evangelicals were dominant Mitt got crushed, that is not an accident. It won't matter in a state like Mississippi but it can in a state like Ohio where you every last vote counts. Mitt has issues with hispanics, evangelicals and even working class whites and women!. He needs to run up the score among whites to even have a chance. The states and people Mitt won during the primaries are the states Mitt will never carry in the general. Mitt will never carry Urban vote ever. Nor will he carry the vote of people with advanced degrees.