On Wednesday, Marquette University released its latest poll of the battleground state of Wisconsin. Their last poll, taken in the middle of August, found Obama will a slim 3-point lead over Romney, 49-46. This poll, however, found Obama moving into a commanding 14-point lead among likely voters, 54-40. The poll also found that Tammy Baldwin, Democrat candidate for Senate, who has trailed in every poll, moved out to a 9-point lead among likely voters over Tommy Thompson. Curiously, this poll was unlike every other poll Marquette has conducted this year. 

The last three polls Marquette has conducted of the presidential race have had a sample of D+2-4. Their polls throughout the year have ranged D+2-6. Their poll right before the June recall election of Scott Walker used a sample of D+5 and accurately predicted the election results. The sample for this latest poll? D+11.

from Peter Krasinow

watched the original Man Who Knew Too Much.  Remake remains true ... some elements don't stand up to the test of time but the taut direction does for the most part.  And it has a serious Peter Lorre.  Want a kick?  Find a recording of his radio play "The Horla" and listen all the way through.  What a hoot.  No actor of like stature today in their right mind would try such a stunt.

Also watched The Umbrellas of Cherbourg.  What a joy.  Music, set, all of it.  Great fun.

The AP poll released yesterday showed the race between President Obama and Mitt Romney essentially tied among likely voters. Obama is leading by one point, 47-46, well within the margin of error. I think the partisan split for likely voters is maybe a tad too generous to the Democrats, but its reasonable. The D+4 in their likely voter sample is almost half the advantage Democrats had in 2008. More interesting, though, is that the poll provides results for the three different polling universes; adults, registered voters (rv) and likely voters (lv). Its a very instructional lesson in polling. 

I've stressed repeatedly that the voter screen and partisan sample have a profound effect on the results in any poll. Polling adults will generally give you results more favorable to Democrats, since many of those who aren't registered tend to identify with that party. Polls of registered voters cut down on this bias, but because GOP voters are the most likely to vote, there is historically a 2-3 point bias towards Democrats. Likely voter polls remove the inherent bias and are also the most predictive of what will happen on election day. 

The other major variable is the partisan split in the poll. The best poll will be the one that most closely matches the electorate on election day. If 32% of voters who show up are Democrats and 30% of those who show are Republicans, we'll say the election was D+2. In 2008, the electorate was D+7, meaning Democrats had a seven point advantage on election day. In 2004, the electorate was D+0, meaning equal number of Republicans and Democrats voted.

Words mean things.

Domino has come out with a product they're marketing as carbon-free sugar

Sugar is a carbohydrate.

A Carbon free carbohydrate would be ...water!

Eli Lake has a fascinating Daily Beast story today about the rise of female analysts within the CIA, especially as “targeters,” who focus on specific individuals or groups. He describes one encounter between President Obama and some of the top intelligence analysts:

Just before the White House announcement of a new Afghanistan-Pakistan strategy, Obama asked Riedel and his team to come to see him in the Oval Office so he could thank them. Riedel’s team consisted of an Afghan specialist from the State Department and a Pakistan expert from the CIA. Riedel introduced the CIA analyst to Obama as “the best Pakistan expert I’ve ever seen.” Obama looked at the CIA officer, who was sporting stiletto heels, and said with clear amusement, “You don’t look like a Pakistan expert.”

according to Sherrod:

If George Soros or some wealthy person on the left drops $20 million into a race or a series of races, and his side wins -- our side wins -- they don't get any material benefit from it. But if the Koch brothers or Sheldon Adelson or Harold Simmons in Texas put $10 or $20 million each in and win, they get tax cuts, weaker environmental laws and anti-labor legislation. They have more billionaires with more income, more money anyway, but they also have an economic incentive. For their side, it's a good investment to make more money. For our side, it's a good investment in good government and progressive values. And the financial incentive trumps so often.

So Brown believes a) George Soros only gives money away for “good” causes with no thought of ever making a profit, and b) the Koch brothers care only about their wealth and don’t give a damn about making sure America stays free from socialism?

Is he serious? Soros made $1 billion betting against the British pound in 1992; in one day sterling lost 20 percent of its value and dropped out of the European exchange-rate mechanism. And Soros has expressed delight at the prospect of riots in American streets:

Roughrider take on Fisher Catholic.  They haven't been good since the 60's and we thrashed them then.  Win by as many as we want.

NCAA:

1.  Alabama.  for real.

2.  LSU. Will lose to Bama and drop from the top 5 but shouldn't.

3.  FSU looks good but are playing mid-sized Florida high schools.  Oklahoma is playing tribal pick up teams on reservations.  Texas is playing off duty boarder patrol teams.  Okie State?  Div III schools.  So #3 goes to the ol' ball coach:  South Carolina!

4.  One good loss, and when the teams above beat decent competition they'll drop out, but for now USC still belongs here.

5.  And just so the SEC can domnate, we'll give the 1-1 Texas A&M this slot.  

 NFL:

Patriots vs Ravens

Packers vs 49ers.

Pats still da bomb