Patch has always allowed ANYONE be a blogger/columnist. Here's how: http://lakewood-oh.patch.com/blog

I hope you, Sumco Res, will take the opportunity to express YOUR views!

Sumco Res,
Patch is a creation of the Huffington Post. One has to expect that the personalities involved would come from the pool of "Progressive" thinkers. That being said I have found that they, for the most part, do maintain an open forum that does not exclude conservative comment that follows their stated guidelines.

James, you keep using this Pauline Kael reference when you respond to my blogs. I understand you think that-- as you think Pauline thought-- I must believe that Obama will win the election because I am so shallow that "almost no one I know" would vote for Romney.

I'm a little sick of this for a number of reasons:
1) the insinuation that I'm not intelligent enough to see the world outside of my own perspective;
2) I provided several links to polling data to back up my claims that Romney is behind in key states;
3) The idea that Pauline Kael actually said this is debatable at best, as it has also been attributed to others;
4) If I had a nickel for every time you name-drop (Saul Alinsky, et. al) someone like this that no one has heard from in forty years, I could afford to run for office myself.

If you're going to throw stones at me because you believe I am shallow, pick a better rock.

Patrick,
1) I have never insinuated that You're "not intelligent enough to see the world outside of my own perspective; you just don't.
2) The links that you provide have all the credence with me that the links I have provided have with you.
3) Even if she did not say it it is a political proverb now and still valid.
4) Hey, if a 40 year old shoe fits, you wear it.

Prove it.

Thomas - please turn caps-lock off and consider installing this on your keyboard: http://www.seanmichaelragan.com/html/%5B2008-10-27%5D_CAPS_LOCK_TRAINER_KEY.shtml

Bill,
so far. The vote has not yet been cast.

Bill the latest polls have Romney ahead, tied or within the margin of error in every state you list (checkout realclearpolitics.com). Things are tight and the presindent is stuck in the mid 40's. Essentially the country has concluded Obama is a failure (not hard to do). The only question is can Romney make people ok with him.

Joe, as the map stands today, Romney has to win Florida, PA, AND Ohio in order to win. If Obama takes one out of those three (and either Colorado or Virginia), it's over. If you see any of those three states called for him on election night, you can go to bed early. The shocking thing is just how frozen those polls are, and have been for some time.

And James is right: it isn't over until the votes are cast-- if they're allowed to be cast, that is (but I won't get into that just yet). But by late September, if the map still hasn't radically changed post-convention/debate season, it's going to require a small political miracle.

Oh Patrick,
"if they're allowed to be cast"
Please tell me you aren't stuck on 2000.

This has nothing to do with the discussion we're having. You can be irate at President Obama all you want, and for whatever perceived role you think he's playing in raising gas prices (and/or your favorite brand of condom), but it doesn't change the numbers. If you run across polls that indicate I'm wrong about the strategy of the election, feel free and let us know.

And... now we're speaking Spanish.

Kudos, dude. I've had a lot of people make bizarre, nonsensical comments on my blog, but no one has ever completely abandoned using the English language on me. That one took the cake.

Joe, for the win.

Joe just likes to ramble on with himself. It's ok to ignore him.

I used the link you provided to the polls, and Obama has the lead in every one of those swing states you mention, so your "facts" are now incorrect. Which pretty much invalidates all your other predictions for the future. Thanks anyway.

You are looking at the two averages which RCP post up top. For RECENT POLLS scroll down and you will confirm Mr Andrews numbers.

Excellent. We're on topic. Thanks.

I agree with a lot of what you've said. I think you should consider looking at http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/. The reason I'm suggesting this is because it takes the same polling data RCP is looking at, but it uses an algorithm that weights each poll company according to its credibility in past elections. It adjusts for known biases and things like that. And in 2008, this model correctly predicted the outcome in every state except Indiana (and Omaha, Nebraska, which carries its own electoral vote).

On 538, and at the time I wrote this (last week), Romney was behind in OH, FL, IA, VA, and CO. Currently, he is still behind in all of them, but FL has shifted to "lean Romney" whereas the others are still leaning Obama.

Two things are important: 1) the polls have changed very little since Romney became the de facto nominee. With the exception of FL (which was red, then blue, now back) none of the states on 538, CNN or RCP have changed much. This is bad for Romney because: 2) Romney automatically is playing from behind. His path to victory is much longer than Obama's. Colorado is a key state for Obama. Once he gets that, all he really needs is (one of) Ohio, PA, or FL.

SO, I disagree that, in any scenario, Romney would ever have a "comfortable" victory. I also disagree that undecideds will support Romney, as the blog illustrates. But I do think you're right that PA is important for both.

Mr. McMillan, RCP reports this morning that in the battleground states of OH, VA, FL & IA Obama’s average lead is 1%. Restated the race is tied in these states. That said, if you view the recent polls used to derive the averages in these states you’ll notice the polls are trending toward Romney.

Added in the reported higher enthusiasm among Republicans, historical tendency for undecided voters to break predominately for the challenger, the steady drumbeat of bad economic news the president is in a highly vulnerable position.

Tim, thanks for the insight. You and Brian (although coming from opposing perspectives on the outcome) have shared intelligent and insightful discussion on this. As someone who has literally written a political blog or two a month for almost a year now, I am pleasantly surprised at how on-track this discussion is getting. Normally, my blogs seem to be the place where people enjoy finding new and hyperbolic ways to show off their lack of knowledge about socialism, and creative uses for the word "libtard."

I want to make something a little clearer: I never said this was over. It's not as if Obama is blowing out Romney in places like Pennsylvania or Ohio. The polls are close, many times within the margin of error; but what I suppose I need to make more clear is that, watching these polls over time, Romney is not making up ground. The polls-- and if you look at the aggregate graph on the sidebar of fivethirtyeight, it shows this-- haven't really moved. This is why I said the DNC should do a wait-and-see approach through late September. At that point, all the bounces will be more-or-less over, barring some sort of catastrophe. I think everyone will pretty much have made up their own mind by then, if they haven't already. And with a much tougher path to win, that lack of time and movement cripples Romney's chances.

Thanks for replying. I think it's really difficult to discuss moral issues with someone whos' starting block is on another track as mine. When there is no common ground foundationally the conversation tends to be unproductive...it just goes in circles. I don't know if we have moral common ground or not.

So, with that said, aside from 'moral' or social issues, I think State rights are important. For instance, I don't see how the Federal Government has any right to get involved with education. Both political parties are guilty of violating that right both at the state and federal level.

Knowing my views on state rights, someone I respect recently asked me if I lived as a southerner just before the American Civil War, and I was dead-set against slavery, what would I have done. That question really blew me away. Here I am, a guy who believes strongly in state rights but who despises slavery! After thinking about it for a while, I decided I hope I would do the morally right thing. Do you think some southerners were faced with that dilemma?

I know I did not answer your question why one party is ruining this country faster than the other. Civil freedom is #1. I just feel that both partys are chipping away at civil freedom...for the sake of 'safety', 'health', 'environment', tolerance, etc. I know that these things are important but don't we go overboard a little?

I can't speak to moral comparisons between us, but I've never been of the belief that people who had different political views from me were somehow more or less moral than I. In fact, I've always found it bizarrely arbitrary that people identify the GOP as the party of religion and morality, when I find neither as such. But I guess that's a topic for another time.

I definitely understand your concern about states' rights, though. And, as someone who is in education, I fully understand your frustration. While I am adamantly opposed to the current administration's approach to education, I've also worked in three different states and seen how different the schools are in terms of curriculum. It's really incredible. And, while I find the thought of a national curriculum a bit invasive, I also have seen the chaos of what qualifies as "a good education" in different states.

The truth is, our approach to education is inherently flawed. All politicians, state federal and local, simply want to compare numbers against one another. They want the states to look better on paper, so the nation will look better on paper. And I am so removed from giving a crap about all that that it's mostly become a moot point for me.

In the end, the Democrats are not my party of choice. They are just my default party, because I find the current GOP radical and hyperbolic. And that scares me more than any of these other issues, because I consider my vote my most important freedom.

Patrick,
" I consider my vote my most important freedom."
I haven't missed a vote since 1976 exactly because of this belief.

Patrick,
"The truth is, our approach to education is inherently flawed".
How can WE (you and me) (grammar nazis go away) un-flaw it?

James,

I suppose this comment applies to both of our blog discussions, but I'm actually working on a book talking about just that. The problem is that, as a teacher, I have to be wary of publicly espousing much in the way of theory, or concrete examples, of the kinds of problems I mean, and the solutions I believe in. I sought legal advice before blogging for Patch to ensure I wasn't crossing any sort of line, professionally; and I was basically told to avoid education as a topic (three cheers for irony). I seem to have a knack, as you may have noticed, for creating a bit of controversy; but I am also very serious about keeping my opinions out of my classroom.

As with most of the stuff I write, the book involves a lot of research which proves that the problems I see in education are broader than just my own anecdotes. I'm also writing it with a very serious concern for the privacy of my students and parents, obviously. If and when publishing that book could/would/should become a reality, I could envision a scenario where I'd have to quit teaching before its release.

J.T. - You have made some very insightful comments. I largely agree with most of your points and opinions. It is important to be open minded and to listen to all sides of an issue. Unfortunately that is becoming more and more difficult these days.

I also agree that both parties have us headed in the wrong direction and often times I find myself faced with the only choice of who would do it at a slower pace. This is truly unfortunate. I like you am a believer in States rights and think the federal government has become far too intrusive. Your slavery question is an interesting one. I know there were many people in the South who abhorred slavery. They helped with the Underground Railroad, they provided safe haven for the slaves, they wrote opinion pieces, they worked from behind enemy lines, or they moved up North and joined the union. There are always choices to be made, some might just be difficult.

I agree with almost all of that. Especially that listening is the key. That, and patience; and a willingness to accept that you might be wrong on an issue.

I think you should definitely consider writing blogs for patch. They will probably make you use your full name, but you clearly have some intelligent and calm perspectives-- and Patch definitely needs that. Hopefully it would elevate the discussion towards a bit more civility. If you get around to it, I'd love to repay the favor by reading and commenting on anything you might post. Thanks again.

I saw that this morning. (I don't know why it's shocking that it came from the Huffington Post site to you, because it was reported in a lot of places, but I guess that's sort of irrelevant.) This model has Romney winning every battleground state, and I think that's a tad ridiculous.

There's two models that have predicted a Romney win; this one and one called the Hibbs/"Bread and Peace" model. While I agree this amounts, somewhat, to a "chink in my idea" (people keep ignoring the time at which I said the DNC should act by diverting funds), I'm still going with 538 as my primary source for the argument. The track record for the last two elections is about as flawless as I would think possible.

And, to your other point, I would think that polling and modeling techniques have evolved greatly since the great flub of 1980-- but, I could be wrong. And, if I am, you'll be happy and I'll be embarrassed. Either way, I don't think the DNC is (actually listening to me, or) smart enough to take the gamble I've presented and we'll be right back in this mess for the next two years, at least.

Tater,
It turns out my candles are almost burnt out, and my poster has been worn down with kisses. I would imagine your conservative website "sources" and your Ron White CDs are probably worn down as well. Maybe if you enlighten me as to what he's "doing," we can have an actual, intelligent conversation that doesn't involve calling each other "moonbats."

Or you could actually write down your ideas in long form as a blog, instead of trolling everyone else's and name-calling for lack of being able to come up with a more mature perspective.