'It Was the Video'

A devastating new clip from American Crossroads, via Instapundit:

PREVIOUSLY: "Nate Silver Blows Gasket as Gallup Shows Romney Pulling Away in the Presidential Horse Race."

Nate Silver Blows Gasket as Gallup Shows Romney Pulling Away in the Presidential Horse Race

Gallup's not the highest ranked public opinion poll for predictive accuracy, but as the nation's original polling organization the firm's got enormous credibility and prestige. No doubt that helps explain why wonder boy Nate Silver's practically blown a gasket over the latest Gallup tracking numbers that find Mitt Romney pulling out a large lead in the presidential horse race, 52 to 45 among likely voters in the latest daily tracking.

Here's Silver's piece, which is especially noteworthy for its passive attack on Gallup for frankly ruining the guy's day, "Gallup vs. the World":

Our database contains records from 136 distinct pollsters that have released at least one state or national survey at some point in this election cycle. Of those, 53 are active enough to have issued at least one survey since Oct. 1.

With so much data to sort through, it will usually be a counterproductive use of one’s time to get overly attached to the results of any one particular poll. Whether you look at the relatively simple averaging methods used by Web sites like Real Clear Politics, or the more involved techniques in the FiveThirtyEight forecast, the Gallup national tracking poll constitutes a relatively small part of the polling landscape...

Er, okay...

"A relatively small part of the polling landscape," which of means of course that it would be "counterproductive" to spend much time attempting to explain away such a horribly unrepresentative survey, right?

Well, no.

Little Boy Nate's pissed that Gallup's messing up Obama's mojo and he's going to use his perch at NYT's progressive propaganda shop to set the record straight for the right-thinking political cognoscenti. He continues, for example:

Over all, the Gallup daily tracking poll accounts for only about 3 percent of the weight in this stage of the calculation. The national tracking polls collectively, including Gallup, account for only about 10 percent of it. Most of the weight, instead, is given to the state polls.

This is, obviously, a rather detailed answer to the seemingly simple question of how much information is provided by the Gallup national tracking poll, as opposed to all the other state and national surveys.
Nevertheless, any rigorous attempt to consider the value of the Gallup poll would probably get you to something of the same answer. Perhaps the Gallup poll accounts for 5 or 10 percent of the information that an election analyst should evaluate on a given day.

The Gallup poll’s influence on the subjective perception about where the presidential race stands seems to be proportionately much greater than that, however — especially when the poll seems to diverge from the consensus.

This simply isn’t rational, in my view. As I discuss in my book, our first instincts are often quite poor when it comes to weighing information. We tend to put too much emphasis on the newest, most widely reported and most dramatic pieces of data — more than is usually warranted.

Poor Nate.

If Romney pulls out an upset on November 6th Pinch Sulzberger Jr.'s going to have to the wonder boy on suicide watch. Seriously. Anyone's who's pegging Obama at a 64.8 percent chance of winning the Electoral College at this point's obviously running a couple of quarts low already. An upset going to put that guy over the edge.

It's not helping that other major polls are also not cooperating with the wonder boy's super sophisticated shuck-and-jive razzmatazz rabitt-out-of-a-hat statistical polling shakedown model of progressive Democrat Orwellian truth generation. Here's a report from this morning, for example, at Reuters, "Romney gains on Obama on foreign policy issues: poll":

Republican challenger Mitt Romney has gained substantial ground on Democratic President Barack Obama on foreign policy issues but Obama still holds a narrow lead, a poll showed on Thursday.

Ahead of Monday's foreign policy debate between Obama and Romney, 47 percent of voters favor Obama and 43 percent back Romney when asked who could do a better job on foreign policy, according to the Pew Research Center for People and the Press.

"This represents a substantial gain for Romney, who trailed Obama by 15 points on foreign policy issues in September," Pew said.

The October 4-7 poll was carried out about three weeks after the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, in which the U.S. ambassador was killed. Romney has seized on the issue to accuse Obama of failed leadership.

The poll involved 1,511 adults, including 1,201 registered voters. It has a margin of error of 2.9 percent for adults and 3.3 percent for voters.

A 15 point pick-up since September 15th. Impossible!

Actually, not. The public's seen this president's 3:00am moment and it's not impressed. Perhaps polls coming out next week might show a little improvement in Obama's numbers when factoring in the Candy Crowley handicap, but then again, Romney'll be playing for keeps on foreign policy on Monday, and the Republican challenger may well deliver the coup de grâce to the embattled incumbent.

I'll update on Nate Silver's psychiatric condition at that time.

UPDATE: The Lonely Conservative links, "Romney Surges In Polls, Nate Silver Hardest Hit":

Now, I’m not hoping that Silver will wind up on suicide watch. There’s no need, because he can always go back to baseball. Oh, wait, is he a Yankees fan? I don’t know, never mind.

And there's a Memeorandum thread now as well, the second thread I've gotten this week. Cool!

More from The Other McCain, "Nate Silver Asks: Whose Shark Is This, and Why Do I Feel a Need to Jump It?"

Still more. Linked at Larwyn's Linx. Thanks!

And Newser too!

Candy Crowley Slammed With Fat Jokes After Shilling for Obama at Hofstra

Hey, don't blame me: I think she's a hottie.

But see Bliss Tree, "Saddest Presidential Debate 2012 Trend: Fat-Shaming Candy Crowley."

And The Other McCain, "@CrowleyCNN Targeted by Fat Jokes, Legitimate Criticism, But Mainly …":

John Nolte at Breitbart.com called Crowley’s performance “a scandal; a total and complete media scandal . . . Absolutely disgraceful.” Matthew Sheffield of Newsbusters said Crowley “disgraced herself . . . showing why many Americans were rightfully suspicious of her ability to moderate a presidential debate fairly.” Donald Douglas at American Power called it “the worst debate moderation in presidential debate history.”

Not one of them felt it necessary to point out that Candy Crowley is fat, and I’m happy for that, because too many people resort to such cheap insults when they’re angry, and it hurts the feelings of fat people everywhere. This kind of cruelty toward BBWs and plumpers also bothers “chubby chasers” like Dan Collins, whose appreciation of Rubenesque ladies is so often misunderstood.

More at the link.

And don't miss the outstanding essay from Dan Collins, "About the Benghazi “Terror” Statement in the Second Debate."

Also cool was getting a Memeorandum thread yesterday.

More later...

Victoria Beckham Gets the Coco Treatment!

Wow!

That lady's got some legs!

At London's Daily Mail, "PICTURE EXCLUSIVE: Ooh la la: c'est Madame Posh! Victoria Beckham is 'honoured' to pose at Coco Chanel's house."

'Sweet Home Alabama'

The video's from just last week, at Harrah's Rincon near San Diego, on October 7th. The hotel was holding tickets for my wife, but we weren't able to make it. Bummer too. Looks like an awesome gig.

And from yesterday's afternoon drive time at The Sound L.A.:

3:00 - I Still Haven't Found... by U2

3:05 - Daniel by Elton John

3:09 - La Grange by Zz Top

3:12 - Jack And Diane by John Cougar

3:17 - Fool In The Rain by Led Zeppelin

3:23 - Last Train To Clarksville by Monkees

3:32 - Come Sail Away by Styx

3:38 - I Need To Know by Tom Petty

3:40 - Take It To The Limit by Eagles

3:45 - Sweet Home Alabama by Lynyrd Skynyrd

3:50 - I Melt With You by Modern English

Kerry Ladka Slams Obama's Non-Response on Libya Attack

At London's Daily Mail, "'Obama didn't totally answer the question': Voter who probed about Libya attack during debate slams President's 'unsatisfactory' response."

Well, that's what you get from this bumbling egomaniac.

And watch this killer clip from Revealing Politics:

Holding President Obama Accountable

Via Carl in Jerusalem.

Syrian Rebels Get Missiles

At the Wall Street Journal, "Fears Rise That Portable Antiaircraft Weapons Could Wind Up With Terrorists":

ANTAKYA, Turkey—Some Syrian rebel factions have obtained advanced portable antiaircraft weapons, according to rebels and regional officials, a development that could alter the Syrian war's trajectory and fan U.S. concerns that such weapons could end up in the hands of anti-Western Islamist militias.

Video footage uploaded to the Internet earlier this week appears to show rebels in Aleppo using weapons that military experts and rebels say are heat-seeking, shoulder-fired missiles, the first documented instance in the conflict. Versions of the weapons—also known as man-portable air defense systems, or Manpads—have been smuggled into the country over the past two months through Turkey and to a lesser extent Lebanon, according to Syrian rebels and those who supply them arms through an "operations room" coordinated by regional governments.

"Northern Syria is awash with advanced antitank and antiaircraft weapons. The situation has changed very quickly," a Syrian involved in coordinating weapons procurement with regional states said. The Manpad transfers weren't sanctioned by the regional states that have armed and financed Syria's rebels since early this year, he added.

On Wednesday, fighters said they downed a military helicopter in the town of Maarat al-Nouman, in the northern Idlib province, one of at least four helicopters and jets they say they have brought down across Syria this week. It couldn't be determined how the craft were brought down. But the reported incidents, three of which are documented on videos but couldn't be independently verified, appear to mark an increased pace over the roughly weekly downings reported in Syria since the summer.

U.S. officials oppose the introduction of such weapons in Syria, citing long-standing fears that they could wind up in the hands of anti-Western militias that could eventually use them against the U.S. and its allies, or sell them to terrorists. "Obviously, we are concerned about the proliferation of Manpads," said a U.S. official.

The rebels in Aleppo who are depicted in the footage uploaded to the Internet this week are identified as members of the al-Salam and Hamza battalions, two of the relatively unknown divisions in a mushrooming insurgency. Rebels with the two largest fighting factions in Aleppo couldn't identify the battalions in the videos, though they confirmed that Manpads acquired over the past two weeks had made their way into the city.

Way to go Baracky!

See also the New York Times, "Rebel Arms Flow Is Said to Benefit Jihadists in Syria."

David Bowie Spotted in New York

He quit touring in 2004 after having a heart attack during his final performance of the Ziggy Stardust encore. I saw him perform in Irvine for that tour. I'm glad he's taking it easy nowadays.

See Telegraph UK, "Reclusive David Bowie spotted on rare public outing":

The reclusive singer David Bowie has been pictured in New York on a rare public outing dressed in cap, shades and hooded top, bearing little resemblance to the fashion icon of the 1970s.

The reclusive singer David Bowie has been pictured in New York on a rare public outing dressed in cap, shades and hooded top, bearing little resemblance to the fashion icon of the 1970s.

Bowie lives in a large Lower-Manhattan apartment with his ex-model wife Iman and daughter Lexi and has been almost invisible since suffering a major heart attack during a jinxed 2004 tour.

Michelle Malkin Slams Anti-Woman Obama Administration

I noted previously the left's ultra-pathetic "binder" attacks on Mitt Romney. I forgot the epic hypocrisy, however --- a major omission, considering how everything's pure hypocrisy on the left.

Hawkeye Voters Apologize for Backing Obama in 2008: 'An Open Letter to Our Fellow Iowans'

This is awesome.

See the Des Moines Register, "In full-page newspaper ad, 13 Iowa voters apologize for supporting Obama in 2008."

Read it: "An Open Letter to Our Fellow Iowans."

Change! Violent Crime Up 17 Percent in 2011, Survey Finds

Hey, thank a Democrat!

At the Los Angeles Times, "Violent crimes up 17% in 2011."

The Times' suggests it "could be a fluke." Yeah, like Obama's election was a fluke.

The crime stats will improve when the economy improves, and that's not going to happen under a second term of President Clusterf-k.

Wild Kayla Fitz

She's lovely.

And who doesn't love Sweet Cheeks bikini?

Acts of Terror

Via Legal Insurrection.

Meet Mitt Romney's Binder Babes

Well, the progs are in fits about Mitt Romney's "binder full of women," and boy, are they jonesin' to debunk the idea that Mitt's got creds with the ladies. See the idiots at Mememorandum and especially David Bernstein, "Mind the Binder."

And at London's Daily Mail, "Revealed: The high-flying women in Romney's 'binder'... but was he telling the truth about his cabinet selection process?" And also at the Hill, "Binders' remark shines spotlight on Romney appointments as governor."

Big Bird. Binders full of women. The progs are really struggling to come up with something, just like President Clusterf-k.

Talk about playing "small ball." These people are complete losers.

Smokin' Alessandra Ambrosio's in Victoria's Secret's $2.5m Fantasy Bra

That fashion show is coming up soon, I'll have full coverage.

Meanwhile, at London's Daily Mail, "'I was worried. I was in total mother mode': New mom Alessandra Ambrosio's race to get in shape to model Victoria's Secret's $2.5m Fantasy Bra."

Attempted Terrorist Attack at New York Federal Reserve Bank

At the New York Post, "Terrorist attempts to blow up Federal Reserve Bank."

And at WABC-TV New York, "Plot foiled to attack Federal Reserve in Manhattan" (via Memeorandum).

More at the New York Times, "Man Accused of Plot to Blow Up Federal Reserve Bank of New York."

Expect updates...

The Morning After: Obama Takes Second Debate 'On Points'

Charles Krauthammer is a tad more charitable than I would be, but his basic gist is in the same park as my comments last night. Obama had a good night. He was aggressive and clearly wanted to make up ground. And my main agreement with Krauthammer is on the point that Romney was in his wheelhouse on the longer soliloquies. But he mentions that Romney missed his chance on Libya. I too was waiting for Romney to bring up Obama's appearance on Letterman, where he was still talking about the so-called anti-Muslim video two weeks later, and about the same time he was on Univision, where the Mexican journalists stood in as the fourth branch for the American media. Clearly, in the president's mind it wasn't an "act of terror" at all, but a "spontaneous" event, just as Susan Rice was tasked to argue nearly a week after the deaths of our countrymen in Benghazi.

Because it was close, the leftist media will spin that Obama trounced Romney. The New York Times is up to the task this morning, "For the President, Punch After Punch":

But the Wall Street Journal comes back with the sober big picture analysis, "A President Without a Plan":

President Obama bounced off the canvas with a more spirited debate at Hofstra University on Tuesday night, as everyone expected he would. He was animated and on the attack. The question we kept asking as the evening wore on, however, is what does he want to do for the next four years?

At least two questioners put the point directly, yet Mr. Obama never provided much of an answer. Sure, he wants to hire 100,000 more teachers, as if there is the money to hire them or it would make much difference to student outcomes.

He wants to invest in "solar and wind and biofuels, energy-efficient cars," which probably means more Solyndras and A123s (see nearby). He wants to raise taxes on the rich—that's one thing he's really passionate about. Oh, and he does want to pass the immigration reform he said he'd propose four years ago but never did propose in his first two years when his party controlled Congress and he might have passed it.

But otherwise, what's his case for four more years? Judging by Tuesday's debate, the President's argument for re-election is basically this: He's not as awful as Mitt Romney. Mr. Obama spent most of his time attacking either Mr. Romney himself (he invests in Chinese companies), his tax plan as a favor for the rich ("that's been his history") or this or that statement he has made over the last year ("the 47%," which Mr. Obama saved for the closing word of the entire debate).

Continue reading.

More at Memeorandum and Politico.

And at Twitchy, "Romney right, Obama and water-carrier Crowley wrong on ‘act of terror’ claim."

Hofstra Presidential Debate — FULL VIDEO

Here's the complete debate clip:

PREVIOUSLY: "Candy Crowley Shills for Obama at Hofstra Debate!"

And the inevitable, "CNN Poll: Nearly half say Obama won showdown." (Via Memeorandum.)

As I noted earlier, I thought Obama was holding his own, but clearly, he got some help from the court shill Candy Crowley.

Indeed, see Astute Bloggers, "WOW: LUNTZ INDIE GROUP SWINGS TO ROMNEY AFTER DEBATE #2."

And FWIW, here's the report at NYT, "Obama and Romney Turn Up the Temperature at Their Second Debate." (Via Memeorandum.)

President Obama and Mitt Romney engaged Tuesday in one of the most intensive clashes in a televised presidential debate, with tensions between them spilling out in interruptions, personal rebukes and accusations of lying as they parried over the last four years under Mr. Obama and what the next four would look like under a President Romney.

RTWT.

Bottom Line: The president will have slowed Mitt's momentum a bit, with the help of the moderator. The later polling data might find Romney on top, especially if there's a big controversy over the moderator's bias. But the ultimate sparks are going to fly when the final debate of the season is held on October 23rd, which will be on foreign policy. Romney will be ready. He won't let Obama get propped up by the so-called "impartial" debate moderators. It's going to be an epic smack down.

Candy Crowley Shills for Obama at Hofstra Debate!

I saw the pre-debate criticisms of Candy Crowley, and I held back from commenting. I wanted to give her a chance. But I can honestly say now that this was the worst debate moderation in presidential debate history --- and I've been watching them since 1988. The moderator's jobs is to moderate, which means to act as a referee and keep the proceedings on track. A moderator is never a participant, for to do so means inevitably to take up sides. So for President Obama to call on Crowley for a fact check during the debate is like asking the NFL refs to give you a favorable spot for the first down in the 4th quarter of a game that's all tied up. No one would ever countenance it, and as the post-debate spin picks up, especially over the next couple of days, CNN's going to come in for enormous criticism for propping up the president and violating the announced rules and advanced directives of the Commission on Presidential Debates.

Ann Althouse has this at Instapundit:

CANDY CROWLEY INSERTED HERSELF INTO THE DEBATE, OUTRAGEOUSLY, to break up Romney’s most dramatic moment, when Romney was questioning what Obama said the day after the attack in Benghazi. Obama had said he’d called the attack an “act of terror” and Romney was staring him down about it. Crowley broke up the showdown, saying “He did in fact call it an act of terror,” which took the wind out of Romney’s sails. We were advised to check the transcript, but the dramatic moment was lost. The transcript shows Romney was right, and Crowley and Obama were wrong.

Althouse updates with Patrick Brennan at National Review, "‘An Act of Terror’?" (at Memeorandum):

President Obama claimed tonight that he called the Benghazi attack an act of terror the day after it occurred, in the Rose Garden. Mitt Romney seemed skeptical, and asked him whether he stood by that statement — that he’d called it terrorism, rather than a spontaneous act arising out of a demonstration.

But here are his remarks....

One could take that as a reference to acts which include the tragedy in Benghazi, obviously, but there was clearly no effort made to label it an act of terrorism. One reason why this might be: According to U.S. law, acts of terrorism are premeditated. The Obama administration’s line for days following Obama’s Rose Garden statement suggested that the attack wasn’t premeditated.

Read the whole thing for the context. And while it's clear that the president only made an oblique reference to "acts of terror" ---- and not an explicit, purposeful condemnation of a premeditated attack ---- the exact wording provides presidential wiggle room, and then progressives will just continue to shill for the administration's cover up.

This was a new low in presidential debates. If folks will remember, as I always argue, we're no longer in a media environment where professionalism demands strict impartiality. We've long returned to a "partisan press" in which media outlets take sides. What was entirely new tonight is that a debate moderator who was charged with the trust of objectivity and fairness injected herself into a debate to deflate the momentum of the Republican challenger. It was as if Candy Crowley was of the monarch's cortege, and she juggled a court performance to place the king in the best possible light, not allowing a glimpse of true frailty of the man behind the throne. It was the spectacle of feigned impartiality in the service of entrenched power. In this case, the president was being brought down low, with truth to power charging from the challenger's attacks, then only to be deflated by a "fact-checking" moment that works to the default advantage of the incumbent. That alone made the debate a travesty of democracy.

There in fact had been a good number of back-and-forth rounds between the candidates, and I was expecting that folks might, some more moderate folks, call it a draw. But on the economy, on taxes and ---- especially ---- on energy policy, Mitt Romney was eviscerating the president. It was almost no contest at those moments. Romney, like during the first debate, was in his wheelhouse. And Crowley clearly sensed the president's trouble and gladly shilled for him at key points, shouting down Romney's attempts to get in brief clarifications and then, of course, taking sides when it came to the president's request to "check the transcript." Seriously. I've never seen such an outrageous thing at a debate. But clearly, Obama needed help.

More at Memeorandum.

Expect updates.

9:29pm Pacific: Fact-checking the debate fact-checker, at WaPo, "Fact Check: Libya attack":

What did Obama say in the Rose Garden a day after the attack in Libya? ”No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this nation,” he said.

But he did not say “terrorism”—and it took the administration days to concede that that it an “act of terrorism” that appears unrelated to initial reports of anger at a video that defamed the prophet Muhammad.

Romney was right.

9:42pm Pacific: Here's the headline at Astute Bloggers, "HUGE BREAKING NEWS: OMFG: OBAMA LIED AND CROWLEY SWORE TO IT: OBAMA DID NOT UTTER THE WORD TERROR AT THE ROSEGARDEN SPEECH!"

And over at Althouse's blog, "'The moderator will not... intervene in the debate except to acknowledge the questioners from the audience or enforce the time limits, and invite candidate comments during the 2 minute response period'":

That was the contractual term that Candy Crowley agreed to and blatantly violated in the debate tonight. She let us know in advance that she wasn't going to follow it...

More at the link.

And boy, like I said, she sure did blow off the advance directives not to deviate from the impartial script. It's a staggering assault of the process, and a blow to the decency and sense of fair play of the average voter.

9:55pm Pacific: At Breitbart, "CROWLEY'S FALSE FACT CHECK SAVES PRESIDENT, DERAILS DEBATE - UPDATE: CROWLEY BACKTRACKS."

This is a scandal; a total and complete media scandal committed by a woman who promised to violate her contract and to insert herself into the debate. All she did for weeks was brag about how she intended to grab the spotlight -- and boy did she ever.

Absolutely disgraceful.