Mr. emma's bee & I early-voted Friday in Cincinnati. There was a flood of happy voters pouring out of the county building, and they all looked like Obama supporters to me (i.e., nary a grouchy old white male in sight).

There is no reason to panic. But there is also no reason to be complacent. I sent more money today.

The VP debate heartened me a bit and it looks like Obama has reached the bottom of his free-fall, but I'm not relaxing until the post-VP debate polls start coming in around Tuesday and Obama has his second debate that same day. Biden did his part but Obama really can't have another weak performance. If he does okay on Tuesday (No groan-inducing gaffes! No attack left unanswered!) then I'll feel much better. Romney is throwing a lot of mud now, but much of it is groundless. Plus, he's finding out he can't just run away from his conservative stance on abortion and reproductive rights.

I wonder if Obama can predict which Romney he'll be facing so he can prepare for the bullshit stream?

So, with early voters (people who have likely made up their mind...) where is the other 10% going? 51+39 = 90? I don't see that many write ins...or is there something I am missing.

Obama's vulnerability in losing the election is increasing by every passing day by the drip-drip-drip of Benghazi-gate. Let's take CBS News 60 minutes correspondent, Lara Logan (a liberal progressive), and her courageous remarks to the Better Government Association 2012 luncheon:

“And when I look at what’s happening in Libya, this big song and dance, whether this was a terrorist attack or a protest, and you just want to scream for god’s sake, are you kidding me, the last time we were attacked like this was the USS Cole which was a prelude to the 1998 embassy bombings which was a prelude to 9/11. And you’re sending FBI to investigate. I hope to God you’re sending in your best clandestine warriors who will go in to exact revenge and let the world know that the United States will not be attacked on its own soil, that its ambassadors will not be murdered and that the United States will not do nothing about it.”

“If you don’t hold your leaders accountable, there is no democracy,” said Logan.

@6 - Please provide a source that Lara Logan is a "liberal progressive." It's also funny that the story you link to was written by the "Paulding County Republican Examiner." Definitely no bias there! This is really all you got huh?

What a loathsome creature you are.

All Obama has to say is: You know videotape exists, right? To any surprise positions.

Obama has to hit it out of the park on Tuesday or he will lose the election.

Actually yeah GDfR I'd much rather have the "war on terror" conducted like a police operation, even with the bit of questionable assassinations and drone strikes on the side.

Wars are expensive. I know Republicans love them, but wars are pricey.

Yes you'll have a few fuck ups but in the end, 4 lives are less then 4,000. And well. Politics suck sometimes. Despite your fantasies.

@6 What's the justification your employers have given you for how the Republicans helped cut funding for embassy security?

I'm interested in how severely they twist reality or outright ignore it in your script.

@11: Excuse me? Let's look at Politico:

With Republicans turning the Libya into a political issue, Democrats have countered that House GOP leaders actually sought to cut funding for embassy security, which Issa tried to refute.

"You can't always look to [new] money when there's money sitting there," Issa said. "We're going through a 'Mission Accomplished' moment. Eleven years after Sept. 11 [2001], Americans were attacked by terrorists who pre-planned to kill Americans. That happened, and we can't be in denial."

But to be clear, the security situation is not the major transgression here. What is, is that the Obama administration continues to think that it can spin events in foreign lands without full candor with the American people. To send out Susan Rice to five Sunday talk shows to claim it was a spontaneous uprising (when the State Department admits surveillance tape shows there was nothing like that) is a stab in the gut by the Obama administration to the integrity of the American experience.

@7: Most would agree that 60 minutes correspondents are of a liberal disposition. But now, yes, Google "liberal" with "Lara Logan" and you get a soup of very interesting hits. Indeed, I stand corrected, she is perhaps a former liberal having seen what she has.

I find it really interesting, that by my calling attention to Ms. Logan's remarks you have the audacity to call me a loathsome creature. Okay, but still I trust trust that I am not as loathsome as her rapists in Cairo were, ey mate?

@7: Oh, and regardless of the bias I use to cite, that doesn't mean it's untrue. After all, the NYT has a left bias, and if I were to link to there you would afford the iron lady your utmost credence.

And, that blue line is ticking up again at fivethirtyeight.com.

Ohio has early voting & 20% of the voters have already cast their ballots. Polling shows the President with a 3-1 advantage in this early voting. That means that even if Willard could tie Obama for the remaining 80% he still loses Ohio! It is not likely the Rmoney/rAyn campaign can get even 48% of the remaining votes so the state is lost to them.

Jew for Hitler . . . er, sorry gay douche for Rmoney:

You obviously don't read the NYT do you? If you did you would know their famous lefty lean is a thing of the long ago past (if it ever actually existed). They were a huge supporter of Boy Blunder and his fabulous efforts to invade all the Middle East as well as the GOPs work to starve grams and gramps.

But then, as Dr. Colbert pointed out, "Reality has a well known liberal bias"

@14 - so you equate the "bias" of the NYT with the "Paulding County Republican Examiner" which have writers that serve as functionaries in their local GOP. Well huh. I guess I shouldn't be surprised as you're willing to throw away your rights (and those of millions of others) for a candidate whose foreign, domestic, and tax policy he can't articulate besides OBAMA BAD.

I stand by my original point regarding your loathesomeness.

the employment of andrew ross sorkin, matt bai, and formerly, judith "stenographer" miller refute your contention.

the NYT leans left where it is convenient to power and money - namely in social and cultural issues. and i said LEAN. they are most assuredly center left at worst/best.

@6,
Speaking of "Benghazi-gate" (don't get me started on how idiotic it is to add "gate" to the end of something to identify it as a controversy) I saw on Fox news today how Republicans are blaming Obama for not sending enough security to the embassy. Can you tell me why Fox isn't talking about how Republicans cut the budget for State Department security? Seems like a substantial cut to their security budget might be related to why they didn't have enough security.

Also, the Cole isn't the last time we were attacked like this. We had 12 attacks on our embassies in the 8 years of Bush. http://www.democraticunderground.com/100… Is that because Bush projected weakness too or does that argument only work on Democrats? If so, maybe you have a different excuse as to why there were so many attacks under Bush. Oh...right, because they hate our freedom.

@6, Reading your ilk discussing how we should "hold our leaders accountable" makes me feel nauseous. Quit shoving your blatant hypocrisy (or your rank stupidity [your choice ...]) into our faces. Even if we imitated you and suddenly developed amnesia about anything antedating Obama and pretty much lied about everything since, you can't even hold your candidate to a consistent position on issues. How would you expect to hold him to account for anything?

@17: Oh really?
Public Editor Criticizes NYT for Downplaying Benghazi Massacre, Gets Explanation: 'There Were Six Better Stories'

Note to Pridge: This link goes to the NYT itself, so its right biased free.

The sample size of early voters is relatively small, but the Democrat's margin is still well above the poll's credibility interval - a measurement of polls' accuracy - of 10 percentage points.

*slams head against desk* That's not what accuracy or margin of error (or credibility interval) means. I wouldn't expect anything else from the Huffington Post, but that piece looks like it was actually written by Reuters, not HuffPo, so that is pretty baffling.

(This has nothing to do with the discussion in the comments, I just wanted to point that out. Journalists who don't know how to interpret statistics probably shouldn't be writing about them.)

Romney leading among women, according to USA Today/Gallup.

Correction: Romney leads among women in the swing states.

And now Romney is leading nationally by 4% in the Gallup tracker. The Stranger has been wrong at every turn.