Just released today.

The race for President of the United States remains far too close to call between Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain as both candidates head toward the finish line, a recent Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby daily tracking telephone polls shows.

The survey, including a three-day sample of 1,220 likely voters collected over the previous three days – approximately 400 per day from Oct. 5-7, 2008 – shows that Obama holds a slight advantage amounting to 1.9 percentage points over McCain. This represents a bit of a recovery by McCain, who had been sliding in some polls before his running mate, Sarah Palin, put in a strong performance in her one and only debate performance last Thursday.

The Boston Globe’s Jeff Jacoby reacts to the debate:

JOHN MCCAIN’S opening words last night were: “Senator Obama, it’s good to be with you at a town hall meeting!” Indeed it was. We now know why Barack Obama declined McCain’s invitation earlier this year to appear together in a series of 10 town hall meetings around the country. This is the format in which McCain excels, and he excelled last night. He was substantive, sympathetic, strong – sure of himself, his facts, and his convictions. On issue after issue, McCain sounded clear and mature. In a word, presidential.

Though most of the debate dealt with domestic issues, it was a foreign-policy question that sent me flying to my files. Moderator Tom Brokaw asked the candidates what their “doctrine” would be “in situations where there’s a humanitarian crisis, but it does not affect our national security,” such as “the Congo, where 4.5 million people have died since 1998,” or Rwanda or Somalia.

In such cases, answered Obama, “we have moral issues at stake.” Of course the United States must act to stop genocide, he said. “When genocide is happening, when ethnic cleansing is happening . . . and we stand idly by, that diminishes us.”

But that wasn’t how Obama sounded last year, when he was competing for the Democratic nomination and was unbending in his demand for an American retreat from Iraq. Back then, he dismissed fears that a US withdrawal would unleash a massive Iraqi bloodbath. “Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama said Thursday the United States cannot use its military to solve humanitarian problems and that preventing a potential genocide in Iraq isn’t a good enough reason to keep US forces there,” the AP reported on July 20, 2007 (my italics).

What kind of candidate is it whose moral response to genocide – genocide – can reverse itself 180 degrees in a matter of months? Is that the kind of candidate who ought to be the leader of the free world?

It’s hardly the kind of person who ought to be in the U.S. Senate. But, Barack Obama gets a pass on his failings all the time.

Tonight, I’ll be live-blogging the Second Presidential Debate over at VoteBitter.com.

VoteBitter.com has a nifty shirt for sale from their website:

Click here to get your shirt!

Click here to check out the liveblogging of the presidential debate at 9 PM Eastern.

UPDATE, by Mark Noonan: As an aside, Obama’s old friends at ACORN hired ID thieves to canvass for voters in Nevada. Some people say that all the voter fraud and illegal fundraising is just all coincidental – nothing to see here, just move along…. Continue reading →

Time’s Mark Halperin: “Is it fair to say that [Barack Obama] continued to associate with [Bill Ayers] professionally — and personally on a casual basis — even after he learned?”

Obama Senior Adviser Robert Gibbs: “He continued to serve on a charitable board and an educational grant board with money supplied by Walter Annenberg, a Republican who was an ambassador under Richard Nixon. Yes.”

Halperin: “But with the knowledge of Ayers’ past?”

Gibbs: “Yes.”

While I primarily trust polls like Gallup and Rasmussen, there’s always reason to look at other polls, and asses current and potential trends. So, I think it’s worth noting that a CBS poll says that the race has tightened since the VP Debate, and Zogby’s Daily Tracking Poll, has Obama only up by 3.

Yes, national polls are not important at this point… state polls are. However, one trend I casually observed was that the trends of state polls seems to follow those of national polls, with some period of delay.

So, we’ll just have to see if the tide has already started turning in McCain’s favor. The bailout business is behind us, and the Obama campaign is clearly rattled by the emergence of Bill Ayers a topic of the campaign. Dick Morris is also predicting the race will tighten.

Look your left, look your right. Look up and look down. Everywhere you look, the left is trying to steal this election for Barack Obama.

Nevada state authorities seized records and computers Tuesday from the Las Vegas office of an organization that tries to get low-income people registered to vote, after fielding complaints of voter fraud.

Bob Walsh, spokesman for the Nevada secretary of state’s office, told FOXNews.com the raid was prompted by ongoing complaints about “erroneous” registration information being submitted by the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, also called ACORN.

The group was submitting the information through a voter sign-up drive known as Project Vote.

“Some of them used nonexistent names, some of them used false addresses and some of them were duplicates of previously filed applications,” Walsh said, describing the complaints, which largely came from the registrar in Clark County, Nev.

Secretary of State Ross Miller said the fraudulent registrations included forms for the starting lineup of the Dallas Cowboys football team.

“Tony Romo is not registered to vote in the state of Nevada, and anybody trying to pose as Terrell Owens won’t be able to cast a ballot on Nov. 4,” Miller said.

Walsh said agents from both the secretary of state’s office and Nevada attorney general’s office conducted the raid at 9:30 a.m. local time, and “took a bunch of stuff.”

In a race expected to be close on Election Day, this is serious stuff.

Today, 100 distinguished economists at major American universities and research organizations, including five Nobel Prize winners, put out a joint statement explain why Barack Obama’s proposals including “misguided tax hikes,” would “decrease the number of jobs in America.”

Below is the entire statement:

Barack Obama argues that his proposals to raise tax rates and halt international trade agreements would benefit the American economy. They would do nothing of the sort. Economic analysis and historical experience show that they would do the opposite. They would reduce economic growth and decrease the number of jobs in America. Moreover, with the credit crunch, the housing slump, and high energy prices weakening the U.S. economy, his proposals run a high risk of throwing the economy into a deep recession. It was exactly such misguided tax hikes and protectionism, enacted when the U.S. economy was weak in the early 1930s, that greatly increased the severity of the Great Depression.

We are very concerned with Barack Obama’s opposition to trade agreements such as the pending one with Colombia, the new one with Central America, or the established one with Canada and Mexico. Exports from the United States to other countries create jobs for Americans. Imports make goods available to Americans at lower prices and are a particular benefit to families and individuals with low incomes. International trade is also a powerful source of strength in a weak economy. In the second quarter of this year, for example, increased international trade did far more to stimulate the U.S. economy than the federal government’s “stimulus” package.

Ironically, rather than supporting international trade, Barack Obama is now proposing yet another so-called stimulus package, which would do very little to grow the economy. And his proposal to finance the package with higher taxes on oil would raise oil prices directly and by reducing exploration and production.

We are equally concerned with his proposals to increase tax rates on labor income and investment. His dividend and capital gains tax increases would reduce investment and cut into the savings of millions of Americans. His proposals to increase income and payroll tax rates would discourage the formation and expansion of small businesses and reduce employment and take-home pay, as would his mandates on firms to provide expensive health insurance.

After hearing such economic criticism of his proposals, Barack Obama has apparently suggested to some people that he might postpone his tax increases, perhaps to 2010. But it is a mistake to think that postponing such tax increases would prevent their harmful effect on the economy today. The prospect of such tax rate increases in 2010 is already a drag on the economy. Businesses considering whether to hire workers today and expand their operations have time horizons longer than a year or two, so the prospect of higher taxes starting in 2009 or 2010 reduces hiring and investment in 2008.

In sum, Barack Obama’s economic proposals are wrong for the American economy. They defy both economic reason and economic experience.

In the extended entry is the list of economists who signed on: Continue reading →

Just a few blog links that I’ve gleaned from Twitter:

Election Journal reports that in Indiana, ACORN dropped off 2,000 voter registrations today – and 1,100 ”are no good.”
McCain wraps Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac around Obama’s neck
The media’s infatuation with Obama blinds them to the truth about Obama and Ayers.
A different Keating 5 member introduces Bruce Springsteen at an Obama rally.
What Does McCain Need To Do To Get His Mojo Back?
Someone’s happy McCain is finally attacking Obama over Fannie & Freddie

I heard our next president, John McCain, was fantastic earlier today in New Mexico… I’m posting his prepared remarks in full in the extended entry. Continue reading →