[impeachedrapist]

Because there's no recent historical precedent for such a blatant favoring of the Dems. In 2004 it was DEAD EVEN at 37% apiece. In 2006 it was Dems +3, in 2000 I think it was Dems +4.

+7 is patently absurd. It's based on thousands and thousands of fraudulent ACORN registrations.

I expect turnout this year to be within a point either way. And that scares Obama and the media to death.

[Jagman]

Operation Chaos!

[tatown]

Not only that, there are already indications that this ‘big democrat turnout advantage’ is BS.

Gallup just release a study that suggests that there won’t be any historic increase in first time voters. They expect to see that same increase as 2004.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2113275/posts

Additionally, early voting right now is even. There is not a big dem advantage, even though there has been a huge effort by the Obama camp to get their people out to vote early (and probably often).

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2114067/posts

[ApplegateRanch]

+7 is patently absurd. It's based on thousands and thousands of fraudulent ACORN registrations

And a few Republican Chaos re-registers to Dem, just to screw things up.

In our case there weren't any local races that needed our primary vote on the Pubbie side, so we switched, and voted for the best (and naturally loser) Dem candidates.

We made that decision before Rush started making noises about it.

[teacherbarbie]

Ras has been saying there were alot more dems since June. What he doesn’t take into account is that alot left the party after Hillary didn’t win.

[uncbob]

I expect turnout this year to be within a point either way. And that scares Obama and the media to death.

Especially since there is a significant number of dems who want no parts of Obama