If Obama is really the son of Malcolm X, is it no longer relevant that he was secretly born in Kenya but issued an Indonesian passport? Is it better or worse proof that he’s a secret Muslim? Would that make his “real” name Barack X? I find that difficult to say, the “ack” and then the “ecks” right in a row like that. Once this is determined to be “true”, can we settle on either Barry X or Barack el-Shabbaz, both of which have a nice ring?
Whew. I know we’re a nation of conspiracy theories, but have we ever had a guy surrounded by such elaborate conspiracy theories before he’s even elected president?
Anyway, I talked to the Butcher (who is having a birthday, but more excited that it’s the Fonz’s birthday and he gets to share it) and he said that when he went to vote, the woman who checked his registration told him that they had more people turn out on the first day of early voting than voted at all in the last election.
I keep waffling back and forth about whether pollsters have taken this into account. I just don’t know. Maybe some of you politicos can weigh in on this. But I wonder–what if 90% of every African American who can vote does? And, in a less likely scenario, what if conservatives don’t bother to show up to vote, because the numbers seem so far apart? I just keep an eye on Hobbs, who seems to be turning his attention to rallying the troops and I can’t help but wonder if, even in Tennessee, where McCain would seem to have an insurmountable lead, the TNGOP isn’t worried that Democratic enthusiasm coupled with conservative apathy might throw a wrench in things farther down the ticket.
I don’t know. But I wonder anyway.
—-
You know, my favorite thing about the “Barack Obama is the secret son of Malcolm X” thing is trying to imagine the pitch meeting.
Malcolm X, in 1960.
“We need you to impregnate this white girl.”
Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.
Tiny Cat Pants 
so, is he a foreigner or the antichrist or the son of malcom x? or all three? we know so little about him.
> I keep waffling back and forth about whether pollsters have taken this into account. I just don’t know.
The pollsters are aware of this, and most of them look at currently registered voters, and/or determine likely voters based on current information.
One standout is Gallup, which uses behavior from the previous cycle (in this case, 2004) as the prime determinant of whether a voter is “likely” to vote this time. However, Gallup looked at how many new voter registrations there were, and created a second “likely voter” poll that is based on current indicators, regardless of 2004 behavior. So Gallup has a LV-I poll and an LV-II poll.