At Daily Kos, DemfromCt provides good analysis on the latest polling:

Andy Kohut of The Pew Research Center was interviewed on NPR about the recent Pew Poll. He noted that while the voter sentiment hasn't changed, what has changed is Republicans are more energized than they were. The poll was adjusted to reflect that, and there we have the explanation for the poll tightening. Subgroups who have a Dem lead (but not as much as before) include women and independents. The slew of polls we covered yesterday looked at those subgroups as well.

. . . It's not that all of a sudden Bush and Iraq became popular on Friday. What happened over the weekend is interviews suggested that as unhappy as Republican voters are, they'll hold their nose and vote for the GOP. To that extent, the GOP "play to the base" campaign worked as designed.

The importance of likely voter models therefore should be appreciated. Gallup's been doing theirs for a long time, yet in a wave election, the sentiment for change can be underestimated (by definition, the LV model isn't based on changing from the past). Frank Newport thinks it looks like 1994, and the difference is strong enough to take the House.

The dynamics of the race have not changed but the GOP has successfully energized its base. Who turns out will determine the size of the wave on Tuesday.

As always, the Republican Party lives down to expectations:

It turns out that some of the political phone messages Granite Staters are receiving as Election Day nears may be illegal. The issue revolves around the national Do Not Call registry.

A homeowner in Hillsboro received the same message several times in one day. It began by stating it had information about Paul Hodes, the Democratic challenger for the 2nd Congressional District.

After a few seconds, the ad turns on the attack. It isn't until the end that you find out it was sponsored by the Republican National Congressional Committee.

These dirty tricks, which are illegal, are being employed in 53 races by the GOP.

Has there been a slimier political party than today's Republicans?

Via Georgia10 at Daily Kos:

Take a minute and remind everyone in your address book to vote this Tuesday. American Greetings has free election day e-cards you can send to all your friends and family.

Raw Story has Denver trainer and "masseuse" Mike Jones' profile as he posted in on AOL's Hometown. You can view the pix here.

This one's the cutest:

When President Bush campaigned yesterday in Greeley, Colorado for the mother of the anti-gay marriage amendment, here's the billboard that greeted him:

[Via ProgressAction Now.]

Monday, the day before Election Day, the White House is trotting out Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and HSA chief Michael Chertoff to announce a new get tough on crime measure:

Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales will participate in a press conference with Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff, European Union Vice President Franco Frattini, Finland's Minister of Justice Leena Luhtanen, and Finland's Minister of Interior Kari Rajamaki regarding the signing of an agreement by the United States and the European Union to improve joint efforts to fight transnational crime on MONDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 2006 at 1:30 P.M. EST.

I guess they figure they're losing their battle to be the party that will make us safer in the war on terror, but they can still be the tough on crime party anxious to increase the prison population.

Kos remembers a few "truths" we were told abouts Dems right after the 2004 election:

Remember how electing Howard Dean chair of the Democratic Party would spell the end of Democratic chances in 2006? Remember how the netroots would spell the end of Democratic chances in 2006? Remember how calling for an Iraq pullout would spell the end of Democratic chances in 2006? In a couple of days, we'll find out if those claims turned out to be true.

I remember a few others "truths" we were told--

How Dems had to have a "positive" agenda, a "plan" for Iraq, reach out to "values voters," abandon choice, listen to Rahm Emanuel about trying to eke out 16 seat in the House, "get serious" about national security (i.e. - adopt Joe Lieberman's views), and so on.

All nonsense.

Like Amnesty International, TalkLeft condemns the death sentence imposed on Saddam Hussein. From their press release:

"This trial should have been a major contribution toward establishing justice and the rule of law in Iraq, and in ensuring truth and accountability for the massive human rights violations perpetrated by Saddam Hussein's rule," said Malcolm Smart, director of the Middle East and North Africa Programme. "In practice, it has been a shabby affair, marred by serious flaws that call into question the capacity of the tribunal, as currently established, to administer justice fairly, in conformity with international standards."

The Right again demonstrates simplemindedness on Iraq:

The DNC chairman praises the result that would not have come without the actions he opposed:

Justice for the Iraqi people was finally served today with the conviction of Saddam Hussein. This dictator ruled by fear, torturing and murdering his own people to satisfy his malicious interests. It’s commendable and important that he was brought to justice in the country where he committed these atrocities against humanity.

Is is too much for Byron York to understand that justice for Saddam Hussein was not worth the Iraq Debacle? Apparently not. Indeed, THAT is the referendum for the American People on Tuesday. Byron York and the Republicans believe the Iraq Debacle was a success because of today. And that we should stay the course and do the same for Iran. Democrats and the American People do not.

Let us vote accordingly.

This is shocking . . . not.

UPDATE: I have to add this from Ledeen's response to the criticism:

As for the Scowcroft excoriation left bloggers are pointing to, I never address military action in it. Which, again, anyone who's been reading me all this time know wasn't my solution to the problem.

His cited reference has him saying:

So it's good news when Scowcroft comes out against the desperately-needed and long overdue war against Saddam Hussein and the rest of the terror masters. . . . Blessedly, President Bush knows by now that the Palestinian question can only be addressed effectively once the war against Saddam and his ilk has been won.

. . .[Scowcroft] fears that if we attack Iraq "I think we could have an explosion in the Middle East. It could turn the whole region into a caldron and destroy the War on Terror."

One can only hope that we turn the region into a cauldron, and faster, please. If ever there were a region that richly deserved being cauldronized, it is the Middle East today. If we wage the war effectively, we will bring down the terror regimes in Iraq, Iran, and Syria, and either bring down the Saudi monarchy or force it to abandon its global assembly line to indoctrinate young terrorists. That's our mission in the war against terror.

An insane liar. Scary.

Reverand Haggard, I submit, should not have resigned, as reported by Jeralyn here. He should have fought for his position.

He admitted to a "'lifelong' sexual problem"; meaning, ... I guess, he has always been gay but married because Jesus required it of him?

Assume, for the sake of argument, that the Democrats take the House on Tuesday. The new Congress is sworn in in early January.

Assume further that the House, finally exercising checks and balances, votes to impeach President Bush and Vice President Cheney. Assume further that the Senate actually convicts, a really big assumption, considering that a vote along party lines would not reach the required number of 67 (U.S. Const., Art. I, § 3, cl. 6).

If both the President and Vice President were convicted on an Article of Impeachment, the Speaker of the House would assume the Presidency.  Then, the new President would name a Vice President to be confirmed by the House under the Twenty-fifth Amendment.