RUSH: Right on schedule and as predicted, yesterday a news flash from the Wall Street Journal. Guess what? The election is now tied. In the NBC/Wall Street Journal poll, the poll that has had Obama up five with Democrat samples of plus nine and plus ten, guess what? The race for the White House is exactly as I predicted and right on schedule. As we are now two weeks away in this poll, the race is tied, as the pollsters now start accounting for reality.
We're getting close to the election, and the pollsters want, of course, their final polls to be as close to the real outcome as possible. So the days of attempting to shift and move public opinion are now dwindling in place of the polls reflecting public opinion. There's still a little attempt to manipulate it, though. The Gallup poll as of yesterday, Romney back up at seven points, 52-45. And so today Reuters is out with a story attacking Gallup. He-he-he-he-he. Yes indeed, ladies and gentlemen. Reuters is out attacking Gallup and their methodology. It's just funny to watch.
RUSH: Now, let's stick with the polling data. NBC, I love this. Here's the way the Wall Street Journal reported it, and this is after months and months of polling with Democrat samples of plus 8 and plus 11. "A late surge in support for Mitt Romney has put him in a dead heat with President Obama just over two weeks ago, according to a new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll released on Sunday. Among likely voters, the candidates are now tied 47-47 in a race that appears on track to be one of the closest in US history." Remember, now, this poll, a late surge in support for Romney. Wait a minute. This is after the second debate where Obama was supposed to have the bounce. After the second debate where Obama's supposed to have the bounce they put this story out saying "after a late surge in support for Romney."
But there's something fascinating about this poll. As you know, Obama is not talking about his second-term agenda. By design and on purpose, he is not talking about it, and you and I know why. He's not talking about it because he doesn't dare. He doesn't dare admit that it's more of the same. He doesn't dare admit there aren't going to be any fundamental changes. He doesn't dare come close to it. And there's a reason, folks. Look, this is gonna sound strange to you but that's only 'cause you don't know liberals like I know liberals. After the election, if he wins, and starts implementing this trail of destruction that he's gonna continue on, people are gonna say, "Wait a minute, you never said any of this."
"I didn't lie to you. I didn't lie. I didn't tell you that I wasn't gonna do this."
That's the way they look at it. They look at it as a mandate to continue this if he's elected by not naming a second-term agenda, and he wins? They pretty much can say that his current agenda's being endorsed. However, there's a problem, and it's in the same NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll. There's a question in that poll, in the internals. I have it right here in my formerly nicotine-stained fingers. "If reelected, do you want President Obama to make major changes?" Sixty-two percent say YES! Sixty-two percent of the respondents in the poll say that they do not want more of the same.
Sixty-two percent of a poll that has Obama and Romney tied at 47%, say they want a change in direction for the country. If that's true, Obama's toast! Why would anybody vote for a guy who's not discussing his second-term agenda when they want a change? Why would you vote for a guy...? If 62% of the American people want a change, you have to assume they're unhappy with what's happening now.
You also have to assume they're not blaming George Bush for it. You would have to assume that most people are gonna associate the wrong direction with Obama. So if you're going to answer a poll question, "If reelected do you want Obama to make changes," and 62% say "yes," why risk it? Is the guy campaigning on change? Not anymore. He's not running on "hope and change."
All he's running on is that Romney's a reprobate and whatever "shocking news" Gloria Allred wants to make up. (interruption) Well, there's supposedly some bombshell she has coming up. From every indication, it's old news. It's been a 25-year-old story involving Romney and a woman and an abortion that's been out there before. But, anyway, I think this is a major, major result: 62% want major changes in the NBC/Wall Street Journal poll.
That indicates Romney and Obama are tied at 47. Just using logic: Why would you vote for the incumbent if you want major change? "Major changes." It said "major changes." That means at best 38% of the people like what's going on. That's at best! This doesn't account for any don't-knows or didn't-answer. There's another poll out there, and this is the Quinnipiac University/CBS News poll in Ohio. Now, the first thing you need to know about this poll is the sample.
Democrat 35, Republican 26, independent 34. That means that in this poll of Ohio... Now, keep this in mind for the data that follows here. In the Quinnipiac University/CBS News poll, the Democrats are plus nine in this sample. What that means is that the poll sample assumes Democrat turnout two weeks from tomorrow will be 9% higher than Republican turnout. Now, in 2008, the actual turnout according to exit polling data was 39 Democrat and 31 Republican.
So there were eight points more Democrats than Republicans. They've given it nine points. They added a point to it. Did anybody think that the same structure in terms of turnout's gonna happen? In 2010, the midterms, let's look at that. Same poll, Quinnipiac/CBS, in the midterms of 2010 the turnout was 36 Democrat, 37 Republican. With a one point Republican advantage in Ohio, there was a landslide against the Democrats in Ohio.
Okay, so now you know that. The news in this poll is this: "President Obama is holding onto a five-point lead over Republican Mitt Romney in Ohio, but that margin has been cut in half since September according to a new Quinnipiac University/CBS News poll. Mr. Obama holds a 50 to 45 percent lead over Romney among likely voters in [Ohio], down from a 53 to 43 percent advantage on Sept. 26. Three percent of likely voters there are undecided."
There's also a gender gap. What you have here is a trend, and what's happening everywhere is the trend is what you look at. We came up with a word last week to describe it: "Mittmentum." I now see that word all over the Internet, kind of like "Gorbasm." We came up with that and ended up all over the Internet. Mittmentum. It's everywhere. It's in Oregon! Mittmentum is in Pennsylvania. I'm hearing today that Obama's pulled out of North Carolina, but that doesn't surprise me. North Carolina has been decided along with Florida.
They're pulling out of North Carolina, and are soon to pull out of Florida. Florida, North Carolina, Virginia, are gone. Colorado's in play according to Rasmussen. Colorado, absolutely. Oregon? Now, I'm not saying Obama is going to lose Oregon. I'm telling you that people are looking at Oregon and saying, "Hmm, maybe Mittmentum has spread there." Oregon might be, could be, don't know. It's too soon to say, obviously, but it's not an Obama slam dunk yet, according to the polling data, according to trends. Which is what you look at.
RUSH: In the NBC/Wall Street Journal poll, by the way, the Democrat sample was 32, Republican 26, independent 39. That means that there was an oversampling of Democrats by 6%. This is the poll that now has them tied at 47, exactly as I told you was gonna happen. I had a note from my brother. "It's uncanny how you know this stuff." No, it's not! I understand how these people think. I know liberals.
You can, too. It isn't that hard. It really isn't. There was no way a poll that shows a Democrat sample of 10 or 11 with Obama beating Romney by six or seven on Election Day was right. That's never been accurate. It's common sense. In addition, Rasmussen finds that Obama leads by one point in Colorado, New Hampshire, Ohio. That is Romney trending up. Obama leads by two in Iowa and Wisconsin, three in Nevada, five in Pennsylvania, seven in Michigan.
Romney leads by three in Virginia and five in Florida, six in North Carolina. The three states are Virginia, Florida, Ohio. If Obama wins two of those... This is according to Rasmussen. Rasmussen says of Ohio, Florida, Virginia, if Obama wins two of them, he's reelected. Those are the three. Right now, Virginia and Florida are in Romney's column. He's leading. Suffolk polling pulled out of North Carolina, Florida, and Virginia.
They're saying it's over there, which leaves Ohio.
The real question: Is there a path to victory for Romney if Obama wins Ohio?
That's really the question. And, of course, there is.
RUSH: Yeah, I had verbal dyslexia. I said Susquehanna has pulled out of North Carolina, Virginia, Florida. It's of course Suffolk University. You knew what I meant. Slips of the tongue. Susquehanna is the polling outfit that shows Romney up four in Pennsylvania. Welcome back, folks. Rush Limbaugh, meeting and surpassing all audience expectations every day.
Andy Sullivan for Reuters: "The election between President Barack Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney looks like it will be a knuckle-biter -- unless you go by one of the United States' most respected public-opinion polls. As most surveys show Obama and Romney locked in a virtual dead heat, Gallup finds that the Republican would win by a comfortable six percentage points if the election were held today."
Do you ever recall...? I don't. Maybe you do. Do you ever recall a news agency questioning another poll? Do you remember when Obama had an 11-point lead, anybody questioning that poll, any other news agency? We, of course, did. When NBC News/Wall Street Journal had Obama up ten or whatever it was with these wild Democrat samples, do you remember Reuters writing a story questioning that result?
And do you know why?
Because it didn't happen.
ABC has not questioned CBS. CBS has not questioned NBC. The Wall Street Journal has not questioned itself. Reuters hasn't challenged anybody else until today. But now Reuters is attacking Gallup for showing Romney with a six-point lead. Now, they repeat the charge that Axelrod and the rest of the Obama campaign have been making against Gallup, and that charge is that Gallup is not weighting the results enough to account for minorities.
You remember when Gallup first started showing Romney way up, Axelrod got into gear and threatened the polling company. He went to the Department of Justice and said (paraphrased), "We're gonna sue these guys or we're gonna investigate these guys at Gallup! This is not right, because they're suppressing the black vote! They're not weighting the minority vote properly." So Gallup made some adjustments.
After being threatened by Axelrod and having the Department of Justice join a lawsuit against them, Gallup has adjusted its weighting to account for a minority turnout even higher than it was in 2008, and even after that they still have Romney up by -- what is it? -- six or seven. And then Reuters goes on to repeat the Obama campaign complaints about Gallup's likely voter screening questions.
But the head of Gallup, who was talked to about this, "No, no, our questions actually favor the Democrats." So no matter what Gallup does, they just can't win. But I've not seen this before. I've not seen one news agency attack another outfit for its poll results. But Reuters is right in there, and we know where Reuters is.
Let's go to the audio sound bites and let's listen to some NBC Obama campaign workers discussing the latest NBC/Wall Street Journal poll. One of Obama's lead campaign advisers is F. Chuck Todd. He was on Meet the Press yesterday. And the host David Gregory (who is another leading campaign aide for Obama) said, "Brand-new this morning, the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll on where the race stands! Let's go right to my colleague [and fellow Obama campaign adviser], Chuck Todd. Chuck? You got the numbers. And, Chuck, this is significant. Chuck, we're in trouble here, right, buddy?"
TODD: Look at this! This is among likely voters, David: 47-47. Now, not all tied races are equal. The president sitting at 47, if there were the Sunday before Election Day, there would be a lot of concerns in Chicago. They want to be at 48 or 49. Sitting at 47 is a good number for a challenger, not a good number for an incumbent.
RUSH: When's he been above that? He still hasn't hit 50 in these polls. That's the magic number for an incumbent. Okay. So after F. Chuck says that 47% is not a good number for an incumbent, he continued...
TODD: Let's go inside the numbers a little bit. The gender gap among men: Romney a ten-point lead. Let's go to women. This is interesting! President, an eight-point lead here. This is actually his smallest lead among women that we've had all year long. A few other things inside the numbers here, David. In the Midwest: Romney a narrow lead but way inside the margin of error. And among all the collective battleground states, a little bit of a lead for Mitt Romney.
RUSH: It's amazing how this happened, 'cause none of this was true just last week, and the week before that, and the week before that, and last month. None of this was true in the NBC/Wall Street Journal poll. But now? Now look at this. Everything is trending Romney! Isn't it fascinating how that happens as we get closer to the election? And don't forget, same poll (F. Chuck didn't tell you this): "If reelected, do you want President Obama to make major changes?"
Sixty-two percent say YES.
That's almost the same thing as saying 62% don't want Obama. Sixty-two percent want major changes. That is major, folks, and I haven't seen this reported anyplace. I'm not saying it hasn't been. (There are some networks I don't watch anymore, as you know, by design and on purpose.) But it's an interesting question for a pollster to ask anyway. I mean, how would you conceive of such a question?
You're sitting there; you're in the tank for Obama. You love Obama. You think Obama's the greatest thing sliced bread. Obama, Obama, Obama! Why would you even think to ask the respondents in your poll this? If you didn't know that things were trending away from your guy, why would you ask, "Do you want major changes in what Obama is doing?" It's not a question born of confidence.
And it is directly attachable to the hard, cold reality that Obama is not detailing a second-term agenda. So you add all this up, and that 62% number is big. Then you add it with all the other internals F. Chuck is worried about: Gender gap, Romney, ten-point lead, Obama's lead in women is smaller than ever, Romney up everywhere else.
And again, 62% want major changes if Obama's reelected. That just doesn't even argue for Obama's reelection. So that's that. Here's Scott Rasmussen. He was on America's Newsroom today with Bill Hemmer on Fox. And Hemmer said, "National matchups. What do you have for us, Scott, between Romney and Obama?"
RASMUSSEN: Forty-nine percent for Romney, 47% for Obama. Very significantly, this is exactly the same as what we showed going into the second debate.
HEMMER: Oh, that's interesting. Hmm.
RASMUSSEN: Governor Romney gained ground after the first debate. President Obama had a better performance and stopped his slide but didn't turn things around.
RUSH: 49-47. I didn't know that. I didn't know that Romney had ever led in the Rasmussen. I thought it was always tied or Obama by one. But Rasmussen would know. It's his poll. Then Hemmer says, "You're finding what, now, in Colorado, Scott?"
RASMUSSEN: Well, all through the year it's been very, very close. A few weeks ago President Obama was up by a single point. But as of this morning, Mitt Romney is leading by four in Colorado. That's the biggest lead we've found for either candidate all year, and it's driven by the fact that people in Colorado are starting to think that Mitt Romney might be better at handling the economy.
RUSH: I'm sorry. I just don't believe people are just now figuring that out. I mean, I'll take it, but I don't believe people are just now figuring that out. I can't prove it, obviously. We have to go with what the polling data says here from Rasmussen, but I think people have figured out Obama doesn't know what he's doing in the economy for two years.
I think that's why the 2010 midterms turned out the way they did. John Harris at Politico. This guy could be the media campaign director for Obama. John Harris at Politico was on Chris Matthews' weekend syndicated show. They were talking about the debates, Harris and Matthews, and they said this...
HARRIS: Obama clearly won the second debate, but I... So far, at least, we haven't seen the dramatic swing in the polls that --
MATTHEWS: (screaming) He didn't knock him out!
MATTHEWS: Obama got knocked out in the first debate!
HARRIS: That's not --
MATTHEWS: He didn't knock the other guy out in the second debate!
HARRIS: It was on points.
MATTHEWS: It was a points thing!
RUSH: Yeah, "It was a point thing." Obama won on points. Obama won the second debate, and we haven't seen it in the polling data. Well, then maybe he didn't win it, you idiots... Uh, you guys. Listen to this: "Well, Obama clearly won the second debate, but so far we haven't seen the dramatic swing in the polls." Maybe he didn't win. In the minds and hearts of REAL people who watch this thing, maybe he didn't.
Matthews says, "He didn't knock him out! Obama didn't knock him out! Obama got knocked out in the first, didn't knock out..."
Oh, it was on points? Oh, we're back to that now?' He "won on points." It's my contention that Obama did not gain a single vote by virtue of his second debate performance. He might have shored up his base who wanted to hear some hatred and vitriol and anger. And, by the same token, I don't think Romney lost any votes because of his performance in the second debate. So these guys can talk about "points" all they want, but points are not votes, and these guys even know that.
RUSH: Russell, Tampa, Florida, thank you for calling, sir. Great to have you on the EIB Network. Hi.
CALLER: Rush, hi. How you doing today?
RUSH: Good. Good, good, good. Thank you.
CALLER: I'm looking at these polls in these heavily Democrat-weighted poll samples and wondering if the media is gonna try to use those to tarnish or delegitimize a Romney president. I think Romney's gonna win, and I'm thinking, you know, with all the accusations of Republican voter suppression, if after a Romney win the media came in and said, "Well, you know, the Democrat voter turnout was much lower, obviously --"
RUSH: There isn't. There isn't any Republican voter suppression. Its the other way around.
CALLER: I know that, what I'm saying is they would use the polls with these heavy Democrat samples after the election to come out and say, well, the Democrat turnout was lighter, therefore that is the result of Republican suppression --
RUSH: No, they tried that with the exit polling in 2004. I think the reason for these large samples has been to try to secure an Obama victory, not to explain a Romney victory. It's been purely aggressive on purpose to try to suppress Republican vote.
RUSH: Not at all. No, no, no. I wouldn't be surprised at all if Obama has a surge in the Gallup poll. I wouldn't be surprised. Look, Axelrod has been pressuring these people for I don't know how long. They're the only poll showing Romney way ahead. If Gallup, say, after tonight's debate reverses this and Romney's only up one or two, can you imagine what that will do to the Romney momentum? The media will harp all over it. So keep a sharp eye, folks. This is no way over.
RUSH: Okay, folks, the one o'clock Gallup poll is out and it's 51-45 Romney, six points. That's down a point for Romney who was at 52 over the weekend, but Obama's disapproval went up one point. So the lingering question here, let me just share a wandering thought with you. Here you have Gallup, which was not among the top five most accurate pollsters in 2008. I think Gallup was around 15 or 16. It was Pew and Rasmussen. In fact, Rasmussen and Pew I think were at one and two in 2008, and Rasmussen has it 49-47 Romney right now.
Now, you've got Gallup at 51-45, 52-45, 51-46, right around there. They're the only one showing anywhere near that kind of national lead. You've had Axelrod pressuring the bezeezus out of there, threatening to sue them, investigate 'em, Department of Justice, for three weeks minimum. Reuters is attacking Gallup today in a story, which I've never seen before. I've never seen one polling unit attack another, not like this, but they're doing it. Gallup says, (paraphrasing) "Oh, no, no, we've done everything you wanted. We're weighting the minority voters even more and it isn't helping Obama and we're accounting for some other things you wanted us to account for, and it's not changing. In fact, our likely voter questions are a little bit more pro-Democrat," Gallup is saying, and it isn't mattering. But they're still the only one out there.
Now, here's the question. We've got two weeks. Is there time for an event or two to take place where Gallup could adjust their poll to 47-47 or even 47-46 Obama? You know, Obama's been nowhere near 50% ever in the Gallup poll. Is there anything that could happen? What I'm getting at is -- and I know people get mad at me when I do this. But I'm suspicious. I'm just naturally suspicious. What Romney has going for him right now is Mittmentum. The momentum is all Romney's right now, and it has been since the first debate, in the polls. I think the momentum's been with Romney even before that, but we'll just stick with the polls.
The one thing that the regime has always counted on is this sense of inevitability. In every poll they were always ahead, no matter that Obama never got to 50, it was just always, they wanted everybody to think that Obama winning was a foregone conclusion. And that was worth something. That thought, that psychological reality alone was worth a couple points in the polls. Every poll showing Obama winning no matter what, that suppresses, depresses, the Republican vote, enthusiasm, by design. Then that debate happened and they couldn't hide it anymore. If they were hiding Romney's support, they couldn't have, not after that debate.
So then momentum shifts to Romney, and two things happened with that. Romney's big momentum by itself is huge, but then they destroy this whole notion that Obama was a lock. And don't discount how important that was to the regime. It would be to any candidate. The assumption everywhere that you're gonna win is worth a point or two anyway. Well, Romney's momentum destroys that. And now the regime is at a place that they haven't been. They're at the low end of the polls, there's no momentum with them, and the inevitability, the lock is gone. So if you are on Obama's side, what do you need to do right now? You need to stanch the bleeding. And how do you do that? Stop the Mittmentum. Well, how do you do that?
Let's say in this debate tonight that it's another wash, that there's nothing major that happens here to scare people away from Romney. Well, where are they gonna go to get Obama's momentum back or where are they gonna go to cut Romney down to size? Well, hello Gloria Allred or some late October Surprise.
RUSH: Just hitting another poll. It's exactly as predicted. This is Reuters/Ipsos. Guess what? Obama and Romney are now tied at 46. Isn't it amazing? The Wall Street Journal/NBC is tied 47-47, as of yesterday. I predicted that to you back in July. We went and looked it up at RushLimbaugh.com. In July, I predicted to you what would happen with the NBC/Wall Street Journal poll. Back then they had Obama up by seven or eight with a plus-ten Democrat sample or whatever it was.
And it was back then when I first said, and I said it many more times thereafter, that as we get closer to Election Day these polls are going to change dramatically. And they will miraculously change to more closely resemble the outcome. Because when we get down to October and two weeks prior to the election, that's when the pollsters start factoring in their credibility. Now, I know some of you are asking, "Rush, are you saying the polls are manipulated?"
I leave it up to you to decide. When you see a poll in the current climate, current economic climate, following the 2010 midterm elections (which were a Republican landslide across this country except for New York and California), with a Democrat sample of plus ten, you be the judge what's going on. See, there are two things that the Obama campaign (if it's tied to polling units) has been intending to convey, or to present.
And the first is the inevitability factor, the fact that they're a lock. There's no way that Romney can win or there's no way Obama can lose. However you want to look at it. That has been the fait accompli attitudinally in the media and everybody in the Obama camp and it was done well, I have to tell you. How many Republicans over the course of the last six months did you run into thinking it doesn't matter who we nominate?
"This is a slam dunk. It's over. You know, Obama's gonna win. All the things the Democrats have at their advantage, plus incumbency," blah, blah, blah. So there's that, and then, as far as polling is concerned, what is the Poll of Polls? Are you familiar with that term, the Poll of Polls? What is the Poll of Polls? It is the Real Clear Politics Daily Average. Now, stick with me. RCP, the website, Real Clear Politics. They have all of the major polls.
And every time there's a new poll, they average all of these polls together. So one of the ways that you can continue this perception of Obama as a lock is to have it Obama winning in the Poll of Polls, or leading in the Poll of Polls. Now, since that is an average of all the polls, it is crucially important that Obama be polling very high in all the individual polls to accommodate for the occasional straggler.
So you have Democrat samples of plus eight to plus ten to secure an Obama edge of plus four or plus five. So that when the Poll of Polls does its work and averages them all out, Obama's in the lead. That gets reported. That contributes to the whole theme, if you will, or narrative that Obama is a lock; that he can't lose. And, if you look what has happened since the first debate, that's all out the window now.
Not only can Obama lose, he is losing.
All the momentum is with Romney. All of the work that was done in the past year and a half or two years with all of these polls and the Poll of Polls was to keep alive this notion that Obama was ahead -- and therefore had the momentum and therefore was a lock. It has been blown to smithereens now. I'm just gonna leave it for you to determine yourself whether or not you think that some of these polling units, in choosing a plus-ten Democrat sample, were trying to skew the outcome.
I will leave it for you to determine whether or not the people at ABC-CBS-NBC-CNN have a vested interest in who wins the election. I'll leave it to you to figure all that out. We've got a debate tonight. Oh, by the way, the Reuters/Ipsos poll, 46-46, now tied? That's just hitting, by the way. All of a sudden the race is dead close. NBC/Wall Street Journal. Now, tonight the ABC/Washington Post poll is due to hit.
They have routinely had Democrat-plus-nine, plus-ten samples. In their most recent poll, Obama was up three with a plus-nine- or plus-ten-Democrat sample. So let's see what the ABC/Washington Post poll that will be released tonight is. But I'm just telling you: If you look at polling in a very broad picture under a certain narrative, and that is, "Obama can't lose. How do we secure that? How do we make it appear Obama can't lose, particularly in the Poll of Polls?"
You gotta have Obama winning by a large enough margin in every poll to average out to always leading. But now we've reached a crucial point in time where the pollsters have to be concerned about their postelection credibility. Nobody remembers a poll in August. Nobody remembers a poll in April. Nobody remembers a poll in September. But they all matter in terms of shaping public opinion, do they not? I submit they do.
Now, we're seeing that a poll or the polls cannot, by themselves, produce a winner and a loser. I've never thought they could, but they do have impact on attitude. You know they do. You've been affected by that. People call here. "Oh, Rush, look at the latest poll! Romney's still down even after all this." Then you get into the internals. In all the individual issues -- be it the economy, health care, whatever -- everybody prefers Romney.
But yet there was that poll and they're tied or Obama's still up two. Here are Obama's numbers from every poll released today nationwide. Without naming the poll, it just doesn't matter, here are Obama's numbers in every poll released today. Nationwide 47-45, 47-45. In Ohio, Obama's numbers in the polls that came out today: 47, 50. In Colorado, Obama's number today: 46. In Iowa, Obama's number today: 48.
He is the incumbent!
He cannot get to 50% to save his life, anywhere.
There is nowhere today, in a nationwide poll or a state poll that's come out, that shows Obama with 50%. I'm throwing California and New York out, because those are not even in question. But what's the old conventional wisdom? An incumbent that can't reach 50% is in trouble. You heard F. Chuck Todd say on Meet the Press yesterday, "Weeeell, it's 47% for Obama in our poll today.
"If this were a week before the election, I'd be really concerned, David," speaking to David Gregory. Okay, so next Sunday if Obama's still at 47 or 48, will F. Chuck say that he's really concerned?