CNN has a group of 25 undecided voters in some room in Orlando, but not one Latino. #ThingsThatMakeYouGoHmmm

— Michael Skolnik (@MichaelSkolnik) October 23, 2012

As they have with every debate, CNN ran a focus group of 25 panelists during the debate. Here's the breakdown of these so-called undecided and likely voters:

We're going to be following exactly what they're feeling as they watch the debate. I want to give you more information about our focus group tonight. A racial breakdown -- 76% of the focus group is white, 20% black, 4% asian. Remember, we're not really talking about representing the community here in Orlando. We're talking about a very narrow sliver of people who say they're both undecided and likely voters.

Hmmm. Does that mean they think Latinos are all zipped up and delivered already, that there aren't any who might still be undecided? It's Orlando, for heaven's sake, and they can't dredge up one Latino voter for their panel?

That's really too bad, because the Latino vote could be the deciding bloc in this election. Latino voters do not move as a homogenous block -- there are conservatives, there are liberals, and there are independents who make decisions based upon some key issues. From the group Latino Decisions, some insight about the impact of the Latino vote in swing state Colorado for CNN's producers:

The Latino vote will help determine the presidential election. If one is not convinced, playing around with the Latino Decisions’ Latino Vote Map for a few of the battleground states with a sizeable Latino population ought to change your mind. The basic equation for each state is quite simple: the marginal (dis)advantage for one of the candidates among Latino voters multiplied by the Latino proportion of the electorate equals the net effect of the Latino vote. The Latino effect thus comes down to two variables—marginal group preferences and relative turnout. If one approaches zero, the Latino effect approaches zero. And in a state like Colorado, now one of the closest battleground states with a sizeable Latino population, how this equation plays out quite possibly determines who passes the 270 point in the Electoral College.

Yes, well, I'd say Florida would be one of those states. Last week's CNN snap poll reported weird, skewed results too, and at the time I challenged them on the value of reporting anything if they overweighted for Republicans by a ratio of 70:30. My point then was that any result coming out of that kind of group is meaningless for an overview look at reactions. It only matters if you care what Republicans thought. And this week, we have a panel with no Latinos in a state with a lot of Latinos. So CNN's results this time around only matter if you care what white people think.

If, on the other hand, you care about what the electorate thinks, try a more balanced poll. Or better yet, just make up your own mind and forget what the "panelists" think.

When Jason Grodensky bought his modest Fort Lauderdale home in December, he paid cash. But seven months later, he was surprised to learn that Bank of America had foreclosed on the house, even though Grodensky did not have a mortgage.

Grodensky knew nothing about the foreclosure until July, when he learned that the title to his home had been transferred to a government-backed lender. "I feel like I'm hanging in the wind and I'm scared to death," said Grodensky. "How did some attorney put through a foreclosure illegally?"

Bank of America has acknowledged the error and will correct it at its own expense, said spokeswoman Jumana Bauwens.

Mr. Gordensky is actually fairly lucky, since he had a pretty easy case to make that the bank couldn't foreclose on a mortgage that never existed. Others aren't quite so fortunate:

Luis Fernandez's foreclosure documents never looked quite right. Critical papers regarding his Orlando home were missing dates, and some signatures appeared to him to be forged. The mortgage had been sold so often - including once in the middle of the foreclosure process - that at times it was hard to tell which company was trying to seize the house. He challenged the foreclosure in court but failed.

Now, as Fernandez seeks to appeal his eviction and get his home back, he has learned that the law firm representing the banks is under investigation for fabricating foreclosure documents.

For those wondering why the banks are resorting to forging documents to foreclose on peoples' homes, let's review what happened over the last decade:

• Mortgages typically aren't held by the original lenders. Instead, they're sold off to Wall Street so they can be thrown into mortgage-backed securities. From there, they're thrown into special purpose entities like collateralized debt obligations (CDOs). And then maybe they're diced up again and thrown into a CDO squared, which is a CDO backed by pieces of other CDOs. Or if they're really lucky, a CDO cubed, which is a CDO backed by pieces of other CDOs that are backed by pieces of other CDOs.

• OK, I'll try to explain it in English: imagine the mortgage is a berry that gets eaten by a worm that gets eaten by a bird that gets eaten by a cat, and then gets crapped out. If you were the person assigned to find the remnants of berry within the mound of cat poop, could you even attempt it?

• So the lenders have absolutely no idea if the original mortgage is anywhere on their books -- or, for that matter, if it's been sent through a rift in the space-time continuum and is now held by the Rang'ar Interplanetary Fifth Dimensional Bank of the Gamma Quardrant. They have no idea what loans they are and are not exposed to. Oh noes! What are they to do?

• The answer, it seems, has been to make stuff up. Forge foreclosure documents, send them out and hope that the people getting screwed aren't smart enough to raise hell about it.

Dean Baker explains this better than I can, and without resorting to crude metaphors involving cat poop:

If the servicer followed the law on carrying through foreclosures then it would have to go through a costly and time-consuming process of getting its paperwork in order and ensuring that it actually did have possession of the title before going to a judge and getting a judgment that would allow them to take possession of the property. Instead, banks got in the habit of skirting the proper procedures and filling in forms inaccurately and improperly in order to take possession of properties.

GMAC, the former financing arm of General Motors and now called Ally Financial, has become the poster-child for these sorts of practices. Jeffrey Stephan, a leader of one of its foreclosure units, acknowledged that he had signed thousands of affidavits claiming that he had reviewed documents he had never seen.

Here's a fun thought: What happens if your mortgage was part of a synthetic CDO? That is, some bank synthesized a security based partly on your mortgage utilizing credit default swaps? Does this mean that if the bank foreclosed on you you'd not only lose you home but would be required to also hand over a duplicate home that's never been built? The mind boggles. I'll have more to say on this in the future when I debut my own creative financial innovation: The four-dimensional collateralized synthetic obligation cubed! Stay tuned.

RELATED: Barry Ritholz is having a contest to craft a new advertising slogan for Goldman Sachs. My favorite so far: "God’s Work. It’s not just for hurricanes and famines and locusts anymore."