Some people are already talking landslide.  In historical terms, we are actually heading in 2008 for another election with a below average electoral vote total for the winner.

I'm seeing another interesting and easy to grasp pattern in Nate's projected election simulation data at 538.

Suppose for the moment that Hillary really does want to continue to fight for the Democratic nomination in Denver.  Will it even be possible for her to put forward a strong argument that she should be the nominee?

The latest Rasmussen polling numbers indicate that both Virginia and North Carolina will be closely contested in November, and that Obama and McCain have very different profiles of support in those states.

Another way to draw conclusions from Poblano's excellent work at fivethirtyeight.com.

I've just caught up with the op-ed by Democratic strategist Tad Devine published in last Sunday's New York Times.  In that op-ed, Devine either makes some of the stupidest commentary on the intended purpose of superdelegates, or he is intentionally misrepresenting that purpose.

This will be quite short and to the point, but a pair of events occurred today that provides some fairly objective proof of Obama's claim to be post-partisan and outside of established political classifications.

In today's testimony, Gen. Petraeus framed the status of U.S. military involvement in Iraq as follows: We are doing well enough militarily that we can begin now to draw down 30,000 troops by July of 2008.

We should accept that framing.

This is short and to the point:

The 57 Democrats who capitulated to White House demands for broad FISA changes have only one reasonable excuse for their actions.  That excuse carries along with it a built-in accountability moment, and the 57 should be held accountable when that moment comes due.

SurveyUSA has just published the results of 2008 Giuliani vs. .... polls in ten states.  What do these results tell us about the relative electability of Clinton, Obama, and Edwards?

Time after time after time GOPers refer to the Democratic Party as the Democrat Party.  It is not an accident, and I've had enough.

In deriding the Brookings Institution's hosting of an Iraq policy briefing that will include Frederick Kagan presenting the American Enterprise Institute's call for escalating troop levels in Iraq, the usually level-headed Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo labels this plan as the one truly nutball idea about what to do in Iraq.  Unfortunately, such rhetoric is not nearly good enough, because the AEI plan is not a nutball idea -- truly.