should have put this in my last post:

http://www.pollster.com/polls/us/08-us-pres-ge-mvo.php

I mean, latest weighted poll average has Obama leading McCain amongst respondents by a whole 2%. Clearly this election is all over but the balloons and memories!

Forget Bush - I thought there was no way the American people would be stupid enough to vote for Reagan . . . but they did.

I thought there was no way the American people would be stupid enough to vote for Bush in 2004 . . . .but they did (kind of).

I have no doubt the American people ARE stupid enough to vote for McBush in 2008. They've proven their stupidity every time.

Lori

Bush is, and has always been, a retarded man-child and the majority of the american voters decided he was just like them and they voted for him. Bush didn't make himself president.

I'd say with those odds, Obama is the clear underdog.

I think you have a very valid point, there. I thought SURELY Bush was toast in 2004. And yet, unfortunately, he's still here. Not to wish the misery and destruction of Hurricane Katrina on the people of New Orleans, but if it HAD to happen, I sure wish it had happened in 2004 rather than 2005. Of course, if it had happened in an election year, I doubt Bush would have DARED be so late, callous and incompetent in his response to a major national disaster.

So I hope Obama continues to work hard, make no assumptions, raise lots of money and campaign EVERYWHERE. And that he keeps pushing back and refuting the lies told about him at every opportunity.

And I hope between now and November 4th that McCain is not shown a current World Atlas and continues to hire absolute doofuses who get him in trouble.

I'm hopeful this year. But I think you're right that any smugness or laziness this year will cost Obama and the party dearly.

McCain's problems are manifold -- too many years of GOP dominance to appear an outsider (despite "maverick" mythology); he's way too vested in the status quo to be able to pretend to be an agent of change; certainly too tied to the snake oil of Republican politics/economics (what he even understands of the latter, beyond "more money to the rich, less to the rest of you") to be able to market them to the majority of Americans; unable to convincingly stray far enough from the reactionary base of the GOP to be able to hoodwink enough Americans to vote for him (or, if he somehow did that, he'd lose those same brimstoners who are his bread-n-butter).

All he's got are the diehard GOP dead-enders and the haters; that's his base. Not enough of either to hold the line against Obama in November, barring something extraordinary occurring between now and then.

And smear campaigns work. Even if the other guy is an addled codger unfit for the job. And face it Barry is colored as McCain and Gramm would say. So we might very well get the clone of Cheneys pet monkey and St Ronnie the stupid.

As stiff, stuck-up and clumsy as Al Gore seemed in 2000, no one I knew thought a Yay-who like Bush had any chance of being elected president. After four years of watching a total chucklehead drive the national bus, even fewer people seemed to think Bush could be RE-elected. Yet it all happened. So as much as McCain seems an impossible candidate, a man from the bottom of his class (again) with very very few skills that would recommend him for the job...I think it's just plain bad luck to assume out loud that he's going to lose.

needs to remember the electoral map, and needs to get away from the coasts.

The last time someone was a "shoo in", as I recall, it was Thomas E. Dewey. Guess what happened to him?

Never underestimated the Republicans' ability to cheat people out of their votes. That's helped their last candidate considerably the last two times...

July seems a bit early to be writing McCain's political obituary, especially since many people don't really begin paying attention to the presidential election until September.

Time Magazine's article makes it two items, just today, that make me question whether things are being floated to depress interest and/or turnout by Democrats. If Grunwald's thesis becomes the popular wisdom, it could make Democrats less likely to contribute money, at a minimum as to Obama's campaign.

The other item is a story on CNN.com that poses the question, "Could an Obama presidency hurt black Americans?" If this notion gains traction even among a minority of Black voters, it could depress turnout in a group on whom not just Obama, but the Democratic Party, are counting this fall. Maybe I'm just being paranoid, but the story's original title was "Could an Obama presidency hurt race relations."

Who would vote for him, other than somebody who is voting based on resentment?

It's like if you were an employer and you had two applicants, one a high-school drop-out and one with a master's degree.

Massive turn-away of voters for whatever reason. Just like in Florida in 2000. Voter ID law in Georgia (among others) is a handy tool for such a campaign.

Also, purging names from Voter Rolls and other such games.

Rigged voting machines.

Second: Declare martial law for some (contrived?) reason. Send Blackwater cowboys down the street to do a big shoot-em-up in the Capitol. Who could stop them? The Capitol Police?

The way things are going with these stupid people, there could be mobs in the streets of Washington BEFORE (WELL BEFORE) November.

cause it's freakin Time mag, but this is not the way to win. Media's just building up the comeback story.

EVen though I am an ardent Obama supporter. I think it's a little to early to be predicting McCain's loss. The general campaign has not even officially started. However Obam sure got some political kudos with his trip. I think Obmaa has out done, even Bill Clinton's political know how.