[Politics/Religion] WTF is wrong with New Hampshire?

[gleek]

Check out this map.

Most state polls have Obama leading in PA, WI, and MN by a wider margin than in NH. Rasmussen actually has McCain leading Obama by 2% in NH. If Obama were to lose NH and win only those other three battleground states that I mentioned, he would win 269 electoral votes (and a tie with McCain). Imagine if NH becomes the fly in the ointment for Obama.

Of course, NH won't matter if Obama can take VA. In VA, Rasmussen surprisingly has him up by 5%, which some say is the required lead to overcome the Bradley effect.

[Aske]

Check out this map.

Most state polls have Obama leading in PA, WI, and MN by a wider margin than in NH. Rasmussen actually has McCain leading Obama by 2% in NH. If Obama were to lose NH and win only those other three battleground states that I mentioned, he would win 269 electoral votes (and a tie with McCain). Imagine if NH becomes the fly in the ointment for Obama.

Of course, NH won't matter if Obama can take VA. In VA, Rasmussen surprisingly has him up by 5%, which some say is the required lead to overcome the Bradley effect.

I think the currently undercounted newly registered voters will counter any potential bradley effect

[Aske]

btw, although i prefer 538 for analysis, the RCP #'s might be more 'conservative'ly accurate...  if the RCP average  of Obama +5  holds out, McChimp will get crushed in the EC (350ish) the way the states are shaping up.

[Aske]

final point for the current 5-10 minutes.  the Rasmussen and Gallup polls are damning for McChimp.... they are consistently a touch 'pro-gop' in methodology and if obama is +4 to +6 in them  McChimp is DONE.

[Blader]

the Bradley effect is dead, according to an elitist Harvard prof wannabe

btw, here is my favorite map