Mitt requires a few black swans. Obama is simply incapable of debating poorly enough to fumble the ball there. Mitt could do well enough to stop the bleeding and even tighten a few races up, maybe get IA and CO into his column, but that is a reach.
Folks in IA, while they don't like bums-on-the-welfare-teat, they detest snobbery. Mitt is really starting to paint a true snob picture. And he's Mormon. Couple the two and he may well lose IA. Oddly, IA is also a opposite of Bradly effect state. The Bradley effect is that voice polled folks unrepresent that are they are going to vote against the black guy. I believe in IA that many, particularly women and suburban evangelicals, underrepresent that they are going to vote for the socialist, a man who happens to be black.
CO? Beats me. CO is a very confusing state. Denver, Fort Collins, Colorado Springs, neighboring UT. Guns and Vail. Tree huggers and ranchers and miners. Federalism and Mountain State rights. I'm thinking the broader melancholy of Mitt gives CO to Obama.
NC. Certainly Mitt will carry NC, right? I mean a Mormon Wall Street Snob could lose, but probably not.
Warren held her own in MA during the debate yesterday. Both candidates are capable debaters.
Not seeing polls on Akin/McCaskill. She could still lose I suppose.
Baldwin is clearly much better organized and aggressive in WI. I just don't know what Thompson is doing. Is he awake? Tommy Thompson has never lost a statewide race in WI. Tommy is letting Tammy define Tommy right now. Its the same thing Obama did to Romney. Will Tommy recover? There seems to be a genuine split in WI between how they want their state run and what they think at the federal level. The notion of public unions was tangible and had broad appeal. And they did elect Johnson over Feingold (the darkest moment in US politics for some time). Go Tammy.
| 
