Obama has a slight lead in Michigan, Ohio, if he were to lose both of these and not pick up virginia or NC he loses.
Thats not as large a lead as Kerry had.
I'm not sure... Poblano (I like to call him that still) indicates on his website that Kerry never had much of a lead over Bush. Obama is doing much better than Kerry so far.
Of course when people find out that a leading Obama supporter speaks French (and I refer to SG) Obama will be toast.
I can read it and can kind of write it (I am extremely literal).
Poblano's old method worked really well in the primary I think this new method is faulty.
That's intresting. Why do you think he's wrong in his new method?
I'd appreciate an answer in Sanskrit.
I agree national polling should have an effect on state races, but a perceived bump is going to be larger in a state like Massachusetts than it is in West Virginia. I think recent polling results from Arkansas and Nevada show this. Obama got a larger bump in Arkansas than Poblano's method predicted and a smaller bump in Nevada. Hillary was very strong in Arkansas and wasn't very strong in Nevada. I agree with the usage of the model in Ohio for instance but not in Virginia.
(As for Sanskrit, I have no idea how to type that let alone make coherent words or sentences)
Kerry never led in state by state polls...he only led in Ohio in a handful of polls, only led in Florida in less than a handful and without the two, he lost.
Obama is doing much better than Kerry.
