You do know, it's going to be a D+8 election again.
No.
Won't be r+1, but I also think its very doubtful we'll see anything over d+4 or 5.
Look, clearly there's hang ups from both sides on the validity of polling, granted on the right it largely revolves around party id, and on the left its centered on cellphones and Spanish-language options, but you either have to accept the fact that polling has built in biases and should question and scrutinize them all, or you reject them all. None of this "well these 3 pollsters are great but the rest suck" nonsense.
At the end of the day, if you believe in the science, you a have to aggregate them and throw out the outlier. Obama is probably ahead in Ohio and Nevada. Romney is likely ahead in Florida and Colorado. Virginia looks very much like tossup. Data would suggest that Iowa is trending Obama. New Hampshire (outside of the uni polls) looks like it is trending Romney.
Wisconsin is on the fringe of being in play with movement toward Romney. A NH+WI strategy is a viable way around an Obama "firewall" in Ohio.
The Ohio "firewall" is troubling if you look at some of the national numbers that suggest a Romney lead and also look at the voting history of the state and how close it's generally mirrored the actual national vote.
So what do you fall back on polling? History? Where the candidates are campaigning? Where the ad money is being spent? Likely a combination of all of those. Which is what makes punditry on this kind of stuff so much fun.
