The so-called “Bradley Effect” is strongest in White Catholic Males, I've read somewhere. If that is true, it means that what the nose-counters call the KEY demographic in the last several [five or six] elections might be fibbing and then confessing later.

I personally think Obama will get the most traction from his observations on which McCain is speaking at any given moment, given that Johnny Mac has been on both sides of almost any domestic issue you choose [except on being pro-Life]. McCain is the guy who can claim credit for the surge & badgering Bush until he went along with Petraeus & Mack. But unless something huge happens on the int'l stage the next five months or so, it's all uphill for McCain.

Young kids & blacks are enthusiastic for Obama, but the over-fifty crowd votes—-that is another demographic that is often ignored. I'd be interested in the numbers on that niche.

I think the most interesting point in Joe's analysis is the “enthusiasm gap”.

The moment in 2004 that I “knew” Bush would clean Kerry's clock was when reading a column by Milbank in the Post comparing Bush's & Kerry's crowds. Kerry's crowds were larger, with lots of star power like Springsteen. . . but Milbank found them wanting compared with the passion of Bush's crowds most of whom, in Milbank's words, would have taken a bullet for Bush.

Most folks here at TMV hate Bush, I realize . . . but I think that 04 lesson is telling: Like Bush or Reagan, Obama stirs enthusiasm. In contrast, McCain can't fire his base.

Maybe McCain can narrow the “enthusiasm gap”. If he doesn't, I suspect the election is Obama's.