FiveThirtyEight.com
 

Realclearpolitics.com has a pretty accurate poll as well.

Drudgereport is good stuff if you don't mind the slant.

Digg.com to see what the crazies are saying.

I like fivethirtyeight.com a lot - as I've mentioned before on here, I'm a big fan of Nate Silver's baseball work, so I was happy to see him doing work on politics.

I also frequently check out the Rasmussen website.

Although I don't know if McCain can win, I don't think he's going to lose by the margins showing.

I admit that I, of course, have no way of knowing what will happen in the future and how well pollsters are tracking in the present, but the couple of articles that I've read explaining that polls are trying to predict for changes in new registrations and likely voters make me think that there may be a lot bigger actual margin of error than is being accounted for when people report results.

I also think that people responding to polls may be less likely to admit to supporting McCain while there is so much negative coverage of McCain and Palin rallies and supporters. (This may or may not go beyond whatever Bradly/Wilder effect may exist.)

ETA: I was Wikipedia-ing Bradly Effect after I posted, and they mention the Shy Tory Factor and the Spiral of Silence to describe what I mean.)

There is no way that I live in a blue state... stupid south floridians.

Oh, it's not just South Florida that makes Florida "barely Democratic," it looks like only the far west and the North-Central Area are committed GOP all the time...between Alachua County and Tampa, it's pretty purple. Around Tallahassee, it's more blue (because of the predominantly AA areas just west and north of Tally).

The same thing happens with NY State, to some extent. NYC and the southern tier (and maybe some of the areas around Buffalo) make it a blue state, while most of upstate NY is pretty conservative.

This is all a moo point for me, 'cause I sent in my ballot last week.

Wouldn't those people just say they were "undecided," then?

Apparently not in the cases where they've tracked this stuff in the past, but I don't know really. I think the deal is they give the answer to the pollster that they think makes them look good.

The polls all may be dead-on for all I know, but the next time you are looking at a particular polls results, look for the breakdown of who participated in the sample and see if the breakdown looks right to you. Maybe it is with new registrants, but we probably won't know until election day.

Sure would be nice to have an election before we start throwing victory parties.

No one's throwing any victory parties. In fact, it was Obama himself who told his supporters not to get "cocky," and that it's still anyone's campaign. The website simply reflects the polls, endorsements, and what else has been going on.

As you can tell, we've been having a pretty fair and balanced discussion about this site, with people on both sides celebrating and criticizing what's going on. If you feel mature enough to be part of that, feel free to join us. Otherwise, keep on keepin' on...

Ah, a "moo point;" a point only a cow would make.

It's crazy how there can be such a division within a state; NY state is especially stark, in my experience. Going from the city to upstate is like night and day.

We have the same division in Michigan. You have Detroit and you have the rest of the state. It's primarily the county that Detroit is in that wins out because of it's higher population. And, when you think about people's life experience and how it shapes their political opinions, it makes a lot of sense.

Are you talking about a wealth-party affiliation correlation? That may be the case in Michigan, but I think, at times, people are too quick to make that connection.

As someone from a lower middle-class, Democrat background who is a registered Republican, I'm probably a bit more sensitive to that issue than I should be. But, I also think people tend to make too many assumptions when trying to draw those parallels.

That connection only works in some regions. There are a lot of lower-income Republicans in the South and very wealthy Democrats in New England.