Last few days

I think the Osama tape will hurt Kerry. I found this exchange on the Kerry Spot.

ALAN COLMES: "It's not like he [Osama bin Laden] had a Kerry-Edward bumper sticker in his cave."

NEIL CAVUTO: "But he's all but doing that, isn't he? I thought I saw a button."

Ok, a little over the top but basically about right.

More EV Analysis:

There are basically 4 big states in play: FL, PA, OH, MI. If Bush wins any two he wins and doesn't need anything else. If he only wins FL he almost certainly wins. If he wins only OH he needs about an even split elsewhere. If he only wins MI (a crazy outcome) he has to take everything else.

Starting with RealClearPolitics current map (Bush 232 Kerry 207) I take HI from Kerry's assumed total and put it in the toss up category. (Current RCP results have Bush with a lead in HI).

Bush needs another 37pts to win. If he takes FL (27) he needs only one of the following combinations: OH, MN, WI, IA + NH, IA + HI. Basically, Kerry has to run the board.

If you swap OH and FL then Bush needs IA and either MN or WI. (There are other options, NH + HI > IA for example).

Latest: Bush in a Squeaker

This has Bush losing OH and NH but winning by picking up NM, IA, and HI. The big suprise is HI, of course. Notably absent in this round of polls is WI which has usually shown up in the Bush column.

Assuming all states go as they did last time.
All positive numbers in Democratic direction (worst case).
Kerry must gain 10 net EVs from Gore's performance to win.

Blue States				Gore Won
State	Poll Data			2000	Now	Spread vs	EV
	Date	Date	EVs	Results		2000	Pickup
MI	10/20	10/29	17	5.2	3.30	-1.90	0
OR	10/19	10/27	7	0.5	4.70	4.20	0
MN	10/19	10/28	10	2.4	1.70	-0.70	0
ME	10/17	10/22	4	5.1	8.50	3.40	0
NM	10/15	10/29	5	0.06	-4.00	-4.06	(5)
WI	10/23	10/29	10	0.2	1.00	0.80	0
PA	10/22	10/29	21	4.2	2.90	-1.30	0
IA	10/23	10/29	7	0.3	-1.70	-2.00	(7)
NJ	10/16	10/25	15	15.9	4.00	-11.90	0
HI	10/13	10/20	4	18.3	-0.90	-19.20	(4)
Red States				Bush Won
State				2000	Now	Spread vs	EV
				Results		2000	Pickup
MO	10/22	10/26	11	-3.3	-4.70	-1.40	0
OH	10/20	10/29	20	-3.5	1.20	4.70	20
FL	10/21	10/29	27	-0.01	-1.70	-1.60	0
NV	10/19	10/29	5	-3.5	-3.70	-0.20	0
NH	10/14	10/27	4	-1.3	2.70	4.00	4
WV	10/13	10/18	5	-6.3	-4.00	2.30	0
AR	10/18	10/25	6	-5.4	-3.00	2.50	0
CO	10/14	10/29	9	-8.4	-5.20	3.20	0
		Projected Evs		Bush wins.
Kerry		268
Bush		270

I continue to believe that Kerry needs everything to break his way, but it doesn't get closer than this.

Moral Consistency

I read the article "Faith and Patriotism". I'd like to expound upon it with an example.

Martin Luther King Jr attacked segregation on grounds of morality. It was a deeply religious movement. Anti-discrimination law involves people imposing their views on others. (All law does, this is only a telling example).

I can confidently predict that Senator Kerry supports anti-discrimination law.

But this makes a mockery out of his statement that he believes life begins at conception AND he votes pro-abortion even on partial birth abortion which even ordinary supporters of abortion often view as infanticide.

If he actually believes life begins at birth then he has supported infanticide.

Yes, Mr. Kerry, James 2:17 says "Faith without works is dead." But his works are his pro-abortion votes which contradict his claimed faith.

My own positions on abortion are, to borrow the term, a bit nuanced. Most Americans hold a nuanced position. I find it strange that Senator Nuance shows absolutely no nuance in his record of voting on abortion.

Hunting Tigers

I deeply respect the observations of Mr. Friedman. This is a response to today's article. His book "From Beruit ..." was recommended to me by a lady who used to work for the CIA.

But I do not always agree with his conclusions from those observations. Sometimes subtle differences in emphasis can lead to profoundly different conclusions.

Senator Kerry: Would he pull the trigger on the Tiger? There is absolutely nothing in his record which would suggest he would. The abberation in his career was the authorization of force in 2002. Absent that, he has been a remarkably consistent opponent of American power in the world (he had a brief timeout regarding Bosnia).

Would Bush shoot: of course.

But here is where I disagree. Iraq was the correct target after Afghanistan, and Bush hit it dead center.

Complaining about the looting is monday morning quarterbacking -- we could never have put the forces in to stop the looting. (First, we don't have them anywhere. Second, we couldn't have put them in theater and supplied them if we had had them.)

There are of course many things to criticize, but that is demanding perfection and overlooking much of our actual results.
Look; We opened up Iraq and found Yugosolovia just like Friedman warned we might. But he did note it wasn't completely out of the question we might have found Germany as the neocons hoped. (And one of the people at the WeeklyStandard said immediately after the statues fell, at we should give Iraq back to the Iraqis as quickly as possible.)

My read?

• Breaking Iraq was still vital for the US even if it later decends into Yugoslavian civil war.
• Our execution in the Iraq aftermath is sub-optimal (in hindsight) but hardly incompetent.
• We are still winning.
• The problem with wars is the guys on the other side try to win, too.
• Our enemies correctly identify our soft center -- American public opinion inflamed by a biased media.
• This is a clash of civilizations.
• If Bush wins it is a clash we _may_ win.
• If Kerry wins this election I think it is a clash we will lose.