Thanks for answering my original question. I was hoping for something a little more objective, but I can't deny that your gut instincts are compelling for you. The fact that mine have been giving me the exact opposite signals, point-for-point, for five years now means we disagree; but if I give my gut any credence for me, I have to give your gut credence for you.

Not that it's news that our differences are irreconcilable on the subject of George W. Bush. You and I are definitely in the made-up-our-minds camp. It generally looks like more people than usual have made up their minds earlier than usual, which is why I was intrigued by that Zogby poll that found there were certain circumstances in which huge numbers of people would change their minds. People have been calling the election "close", but maybe that's too simple. I think the what-if poll suggests that the standard poll results are metastable, and attitudes could be tipped to a radically different state by the right stimulus. Perhaps it's because people are already turned off by the ugliness of the campaigns, and made up their minds early just so they could tune out the shrieking. In that case, the close numbers are basically a sign of something like apathy or fatigue, which could be broken by some dramatic event that wakes people up.

October should be very interesting.

Until then, I think I'll try to cut down on the political arguing. It accomplishes nothing other than raise my blood pressure.