ZOGBY: BUSH LEADS IN RED STATES, KERRY IN BLUE
Zogby's latest shows Bush leading in the states he won in 2000 by a large margin, 51%-39%. That would mean an electoral win of at least 278-260. Kerry's lead in the states carried by Al Gore is only 46%-45%. I would assume that means close "blue" states like Wisconsin, New Mexico, Iowa and Oregon are likely in the Bush column as of today. An electoral advantage for Bush of 307-231. If Kerry is forced to fight over "blue" states this summer and fall, there's no way he can win.

Another interesting finding by Zogby, by a margin of 50%-33%, people believe that Bush is better capable of dealing with al Qaeda, Saddam Hussein, Moammar Gaddafi, North Korea and Iran than Kerry is. Veterans (53%-27%) and current military (58%-32%) believe that Bush is better capable of handling these foreign policy challenges. This despite weeks of reminders about Kerry's military service, Bush's "champagne unit", and Kerry's great appeal to veterans. I guess Bush's experience and performance as Commander-in-Chief trumps Kerry's swift boat command when it comes to geostrategic issues and the fight against terrorism.

IS EDWARDS RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT OR NOT?
John Edwards has succeeded in making this a 2 man race, for now. It is time toask himself if he actually wants to be President. If he does, he needs to explain why he's the better man to represent the Democrats. This friendly, "John Kerry's a good man" talk isn't going to do it for him. He has to say why he is better, and part of that explanation must include why John Kerry is worse. Right now, it sounds like Edwards is running for Vice President, but he won't be selected by Kerry because Kerry will select someone who can deliver a red state. Edwards is no lock to do that. If he's serious, it is time to stop running for Vice President, or stop running all together.

Honestly, I thought Edwards was finished when he lost Virginia and Tennessee, but then his rhetoric became more shrill. He ratcheted the "two Americas" talk up to full class warfare pitch. How dare those corporations make money! He added more attacks on free trade. And it played well among the Democrat faithful. But to push that ball across the goal line, he's going to have to start hitting. Finesse won't do it, he'll have to get down and dirty. I bet Kerry understands this, and look for him to start hitting Edwards more, probably starting with his experience.

PAT BUCHANAN ENDORSES JOHN EDWARDS
Well, not quite. But the biggest laugh I've had watching the big game tonight was Pat's giddiness at Edwards' showing, and his debate advice was delivered with the joy only Pat can feel when we advises Edwards to attack Kerry, saying: "J'accuse! You supported NAFTA, GATT and the WTO!" Pat's got a candidate he thinks is his kind of isolationist. Now, if Edwards only comes out against gay marriage, Pat will be swooning.

THE REAL JFK
And one final thing. Something I don't think the Democrats really understand. Kerry tries to evoke Jack Kennedy's memory, tonight actually saying that he is "the man accompanying Teresa around the country" in a pitiful, dorky effort to echo Jack and Jackie in Paris. But Edwards can win in November, and I predict that if he does, you'll see the media (and the American people) fall in love with him, proclaim another "Camelot" and wax eloquent about the young President's vigor. I can only hope that the Democrats don't see this, or that if Edwards' succeeds, he's as conservative as the JFK of history and not as liberal as the JFK of Democratic memory.

EARLY EXIT POLLS IN WISCONSIN - *Updated*
Stinging Nettle claims to have the first numbers, which they obviously got from the Edwards campaign. Here they are:

John Kerry 41
John Edwards 33
Howard Dean 17

If these hold up, then one has to wonder about this unity that the Democrats and the press keep talking about. It looks like more than half the voters don't prefer Senator Kerry. It would also be interesting to see if the near bimbo eruption has any effect on perceptions of Kerry's electibility, but I bet the polling coalition exercised a little more restraint than when they asked if Howard Dean had the temperament to be President.

Question of the Day, if Howard Dean were out of the race, how much of his support would go to Kerry and how much to Edwards? It might make it a real 2 man race.

UPDATE: Stinging Nettle now reports a real barn-burner -- Kerry 38, Edwards 33. Sounds like we may have a horserace -- but can Edwards make this surge work anywhere else?

PRESIDENT KERRY -- A CARTOON
Here's why you take decisive, preemptive action against terrorists and tyrants who everyone believes have and are trying to get WMDs -- even when you don't have absolute, court-of-law proof. Cartoon by Gary Varvel.

POLITICAL JUNKIES
The News & Observer profiled political junkies today. I thought they might be focusing on weblogs because of an e-mail we at Federal Review received, but we didn't participate. Anyway, Todd at HippyHillNews got mentioned. To see other North Carolina weblogs -- many run by unabashed politics geeks -- see the North State Blogroll on the left border of this page.

WHAT THE HELL DID HE SAY?
I know that President Bush has a serious issue with articulation and syntax, but at least he is trying to actually say something, be it "Attack Iraq Now" or "Cut Taxes Now". But Kerry has trouble actually saying anything:

I have suggested to some people who are my advocates who've gone that line of attack, it's not one that I plan to do, it's not one I have. I don't plan to do that and I've asked them not to. But the president has to speak for his own military record. And those of you in the news media, obviously, have asked questions about it, and that's where I'll let it sit.

Say what?

More on how Kerry never actually says anything, or says everything on every side:
Questions for Kerry
John Kerry's shifting stands
Kerry's troubling consistencies

WHAT A DORK
From Reuters:

. . . a laboratory where he watched a computer-control machine tool etch the words "Wisconsin Backs Kerry in 2004" into a 40-pound aluminum slab.

"This is heavy, man," the senator said. "But I appreciate it very much. Make it come true on Tuesday."

The sixties are over, man.

ALEX POLIER SAYS NOT ME
Brian, who's actually greatly left of center, brings to my attention the exoneration of John Kerry. Alex Polier says, "I have never had a relationship with Senator Kerry, and the rumors in the press are completely false." Brian says: "Su [sic] much for Drudge's credibility..." Not sure what that means, unless there are reports that other media haven't been investigating infidelity allegations, which is all Drudge reported.

Anyway, this should end the rumors with respect to Ms. Polier, unless evidence of a cover-up arises. Actual, real evidence of a cover-up. If you were using the standards the Democrats are applying to the whole AWOL thing, you'd say this statement just raises more questions. What does "relationship" mean? Does that include sex? An unwanted advance? What's up with the "sleazeball" report. Does Mr. Polier deny saying that? Blah blah blah. That's how the AWOL story sounds.

This appears to be APs first mention of the mini-scandal. If the potential scandal wasn't news, why is this?

HEY, IT'S A STORY, SO I'M NOT GOING TO IGNORE IT
Yep, this is no way to choose a president, but here's a report that claims the alleged, supposed, purported, theoretical, rumored mistress has taped an interview with a U.S. TV network. I have no idea who or what this site is or whether it's credible, but as Howard Dean might say, it's just something that's out there.

CHEATING AND THE PRESS
Did the press take a rumor of infidelity about President Bush (41) much more seriously in 1992? It appears the "mainstream" media were much more interested, and put more questions to the candidate than they do today, and Drudge has done the research. Maybe times have changed. Maybe the press is more responsible when it comes to rumors.

TALK ABOUT THE PASSION
Mel Gibson talks to ABC monday night about whether he's anti-Semitic. So, if the Jews were responsible for the death of Jesus Christ, then shouldn't all Christians everywhere say thanks? Without His death, we would not be saved. He was supposed to die.

DOES CHEATING MATTER?
As a partisan, I can be rather pleased about the recent bimbo near-eruption and can hope that it becomes a full blown scandal. But does it really matter in the whole calculus of choosing a president? Democrats may decide they don't want damaged goods as the nominee, but that says more about political strategy then presidential qualification. But assume Kerry is the nominee, does it matter in the general election?

Yes it does, especially for the "swing" vote. You know, those people who have no clear guiding philosophy and take pride in voting for the "right man," even when it means putting both John Edwards and Elizabeth Dole in the Senate and having their votes cancel each other out and rendering North Carolina's voice irrelevant in the upper house. There's no logic in that, so the question of whether cheating matters is not resolved by logic. The voters who don't know from day to day if they'll vote Republican or Democrat are swayed by everything from wedge issues, personal issues, favorite isolated policies and fear, among other things. But a big part of their decision will simply come down to whether they like the candidate.

The arguments will be made. Some would argue that if his wife can't compete with the candidate's desire to serve his own "needs," then can the good of the country compete? What does it say about the candidate's judgment to fool around with [describe mistress here]? What does it say about the candidate who lies about it? But these arguments only matter to the extent they have any effect on likeability. "He cheats on his wife, I knew there was something I didn't like about him." And now that person may be more inclined to go to the polls.

And it may go the other way, if the Republicans try to push it. "Complaining about sex again, I knew there was something I didn't like about them."

Yes, it matters. It matters to the same extent that President Bush's National Guard history matters. But who gets hurt depends on how the sides play the scandals. And, unfortunately, that's no way to choose a president.

What John Kerry said after returning to Vietnam is a different issue, it does matter for matters of reason, logic and philosophy, and I'll address it later.