So PPP has released a fresh poll showing President Obama up by eight points in Pennsylvania. Which makes us cats PURR.
But at the same time, it makes us cats HISS that the political cogniscenti are such jerks. Why is it assumed in Pundit World that Willard Mitt Romney has a legitimate shot in Pennsylvania, when he's eight points down?
And why do the same punditheads who call Pennsylvania a battleground state claim that it's: 1) 100 percent impossible for Obama to win Indiana, 2) unrealistic for Obama to dream about contesting Arizona, and 3) naive for Obama to think that North Carolina is within his reach — all because he's, gosh, eight (or fewer) points behind?
The pundits' electoral bias in Presidential elections, which probably dates back to 1972, is infuriating. And Obama strategists like David Axelrod need to call them on it.
After all, since 1988 the Republicans have won — outright — a grand total of ONE national general election. And that was only because the media allowed the Worst Person Who's Ever Lived and the Worst Person Who's Ever Lived (If Indeed He Were a Person) to get away with the ridiculous threat that if you vote for a Democrat you will die.