But are any of them right?

Anyone want to lay a bet that they aren't?

I was just talking to a source inside the Obama campaign about polling in Nevada. Doesn't seem they have anymore confidence in those polls that I do. With no history to fall back on, it's a crapshoot.

In fact, here's my poll prediction. Obama will beat Clinton by one point. Where to I get that? I just guessed, which means I have about as much chance of being right as any of those polls you are reading.

So basically the campaigns are flying blind right now. They will have to concentrate on their ground game, getting their people to the polls. Obama's union endorsements should help here. And hopefully Chris Matthews can pull his head out of his rear long enough to actually talk about issues instead of focusing entirely on the horse race stuff.

In my column coming out tomorrow, I wrote that Nevada will be impossible to poll since there is no history to fall back on concerning turnout. Since finishing that column, If found a story by the Las Vegas Sun that goes deeper into this topic. It seems the big polling outfits have been skipping Nevada for just that reason. And now that they have egg on their faces from New Hampshire, none of them want to jump in the impossible task of predicting Nevada.

Could this be a caucus where the news media will have to concentrate on issues. Wouldn't that be refreshing!

On the other hand, the news media may just skip over Nevada, since according to the idiot Chris Matthews, if they don't have polls, they wouldn't have anything to report on.