Pundits don't grasp how presidential system works

The structure of our electoral college method of electing the president means that each state is fought out as an individual, winner-take-all contest. That means the highest vote-getter wins 100% of the electoral votes from that state, even if they have less than a majority of the vote. And most states already are locked up for one party or the other.

That means the election will boil down to only about 15 states. And it will be a handful of undecided swing voters in those 15 states, combined with voter mobilization, that will decide the presidency. For progressives, this should be sobering, particularly when you realize those states are ones like Missouri, Arkansas, West Virginia, and Florida, and the swing voters in those states are not very progressive.

Polling from the battleground states would be more informative and revealing for the public than national polls -- just ask Al Gore why he's not president, after winning a half million more votes than Bush in 2000.

If the Democrats manage to win all the states they won in 2000 -- a very real possibility -- they only need to pick up one more state like Florida, Arkansas or Missouri to win. Candidates like Wesley Clark or John Edwards could help the Democrats win their home states of Arkansas or North Carolina. Dick Gephardt could help in Missouri, and Senator Bob Graham in Florida. So look for a candidate like them as the Democrats' vice presidential nominee.