Want to see a prominent (and very rich) (and, I suspect, disengaged from certain practical policy questions) (but obviously smart) nonideological-reformist-voter thinking aloud? Check out Mark Cuban's blog. Cuban, as some of you know, owns the Dallas Mavericks NBA team; on his blog, www.blogmaverick.com, he posted some very MyDD-sounding complaints last week about the price of the inauguration. Now he reveals that he voted for W, because he thought W a strong leader and Kerry not so much. Bummer.

Next time you're thinking about which candidate can speak to the nonideological-reformist-voter mindset,  you might ask what it would take to get Mark Cuban to vote for our side. I hope and suspect the answer is "not that much, but he'd need a visceral connection to the candidate, and the appearance of strong, decisive independence." (Not the reality, note-- Kerry had that-- but the appearance.)

New M/D poll of blue states, as you may have heard or seen, looks good for Blinky: 49-43 in Iowa, 49-44 in NM, a 45-45 tie in WI, and one-point leads for JFK in MI,  PA, even OR. Here's a link:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6056143/
What to make of it? Well, the IA and NM numbers look almost identical to what the same firm found in early September, when M/D had Bush 47, Kerry 43 in NM,  and Bush 48, Kerry 42 in IA. Almost everyone else who polled those states at that time found much closer races: ARG usually found Kerry ahead.  Fortunately, M/D offer internals for all but NM: their IA sample, for example, is 40% R, 37% D, and 39% self-identified born-again/evangelical-Christian. (Scroll down on the MSNBC poll results page for these numbers.) Their MI is 38 D, 36 R, and 36% born-again; their PA 49 D, 44 R, only 8 (not 7 due to rounding) independent, and once again 36% born-again. Chris, or anyone: what are the real numbers for these states, not just on party ID but on born-agains? Have I drunk the kool-aid, or has Mason-Dixon?