[via Political Wire]

So, it was a year ago August that we started calling it an Obama electoral landslide. No special insight — just a recognition that the Republican A-Team was sitting this one out, because they saw that Obama was a lot stronger than the conventional wisdom credited.

Comparisons to the “fundamentals” — the economy, unemployment — were misguided. This was no conventional moment in American history, and this would be no conventional election.

Read more »

What “un-skewed polls” was telling us:

Read more »

As nojo – @stinque – correctly pointed out on Twitter, Mittens’ speaking speed indicated he wanted to get through that speech and back to his pile of money in the Caymans:

Whoever wins tonight (or late December, pending recounts), you can bet the losing side will claim Nefarious Irregularities that undermine the result. And so, as we commence the grueling journey of our Election Night Open Thread/Heist Movie, just remember that it ain’t over until the Supreme Court sings.

Image: Zombie Head Cookie Jar [ThinkGeek]

…if Mitt Romney loses Ohio. According to Karl Rove’s own final prediction for Fox News. If you look at the numbers, Obama wins with 271 if he takes Ohio, according to Rove.

Considering Karl Rove’s job is GOP spin, it’s pretty significant that he doesn’t give Mitt a path to victory without Ohio. And when you consider that Nate Silver has Obama ahead by three in Ohio, and the even the Rightward leaning Rasmussen has that race tied, Rove’s view of the election isn’t that rosy for Republicans. Oh, one more thing: Rove’s map has Romney winning 6 of the 8 states that Fox has declared tossups, a tall order given that Obama leads Romney in 23 of 26 polls in swing states.

Will that make tonight any less brutally agonizing? Probably not. I still haven’t decided if I’m staying up to watch, or or downing a few cocktails and putting myself to sleep before the results start rolling in.

“If the EV/PV split does occur, Obama’s people fret that it will be terrible for the country and will make it much harder for the president to govern effectively.” [New York, via Political Wire]