That needs a correction. Zogby was way, way out of line on February 5 in California. He dramatically underestimated Hispanic turnout in SoCal, and it badly skewed his results. In the remaining states where he polled, he showed Obama doing better than many other polls - and was largely correct.

I'd be the last one to defend Zogby's methodology, and I take all his polls with a healthy dose of skepticism, because of his penchant for trumpeting small-sample trends and his facility for hedging to match expectations. But that stands independent of February 5.

Whatever they are on it seems to cause extreme mood swings.

YES WE'RE CONNED!!! YES WE'RE CONNED!!!
YES WE'RE CONNED!!! YES WE"RE CONNED!!!

I think Zogby decided to stay away from polling actual elections so that he could focus on hypothetical matchups that can't harm his reputation further.

Zogby may not have been too far off in estimating California after all...many of the independents didn't get to vote for president because of a flaw in the ballot printing. The exact number is still being looked at.

But independents comprised 19% of voters in Cali, so that had a real effect.

Also, I was living at the same address in Los Angeles for ten years and in 2004 I got a provisional ballot instead of my regular one because my precint couldn't find my name..even though I got my sample ballot and precinct info via US mail. There were many such problems reported and things haven't improved.

I'm an Obama supporter, but I take Zogby numbers with a full shaker of salt.

One of the underreported stories of this campaign is not the inaccuracy of the polls, but their comparative irrelevance.

The four major players in recent political history have been more Pollish than Lech Walesa. Bill was unabashedly poll-driven. So too was Newt. Rove monitored polls like vital signs in an ICU. Hillary won't empty her bladder without a focus group.

Obama, on the other hand, comes across as though he couldn't care less about such things. This is not actually the case, of course, but appearances are what they are.

Meanwhile, Americans have become disdainful of the whole polling process. They lie to pollsters. They decline to participate. They don't trust the results.

The furniture has been rearranged.

It's not particularly surprising that Hillary's floundering nationally ever since she stopped running a national campaign and plunged full force into Texas and Ohio with minor detours to the Potomac states and Wisconsin to try and stop bleeding delegates at a totally alarming rate and limit comparisons to Rudy's firewall (with some success). The "we can win this thing!" until two days before a primary, and then uprooting and heading for Ohio/Texas for a standard stump speech not mentioning that night's results is getting a little tired.

Not to mention the single-minded targeting of her support in Texas on 2/12 and in Ohio on 2/19. That night in Texas, "Hillary is the first Latina president!" and hundreds of Mexican-American faces dotting the audience. Conversely, I think there was one single non-white-middle-aged-woman in the tableau behind Hillary last night, despite Ohio being a fairly diverse state. Banking her candidacy on being able to pull out a big win in two states via strong support in really disparate groups (Lou Dobbsian lower-middle-class whites in Ohio, Mexican-Americans in Texas) without hemorrhaging support amongst, you know, everyone else... against an opponents who's explicitly campaigning for the votes of everyone was a gamble to say the least, and it doesn't appear that Hillary's support is holding out long enough to make that gamble pay off.

Unless last second negative attacks by Hillary or billionaire-backed 527s can somehow trip up Obama, the national momentum will continue as people see the cynical nature of the microtargeted Clinton campaign.

DOES ANYONE BELIEVE ZOGBY? Zogby and ARG should be investigated for human rights abuses. Both of them lock monkeys up in a dim room and have them throw feces at a chart with candidates' names on them. They're terrible on animal rights and even worse on polling.

p.s: Just so we're clear, this isn't sour grapes from a Clinton supporter. I'm an Obama supporter who likes reading non-feces generated polling data. Also, I'm not a latte-drinking, Prius- driving, Birkenstock-wearing, trust fund baby as Clinton surrogates are claiming today.

The American public has seen Hillary for who she really is, and is voting appropriately.

This whole race could be over in a week, if we all just keep repeating a few simple words:

"Shame on you, Hillary Clinton!"