Yeah I saw that. I can't believe it....What is going on?

But Pat Buchanan said today everything's going wrong for Obama. I don't understand. Pat's a straight shooter.

This isn't too surprising when you consider they have recently elected a Democratic governor and senator. Still, good to see another state that could switch.

Barack Obama leading in Montana: Should we be that surprised? I never bought into the MSM cynical notion of red state and blue state: we are the United States of America. And as long as Barack Obama has the message, resources and support he can compete anywhere. Bill Clinton won Montana in 92', Barack Obama is going win Montana in 08.'

wow i wonder if msm will cover this.........that's a pretty big margin, this may be a snapshot in time with this poll but this may keep mcsame camp up at night sweating............

I feel the earth move (landslide) under my feet.

Wow? What the fuck is "Wow" about this, Eric? Obama is barely outside of the margin of error. That's a tie, not a "lead." Considering McCain came in third in Montana's February caucuses, it's not surprising that the state has some ambivalence this year.

McCain was ahead in April because he was the presumptive Republican nominee and the Democratic primary hadn't been contested yet.

Montana has how many electoral votes?

Sorry, but this does not qualify as Wow news. I've never seen you write propaganda before, Eric. Maybe it was never so obvious.

Thanks for all the hard work.

I've never understood why the state of Mike Mansfield and Lee Metcalf voted for Republican presidential candidates, especially this last one. For that matter I can't figure out what's up with Frank Church's state or Frank Moss's or Fred Harris's. These places shouldn't be owned by Republicans, especially today's Republican party. I can't wait for the Empty Quarter to come home.

Another Rocky Mountain High with this news!

But this is a Rasmussen poll. Rasmussen's polls have tilted toward the right all year. Hillary Clinton lead Obama in the Rasmussen poll throughout the primary until it was clear she had no mathematical chance of winning.

If Rasmussen says that the Dem is leading the Republican just OUTSIDE the margin of error, then the Dem probably leads by a little more than that.

Brian Schweitzer . . . Jon Tester . . . Barack Obama. It's a logical progression. And a good one.

No mention of Bob Barr or Nader in the Rasmussen poll-- (maybe they're in the cross-tabs that you've got to pay to get)

I suspect that Barr will be somewhat of a factor in Montana -- Paul placed second there with 25% and ran ahead of McCain, and the state has plenty of "sagebrush rebellion" types who kept the west Republican for so long. If he mounts much of a campaign, this would be one of the states where he could have an impact.

Nader got 6% in 2000, but that was probably because Gore wasn't contesting the state so progressive Dems felt free to cast a bit of a protest vote. Nader dropped to 1% in 2004 -- even though Kerry wasn't contesting. I doubt he'll be much of a factor in Montana this year - although in a close race, even a few hundred votes could be a problem.

Whatever the outcome, I love the fact that the McCain will have to play defense and possibly lose states like Montana -- every dollar he spends there is one less dollar in Ohio, Virginia, Colorado, New Hampshire, Nevada, etc.

Larry Crain-man! Larry Craig-man!

If I'm not mistook, that's plus or minus 4.5. So 48 - 4.5 = 43.5 and 43 + 4.5 = 47.5. In other words, this is well within the margin of error.

And yes, Obama just campaigned there. But this is also a good sign. If he is campaigning places and then the polls swing in his direction, that is a sign he is doing something right.