Maybe I’m late to this since I get the print New York Times on Sunday, but I thought it was interesting to see that Frank Rich’s online column is like a long week-in-review blog post full of links supporting his claims. I’m not a fan of Rich (who frequently distorts facts in an effort to dramatize politics), but it’s a useful way to improve the stale columnist op-ed format.

PS Rich’s column today does a nice job of undermining the Obama landslide myth:

No presidential candidate was breaking the 50 percent mark in mid-August polls in 2004 or 2000. Obama’s average lead of three to four points is marginally larger than both John Kerry’s and Al Gore’s leads then (each was winning by one point in Gallup surveys). Obama is also ahead of Ronald Reagan in mid-August 1980 (40 percent to Jimmy Carter’s 46). At Pollster.com, which aggregates polls and gauges the electoral count, Obama as of Friday stood at 284 electoral votes, McCain at 169. That means McCain could win all 85 electoral votes in current toss-up states and still lose the election.

However, he then attributes Obama’s narrow lead to the fact that “the public doesn’t know who on earth John McCain is.” And while it’s true that the press coverage of McCain’s background hasn’t been particularly skeptical, a simpler answer is that the race is close because the political fundamentals are close. If the economy were in deep recession, then Obama would be leading by 15 points.