In sports, they always discuss "game changing moments" that determine the outcome of a game. In politics, we are seeing "game changing moments" in the Presidential election that have spurred major changes in each contest.
On the Republican side, in December, shortly after the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, Michael Barone noted that this could affect how the election was conducted. As we learned, it was the "game changing moment" that gave McCain the victory on the pachydermal side of the electoral situation.
On the Democratic side, the jackass has not decided on a winner, but it seems we are seeing an ebb and flow, with one game-changing moment being Obama's competitiveness in the Iowa Cauci, and then another game-changer in the mud on Obama's pastor, Jeremiah Wright, who is associated with the ultra-liberal United Church of Christ. Will another game-changing moment strike on this side?
And on the national election front, the Democrats' undefeated streak continued through four House races, making it a clean +3 on the takeaway,and keeping seats. With 236 safe seats, all Democrats, and 199 leaning Democrat seats in the House, as boasted by the national Democratic committees, could this be a 290-seat romp?
Or could the next game-changing moment have come today by the California Supreme Court's ruling that Proposition 22, which defined marriage as between one man and one woman, was unconstitutional, with an amendment to the Golden State's constitution on the ballot in November up for a vote. Could this be the game-changing moment of the overall election?