The assumption among most observers seems to be that Barack Obama will get a bounce in the polls from his trip to Afghanistan and Iraq, the Middle East, and western Europe. But it's not apparent in the polls that have come in to date. Gallup tracking shows him with a 46 percent-to-42 percent lead, about what he's had since clinching the Democratic nomination June 3. Rasmussen tracking shows him ahead by just 47 percent to 45 percent and the day before had the race at a 46 percent-to-46 percent tie. The Detroit News poll shows Obama leading in Michigan by only 43 percent to 41 percent, and there is some good news for John McCain in the recent Rasmussen poll in Ohio showing McCain ahead 46 percent to 40 percent. This last is a contrast with another poll in Ohio, showing Obama ahead 48 percent to 40 percent, conducted by the North Carolina Democratic firm PPP, whose record this cycle seems to me to have been erratic.

I put more weight on the Rasmussen poll, and I also think there is something to this interesting post from blogger Sean Oxendine saying it is going to be difficult for Obama to carry Ohio. Oxendine is arguing that Obama's weak primary showing in southern and southeastern Ohio will make it hard for him to carry the counties that enabled Democrats Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton to carry the state narrowly in 1976 and 1992. That thought occurred to me on the night of the March 4 Ohio primary, when I noticed that Obama lost Scioto County (Portsmouth, on the Ohio River) by an 81 percent-to-16 percent margin. Carter carried Scioto County 57 percent to 41 percent in 1976, and Clinton carried it 44 percent to 35 percent in 1992.

Here are Polidata's estimates of which states will gain and lose House seats and electoral votes based on extrapolations from the 2007 Census Bureau population estimates. Here's a list of which states are projected to gain or lose seats, for Bush 2004 and Kerry 2004 states.

We had greater differences between the age groups in the Democratic presidential primaries than any I can recall seeing, and we are seeing significant differences between age groups in general election polls. The ABC/Washington Post poll has Obama ahead among the under-30s by a whopping 66 percent to 30 percent, while McCain leads among over-65s (technically, I should say "65 and overs," but "over-65s" is more succinct) by 45 percent to 40 percent. Quinnipiac has Obama leading among under-35s by 63 percent to 31 percent, while McCain edged Obama 45 percent to 44 percent among over-55s. The CBS/New York Times poll showed Obama leading among under-30s by 48 percent to 36 percent, while McCain led among over-65s by 42 percent to 40 percent. In general, Obama's current lead in recent polls is due entirely to his lead—by as much as 2-1—among young voters.

But will they vote? The ABC/Washington Post (see page 2) poll shows young voters significantly less likely to say they would vote than they were in March. The Obama campaign is sending in organizers to register and turn out young voters—a good use of its copious resources, I think.

For a searing analysis of Barack Obama's current position on Iraq, you can't do better than this editorial from the Washington Post. The final sentences sum it up:

Indeed: The message that the Democrat sends is that he is ultimately indifferent to the war's outcome—that Iraq "distracts us from every threat we face" and thus must be speedily evacuated regardless of the consequences. That's an irrational and ahistorical way to view a country at the strategic center of the Middle East, with some of the world's largest oil reserves. Whether or not the war was a mistake, Iraq's future is a vital U.S. security interest. If he is elected president, Mr. Obama sooner or later will have to tailor his Iraq strategy to that reality.

"Ahistorical" is a good word, for Obama seems surprisingly lacking in his knowledge of history for a man educated at Columbia University and Harvard Law School. At one point in the campaign, he cited Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman as presidents who met with enemy leaders. In my reading, I have missed the descriptions of the Roosevelt-Hitler summit and the dialogue between Truman and the leaders of imperial Japan. Perhaps Obama had in mind the pictures of Roosevelt sitting next to Josef Stalin at Tehran and Yalta or of Truman sitting next to him at Potsdam. But the Soviet Union was our ally at the time of those meetings. Is it possible that Obama doesn't know this?

Two former U.S. News colleagues have books coming out, and they both look terrific. Linda Robinson, whose previous book was on our military's Special Forces, has now written what I suspect will be the definitive book on Gen. David Petraeus and the successful surge strategy in Iraq: Tell Me How This Ends: General David Petraeus and the Search for a Way Out of Iraq. And David Whitman, always a scholar as well as a reporter, has written Sweating the Small Stuff: Inner-City Schools and the New Paternalism, a description of some of the great charter schools that are doing a terrific job of educating kids from the most disadvantaged neighborhoods, including the KIPP Academy in the Bronx and the SEED School in Washington, D.C. Official publication dates for both books are still ahead: September for Linda's and August 15 for David's. But get your hands on copies as soon as you can if you have any interest in these subjects.

The presidential race seems to be tightening, at least according to the two tracking polls. The Rasmussen tracking poll showed Barack Obama in a statistical tie with John McCain last weekend; the latest numbers show Obama ahead 47 percent to 44 percent. Here is Scott Rasmussen's nut paragraph:

A review of Rasmussen Reports full week tracking confirms the slight tightening of the race. Seven-day tracking shows less volatility than three-day tracking and is based upon interviews with 7,000 Likely Voters each week. For the first five weeks after clinching the Democratic nomination, Obama led McCain 49 percent to 44 percent in every week but one. The sole exception found Obama ahead 49 percent to 43 percent. However, for the seven days ending July 13, Obama leads McCain 47 percent to 45 percent.

Tony Snow's death this past weekend did not, given what we knew of the spread of his cancer, come as a shock out of the blue. But it came as a shock nevertheless. Tony was one of the people in the politics/journalism business for whom the first word that comes to mind has long been "good." Good not just in the sense of competence and knowledge but good in the sense of moral human being. I first knew Tony back in 1991, when he and I were both panelists from time to time on the Channel 5 talk program Off the Record, hosted by Bob Beckel. Tony was then an editorial writer for the Detroit News and the Washington Times, and he brought his unfailing good humor and cheerful demeanor to a show that featured a certain amount of partisan rough and tumble.