This is pretty much what I said Tuesday but it's nice to have company. Writing an opinion piece for the NY Times, pollster Nate Silver says the polls definitely show the race is a dead head, meaning there's no way to predict the winner with any certainty. It's going to be a coin toss.

However, Silver says people ask him all the time what his "gut" tells him. And rather than dodge the question, he just comes out and says it. It feels like Trump is going to win.

So OK, I’ll tell you. My gut says Donald Trump. And my guess is that it is true for many anxious Democrats.

But I don’t think you should put any value whatsoever on anyone’s gut — including mine. Instead, you should resign yourself to the fact that a 50-50 forecast really does mean 50-50. And you should be open to the possibility that those forecasts are wrong, and that could be the case equally in the direction of Mr. Trump or Ms. Harris.

For Silver, he seems to find it somewhat more plausible that the current tie in the polls is masking some Trump strength. After all, Trump's support has been underestimated twice before.

...the likely problem is what pollsters call nonresponse bias. It’s not that Trump voters are lying to pollsters; it’s that in 2016 and 2020, pollsters weren’t reaching enough of them.

Nonresponse bias can be a hard problem to solve. Response rates to even the best telephone polls are in the single digits — in some sense, the people who choose to respond to polls are unusual. Trump supporters often have lower civic engagement and social trust, so they can be less inclined to complete a survey from a news organization. Pollsters are attempting to correct for this problem with increasingly aggressive data-massaging techniques, like weighing by educational attainment (college-educated voters are more likely to respond to surveys) or even by how people say they voted in the past. There’s no guarantee any of this will work.

If Mr. Trump does beat his polling, there will have been at least one clear sign of it: Democrats no longer have a consistent edge in party identification — about as many people now identify as Republicans.

Silver sees a real possibility the polling could tilt the other direction, toward Harris, but obviously he finds that slightly less persuasive. His final prediction is that one way or the other the final outcome will not be as close as the polling currently seems to suggest. With everything tied up, the Electoral College outcome could be a clear victory if things shift by just a point one way or the other. He specific prediction is a 60% chance that one candidate sweeps all of the battleground states, making it look like a blowout.

Silver must be right about lots of anxious Democrats feeling the same way because the copium is flowing in the comments on this one.

I was canvassing in Philadelphia last week, and those who weren’t planning to vote for Harris (either decisively Trump, or undecided) all said the same thing. “Taxes and prices.” That is the only thing they care about. Some of them laughed at the very concept that the president’s character, and his respect for the constitution should be a factor. 

We’ve reached peak consumerism. The founders wouldn’t recognize the country we’ve become. Half the country is willing to toss out the constitution to save a few cents on eggs and gas. (Neither of which are controlled by the president.)

Hmmm. I seem to remember something about the Boston Tea Party where people objected to taxes by dumping a load of tea in the harbor. And this eventually led us to a war for independence and our own constitution. Maybe we reached peak consumerism in 1773? Speaking of Boston, a reader from Massachusetts finds Silver's take depressing.

What a depressing column.  From a pollster, no less.   Frankly, I'm really getting sick of polls.  They start two years out from an election and intensify until for me, they've lost all meaning.  

I have never ever been polled.  Of course, this is the classic case of poller ID and call screening. But I think I have an inkling of why so many are running towards strong man Trump, despite every thing he's said recently in his usual vulgar outbursts.

Last night there were interviews in Michigan of Trump supporters eager to justify their choice: "he's a businessman; "he's better on the economy"; he's decisive and strong"; "he's entertaining and funny".  

All I can say is, this country is in really bad shape if it elects Donald Trump based on the above reasons and despite of all the evidence on how he plans to "govern."

Anything the hoi polloi like or care about is obviously the road to destruction. How are these people allowed to vote? To be clear, I'm not saying that, I think that's what the depressed writer is saying in so many words.

There's a lot more like this but you get the idea.