Not gonna happen.

Obama is the one we've been waiting for. When the oceans start to recede, the planet starts to hear itself and the rubes all fall in line to vote, yet again, for The One.

Sure hope Larry is right. But the Republicans have done everything they can to cause Obama to fail, and the inadequate response to the 2008 economic collapse may have done the trick.

That's the problem with analyses such as these. They're always right in retrospect...until they're wrong. I'm not making any predictions one way or another, and I'd have to be an idiot to try, but I just note that partisans on one side or another clutch this sort of analysis like rosaries and pray. If it turns out to be wrong, well, it's just like the people who note the incredible track records of television psychics and conveniently ignore the misses.

Larry, this is setting up like 1980, with a crap hole economy. Jimmy Carter leaves the Convention with a 7 Point Bump and is beaten like a red headed step child in November.
With Newsweek, the Boston Herald, etc. starting to jump ship, and the only thing that Obama can run on is Mitt's tax returns and trying to tie him to Akin, he will lose badly.

There's so many variables.

Earlier in the week, Mitt Romney was very worried about Hurricane Isaac, but now he can relax. It looks like the hurricane's going to miss the Cayman Islands after all.

He might lose OIHO.

Mittens had a dream about being Reagan the other day. But he awoke to realize it was Bedtime for Bonzo.

Of the 57 states, 7 are a lock for Obama...regardless of the polling.

Obama deserves to lose. The economy isn't bad luck, it is the result of policy choices by the Obama administration. And there is no sign that he has learned any lessons yet.

There are structural problems in the economy that neither candidate or political party is addressing.

Ultimately, for an economy to thrive you need a growing percentage of money in the hands of the middle class and working class, but the statistics show both the middle class and working class are having their purchasing power reduced over time.

Getting government under control and accountable to the people is only one aspect.

Neither party is seriously addressing the offshoring of jobs and entire industries.

Yet, a majority of both Democratic and Republican rank-n-file realize you can't have a economic system which encourages offshoring of jobs which puts downward pressure on wages because of widespread unemployment.

Stagnant third world countries have a rich elite and a broad class of poor and a small middle class.

That is the direction America is heading in.

With this economy Obama should be down by 10%, but Romney is so easily identified with Wall Street and bankers that many folks struggle with that, as do I.

I go back and forth on holding my nose and voting for Romney (Obama does not have the country going "Forward", it is treading water at best), but I really have serious doubts about Romney, too.

Neither are leaders.

Both are synthetic candidates put together by political consultants.

Both have serious problems with background issues and haven't put forth plans which I think will take America in the right direction.

I can't vote for Obama, but am less inclined to vote for Romney the more I learn about his background.

I believe whichever candidate wins the election the current Rule by Deception course America is on will continue.

Here in Nevada - which is a swing state - Obama just made his third visit in less four months. His speech lasted about 15 minutes and mostly focussed on education loans and grants; which is a low priority in a state with the highest unemployment rate, the third highest rate of home foreclosures and high rates for bankruptcy filings. He seemed rushed and eager to jet off to Las Vegas so he could kiss Harry Reid's ring and hopefully raise a few more dollars from the few casino bigwigs that haven't already abandoned him.
It's not looking good for Obama here, with Dean Heller (R) holding a 3-5 point lead over Berkley (D); who has a Congressional ethics investigation currently against her. And while Dems hold a lead in voter registrations, it's debateable how many will show up at the polls.

Obama inherited the worst economic situation of any Prez in 80 years then had to deal w/GOP obstructionism.

And no, he didn't have full control of Congress for his 1st two years. He rarely had the 60 votes needed to break filibusters in the senate thanks to republican-in democrat clothing types like Blanche Lincoln in Arkansas (good riddance) and Ben Nelson in NE, and of course, Lie-berman.

U.S. policial parties are weak and decentralized and the President has little ability to twist arms of his party's legislators.

Every democratic president has had to scale back his domestic agenda largely because enough dems voted with the GOP to block them.

Truman tried to pass medicare and failed,most if the "fair deal" he wanted never saw the light of day. FDR wanted some form of universal health care but had to back off. Kennedy failed largely to get his domestic agenda passed.

Obama's biggest failure was not sending Biden to capitol hill Jan 21st and having him issue a ruling as senate president that filibusters violate senate rules.

Such a ruling needed only 50 votes to pass (as opposed to changing senate rules in the middle of a session of Congress which requires 67 votes).

All Mitt and boy wonder want is to gut social programs for the poor and elderly and continue Bush tax cuts for the rich.

Also look who co-spnsored the "personhood amendment with Todd "legitimate rape" Akin? Paul Ryan, who has voted the same way as Akin on every abortion bill intro'd in the house since they were both 1st elected in 1998.

Obama is consistently polling below 50 percent in the swing states. For an incumbent, at this point in the election cycle, the polling numbers are more like a ceiling than a floor, so these prognosticators may very well be correct.

Romney's selection of Ryan for VP was a deft move, because it took a lot of people like myself away from a protest third-party vote status, into leaning for Romney, who it now appears may actually be serious about confronting our country's enormous problems, unlike the carping brat who currently occupies the Oval Office.

"But the Republicans have done everything they can to cause Obama to fail blah blah blah..."

"Obama inherited the worst economic blah blah blah..."

Come on! We will need better ammo than that to take out the evil Rethuglicans!

Personally, I like the "1,000 lawyers disbursed across the 7 swing states" plan much better (litigate the states with close vote counts until past the time the EC meets), and then declare martial law "for just a few weeks until we count ALL the ballots". After all, Obama did cut his teeth in Chicago politics. And if the people don't fall in line, the various departments of the Obama administration have their own supplies of hollow point 'target practice' bullets, to help them fall in line.

Things break differently this year for two reasons.
1. Yes, the economy will be the big issue. But the choice being put forward is essentially one between stuff that might help a bit, and stuff like tax deductions for show horses that we know won't help.
Couple that with the prospect of Supreme Court Justice Todd Akin (or the equivalent thereof), and conventional wisdoms may be less reliable than usual.

2. The Republicans are sitting on something like 11 gazillion dollars in attack-ad money. For all the bleating about the Marxist in the White House, the GOP is counting on a strategy best outlined by Lenin.

It's about to get real:

http://gawker.com/5936394/

Let's see, Obama is worse than Carter was; SOOOOO if Carter didn't get a second term (and man was he a horrible president) then I can only hope, wish and pray that Obama is shown the door.

The country can't get much worse. We were in trouble when Obama was elected; and instead of getting us out of trouble, he jumped in the hole, grabbed a shovel and started digging even deeper.

Anyone hear about another FIRST that Obama accomplished? The first time we've run a $1 trillion deficit EVER. The man is truely amazing. As is said when I've been let go - I wish him well in his future endevours :)

Sorry about that, the FIRST was the first time we've ever run a $1 trillion defecit for four years in a row.

Allan L., it seems to me that the worst damage done to Obama was done by his mouth, with the able assistance of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. YMMV. His mistake with Obamacare was 3-fold: it was Hilary!'s idea retreaded; he outsourced it to Nancy and Harry; and after they rammed it thru Congress, O gave out waivers to it.

Mike H., have you laid in a ton of TUMS? You might want to think about it.

Native, I'm interested in your understanding of how Obama is responsible for the deficit, assuming it's something to care about (which it seems is not the case for anyone holding elected office), since the Congress controls revenues through tax rates and authorizes expenditures. As far as I can tell, the major policy decisions affecting the last four years of deficits were taken by the Congress in earlier years (Bush tax cuts, Bush-initiated wars, financial deregulation, Medicare Part D). What has happened since that has affected the deficit has been largely in the private sector: a burst housing bubble, inflated through too much private sector lending, and the resulting loss of consumer demand, causing massive unemployment.

Sam, I agree that the PPACA is pretty unsatisfactory. But I believe it was about the best that could be done at the time. And I'm confident that if it had not been adopted, or if it were now to be repealed, we would collectively be worse off.

From what I've read about this study, the study's "predictions" of the last seven elections were actually retroactive. Which means the predictions aren't really predictions.

It's going to be close, and maybe they'll get this one right, but never trust an astrologer who hasn't already made a fortune on the stock market...

Neil Anderson

I really can't understand how the Obama sympathizes can stand there with a straight face and cry and whine about Romney being a Wall Street guy when Obama appointed a confirmed tax cheat to be Secretary of the Treasury !
Grow up folks, your boy is no better than our boy...

This analysis might be at least plausible if it weren't for two factors: (1) the fact that the gender (and racial) gap between the two parties is both larger than ever and growing faster than ever, and (2) the fact that Romney, rather than trying to broaden his appeal with his VP pick, has unfathomably chosen the most ideologically extreme running mate in modern political history. Judging from the story, Bickers and Berry don't seem to have considered those factors.

I can't wait for Obumma to lose. I'm going to have the pleasure of reading all the sore losers whing here for 8 years of Romney and 8 years of president Ryan. It's gonna be great for the country. It will be great for bojack as his readership will probably triple from all the sore losers coming here to find a shoulder to cry on.

If Romney wins and does what he says he's going to do there won't be a 2nd term. So no worries.