I find this a bit interesting, in that even back in the 80s, the pollsters were pulling for the lib, only to see him go down in flames.
I mention this, because it should be noted that the left will try again when it gets close to election time.
But just like the 80s, the left will feel an embarrassing defeat.

Gallup makes the following observation: "Comparing today's economic and political ratings with those from previous years when presidents sought re-election reveals that today's climate is more similar to years when incumbents lost than when they won." I would go one step further: Obama's situation is actually worse than that of some of the incumbents who have lost in the past.

In 1980, Democratic president Jimmy Carter faced an uphill struggle for re-election. Yet, despite an index of inflation and unemployment far higher than Obama's, he was actually doing slightly better in the polls. In March of that year, Carter led his Republican opponent, Ronald Reagan, by around 25 per cent. By May, Gallup gave him a lead of 49 to 41 per cent – higher than Obama's today. Carter's advantage evaporated in the months that followed, but he regained ground in October and by the last week he was running even.

None the less, Carter eventually suffered a landslide defeat. The scale of his humiliation was hidden by the fact that people were unwilling to commit themselves to the conservative Ronald Reagan until the very last minute. It was only when they went into the polling booth and weighed up all the hurt and humiliation of the past four years that they cast their vote against the president. It looks like Barack Obama will be the Jimmy Carter of 2012.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/mitt-romney/9289994/Barack-Obama-is-facing-his-Jimmy-Carter-moment.html

God willing.   

Quote from: Charliemyboy on May 27, 2012, 06:51:14 PM
God willing.   

And the creek don't rise...

Hussein makes Stalin look good.


Billy

Quote from: Bad water BILLY on May 27, 2012, 08:19:49 PM
Hussein makes Stalin look good.


Billy

At least Stalin understood how economies actually worked, that's more than you can say for hussein...

Quote from: Solar on May 28, 2012, 07:20:06 AM

At least Stalin understood how economies actually worked, that's more than you can say for hussein...

Stalin didn't dither on foreign policy or "lead from behind" militarily.  Stalin didn't apologize to his enemies and undermine his allies.  Stalin didn't telegraph KGB secrets to enemies of the state.  Stalin didn't assert he personally put the bullet in Hitler's skull.

Say what you want about Stalin, but he was no Obama.

Incidentally, why hasn't James Earl Carter been prosecuted under the Logan Act yet?  He's done almost as much damage to our national security since leaving office as he did in it.

Quote from: Eccles102 on May 30, 2012, 10:14:16 AM
Incidentally, why hasn't James Earl Carter been prosecuted under the Logan Act yet?  He's done almost as much damage to our national security since leaving office as he did in it.

Well, since only one person has ever been indicted -- in 1803 -- for violating the Logan Act, I would opine that Mr. Carter, like all others who have technically violated the Act (a federal felony, incidentally) will get a pass. I see your point, though -- Carter is a rather persistent pain in the ass with regard to stuff that ain't his bidness.