Obama vs. Romney, compared with Obama vs. McCain, and Kerry vs. Bush.

[retromike22]

Here is a graph showing the realclearpolitics poll average between Obama vs. Romney, overlaid on a graph of Obama vs. McCain:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/obama_vs_romney_compared_to_obama_vs_mccain.html

What's interesting, is that Obama is higher or even with the level he was in 2008. He actually was better in April and May 2012 than April and May 2008, probably due to the Reverend Wright issue. With Romney he is much different than McCain. While McCain has had drastic highs and lows from February to August, Romney has held fairly steady, with occasional small peaks now and then. When you look at the lead graph, that is which candidate is leading and by how much, Obama is leading constantly, but at a lower level than in 2008. From March to May, McCain lead or was extremely close to a lead. Romney in contrast, has never lead.

Still, up ahead you can see what a dramatic impact the September economic crisis had coming up. I doubt polling will match that as closely. But what I take from the comparison from February to now of the comparison is this:

1. As of right now, Obama is doing just as well as he did in 2008, and at times even better.
2. Romney is more stable than McCain. Not better, not worse, but Romney is almost like an average of McCain.
3. Obama's lead is smaller over Romney than it was over McCain, not because Obama is doing worse, but rather because Romney's lowest polling was not as low as McCain's lowest polling.
4. Romney 2012 is not as good as Obama 2008, which is a given, but Obama 2012 is nowhere close to McCain 2012.
5. Only twice did McCain ever rise enough to significantly lead Obama, and that was from two unlikely surprise events, the first being the Reverend Wright controversy, and the second from Sarah Palin's convention power boost. Other than that, Obama led McCain for a strong majority of the time.

Here is a graph showing the realclearpolitics poll average between Obama vs. Romney, overlaid on a graph of Obama vs. Bush:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president
/obama_vs_romney_compared_to_bush_vs_kerry.html

Obama is doing a lot better than Kerry, never going below 45%, while it took Kerry until July to reach 45%. On this graph BE WARNED, it's not at the same scale as the 2008 vs. 2012 map. The reason, is that 2008 was more erratic than 2004. In fact, look at the left margin. In 2008 its from 40 to 52 (12 points), while in 2004 it's from 42 to 50 (8 points). So Romney is not erratic in the 2004 map, his numbers are the same. Compared with Bush they are similar as well. When I look at the lead map, although Obama has a consistent small lead over Romney, the race between Bush and Kerry was way more erratic, with both switching leads several times. The reason for this was because this race was so much more closer than 2008 or even 2012.

What I get from that graph is this.
1. Obama is significantly better than Kerry at this stage, and more stable.
2. Romney is very similar to Bush, but maybe slightly more stable.
3. Obama 2012 is significantly better than Bush 2004, and Romney 2012 is even with Kerry 2004.

So overall when comparing all three, I come to these conclusions:
1. Obama 2012 vs. Romney 2012 is not analogous to Bush 2004 vs. Kerry 2004 respectively, it is analogous to Obama 2008 vs. an average of McCain 2008.
2. At both ends of 2004 and 2008, the number of undecideds shrunk drastically, with most of them going to Obama in 2012, and an even split in 2004. So the total numbers for Kerry and Bush in fact rose in the final weeks.
3. In order to win, Romney needs to win undecideds by a large margin by rising his numbers. He has never shown the high numbers of McCain and at this point in 2004, Bush had yet to have his big post-convention boost and swift boating attack on Kerry. At this point in 2008, McCain's selection of Palin did not come until September.
4. It will take either a strong negative controversial event associated with Obama or a significant enthusiastic power boost for the Republican ticket to RISE enough to beat Obama. We already know Obama in contrast to Kerry in 2004 so biography attacks are a lot less effective. And to see that happen this year, when it hasn't so far, and to occur in the weeks right before election day is very unlikely. A second economic meltdown, Obama's real Kenyan/Muslim/Martian birth certificate found, or Romney choosing resurrected Ronald Reagan as a running mate seem the only possibilities.

Final conclusion:
Obama will win re-election, by the same margin as 2008 or greater, simply because Obama's numbers are high enough so that it takes a significant event for the Republican's numbers to pass him. Undecideds are not going to break for Romney 2012 like Obama 2008. They will either break evenly, in which case Obama wins like 2008, or break for Obama, in which case an Obama landslide.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I think you're overestimating Obama's margin significantly, but agree with the basic conclusion.

[Politico]

That's, right, Democrats: No point in turning out. Your vote will not matter because Obama will win in a landslide. Please forward the OP's message via e-mail.

Also, remember the time Jimmy Carter was above 45% and Ronald Reagan was below 40% in October 1980, and Carter went on to win re-election in a 50-40% landslide?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

That's, right, Democrats: No point in turning out. Your vote will not matter because Obama will win in a landslide. Please forward the OP's message via e-mail.

It doesn't work that way.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That was a very different world and you know it.

[Maxwell]

That's, right, Democrats: No point in turning out. Your vote will not matter because Obama will win in a landslide. Please forward the OP's message via e-mail.

Also, remember the time Jimmy Carter was above 45% and Ronald Reagan was below 40% in October 1980, and Carter went on to win re-election in a 50-40% landslide?

Mitt's rhetoric isn't anywhere Ron Reagan, much less even his record.

[pbrower2a]

That's, right, Democrats: No point in turning out. Your vote will not matter because Obama will win in a landslide. Please forward the OP's message via e-mail.

No competent politician ever gives such a message. There will be races for the Senate and all House seats. Expect President Obama to give aid as possible for such races.   

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Mitt Romney, much unlike Ronald Reagan, is no paragon of ideological stability. Barack Obama is no bumbling Jimmy Carter, either.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Final conclusion:
Obama will win re-election, by the same margin as 2008 or greater, simply because Obama's numbers are high enough so that it takes a significant event for the Republican's numbers to pass him. Undecideds are not going to break for Romney 2012 like Obama 2008. They will either break evenly, in which case Obama wins like 2008, or break for Obama, in which case an Obama landslide.

Obama's final surge was due to the housing bubble crisis and McCain's inept response to it.  Absent a comparable mistake on the part of the Romney campaign, Obama will not achieve the same margin as in 2008, tho unless Obama goofs he is likely to obtain a narrow win.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Well, besides Sarah Palin being in over her head, that large gain for Obama in September was from sh**t hitting the fan hard. It's actually kind of amazing that after that economic meltdown that he won by only 7 points. Then again a lot of people, including Obama himself, did underestimate the quantity of sh**t that hit the fan.

[Frodo]

Final conclusion:
Obama will win re-election, by the same margin as 2008 or greater, simply because Obama's numbers are high enough so that it takes a significant event for the Republican's numbers to pass him. Undecideds are not going to break for Romney 2012 like Obama 2008. They will either break evenly, in which case Obama wins like 2008, or break for Obama, in which case an Obama landslide.

Obama's final surge was due to the housing bubble crisis and McCain's inept response to it.  Absent a comparable mistake on the part of the Romney campaign, Obama will not achieve the same margin as in 2008, tho unless Obama goofs he is likely to obtain a narrow win.

Considering all the tone-deaf mistakes Romney has made on this campaign, I wouldn't put it past him to make yet another. 

[Person Man]

I am inclined to think that 2012 will probably be like 2008 if there was just a normal recession and there wasn't the plunge into the sh**tabyss.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Final conclusion:
Obama will win re-election, by the same margin as 2008 or greater, simply because Obama's numbers are high enough so that it takes a significant event for the Republican's numbers to pass him. Undecideds are not going to break for Romney 2012 like Obama 2008. They will either break evenly, in which case Obama wins like 2008, or break for Obama, in which case an Obama landslide.

Obama's final surge was due to the housing bubble crisis and McCain's inept response to it.  Absent a comparable mistake on the part of the Romney campaign, Obama will not achieve the same margin as in 2008, tho unless Obama goofs he is likely to obtain a narrow win.

Considering all the tone-deaf mistakes Romney has made on this campaign, I wouldn't put it past him to make yet another. 

Romney's caution will likely keep him from making any major political mistakes.  It also will keep him from seizing the opportunities it looks like it will take for him to win.