Think back to 1980, as bad as things were for Carter - and I would argue that the economic pain in the fall of 1980 was probably much worse than the pain is today, not to mention the hostage saga - Carter still led Reagan by 3 to 5-points less than a week before election day. If Reagan wouldn't have crushed Carter in that last debate, Carter probably wins reelection. It's tough to beat incumbent presidents, that's why it's done so infrequently.
At the end of the day, Presidential elections are still contests between two people. Reagan beat Carter because he was optimistic and hopeful, wildly experienced and one of the best communicators, ever. Clinton beat Bush because of Perot, but also because he had a lot of experience,more than 10-years as governor, and was one of the best communicators, ever. That's what it's going to take to beat Obama, and anyone who thinks otherwise is whistling past the graveyard.
“Think back to 1980, as bad as things were for Carter - and I would argue that the economic pain in the fall of 1980 was probably much worse than the pain is today, not to mention the hostage saga - Carter still led Reagan by 3 to 5-points less than a week before election day.”
Even then, polls were clearly push-polls. The MSM and pollsters find and publish the results they want the public to see. Couldn’t believe them then - can’t believe them now.