It is possible, but not probable. The mood of the electorate is vastly different this time. 1996 things were ok. Plus, Obama moved left to find his lost base, while Clinton moved hard right to save his presidency. He signed on to tax cuts and welfare reform, co-opting some of the issues of the GOP. Obama has not done that. He’s fighting problems in his left flank as well as losing the independent voter. Unless there is a significant noticeable economic improvement, he has a tough battle to get back for four more years. It is possible, but not probable.
Exactly - plus, HillaryCare was “gone” as an issue by 1996.
What a lot of people overlook in the mid-1990s is that Bill Clinton actually signed most of Newt Gingrich's "Contract With America" into law -- including items like the Federal welfare reform that he had previously vetoed. By 1996 he was basically running as a moderate Republican candidate.
You think Barack Hussein Obama would do any such thing?
Oil is trading over $100/barrel today, and the "official" unemployment rate is over 9% while the actual rate is probably north of 15%.
And I haven't even mentioned massive bank bailouts, enormous personal debt, and all the other issues that affect the attitudes of voters. Any comparison between 1996 and today is pretty silly when you consider just how far worse off most Americans are these days.
Clinton could run on a strong economy. Obama cannot run on a weak economy - he can’t claim success, and he doesn’t have enough of the voters dependent on government to get a majority (like the PRI in Mexico did).