Hat tip to Clarice Feldman (FB).

A University of Colorado election model with a strong recond of predictive success forecasts a November loss for Obama predicting Obama winning 218 electoral votes versus 320 for Mitt Romney. The model predicts all swing seats to vote Republican including Colorado, Ohio and Florida.

Daily Mail:

A model which has foretold the correct results of the Electoral College selections in U.S. Presidential elections since 1980, has predicted a loss for Barack Obama and the Democratic Party.

The forecast was made by two professors at the University of Colorado who used economic data and unemployment figures from each state to predict a Republican win come November.

Political science professors Kenneth Bickers and Michael Berry’s study predicts 218 electoral votes for President Obama and 320 for Romney with the Republican candidate winning every seat currently considered to be on the fence. …

The professors’ analysis concluded that Romney would take home all swing states including Florida, Virginia, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Minnesota, New Hampshire and Colorado. …

The Washington Examiner quotes Media Research Center:

According to the Media Research Center’s analysis:

— During the first 72 hours of the Akin controversy, ABC, CBS and NBC morning and evening news shows ran a combined 40 segments totaling nearly 89 minutes of airtime compared to less than 20 minutes for Biden.

— NBC and CBS both immediately attempted to link the “firestorm” created by Akin to Romney even though his campaign openly supports rape exemptions.

— Obama’s extreme pro-abortion record – including his support for partial birth abortions – was almost entirely ignored by the networks in 2008.

— The networks have given Akin 10 times more coverage than they gave to credible allegations by Juanita Broaddrick back in 1999 that Bill Clinton actually committed rape.

The smartest man who ever lived is participating in spelling the name of the great state of “O-I-H-O”.

Even funnier was the Washington Post‘s hasty attempt to explain that the picture had been Photoshopped by nasty Republicans, which they were forced before very long to recant.

In this political ad, a variety of retired military and intelligence officers and special forces operatives go after Barack Obama and the Obama Administration for leaking sensitive national security information for political gain.

There’s been a great deal of positive female reaction to Mitt Romney selection of Paul Ryan as his running mate. On Facebook, I came across a couple of recent Yale grad chicks I know crushing over the photo of Paul Ryan with his compound bow. The liberal girl confessed: “I don’t like his policies, but I’m man enough to admit he’s pretty dreamy.”

Monica Crowley thinks the GOP has turned the tables on the democrats this time, by choosing the younger, hipper, more sexually attractive nominee, and the percentage of young people’s votes going each way will be very different this time from 2008.

In 2008, the Democrats did something ingenious. They found their first 21st century candidate for the presidency.

No more Al Gores or John Kerrys. No more Clintons. No more Cold War-era fossils. In fact, one of the biggest reasons Barack Obama was able to beat Hillary Clinton in the 2008 Democrat primaries was because he created a new brand based on the future. The Obama brand was able to smash the once-omnipotent Clinton brand because the Clinton brand was yesterday’s
newspaper while the Obama brand was tomorrow’s.

Obama was the quintessential 21st century candidate: a young, hip, and biracial man with a glamorous wife, adorable young children, and friendships with pop culture icons like Jay-Z. Obama’s campaign was equally 21st century: they used social media to great effect before most people even knew what it was. They were tweeting their followers at Kanye West concerts
while John McCain, God love him, was campaigning with smoke signals.

This time, the tables have turned. While Mitt Romney sort of straddles the 20th and 21st centuries, his running mate is most decidedly 21st century. Paul Ryan is 42 years old, making him almost a decade younger than the young whipper-snapper of the 2008 campaign, Barack Obama. He sleeps in his Capitol Hill office like it’s a dorm room. He does the insanely tough
workout P90X. He walks around wearing headphones, like NBA stars and Olympic athletes. He is cool.

This matters in a nation that has always been forward-looking, pioneering, innovative, and geared toward the future. Negativity and the past don’t win the big battles for the future. Obama knew that when he crushed the Clinton machine and later, the 20th century GOP machine. This time, the Republicans get it, and they’ve found a dynamic, fearless 21st century guy in Paul Ryan.
Even Mitt Romney has become cooler, tougher, looser, and more forward-looking since Ryan joined him on the trail.

Call it The Ryan Effect.

If anyone wonders why the Obama team is so unhappy about Mitt Romney’s Vice Presidential pick, just watch Obama’s face as Paul Ryan dissects the Obamacare bill. Obama looks like he’s about to turn into a giant snake, the same way Thulsa Doom (James Earl Jones) did in “Conan the Barbarian” (1982).

These days Barack Obama looks like he’s channeling Herbert Hoover, but Arnold Goldstein thinks he may really have more in common with Grover Cleveland.

[L]et’s say Obama loses in November. He has a ready made excuse for his defeat. Obama can say that the forces of darkness (i.e. opponents of gay marriage) are to blame for his defeat while patting himself on the back for his “courage” in supporting same sex marriage. It also helps to position him for a comeback in 2016 or 2020. Make no mistake. If Obama loses this fall it won’t be the last we see of him. By that time with a greater presence of voters born after 1980 chances are there will be more voters in favor of gay marriage which would give Obama an opportunity to claim he was ahead of the curve.

So while Obama might have come out in favor of gay marriage far sooner than he wanted to do so. But now that he has come out of the closet on the issue it could work to his advantage if not in this election then perhaps in the next one or the one after that.

——————————-

James Pethokoukis thinks the same thing.

Might Obama try to grab the nomination in 2016 and take another crack at Romney?

1. Obama, always trim and fit, would be only 55 on Election Day 2016.

2. Obama would likely still have a deep reservoir of support among key Democratic interest groups including (most importantly) African Americans, gays, young voters, and the educated elite.

3. Many Democrats might be inclined to give an historic president a second chance, reasoning he was dealt an impossibly bad economic hand by George W. Bush. “Bush got two terms, and Obama just one? Please.”

4. While there could potentially be some big name rivals in 2016, including Hillary Clinton and Andrew Cuomo, none seem as formidable as Ronald Reagan was to Ford in 1980.

5. The economy the next four years could be pretty rough thanks to high levels of U.S. debt and a possible eurozone implosion. The Obama years might be subject to some positive revisionist history by a friendly media. And as one gloomy economic analyst told me recently, “Whichever party wins the White House in 2012 won’t win again for 20 years.”

I can see that 2016 Obama-Warren ticket already …

The bad news is that they’re right: he could very possibly come back and try running again. The good news is: we’re already sitting around contemplating Obama losing in November as the most probable outcome.

Hat tip to Jim Geraghty.