I like the Mondale analogy...

I hadn't thought of that one... nice job.

However, as bad as Obama has performed to date, I don't see the sort of landslide victory for the GOP that they saw in '84... which was the worst electoral college defeat a Democratic Party candidate ever saw in all of American history. Didn't Reagan win like 525 electoral votes? Even Alf Landon did better than that against FDR's first term. Obama will still have the full press of liberal/progressive support behind him and more money than any other candidate in history to throw around. Mondale couldn't even win the full support of registered DFL members in his own state... ouch.

We need to see some more discussion about who is going to run for the nomination, though. I know, the GOP doesn't want to detract from the midterms and any gains they might make there, but barely two years from the actual 2012 general election, and no clear front-runner for the candidacy? Not even a short list?

Where does the Bund list stand? Who is on our GOP nomination list for 2012? (Let's have more than just the "Dream Team" list, too... we all know Palin's name is going to be in the hat)

Bobby Jindal? Said he wouldn't run, but has made a real splash with the disaster recovery he has managed in his home state. Seems unavoidable that his name will come up.

Sarah Palin? I don't like two-time losers on the list, but she has kept herself in the lime-light rather nicely in the months since, and hasn't eliminated herself into oblivion... yet.

Haley Barbour? I could vote for Haley, no problem... but he's old, he's really Southern, and he's going to square off against the first black President, instantly putting him in the role of the "antebellum" establishment. I have no doubt that the man can win moderate votes in the South, but he has next to no chance in places like the Northeast, West and MidWest. He does have a proven track record though, one that rivals Jindal's every inch of the way.

Huckabee/Romney? Not quite the "losers" that Palin is, but failed candidates, none the less. Neither is all one could hope for, but they are familiar names and can toe the conservative line pretty well.

Christie/Pawlenty? Conservative (nominally, anyway) Governors with measurable success in some areas that can be weighed against Obama's plans and policies... but both have a lot of baggage and neither can rally all the support a GOP candidate will need in 2012. Honestly, I'm not 100% sure Pawlenty can even win MN right now... their budget is as big a mess as California's.

There has been no leadership from the conservative element in the Senate for months... and Representatives don't win the White House, no matter how much press Ryan (R-WI) and Bachmann (R-MN) have been getting lately.

I know Ryan will freak out when I say this, but I still feel that the GOP candidate must appeal to the "moderate" crowd of American voters in 2012... we all know how the base is going to vote, so pandering to the "arch-typical" Reagan-conservative (something I still can't fully understand the definition of) seems the surest way to alienate the very voters that we need to beat the liberals. Promising to privatize Social Security, or to eliminate the Department of Education, or any one of a baker's dozen "conservative" actions that might NEED to be done at some point in the future, does nothing to garner the support needed to get what MUST BE DONE IMMEDIATELY to stop the recession from getting worse (again). This election, we need a candidate that can appeal to "mainstream" America, and Hannity, Limbaugh, and Beck do not represent mainstream America. The vast majority of Americans now think a Department of Education is a must... and the vast majority of Americans think some health care reform is needed... and there are many (although maybe not a majority) that think that some stimulus action on the part of the Fed was needed (certainly the union-affiliated voter will).

No GOP candidate is going to win by promising to be another Bush, or to take us back to 2005... but you can't win by simply saying "I'm not Obama" either. Incumbents have a distinct advantage in election cycles, and Obama is going to know how to use his to the utmost limit. They (meaning the GOP) will need to SHOW the public what isn't working, and how they intend to change what isn't working by employing means that have been PROVEN to work in the past.