My Meltdown Blueprint Looks Like a Solid Call

Just for fun let's go back to the original DB blueprint of Obama meltdown predictions. So that's how it happens. I think there is plenty of evidence that the media is slowly dismantling its supportive scaffolding around Barack Obama. Now the evidence that the never-loyal hangers-on are dropping off (remember Obama really only rented loyalists, he had no deep connections going into his campaign). I think Carville's rant over the BP spill response and Mort Zuckerman's numerous scathing diatribes against Obama's economic policy are evidence that the Clintonista's are free to drop unbending loyalty to Dear Leader. Now, we have Ed Rendell says that The One might have a primary challenge. That's confirmation folks. So my blueprint is looking pretty darned money.
All of this, of course, leads to the key discussion of Obama's viability in 2012. Many seem to think that Obama is easily re-electable and that anyone else can only be considered a long shot. I disagree and I think there are three paradigms that one can use to analyze Dear Leader's chances of being a two-term President. The first paradigm is one that I have discussed at length, which is discerning the state of the nation from some time-tested metrics that have a good record of determining an incumbent's electoral prospects - namely unemployment and gas prices. I have already nailed the 10% unemployment prediction and I am standing by the $4 gas prediction - Obama will see this toxic economic tandem at some point before the 2012 election and history teaches that his electability will likely not survive such an environment.
The second framework in which to analyze his 2012 chances is to look at the demographic coalition that formed to deliver him the win in 2008. He won on the back of 1) huge black turnout, 2) dominance among the young and independents, 3) a solid swing to him from the business community, and 4) Republican apathy and failure to turnout. Clearly, each one of these phenomena will not be repeated to the same degree in 2012, if not fully reversed. I believe blacks will not turn out in great numbers in 2012. Their historic moment has been achieved, the passion and excitement has faded and their turnout will revert to historical norms. The polls are clearly showing that Obama has lost independents and, as I have highlighted, the terrible economic prospects for America's voting-age youth are dismal and likely to dampen the youthful passion that benefited Dear Leader in 2008. On point three, the business community loathes this administration, full stop. He'll get no support here. On point four, they won't make that mistake ever again. For all the putative squabbling, leadership vacuums, and lack of focus, the one thing that Republicans, Republican-leaners and Republican-sympathizing Libertarians can now agree on - if you're caught sleeping come election time, you get statist, big government progressivism run amok and you lose liberty and prosperity in big chunks.
Finally the third and least compelling paradigm is the historical preference of American voters for executives with actual executive experience, so of Governors over Senators. Once in a while this pattern breaks and it did in 2008, but there is a reason we as a nation prefer not to put Congressional leaders in the Oval Office...we value executive experience. We dabbled in 2008 and took a gamble on breaking from this historical pattern. It is fair to say to date that the gamble has not worked out well, making historical reversion much more plausible by virtue of solid reasoning.

Granted, all this could change drastically in two years, so stay tuned...

UPDATE: What did I say just a few lines up about Republican-sympathizing Libertarians? Steve "Vodkapundit" Green is kind of a bellweather for libertarianism and he says (I'm paraphrasing) "No flights of fancy this time around folks, vote for the most electable Republican. That Libertarian Party candidate can wait for less crucial times."