I will say this: If Republicans win the House in 2010, they wont be winning back the White House until at least 2020.
The results of 2010 will have absolutely no bearing on what happens in 2012. People have been quickly seeing what Obama's Amerika entails and they don't like it. He's going to be a one termer like Carter.
The same could have been said for Clinton in 1993. And I think both you, and the GOP, is mistaking anger at Democrats for enthusiasm for the Republican party. There is none. Thats why the GOP has barely moved on the generic ballot tests, while the Democrats have fallen. Furthermore, do you really think that independents who are considering voting for Kirk in Illinois or Simmons in Connecticut have much appetite for any prominent national republican with possible contingent exception of Romney? I think Obama is proving a disaster, and might well have preferred McCain in hindsight, but I would almost certainly never vote for any of the Republicans whose names have been thrown about for President.
I fully expect a good result for them in 2010, but how the GOP handles it will determine their chances in 2012. There is no way Palin or Huckabee or Perry will win a national election, and if they go the Gingrich route they could end up losing quite convincingly in 2012.
Remember also, even Carter was in a toss-up race as late as September of 1980 before his campaign fell apart. Its not so easy to beat incumbents, especially when they can run against you, which Obama will be able to do with an extremist house.
That is basically what I am trying to say. Also remember that Obama and Democrats are highly unlikely to work with Republicans the way they did in 1995-1996. They will remember what Republicans are doing to them now and they will rightly take revenge. I expect Schumer in the Senate to basically kill anything Republicans pass in the House. It will be much like the "do-nothing" Congress of 1947-48.
