In early September 2008, McCain was either tied with Obama or led him narrowly in most polls. When Paulson made the idiotic and nonsensical decision not to guarantee Lehman Brothers' assets so they could make a sale to Barclays on September 15th, he crashed the markets and Obama regained the lead over McCain.
1. The idiotic and nonsensical decisions were made ages before that day. Say in 2001 (and later). By 2008 it was the matter of timing: when would sh**t hit the fan, not whether. It might not have hapened that same week - a few weeks later, perhaps, but it couldn't have been held off too long. At the Fed they had been fully aware that it all is held together with nothing more material than prayer at least 2-3 years earlier (that's when I heard that said - and I have no particularly good inteligence w/ the Fed). It is far from clear that the decision was idiotic and nonsensical, in any case.
2. You are looking at the post-convention bumps. McCain's chances weren't zero in late September, but he was a heavy underdog long before that moment - the Hail Mary pass of choosing Palin is evidence that he himself understood that well. Lehman or no Lehman, Obama was the favorite.
3. Obama's chances of winning in 2012 do not, at present, look particularly bad. Yes, certainly Obama is not a sho-in for re-election, but his chances, clearly, are better than even. True, redistricting control has been affected unfavorably fo the Dems, but, surely, having the presidency is also worth something. In any case, it's not a generation - just 10 years. And it's not that humongously important - in 2000, arguably, Republicans weren't that much worse of in state legislatures, but that didn't prevent the Dems from gaining the Congress in 2006. The only truly screwed folks are the white Southern Dems - but they'd be gonners a few years later in any case, and not that the national party feels particularly sorry to see them go.
