OK, so there are some similarities to 2008. The Olympics were held in Asia. The winner of the presidential election will succeed a two-term Republican incumbent. The Keating Five was in the news.
But don't despair. At least this time, history is very unlikely to repeat itself. Evidence offered below the fold:
Barack Obama is a much, much better candidate than Michael Dukakis. Remember that shot of the Duke in the tank? Even on an off-day Obama is light years ahead of that in terms of campaign strength.
George H. W. Bush was a much, much better candidate than John McCain. Even though it came back to haunt him later, "Read my lips, no new taxes" initially worked very well.
Dan Quayle was a much, much better candidate than Sarah Palin. I'm serious here. Despite his well-known foibles, in 1988 Quayle was a second-term United States Senator who also served two terms in the House. Palin is only marginally more qualified for the office than some silly blogger such as yours truly.
The New Kids on the Block may be back on the block, but they're not new, and they're definitely not kids. 'Nuff said about that.
Bush I actually had a popular incumbent backing him. Ronald Reagan left office in January 1989 with a 68 percent approval rating. As a frame of reference, Bush I left office four years later with a 54 percent approval rating despite being badly beaten for re-election.
Bush II is currently mired in the low 20s. He'll be fortunate to go back to Texas in January more popular than intestinal flu.
Dukakis became known for not responding to attacks quickly or effectively enough. By contrast, Obama has actually responded to attacks in a pre-emptive manner, and has done so recently.
Swiftboating works when the economy is not in the forefront. Remember Willie Horton? Well, when the economy is a big deal among voters it doesn't work near as well for Republicans. Remember Bill Clinton?
Acid-washed denim? If that doesn't ring a bell, consider yourself lucky.