Nope. But she can make it close. Maybe a little too close for the comfort of some Democrats.
As I watch the rise and rise of Michele Bachmann, you will be seeing more and more a trend of people saying, "Hey, she just might be the nominee" and if she wins the nomination there will, of course, be much prognostication from the national media about her chances of winning.
Kossacks will inevitably scoff at this kind of talk, and even entertain thoughts of a 48-49 state sweep by Obama in such a hypothetical matchup, but here's the thing. GOP nominee Lady Blah Blah will get that automatic conservative love instantly. I love 538 and electoral-vote.com and just like crunching numbers, and so one thing is plainly visible right now: Any Republican Candidate Gets an Automatic Thirteen States Right Off The Bat.
Texas, Idaho, Alaska, Utah, Wyoming, Tennessee, Oklahoma, Kansas,
Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and the Dakotas. I don't have hope of seeing any of these states turning purple any time soon. Their state legislatures and voting histories bespeak a strong red tide. (I know people like to hold out hope for Texas sometimes, but that's a pipe dream. Yes, he lost by "only" 11 points in 2008, which signals room for growth, but he'd lose by way more if the election was held today.)
So this means that any mongoloid troglodyte run by the Repubs is guaranteed 104 electoral votes. (Note: I'm using the latest EV totals. The ones that states were granted/denied by the 2010 Census)
So sorry guys, but even with Lady Blah Blah or Caribou Barbie or Senator Man-On-Dog on the GOP ticket, the best Obama can do is 37 states.
It's nice to dream of a Dem getting a vote total like Reagan in '84 or Nixon in '72, but unfortunately the numbers just aren't on our side. If the Republicans ran a grapefruit that had NRA, Pro-Life and "Don't Tread On Me" decals stickered on it, THAT would win 12 states. (*note: This is actually a step up from Sarah Palin, seeing as how the grapefruit probably has a firmer grasp of history, or at least would know to say silent about what it does and doesn't know)
Now, IF Michele Bachmann wins there are some "tough nut" states that could possibly, I repeat, possibly switch at least for just 2012. Georgia, Nebraska, Arkansas, West Virginia, Montana, Missouri, Arizona and South Carolina are all in this list. Many of them are Carter/Clinton states, i.e., states that voted for southern governors Jimmy Carter in 1976 and Bill Clinton in 1992 and 1996, but are red otherwise. I believe that in this case, Bachmann's batshit-ness will be sufficient to make up for Obama's lack of southern bonafides.
(South Carolina, could, possibly and amazingly, be in play based on dissatification with nominees. Missouri, thanks to Eric Cantor's sorry-but-no-ER-aid-if-it-doesn't-balance-the-budget paygo philosophy could finally tip over to the D side)
There's a greater point to this.
This is why the GOP can be so batshit crazy and suffer no repercussions. They can threaten succession, threaten women's health, voters' rights, unions, and the poor, and suffer no pushback.
This is why they can mouth bold-faced lies, and then say "Oh, well, it wasn't meant to be a factual statement" and it barely registers as a blip in the mass media.
They walk in to any election, automatically knowing it's 104 EV's without having to lift a finger. No trips, no posting bills, no TV ads needed, no nothing. Then you pile on that second state of "Carter/Clintons" I mentioned and that's another 65 EV's usually gained with minimal effort.
If Bachmann is the nominee, it's going to be a somewhat easy path to re-election for Obama but it won't be a cruise to the finish line.
It's not like Election Night won't be fun though; leading up to the election the media will do their "oh, we're fair and balanced" thing as usual and artifically inflate the numbers of the teabaggers, and pump Miss Glassy Eyes into Real Contender Status with lots of "She...Could...Go...All...The...Way!" forecasting. And then a 37-13 lambasting would be sweet indeed.