Romney pollster: We're not losing by as much as McCain was losing!

Yup, that's Obama, still above you in the polls. (Reuters) The Romney campaign is in "spin-the-polls" mode:

Barack Obama V. 2012 is not keeping up with Barack Obama V. 2008.
Four years ago today, candidate Barack Obama led John McCain 47.0%-42.5% (+4.5%) in the Real Clear Politics average of polls.  Today, the race is even tighter for now President Obama.  The most recent Real Clear Politics average puts the race at 46.8% Obama-44.4% Romney (+2.4%).  

So, they admit that Mitt Romney is losing, it's just that he's not losing by as much.

But even that is not accurate. The headline is that Obama in 2012 is "not keeping up with" Obama in 2008. But look at the numbers. At this time four years ago, Obama had 47.0 percent of the vote. Today, he has 46.8 percent. That 0.2 percent is just noise.

So Obama is actually running even with his 2008 version. The big difference, and it's not that big, is that Romney is running a bit ahead of John McCain'44.4 percent as opposed to 42.5 percent.

Now if the Romney campaign wants to brag that they're losing, but not as bad as their 2008 loser, then by all means, all the power to them. Personally, that doesn't seem so impressive to me.

And, for the incumbent President to be polling well below the 50% mark does not bode well for his re-election prospects.

Yeah, that didn't turn out so poorly for the incumbent Republican in 2004, did it? And it wasn't just that John Kerry was leading George W. Bush 46.5 to 43.8 at this point eight years ago, but that Bush was at 43.8'far below Obama's current level.

The 50 percent rule doesn't hold much water at the presidential level. It's more salient in Congressional races where the candidates aren't as high profile.

2. The ballot is narrowing despite the Obama $28.7 million ad advantage.
According to The Washington Post, since the unofficial start of the general election campaign on April 10 (when Senator Santorum suspended his campaign), President Obama's campaign has run $51.4 million in paid television advertising, while the Romney campaign has run $22.7 million (after having spent $87 million in winning the GOP primary).  Of Obama's $51.4 million, more than half of it has been in negative advertising.

What is missing from that math? What major new factor in American politics is omitted from this calculation?

Oh yeah, the Super PACs.

But perhaps the best part about this polling memo was what was excluded'any mention of battleground state polling. And the reasons are obvious.

Where it actually matters, and where Obama is spending his big ad dollars'in the battleground states'Romney is having a hard time getting out of the low 40s. And that's certainly not something you can spin away.