"The Most Difficult Presidential Incumbent to Defeat in American History"

On Huffington Post, Dylan Loewe argues that President Obama's weekend appointment of moderate Utah Governor Jon Huntsman, a potential 2012 presidential contender, as Ambassador to China "a masterstroke of political strategy". And he's right, not only did the move eliminate Huntsman, but it also functions as effective outreach to the Mormon community that may feel a bit alienated from the GOP, whose chair says the party's voters will not nominate a Mormon.

In his evaluation of the move, Loewe looks at the landscape for the 2012 election. He makes a very bold claim:

Anyone smart enough, capable enough to compete against Obama is going to be smart enough not to run. When Obama kicks off his re-election campaign, he'll do so with a two million member donor base already in place. He'll do so with over one million volunteers ready to be reactivated. In his first month, he'll likely raise more than $100 million dollars. His re-election will dwarf his first campaign is size and scope, just as his first campaign dwarfed its online fundraising predecessor in Howard Dean. Just with sheer organization, President Obama will be the most difficult presidential incumbent to defeat in American history.

I've always seen Obama as being secure based entirely on the fact that he has absolutely no viable opposition on the horizon. But Loewe is right, Obama's edge is just as much in his campaign machine as it is in the vaporization of moderate Republican challengers.