I’d have liked to see him address the fact that at the Presidential level, 2012 was a low turnout election, despite the Democrats’ vaunted round ‘em up and turn’em out high tech get out the vote operation(even if it is conceded , which I don’t, that voter fraud played little role). Did that low turn-out at the Presidential level play a large role at the Congressional level? How could it not have? The extent to which the media have been willing to avert their eyes from examining that is not surprising given their subservience to Obama, but is astonishing in their dereliction of duty. The Wikipedia article on voter turnout is laughably deceitful (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_turnout_in_the_United_States_presidential_elections), claiming that the US population of eligible voters declined by 18 m between 2008-2012, in a country that is apparently gaining population at a rate of several million each year. Dave Leip (remember he stuck with the old color scheme of Democrat red when the networks decided to change it to avoid the connotation that Dems were commies http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/ )hasn’t completed his bar graph showing voter turn out. I suspect that the reason is that the percentage of voting age population that turned out was down near 50%, which hardly goes along with the media theme that the Democrats have created a voting juggernaut and Republicans need to cut deals with that in mind.
Predicting presidential elections and other things
It was "The economy stupid", but that the US economy was recovering too well for voters to fire Obama, and not to fire him because of the dismal recovery. (Roosevelt managed reelection with a similarly dismal economic performance.)
IMO (not Dr. Fair's) if the presidential election had been held in 2010 or was to be held in 2014, the outcome would be completely different. The economy has been in a historically muted recovery, but still doing well enough that a few % of voters didn't want to rock the boat.
Coupled with a Republican "GOTV" strategy that imploded on election day. This wasn't a rejection of conservative principles (Mitt Romney? Conservative?) or affirmation of nanny liberalism. People "vote their wallets" and for the first time in a few years their wallets weren't completely empty back in November. That's all this was. If it's any consolation, Obama is tracking Bush #43's second term approval ratings pretty closely. And we know what happened in 2006 and 2008.