re: OP -
These guys are working from a model that ignores polls and focuses on economic indicators, and they're playing off some "trueisms" that have evolved over the last 60 years, like: "when unemployment is above 6%, the incumbant is in deep dodo".
It also should be noted that polls (and the people who respond in them) are notoriously fickle. Carter famously led Reagan by 6-10 points, and had a similarly "insurmountable" lead in the Electoral College projections as late as September 1980. When the voters actually showed up just 6 weeks later, Reagan crushed Carter like a bug.
While their base assumptions have some validity, I think these CU guys are overlooking seveal contraindicators that make this situation unique. Namely: Although the economy is sour, the incumbent team has done a remarkable job of portraying the situation as an "inherited mess" that is taking longer than anticipated to clean up. Independents and moderates would seem to be buying this explanation in large numbers, which would largely de-fang the whole underpinning of the poll.
Add in the fact that Romney has been unable or unwilling to clearly outline his own economic agenda in any detail, and the Republicans are the ones in deep dodo.
There is still time for Romney - he can make his case in the debates. But if he can't or won't come to the debate table with specifics, Barry will eat him alive.
(Uncle Joe will do better in the Veep debate that a lot of people think, BTW.)