So, first we learn that the Obama money juggernaut isn't all it's cracked up to be. (Sidenote to Allah: $100 million in September/October isn't impressive if the HoDean DNC is broke and third parties like Progressive Media USA are going bellyup.)
And now we just might be getting a race again. The last three polls are Obama +3, Tied, +3. The Pollster.com average is down to +2.7 for Obama. Obama had peaked at about 6 point lead nationally:
Bill Clinton was consistently ahead by 10-20 points after his convention (which was about now) in his race against George H.W. Bush. He was up by the same amount against Bob Dole throughout the '96 elections. He won both elections by much more modest 5 and 8 points, nearly 10 points less than his polling lead. In 2004, Bush closed about 3-4 points ahead of his summer polling average. I think there's a credible argument to be made that media coverage shaped these poll numbers before voters made their final decisions.
Sean Oxendine has described how elections have closed towards the candidate who is the "established product." So if one were to take an informed view of history, one would have to conclude that Obama has little margin for error, especially if his money advantage isn't going to be that huge.