What the F?

This graph shows what the Obama administration and their team of economists predicted unemployment would be at with and without the stimulus package. The red dots are the actual unemployment numbers.
There are a few different ways we can explain the results shown in this graph.

1.) The inputs into the calculation were incorrect. That is to say, the formula for creating/saving jobs was correct but the initial information was incorrect.

2.) The economists actually had no idea at all how it would play out with or without the stimulus.

3.) The formula for government "job creation" is incorrect.

4.) The stimulus had a contrariant effect, causing unemployment to rise rather than fall.

Any thoughts? Did I miss any possible scenarios? Anyone want to venture a guess, or even an educated answer?
Perhaps deregulation and George Bush is the cause?

My thoughts:
On #1, possible but not plausible. Is anyone honestly going to attempt to say that Obama and his economists are so incredibly brilliant that they are able to account for all possible future variables and yet they are unable to use the correct starting point(using static data) in their equation?

As to the other 3 options, I feel it could be any of them. In reviewing my old Econ professor, and head of the SCSU Econ department, I feel like he seems to align himself with #2 or #3, http://www.scsuscholars.com/2009/04/hey-rocky-watch-me-pull-number-out-of.html