This is an attempt to put as objective of a view on these candidates in the following categories to make some type of prediction. Also, all the political threads are starting to fall, so clearly it's time to start a new one!

I'd be happy to hear what others' takes are, but if you want to argue with what I've written, keep in mind that I've attempted to be as objective as possible in looking at what the average voter would probably think. Not what a liberal voter or a conservative voter would think. Those voters are going to vote for their party (or not show up at the polls at all)


Foreign Policy: Edge: Obama. Obviously Romney lacks the credibility Obama has here partially because Obama is the incumbent. However, big words along with missteps from the incumbent can make this an issue where it’s contested. Obama’s missteps, whether real or imagined by opposition, have been minor though compared to getting American troops out of Iraq without major incident, successfully aiding rebels in Libya, and the death of Osama bin Laden. Making American safer and the world safer for democracy might be Obama’s biggest edge, despite the fact that many conservatives bristled at issues like bowing to foreign rulers.

Executive Experience: Push. This was a major problem with some voters for Obama in 2008, but with 4 years as President, you can’t question the guy has the experience he needs to be an effective President (even if you dislike the guy’s policy, etc., he’s got the experience).

The economy: Edge: Romney, but closing. Romney’s got the pedigree as a business man. Obama’s got the background of being president during one of the worst economic periods in American history. However, every time Romney talks about firing people (even though this quote was totally out of context) or every time positive growth numbers come out, this closes a bit. If the economy continues to strengthen and if Romney fails to give specific ways in which he intends to heal the economy more quickly, then this could be a Push or even Edge: Obama by November. If the economy stalls or worsens or Romney can give compelling arguments, this is his biggest strength.

Social issues: I have a poor read on this one. I tend to think for people who vote on social/ethical issues, they’ve probably already got their minds made up, and most independent voters probably tend to look big picture rather than just at social issues. Santorum might have been able to inspire the conservative base a bit more on social issues, but this isn’t Romney’s strength (at the same time, someone who is pro-life, believes in deregulation and holds other conservative positions isn’t going to cross over to Obama on social issues). I guess I’d say push, but this just because I’m unwilling to commit an answer otherwise.

Intangibles: Edge: Obama. Obama is still considered very likeable and very trustworthy by most voters. I see Romney as being sort of like what John Kerry was in 2004 as far as likeability. He’s not a bad guy, but he doesn’t really connect with the average person very well. Obama comes off as highly thoughtful and intelligent, trustworthy and a genuine person. Romney also comes off as intelligent, and I have no reason to think he’s not trustworthy, but he seems almost mechanical in his personality.

Organization: Edge: Obama, but not as much as it could have been. Obama will likely be able to reignite much of the organization he had in 2008 when this was a huge advantage for him. However, since the organization was virtually dismantled after the last election, this won’t be as big of an edge as it could have been. Romney also is the one Republican candidate who will at least have the bankroll to compete with Obama money wise. Obama’s advantage over any other candidate would’ve been much larger, but I still think Obama’s got an advantage here.

Overall: Probably Obama, but it’s all about the economy. I can’t imagine most people who are unemployed or underemployed care if the overall economic picture is getting slightly better each month. If this turns into a popularity contest or a discussion about foreign affairs, then Obama’s a lock. If it hinges on social issues, then it’d be very interesting to see. I think Obama’s a good enough salesmen to probably win more votes than Romney in a discussion on values and social issues, but I think that’s another area where Romney isn’t at the same disadvantage that he is on foreign affairs and general intangibles.

So. Why am I wrong? Why am I right? Let's hear it, kiddies.

"but with 4 years as President, you can’t question the guy has the experience he needs to be an effective President"

i'm sorry, i stopped reading. i'd, and many americans to boot, should argue his first four years is anything *BUT* proof of his experience. How is four years of ineffective presidency proof of him being effective?

The do nothing congress? You mean the one that was voted in by americans more or less solely to prevent obama from ruining your country?

Are you kidding? Four more years and america won't have an economy to be worried about, let alone a failing one

go print money and tell me you killed bin laden, i'm going to call bullfluff on every word you say.

*canadian, fiscal conservative and.. i hestitate to say republican, because of the whole born in canada thing :P*

(i need to not post while drinking!)

And that is why I'm not going to waste time with a real rebuttal.

yeah, me reading the rest of your post after i make my point nullifies my point, how silly of me.

FOUR MORE YEARS!

argue the fact i have no say, so keep my mouth shut. ignoring points because i didn't want to jumble my thoughts (while under the influence, so yes) is kind of silly.

but so is thinking obama has had a successful first term, so grain of salt?

(and yes, i read your whole last post, so you can bother with a real rebuttal this time!)

I'll be happy to, since you actually read the whole thing. The point on experience was purely experience, which is why the parenthetical is on there. The previous election features the argument that Obama couldn't be a good president because he had no executive experience. Anyone who is thoughtful, intelligent and has held a job for four years should have what it takes to do it successfully. I don't see this as terribly debatable.

Whether he actually IS successful is debatable. You seem to be debating whether he has what it takes to be successful based on an experience point.

I don't care whether you have a say. While you clearly don't have a say when it comes to voting, you have every right to have an opinion about Pres. Obama. I just figured if you're arguing about something where you seemed to be missing the point of what I was saying AND you didn't even bother to read the whole thing (possibly leading to why you missed the point to begin with), then I wasn't going to bother to respond.

Anyway, again, these arguments above are based on how I see the overall election, not how I see it. Of course my biases can't be 100% removed, but if it was how *I* see it, then Obama would have much larger edges in all of these things.

I'll rebutt your other points in a new post.

The economy is getting stronger. He successfully passed a huge health care reform bill. America is viewed more positively by most other countries in the world than they were during the previous administration, we've successfully toppled Gaddafi and bin Laden during his time period, and we've drawn down our forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. Has he had failures? Sure. Is it true that all the people on here who identify as Republican see his presidency as a pretty awful thing? Sure. Just because the Republicans think Obama's a terrible president doesn't actually mean everyone does or even that it will be true historically.



I guess. I'd say the 2006 and 2008 elections were definitely referendums against the Republican party. The 2010 election was actually the backlash of that. Since the Republican party lost control for the first time in awhile, I think it's more a case where the Republican base probably came out to vote in larger numbers than typical (compared to other midterm elections, not compared to 2008), while the Democrats probably had gotten a bit complacent. In a quick search, I can't find any hard numbers on this (they're likely out there), but I did find that in 2006, a large increase in young and first-time voters (same in 2008), meanwhile in 2010, Republican primaries were much better attended than Democratic primaries. It would make sense that the same would likely hold true for the general election. So I don't know that it's a referendum by the American people, but moreso that the Republicans just did a better job getting their voters out there after the Democrats got complacent.



The economy isn't great. I don't deny that. However, there is job growth at this point as opposed to job losses as there were from 2008-2010. The Dow Jones is healthy, after bottoming out a few years. If you want to come up with real reasons that a Republican president could have restored the economy faster and will be a better president for the economy moving forward, then I'm all ears, and I certainly think there's a debatable point there, but this idea that the economy has been grossly mismanaged under Obama and that it's falling apart just isn't backed up by facts.

Obama is a bumper sticker, Romney is a joke.

Ha! I figured you'd show up eventually. Thought you'd put up more of a fight, but I did find amusing. :)

You know I <3 you, despite our politacal differences ;)

Romney will lose because Christians believe the Mormon church is a cult.

I was curious about this myself. I wonder how his Mormonism will play out especially with more fundamentalist groups.

I figure most people that would be offended by Romney's Mormonism probably aren't going to vote for Pres. Obama either, so I don't think it will shift voters away from Romney, but it might cause some voters that would most likely be loyal Republican votes to stay home instead of voting. But voter turnout is usually really good for Presidential elections (usually around 60% of potential voters), and I doubt this year will be any exception.

I also read something I think in TIME about polling looking like the Romney/Obama race is starting to get closer (Romney pulling within striking distance), but at the same time, it looks like the Democrats might get back their majorities in both houses of Congress.

I think that might actually be a pretty favorable situation for independents since it would be a Republican president (but one that in Massachusetts had to work with the primarily Democratic legislature) along with a Democratic Congress. That could actually be a recipe for getting some reasonable things done.

Having said that, I'm still an Obama guy and I think if he wins a 2nd term, even if the Republicans do hold onto one of the houses of Congress, they'll be more likely to try to work together to get things done since Obama won't have another election,

wasn't Romney governor of Massachusettes(sp?)? i think if the christians elected him there, then Mormonism might be a bit more mainstream nowadays.

Mostly Catholics in MA. My parents are conservative Christians who I think will stay home on election day partly because of Romney's religion and partly because they feel he is not truly conservative, at least on social issues.

king: I'm curious how many people will do that though. Many of the more hardliner Republicans look at Obama as being virtually the Anti-Christ (in fact, around the 2008 election, I actually had a notice on my windshield when in a store for a presentation somewhere that was supposed to PROVE that he was the Anti-Christ).

Obviously Romney's record as a true conservative might not rile up the base and get them excited, but Obama's perceived liberalism (I admit he's liberal, but he's been far more centrist than the Republican talking heads make him out to be) might bring those portions of the Republican party out that might otherwise be tempted to stay home.

I completely agree with you Twain, I've definitely seen the demonizing of Obama and it will get the GOP base out to the polls. I guess the voters I'm wondering about are the values Republicans who supported Santorum, they still don't like Obama but I'm not sure if they will turn out for Mitt. A quote from my Dad on this topic: "Well atleast he (Obama) is a Christian." I think the truth is that both candidates are centrists and people who come to that realization may stay home.

I find that very interesting that he keyed on Obama's Christianity, mostly because a lot of the "values" voters tend to buy in to the conspiracy theory of Obama as a closet Muslim.

And I also agree that both are centrists. I think it could be a key point though that while Obama can afford to move himself more and more towards the middle for this election, Romney has had to spend a lot of effort arguing for positions further to the right than what his record as governor shows him to be.

I think that could actually hurt Romney. Probably far more than his Mormonism will, but who knows, I could be wrong.

all i can say is Ron Paul 2012 - simply because I know my history :/