Until my intellectual oligarch is in place, I will be voting for the less horribly fucking awful of the two.

Ideologically, I align much more with Obama than with Romney. My key complaint against Obama was my key concern when I voted for him 4 years ago. I was worried that with his lack of executive experience and his lofty goals, he needed a strong Cabinet and inner circle to make up for his deficiencies. In the past four years, the only brilliant staffing choice he made was Hillary as Secretary of State. The rest have been lackluster choices at best, and downright ludicrous at times.

I also don't like how he handled pushing Obamacare through. I agree that something had to be done, whether it was a shrewd political move or not, and I understand why he pushed through so quickly, but the representative democratic process exists for a reason; to bypass Congressional debate and much of the typical legislative process by strongarming the Republicans with a supermajority was a terrible political move, and I didn't like it.

There are other things I could say, good or bad, but right now I'm still leaning toward voting for him (not that my vote matters in crimson red Utah). I like Mitt as a person, I respect him as a businessman, I actually think he did a great job as governor in Massachusetts, but I don't agree with him on a lot of key issues. Religion doesn't factor into my analysis (nor has it ever). For me to vote for him because he is Mormon would be nearly as stupid as people who refuse to even consider voting for Obama because they think he is a secret Muslim.

In all honesty, Mitt seems like a jackpot businessman who should stick to what he knows best: business.

Just as a reponse, I don't dislike him as a person... at least what I know of him from being our governor; what I see in the campaign is always nauseating, no matter which side.

I find it kind of hard to muster up the absolute disdain I had for a lot of the other candidates before the primaries (ie Santorum, Gingrich, Bachmann, Perry, oh my!). That's not to say he's got my vote.

Just today he was saying how he sympathizes with the average American! He implemented Obamacare in Massachusetts! How could he possibly be accused of not being sympathetic? (I wish I could find the NPR bit online... I just heard it a few minutes ago while prepping dinner... maybe they'll publish it later tonight or it's on another media site.)

I get the impression that he's just a guy who's wrapped up in a world he's not made for. Much, much more so than Obama ever struck me with his "lack of experience."

Here's Boston.com's article regarding his comments. It's really funny to try and watch Mitt play the misunderstood everyman who brought socialized health care to Massachusetts while simultaneously suggesting that his businessman acumen is the best thing this country needs right now and socialized health care is not.

I hate how Romney's campaign has been run because at the heart of it, he seems like a moderate who had to pander to the far right to survive the primaries, and is stuck now.

I do think he's a better businessman than a politician, but I think a business approach to the economy might be a good thing. Honestly, I think that if Obama wins, he should make use of Romney's business expertise and put him to work somewhere he can make a difference. It would be a great symbolic step in healing the rift our idiotic two-party system has caused at the very least.

Drex, he doesn't "seem like" a moderate who had to pander, he is a moderate who had to pander.



Remember four years ago, when he said stuff along the lines of "while I don't want to call it marriage, gays at least deserve something to give them the same rights as a couple as straight folks do"? Or "Universal healthcare is Not a Bad Idea?"


Yeah, I actually liked him back then before he did the McCain "I need to court the extreme right instead of the moderate vote" thing.

I have a hard time blaming him for pandering. It's one of the stupid byproducts of our political system. In order to survive the primaries in either party, you have to appeal to the base, which often includes taking a more extreme stance than you normally adhere to, and generally aligning with the party's platform whether you like it or not. Then once you've survived the primary, you have to try to scoot yourself closer to center so you can appeal to all of the people in the other party that you just spent months alienating. Let's be honest, he would never have beaten Santorum if he had touted his moderate side. People who don't align and stick to their guns end up marginalized or demonized like Ron Paul.

If? IF? The only way Romney can win at this point is if 90% of America doesn't vote.

Do you think Mitt is planning on doing that anytime soon?

Sadly, it doesn't look like it. I think he's banking on the anger of the Right to galvanize them and get them to the voting booths. His choice of Ryan as a running mate really facilitated that, and left him the option of staying right or moving back to center. I think that it would be a big risk for him to move too far back to center, as he will be accused of flip-flopping (not helped by the fact that people are on notice, with his famous etch-a-sketch comment from a few months back). However, if there is any time that he'll move back to center, it will likely be during the debates.

LeHah: I agree at this point. If Mitt's campaign had been managed better they would probably still be in a dead heat. Before the GOP primaries, I had thought that the polling was ludicrous because Obama hadn't started flexing his moneybag power, but then Romney surprised me and was matching him on the fundraising front. I don't know what they've been doing with that money, but it hasn't been trying to win the election. There's the chance for Romney to make up some ground in the debates (especially on issues like the economy and national defense), but at this point there's too much ground there.

Although, the voting bloc that pushed Obama through is less motivated to vote this year, and the Right is angry. There is a chance (however statistically insignificant or improbable) that the polling numbers won't reflect the actual voting numbers, in which case it's feasibly up in the air. I don't personally buy it, but it's within the realm of possibility.

Shit, if Republicans had their way, 90% of Americans wouldn't be ALLOWED to vote.

Or simply wouldn't be American.

So, are we going to livechat the debate tomorrow in IRC? Perhaps with beverages?

EMERGENCY DRINK ON: DECISION 2012

What's the point?

Just livechat the Daily Show/Colbert Report the following night.

I just hope I have time to watch it at all. If I do, I might take the opportunity to pop into chat purely because I'll need people to complain to.

I am hoping to catch the debates tonight. I will swing by chat if I do. =)

If by "better managed" you mean "wasn't subject to the insane opinions of the Tea Party", then yes.

Also true.

Perfect Strangers - The Dance of Joy - YouTube
Since this is the original reason I poked my head in, I'll just leave this election night reaction here. (If there are proper tags to embed youtube I'll happily fix this... youtube didn't exist when I was last really active)

Still waiting to see if Bachmann and West lose before I declare this The Day Everything Went Right.

this is a good day for the soviet union - obama willnot interfear with the democratical agenda of presidjent putyn - with rommey the problem of a world wide escalated war situation is higher !

congratulations to obama for winning the 2012 elections!