In response to:

Obama's Numbers Went Down, but Romney Never Inspired Voters to Vote

Shirleyjean Wrote: Dec 27, 2012 1:05 PM
Obama won because, just like the voter in Hawaii said "Romney would take away her food stamps". Also, the establishment and Fox News decided it would be Romney instead of a more conservative type; like Gingrich or Santorum whom the people were clearly in favor of.
Jack2894 Wrote: Dec 27, 2012 1:11 PM
Santorum would have been crushed far worse than Romney. Gingrich would have lost as well. It wasn't the messenger; it was the message.
Earl29 Wrote: Dec 27, 2012 1:17 PM
No, Santorum could have won. Gingrich, too. Unlike Romey, they could have offered a clear contrast to Obama. It's always the messenger, Jack.
arpiem Wrote: Dec 27, 2012 1:26 PM
Santorum is a moron and Gingrich is all over the map on both liberal and conservative ideas.
Earl29 Wrote: Dec 27, 2012 1:32 PM
Santorum is not a mental giant, but he is not a moron. I agree that Gingrich thinks quantitatively, but I see nothing wrong with that. Would you prefer he be narrow-minded?
Jack2894 Wrote: Dec 27, 2012 2:09 PM
Santorum lost his last election by 18%. He was crushed by a lousy Democratic candidate. His unfavorable ratings were much higher than Romney's and he had far far too many crazy moments and comments to be a threat to anyone. Gingrich would have been subject to an array of attacks on his character, all of which would have established him as a "do as I say, not as I do " candidate.

I do not know what it will take to get conservatives out of their bubble and seeing the political reality.
Earl29 Wrote: Dec 27, 2012 2:40 PM
That lousy Democratic candidate's daddy was the most popular politician in the history of Pennsylvania; Romney lost his Senatorial bid by 17% to a candidate whose daddy was a rum-runner.
In combing through the results of the 2012 election -- apparently finally complete, nearly two months after the fact -- I continue to find many similarities between 2012 and 2004, and one enormous difference.

Both of the elections involved incumbent presidents with approval ratings hovering around or just under 50 percent facing challengers who were rich men from Massachusetts (though one made his money and the other married it).

In both cases, the challenger and his campaign seemed confident he was going to win -- and had reasonable grounds to believe so.

In both elections, the incumbent started running a barrage...