Romney or Obama and why

[Mr Khan]

SamuelRSmith said:

TadpoleJackson said:
Out of these two, I will have to go with Obama. The reason is simple. I don't see much of a difference between the two, and neither is very appealing, so I'd rather have four more years of Obama, than a potential eight years from Romney. Come 2016, I'd like to see the Republicans run some real candidates, not the bottom of the barrel like we had this year

This is based on the assumption that the Republicans will have somebody better than Romney in 2016.

My bets on 2016 candidates:

Dems: Hillary Clinton

GOP (if Romney is not Pres): Chris Christie, Bobby Jindal, Sarah Palin.... maybe Jim DeMint.

If you're thinking tactically like you are, you've got to consider this. Some of those candidates are definitely better than Romney, but could they beat Clinton?

----

As for the OP. If those were the only two on the ticket, I wouldn't bother voting (if I could vote, anyway).

Clinton is even withdrawing as Secretary of State if Obama wins re-election. She's aged more visibly than Obama has in the current term, and its fair to say she's fairly burnt out.

That said, i don't really know who else the Democrats even have. I don't know whether it's the fact that media attention on "good presidential candidates" has focused solely on Republicans in the last four years, but i'm not aware of who the real up-and-comers are on the side that i favor. On the Republican side, Christie is a possibility, the party was flirting with Jindal in the first year of the Obama Administration but they seem to have ignored him since. Palin is moving beyond "has-been" status at this point. DeMint is also possible.

I'd say Christie, Pawlenty, Jeb Bush (for some reason, despite the fact that no Republican candidate even likes to mention his brother), Scott Walker (if he survives his recall election), Rick Santorum again, and Rand Paul.