Romney or Obama and why

[Kasz216]

Mr Khan said:

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).

 

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.

Always Biden... though for gods sake i hope not.  If the media paid attention to even half the bullshit lies he comes up with off the top of his head.  Guy is an prone embellsher who talks of the top of his head.  His only saving grace has been nobody has paid that much attention to him.

Mark Warner would be a good choice since by the people will likely be looking for a fairly strong economic candidate and he's sided with republicans on some key economic actions.  He was a govonor where he solved a budget crisis via cuts and tax reforms... and is trying to work on the current budget crissis.

You'd have problems energizing the far left, but the guy would essentially be a callback to Clinton.