That's an incredibly oversimplistic reason for why Obama won. Yeah, his charisma helped, but it doesn't change the fact that both 2006 and 2008 were poor years to run as a Republican because of negative evaluation of the Republican party and Bush administration (primarily on the Iraq War and economy). This is why you saw McCain trying to distance himself from Bush, as well as from the Republicans (think about the "maverick" line).

If you want to criticize ambiguity, Republican candidates are almost always more ambiguous. They tend to run on more abstract/general ideas (smaller government) while Democrats tend to run on more specific policies (reforming healthcare). Just as a note, this isn't because one party is objectively better than another, it has to do with how the public understands liberalism and conservatism. You've probably heard the line that people want to decrease spending/taxes, but they also consistently support more government spending on specific programs. Dems and Reps. just empasize different aspects of this paradox.

Funny things is, I doubt Americans really care whether the rest of the world wants Obama or Romney to win. It made me think of the whole Olympic issue with Romney criticizing how London was handling the Olympics. The news media covered it like crazy, but I seriously doubt whether it changed how any American viewed Romney. As you can see, its hardly an issue now.

Gary Johnson by a landslide. But if I had to pick between Obomney I'd pick Mitt since he's ever so slightly more conservative and I know that Obama would be 4 more years of continued failure.

You seem to have added a qualification in my post that wasn't there... You speak about Obama vs McCain but in order for that to have been a possibility certain events had to happen before... ones that have no involvement of the Republican party

I wouldn't vote for Romney.  Even so I can see a lot of reasons you would vote for him... off the top of my head.

Economics.  He has a much better grip of it then Obama.  For example, his often untalked about plan to remove capital gains taxes for anyone who makes under 250,000.  Which you would think would greatly increase the personal investment rate, which currently happens to be the area of GDP that we're really lacking in.

He was govonor of Massachuteses - Which shows that he actually knows how to compromise and accomplish legislation with bipratisian support. 

While he agreed with Obama's drone policy he didn't seem overly agressive on it.  Makes me think it might be a poltiical move.  Since by all accounts Mitt Romney is a devout mormon.   So there is at least a chance that he would run a less awful drone campaign then Obama... and hoenstly, it'd be damn near impossible to run a drone campaign that was any worse.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/10/what-if-mitt-romney-inherits-obamas-killer-drone-fleet/263977/

He's more likely to fix medicare/social security/welfare.

He's more likely to stop the country from going over "The fiscal cliff".

He's more likely to remove the negative parts of regulations while keeping the positive aspects of them.

He wants to simplify the tax codes by getting rid fo a lot of deductions... espiecally evening them in the buisness sector so that all buisnesses play by the same rules.

He's more likely to reduce the deficit, by a small inconsquetential amount... but it would be less small and inconsequential then Obama.

Romney actually probably would close guantanom bay, because Democrats would be mad at him if he didn't....

and the biggest one....

all the neoconservative bullshit stuff that Obama does would get called on by democrats if Romney was doing it instead of them "backing up their guy" and having zero party for civil liberties.

I mean hell, the guy just signed a bill that allows american citizens to be detained INDEFINITLY if they are "suspected of terrorism" and nobody even remotely mentions this.

Reasons that qualify you for being suspected of being a terrorist?   Missing fingers is one... so I guess there will be a lot of shop teacher jobs open.

Having more then a months worth of food.  Guess they're just going to have the CIA arrest everyone who shops at Costco.

I love Obama, wish there was a candidate like him in my country - personally I think he reflects a kind of honesty very rare on politicians.

Watched all debates (last one not completely) but if I was american, definitely Obama.

Huh? I think your reading too much into my post. I was just arguing that Obama did not win solely because of his charisma and ambiguity. There are much more prominent things at work when looking at election results, whether at the primary or general election level.

I get your cause but atleast vote for rocky anderson or some one worthy of your vote. Jill stein. Waste it in a meaningful way. Now if you where in a swing state I would say think about the supreme court. They have life long terms. Don't allow mitt to destroy us with more reckless judges.

No, the 57 to 41 is without including the independents, who are both actually democrats anyway.  So dems had 59 to 41, then a couple months after the election arlen spectre of pensylvania switched to democrat, giving democrats a super majority.

Edit: i see where you are getting your numbers, after the election there were two disputed seats, minesota that was too close to call, but went democrat, and obamas seat that was appointed by the impeached governor of illinois that was somewhat disputed. Either way, a few months into the term, democrats stood at 60 to 40 seats. 

But you isolated the presidential election. I was talking about the whole process for Obama. Including being named the Democratic nominee. You say there were more prominent things at work but only list the republican party's image... How did he win the nomination?  None of those people were republicans. What made him stand out from the rest was his charisma