they didn't need to complain because he was never winning.  

Mitt Romney isn't winning either though.

At best from what I can see he's been at a statistical tie... at some points.

I don't think he's any closer to Obama then McCain was... it's just the huge turn on Obama as he failed to live up to his promises has lowered his enthusiasm to a low level where people are afraid because they personally don't like him as much.

I would argue that Romney is in a better position today that McCain was, but that this is more of a result of Bush blaiming being outdated, people no longer needing to support the black candidate to prove they're not a racist, and Obama really having nothing postive to run on.

The whole Chik Fil A thing is...dumb. Okay, so the CEO said something negative about homosexuals. So what? Does that really represent what every manager and every employee who works for that company thinks? Also, what is protesting going to achieve? A non-meaningful apology? I can understand why people are upset, but people need to be more rational about this. Not to mention, a lot of the people who complain about Chik Fil A most likely shop at Walmart. While Walmart CEO Mike DICK has never publicly said anything bad about homosexuals, Walmart is a company who has been caught time and time again doing things that are both illegal and immoral, not to mention the company treats it associates like shit. Yet it'll be okay to shop there as opposed to eating at Chik Fil A just because the CEO of that company said something that pissed some people off. Does that really make sense?

As for Mitt Romney, I don't like him. I'm not an Obama fan either, but I will still be voting this fall because I always remember that not everyone in the world has that right and it would be selfish for me not to exercise that right.

I'd disagree if only because John McCain had that whole "Maverick" reputation and was a well known well liked guy before he ran.

I see Obama/Romney, playing out like Bush/Kerry.

I don't see any advantages Romney has that Kerry didn't.  They even look alike. 

I'm still of the opinion that this presidential election will primarily be determined by how people feel about the economy in November ... Which is mostly outside of either of the candidate's control.

Unfortunately, what the American people don't understand is that our economy is so internationally linked that even if a politician does all the right things and people are able to find work, some financial disaster in some far away country could have a negative impact on us. Even if in some alternate universe where Romney won the 2008 elections, he would probably have a lot of the same issues Obama is having right now. So whoever wins in November, I hope they try their best, but I don't think we'll see any miracles happen.

The problem is that the government policies that have a negative impact on the creation of jobs tend to have the most impact when the economy is already in trouble ...

The 2008 financial crisis could have been averted with effective lightweight regulation and the government not trying to manipulate bank lending practices for political gain; but even if it happened, had the US government had a lightweight regulatory system, reasonable tax rates, and an effective education system there would have been fewer jobs lost and more jobs created making the financial crisis much smaller in effect.

thIs is why we should distance or selfs and start a campaign called built here, bought here. Tariffs on all imports from country's with human rights abuse's. This should either be a american goal or even a world wide goal. stop buying from human rights abusing country's and we will see them making conditions a whole lot better to get back into the market.

If you impose tariffs on one countries imported goods they will (likely) impose tariffs on your exported goods, and usually both countries are worse off as a result. Usually you will import similar goods from another country that is a rival of theirs, and they will import goods from another country that is a rival of yours, so neither country produces more goods but your rivals do produce more goods.