Its interesting that many people would rather have an incompetent nice guy than a good manager they don't like. Apart from redistributing income, which cannot stimulate job growth, Obama has no economic plan. Yet Romney fails to impress because he doesn't have a celebrity style personality and is 'wealthy', which is apparently only acceptable if you are a Democrat.

Obama did/does have a plan! Unfortunately, it has been endlessly blocked and or sabotaged, by a republican controlled congress.
Who then have the hide to turn and blame Obama, for the lack of progress.
In simple economic terms, one cannot grow the economy by shrinking the very things that underpin and support it!
Things like discretionary spending, which reduces the inventory on the shop shelves, which in turn reduces the inventory stacked in warehouses, which in turn then demand the wheels of manufacture and commerce to begin to turn once again!
Creating jobs, wealth, opportunity and more taxpayers paying tax, in the process.
In purely scientific terms, it is called he law of cause and effect!
The very last time we tried the tea party/conservative economic pie shrinking austerity, we forced around thirty percent of the population onto the dole queues.
And nobody but nobody was safe or assured of a life supporting income; unless you owned a lot of gold or a self sufficiency sustaining food growing farm, or both?
People eking out an existence on dole queues or good Samaritan charity, simply cost the economy.
They don't contribute tax or economy supporting discretionary spending, any more that a obscenely rich person does?
Given the rich person is already maxed out, consuming much more than he/she needs, or the good life or health dictate?
Yes, it is all over for Mitt Romney.
The Mitt has hit the fan.
He is pushing it uphill!
He has exposed his true character and plans, neither of which are suitable in a so-called economy rescuing American President? He seems to not understand, it's not about him!
All he seems to focus on, like any serial corporate raider, is the acquisition of, or wielding power; and or, even more privileges for those already over endowed with unearned, and therefore undeserved privilege?
Much of which has arguably been created by the creation and sale of patently worthless derivatives; and or, endless tax avoidance!
We can probably save the global economy or unearned privilege, but never ever both!
Rhrosty.

Redistributing income upwards, to the wealthy, has long been Republican policy and it certainly hasn't created jobs. Its certainly worth seeing if putting more money in the hands of the poor so they can buy more stuff would work better.

As long as the Republican party feels they have to appeal to the Christian Right and the uneducated -- two closely overlapping groups -- they are never going to be able to field a credible Presidential candidate. Nobody with enough intellect and integrity to have a serious chance at the job is going to sound convincing mouthing the naive platitudes that pass for Republican policies.

Unfortunately, the only thing that will improve the Republican party is an improvement in the Democratic party, which -- although it can still attract intelligent leaders -- is still heavily in thrall to naive fanatics of one kind or another.

If you lot are right about the Republicans making all the rich people richer, then I suppose there is a difference.

From what I observe, Obama specialises in making donors to his campaign funds very much richer, rather than just any old rich Joe.

He's given tax payer funds of from almost of a quarter to half a billion dollars each to a number these people, hopping on his fool solar & wind policies. Their companies all seem to go broke not that long after, but not before making their owners very rich, & of course returning a lump of those tax payer funds to the Obama re election war chest. It is all so simple really.

Then of course he's done a great job for the unemployed. Tens of thousands of coal miners, & oil workers have lost their jobs, thanks to him locking up any resource he can.

The greatest con job of course would be the clown now trying to claim the shale gas bonanza as his doing. Having fought tooth & nail against anything but what his renewables mates wanted stopped. Now he's lost that one, he wants to claim it. There is a lot of our Julia in their Obama, & none of it is good for the little bloke, here or there. It seems that an inability to tell the truth is a common trait in most lefty politicians.

Both Obama and Romney are owned by the Banking Military Industrial Complex.There is little difference between them.Romney is backed by the Zionist faction who want to attack Syria/Iran and expand the wars of imperialism.

It is just a matter of the lesser of two evils since Obama is less likely at the moment to take us to WW3.

I wish people would get off Romney's back. He's doing the best he can. Like his father, he's tried to translate his vast wealth into public service, his father as head of American Motors and as Governor of Michigan, Mitt as Governor of Massachusetts, where his health care program was as good as Obama's is.

And why go on about his tax records ? He's released two years of records, showing that he made $ 13 million last year, or $ 250,000 a week from his investments - that's hardly Bill Gates or Zuckerberg, or even Gina Rinehart stuff - and why should he release any more - just to give Obama ammunition for his relentless campaign to show Mitt as 'out of touch' ?

And isn't it true that whole swathes of the population are never going to vote for Mitt anyway, so why should he bother with them ? Women, Hispanics, Blacks, the working class - what have they ever done for Mitt ? So why should he do anything for them ? Will he get their votes ? It's a two-way street.

I'm sick and tired of these slurs about his wealth, about his having an elevator to bring his cars up from an underground garage, and his wife having a couple of Cadillacs, as well as other vehicles. Hasn't anyone else had that experience when you put your car in for a service, but you would like another car just like it, to run around in while you wait ? Give them a break !

People forget that in the fifties, life was pretty good for a lot of other people. Why can't we return to those strong values ? Elect Mitt Romney, and then we'll all know what he really stands for.

I think Romney has at least two major problems - both are touched on in the article.
1. The people who know him report he is warm and caring - and yet the general populace consider him cold and unfeeling. How do you explain this disconnect? He clearly does not relate well to the media.
2. He is clearly a distinguished economic manager - but too many people have been burned by managers like this recently.
The elections of GW Bush show that likeability ultimately is more valuable than capability. I like Obama but I think his election last time (and likely this time) will merely reinforce the fact that politically it is better to be likeable than capable.