Is Romney in any sense impressive or a flip-flop flaky pathological liar? The candidate of a party that is now completely toxic.

I came across an article by Thomas Mann and Norman Ornstein in the Washington Post titled: Lets Say It The Republicans Are the Problem.
Mann & Ornstein are authors of the book Its Even Worse Than It Looks.

Unfortunately, Americans think they're voting for the King of the World!

They can't see that one candidate is an Oligarch, one of the Ruling Class, and the other is a jumped up snake oil salesman who is entirely out of his depth.

The world needs to reduce the power of the U.S., bring it down to a size that better represents its 6% share of the world's population.

The ownership of the world's biggest stockpile of nuclear weapons should not entitle the U.S. to abuse its power.

We live in a democratic world, don't we?

"We live in a democratic world, don't we?"

Nope

But, Don, Obama is under the thumb of the unions, just like Labor in Australia. Obama will continue to pile regulation on top of regulation, regulating USA into poverty. Just like Labor is doing to us in Australia.

Compare the science policies of the two Presidential hopefuls [1]. There is no comparison. Obama all waffle, spin and BS. Romney's is clear, considered and has substance.

[1] http://www.sciencedebate.org/debate12/

Don.

Good article. Thank you. I’ll take you up on a couple of your points.

“Anyone who has ever run any organisation knows well the frustration of being at the top: you have relatively little idea of what is actually happening further down in the organisation.”

True. But it is up to the President to select the right people. Obama selected green and left activists for his science and energy advisers. That’s one of the reasons USA is in deep doo doo. And the economic management incompetence his team has displayed.

Furthermore, he’s a pacifist. That ideology should be reserved for idealists. It’s dumb for the President of the leader of the most influential country in the democratic (free) world.

You say: “I would probably vote for Obama, because I like the sound of him, even though I know that is a silly reason. As I have said before, he is Hollywood's idea of what a President should be - handsome, self-confident, articulate and graceful in his movements. “

The vast majority of people vote like that. But I am aghast that a professor of your standing votes like that. Why aren’t you advocating that people should carefully consider and weigh up the policies and the consequences of those policies for the future of the nation?

At federal election times in Australia I weigh up what I think are the most important priorities for Australia’s Federal Government and then I weigh the policies of the political parties to address these. In my opinion the most important things for the federal government to manage well are:

• Defence of the nation and its interests
• Foreign affairs and trade
• the economic performance of Australia (for both the long term and the short term)

Everything else follows as a result of these, especially the economic performance. The funding and quality of all the things we need follow: real wages growth, real standard of living improvement, Health, Education, infrastructure, quality of our cities, environmental management, etc. They all depend on the economic management.

Risible rubbish, and shovelled by the shipload?
Peter Lang's comments, ditto?
Apparently you actually can fool some of the people all of the time?
Already we have credible evidence of quite massive vote rigging, with video of Romney supporters, allegedly posing as bipartisan election officials,caught on film/video, erasing pencilled in Obama votes, and replacing them with pencilled in Romney votes?
If true, I wonder how much it might cost, to buy a corrupt official?
[Mere pocket money perhaps for a, I can buy anything, billionaire!?]
The way to stop this patently illegal behaviour, is to simply recount all the votes emerging from a particular problematic booth, in favour of, the quite deliberately disadvantaged candidate?
In a genuine democracy, this sought of illegal behaviour should never ever be necessary!?
Who says election results can't be bought?
[Is it a chard or not a chard, or indeed, a hanging chard?]
Thanks to providence and some rather innovative people, we now have mobile phones, the social media and, keep the bar stewards honest, eyes everywhere!
I'm still predicting a narrow win for Obama, in spite of the alleged attempts by "gerrymandering" republican supporters, to fix it for Romney.
Someone who wants power too badly, should never ever have it, or indeed, be so placed as able to bring the world to war, where it is his finger that hovers over a single button!?
Rhrosty.

Peter Lang Australia is a society not an economy, we develop our society then the economy will follow.

Obama a pacifist - oh puleez!

He did not curtail or shut down any aspect of the warfare/surveilance state initiatives etc put in place by Bush. In fact he extended most of them and has been responsible for untold numbers of killings too.

But then again it is now almost impossible to shut down any aspect of the warfare/surveilance military-industrial state which has an almost unstoppable momentum. Indeed the USA is now effectively a permanent warfare state - see TomDispatch.

What is interesting about the book that I referred to in my first post is the fact that one of the authors is a "scholar" at the AEI which is an influential player in what David Brock called The Republican (repugnant) Party Noise Machine, an outfit which helped to create the situation described and criticised in the book.
As indeed did/does shrill harpies such as Ann Coulter.

But of course the situation described in the book has been completely obvious for years.
What is also interesting that most/all of those on the right side of the culture wars here in the land of Oz are staunch enthusiastic advocates/supporters of the GOP. This of course includes Tony Abbott. Abbott's (mister NO) attack dog style has of course been borrowed from the said GOP noise machine.

Daffy, I'm glad you mentioned Tom Dispatch.

It's great to think that some Aussies get their news from sources other than the Daily Telegraph and Fux News!

Well done!

Both Obama and Romney are owned and controlled by the Banking Military Industrial Complex. http://www.globalresearch.ca/ They are both war mongerers and believe the West's New World Order of Global Imperialism can be achieved.

Arjay,
The difference between the two candidates was slight to be sure, they're both equally despicable but the U.S is now a single party state, a lot of right wing people correctly predicted the Obama win and pointed out that from this point on, due to racial and demographic factors the future election of another Republican president is now impossible.

for Peter Lang:

I don't think professors of politics (in my case a former one) are any more immune than anyone else from being affected by the appearance and style of a candidate. I thought Romney got better and better as the campaign progressed, but he doesn't have the charisma of Obama.

But my saving grace is that I was not eligible to vote anyway! If I were, than I would have a large and different set of worries.

Unfortunately, charisma alone maketh not a good President, Don!

You need a few other qualities as well. How about honesty and integrity? What about vision and maturity and some understanding of world politics?

You seem to be more interested in Obama's body than his almost total lack of achievement!

*that from this point on, due to racial and demographic factors the future election of another Republican president is now impossible*

Not quite, Jay. In fact it was the women's vote which got him over
the line, as the nutcase end of the republicans tried to ban
abortions etc. Whilst the religious right and tea party run things
in the republican party, the centre are hardly going to vote for
them. Good on women for showing them the door.