Talk Elections

Hypothetical question here: If you could run for President this year, and regardless of your political leanings or whatnot, would you rather run against Obama or Romney?

I'd rather run against Romney, since Obama would be pretty hard to run against in my opinion.

I concur on Romney being a weaker candidate and more vulnerable to negative ads. He has lots of economic skeletons in the closet, so his much-taunted strength in experience in the private sector can be used against him.

President Obama is an incumbent with no scandals, no military or diplomatic blunders that he can't recover from, and a long spell of economic growth even if it is from a very low spot.  The last President to be in that position after his first term was FDR -- who won big in 1936.  His most obvious weakness is 'too much melanin' for many voters. He won despite that in 2008 and that is certain to be less relevant in 2012.

Beginning in 1900 with McKinley, 13 incumbent Presidents (counting FDR three times) have sought re-election and five have been defeated. All of those defeated incumbents had a serious weakness that President Obama does not have.

Oh, Obama has serious weaknesses.

Obama can justifiably claim to having saved the auto industry, killed America's biggest boogeyman, ended the Iraq War responsibly, passed middle class tax cuts, and ended discrimination against gays.

He also presided over years of job growth, which has been slower than normal.. but this is exactly what everyone said would happen back in 2008, because the recession was caused by a financial crisis and not a natural turn of the business cycle.

His biggest weakness, health care reform, is off the table with Romney as the nominee.

I don't get why Obama doesn't just run on these strengths, instead of demonizing private equity. Seems like he's not embracing what is a winning record, especially the first two bits.


Tune in next week for them?

Obama is the more talented politician for sure, and is probably less controversial, but in *this* election I'd rather be running against the incumbent.

Obama [Obama voter]

I'd rather run against Obama this year, but Romney in a general year. This year you'd have anti-incumbency feelings and Obama's abysmal record to help you, and in a generic year you'd have Romney's robot-ness on your side.

Against Obama. He's one of the weakest incumbents in decades.

Against Romney. He's one of the weakest challengers in decades.

Romney really isn't that weak. The media has just made an issue of his wealth. I'd say he's the best Republican nominee since Reagan.

and yes... he really is weak.

It's your choice between weak challenger or weak incumbent.

Why would you run against Obama if you're an Obama voter? :P

Obama's weaknesses are more overstated than Romney's.  There have been Presidents re-elected in worse conditions and Obama passes some better incumbents with his remarkable organization and unprecedented fundraising machine. 

I invite any Repub who says Romney isn't the worst nominee in the past century to do a side by side comparison with every previous GOP nominee. I doubt outside of Wendell Wilkie you'll find Mittens to have an edge in any category you draw.

Aganist both.

He's not really running yet though is he, just starting to lay down some groundwork against his opponent. From the convention onward, when he starts unrolling some big speeches, everything you said will come out in spades.