Magox

That's how ads work best, with generalities, not specifics. You don't like it, because he isn't the one you are supporting and thats natural. However, it will work well with independents and thats what matters.

It's a television ad, it's not suppose to go into detail Simplicity is best, it's positive while at the same time hitting Obama on his weakness. It's a good ad, even got high marks On MSNBC Morning Joe's panel this morning. Its already gotten good reviews, and I've been keeping up with this long enough to recognize whatworks and what doesn't, and this one clearly does.

Actually its a very good ad. It highlights Obamas weakness on Keystone and his deeply unpopular signature piece of legislation and paints a simple, stark contrast in what Romney would do immediately. It marks high and will poll test well. Almost all ads will be in the battle ground states.

No offense taken, and yes I can say that with 99% certainty. So naturally you may ask, how could you possibly be so certain? Why thats an excellent question Cbiscuit. Considering that the last 12 polls that came out, Romney is leading anywhere from 5 to 13 points. In the 2008 elections Obama won independents b 7 points. So, simple math and common sense tells you that there are more people switching from Team O to Team R than from Team Mc to team O. And, maybe this development is occuring because people are tired of Obama "crapping" on the economy. Yet he is running neck and neck with the incumbent. Liberal or conservative.....doesn't matter.... Obama is a really weak incumbent president...... We're talking about potential Jimmy Carter level weaknes....

Here's the deal, you initially rushed to judgement and you were wrong. It appears that Zimmerman overstepped his bounds and should have never of ignored the 911 call, because of that fateful decision, Trayvon is dead. Having said that, the photos and I witness accounts corroborate Zimmermans allegation of self-defense. First off, Zimmerman is skinny and like 5 foot 4 , so he isn't a big guy by any stretch of the imagination. Second, he had gashes in the back of his head, a bloodied possible broken nose and bruises to the face. According to a witness he was being straddled like an M & A fighter, and then lastly the gun shot wound was from anywhere from 1 to 18 inches of distance. In regards to self-defense, it looks pretty clear. The allegations of Zimmerman hunting down Trayvon or killing him in cold-blood dont match up with the facts. The D.A overzealously charged Zimmerman with 2nd degre murder simply because she succumbed to public pressure and as a result, screwed up the case. She should of charged him with a manslaughter charge, There is just no way that he will get charged for second degree murder, now this is going to be a real cluster !@#$. There will be a segment of the population who will want him to be convicted of murder, but the facts tell differently. They need to try to plea bargain ASAP, reduce it to man slaughter. But if you are Zimmermans defense, you gotta ask yourself "why should we?" Considering they have lots of physical evidence, the close up gun shot wound and several I witnesss that support their case,they win this easily in a court of law. Remember, this is being tried as a second degree murder, so the merits of the argument that Zimmerman ignored the 911 call don't suggest murder. If it had been a manslaughter case, then the argument would of been much easier to make. This is gonna get ugly, I think its almost a forgone conclusion that we will see rioting on the streets once he has been found innocent.

So you complain about a state that has a hiring boom, with above average wages with 3% unemployment, but mum on a state that has a 16 Billion dollar shortfall, sky high taxes, polled as he worst place to do business in the US, crappy educational system, 10% unemployment and one of the most corrupt public sector unions in his country?

Name some people here that believe Obama was born outside of the US

A good piece from Kimberly Strassel http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303360504577410573651845802.html

It would certainly be a quite potent dynamic. Could go either way, could be a unifying galvanizing sort of an event for the president or it could be very negative for him as well. The problem with this is that the two previous unifying war related events was right after 9/11 and there was alot of support for Americans going into Afghanistan and the killing of Bin Laden. Both of them were easily defined and not too difficult to justify the decisions for the actions. In this case, there is no clear cut victory. The best that could happen is that they disable the nuclear facilities and delay the process. This is not a mission that would include the ousting of their leaders, and the likelyhood of their being some sort of protracted lashback is quite high. The risks for Obama is that the Israelis and Iran and it's proxy's trade fire for an extended period of time, in the meantime gasoline prices go up anywhere from 50 cents at a very minimum to as high as $5 a gallon. The country is already war fatigued and are in no mood to see higher gasoline prices, specially now considering that the economy could very well dip down to below 1.5% GDP growth. My guess is that Obama would do a 180, have a nationally televised speech, as he should, and speak of the dire need to stop Iran from getting Nuclear capabilities and begin justifying the need to be proactive about the situation. That would be my guess.

You can beg all you like, we'll just have to disagree.

Yes and it is a vulnerability. MSNBC Brashir and ODonnel have both had hit piece segments on it. The Obama campaign has said it is off limits, similar to Romneys denouncement today of Jeremiah Wrights. It will be brought up, I suspect once they start panicking, (which they are getting close to that level now) you will see factions of the media do the presidents dirty bidding.

Do you really expect him to understand what you just wrote?

Racial? What are you talking about? Did you not hear some of his sermons? Its completely legitimate to bring to light that Obama attended his church for over 20 years and all the way up unto 2008. The question is why did he attend his church for over two decades when we know that Jeremiah Wright is a full blown anti-semite and had many other crazy views. Thats a fair question to ask and remind some voters that this is who president Obama decided to attend church with his family for a long period of time. It's fair to further examine Wrights views, specially knowing that they had a pretty close relationship with one another. If I was Romney, I would distance myself from this, but for a superpac to go after it, I think it's logical. Mind you, everything I'm speaking here is from a political POV. I like talking politics, specially the wonky side of it, but I also like talking political strategy. And this is a strategy that can work, it just has to be crafted and targetted correctly.

It has to be done right and targeted in specific areas, preferably white working class socially conservative democratic voting districts. These guys arent enamored with Obama as it is, and they don't like Romney either, but they tend to vote Democrat. If you can influence them enough by reminding them who Obama is at his core, then a good chance that a decent portion of them will not come out to vote. Many districts like this in Ohio, PA come to mind. Again, the other side is gonna go with the character assasination attempts, then it's only fair to return fire. Also, the Obama campaign is very concerned with this, even David Plouffe in 2008 thought this could have been the issue to have cost Obama the election. You can see with their reactions in how desperately they want to get in front of this and intimidate anyone who dares bring this subject up. Now you want to fix it? you're such a weaselly little hypocrite

Damn straight! It's at the state and local level where the most corruption is on full display. If anyone wants to truly have an interest and point a finger at anyone for all the state/local gov. layoffs, you blame the corrupt politicians and public sector unions. Listening to some from the left whine about money and politics now is hilarious. Now all of a sudden they have a problem with it, even though the public sector unions have been bending us over for years.

Yeah, but at the end of the day, they are all getting exposed for contributing and most seem to be fine with that. The playing field is even, and now we have a fair fight, which is the way it should be.

Holy hypocritical Batman!

Funny how people NOW see a problem with money and politics, but when the Unions were buying elections, not a peep from the left, now that businesses wants to influence elections there is all this outrage. Sorry, but all this whining from the left is falling on deaf ears, and I gotta tell ya, I'm glad they exist.

Nope, too late for compromise on this issue. Unions have unfairly influenced elections at the expense of the taxpayer for too long, and now that there is an opportunity for conservatives to finally have large contributions,you want compromise? yeah right! Maybe in about 30 years we can revisit this "compromise"

That is correct, and now that the playing field is getting evened out, you have the little whiny bitches coming out and crying foul. (see fjl2nd) I'm glad they are there, it gives an opportunity to examine the record of our elected officials under microscope. For far too long Unions gave a huge advantage to Democrats, just in 2008 alone, 3 out of the top four contributors were Unions.

What's sad is your ignorance.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/bush_administration/22_believe_bush_knew_about_9_11_attacks_in_advance

What are you, 13? So after I just made mincemeat of your fallacious (or ignorant) claim, I'm guessing the latter, now you deviate to another point? Who cares? As long as Romney has the money along with the SUperPacs, which he will, thats all that matters. ANd I'm glad that all this "dirty" money is making little whiny bitches cry foul about it. Get use to it, because the hammer is gonna get dropped on Obama's miserable record, and thank goodness that there is this money to expose Obama for the failure he has been on both he economy and the debt.

Even Steve Rattner, ardent supporter of Obama and his former car czar knows that this is nonsense. Everyone in the world of finance knows that Bain Capital was one of the best Private Equity firms in the business. Do you even know what quality Private equity firms do? They invest in either start up or struggling companies. They provide capital infusions, trim fat, streamline products, market them and restructure accordingly. In other words, most of these companies were going to go out of business and with the help of these private equity firms they have a fighting chance at staying alive. Bain Capital is universally recognized as the cream of the crop. They not only created lots of jobs, which is not the focus of any business, but they created wealth for investors which included pension funds. So while only partisans, dimwits and lemmings believe that Bain capital "showed how wonderful bain was to middle class workers whse companies they killed while getting rich and 'improving' the economy" storlyline, lets really think this out for a second. Try taking off your ideological goggles for a second and think about this . Do you really believe that the Salt Lake City Olympic committee would go out and hire out of all people, Gordon Gekko the "vulture capitalist" to help turn around the Olympics that the US was hosting, when it was riddled with debt, inefficiencies and bordering on becoming a national embarrassment? You really believe they would do that?

Because the way they are structured now, there can be more money given through the SUPERPACS on behalf of individuals and corporations then the way it use to be structured. I have no problem with this, Unions dominated campaign financing for years, and all these states that are having to slash budgets can blame the public sector unions and the corrupt politicians who pandered for their money at the expense of childrens education and the local/state taxpayers, and now when the cuts are coming, they have the nerve to blame conservatives for the current layoffs that they themselves brokered. That's like someone lighting a fire on a house and then calling the fire department to put out the fire, only for the fire department to not get there on time, and have the same person who lit the fire come out and criticize the fire department for not getting there on time.