Could not agree more, HMJC.

BHO by a nose at the wire.

Four years ago, President Obama promised to unite the people of this nation. He said that he had a record of working with people from all walks of life and political persuasions, and that there were no blue states or red states - that there was only the United States. He also implied that he could reconcile the racial divide in this country, in particular because he himself is "multi-racial."

By all accounts, the President has not lived up to this most important campaign pledge. Most people in this country are tired of the name-calling and the demonizing of the political opposition. Four years ago, we were promised a president who would work together with the other side without characterizing them as bad people. Getting along with opponents and making progress is what the voters of this country want - not bombastic rhetoric that makes for "gotcha" headlines and further aggravates the situation.

President Obama has had nearly four years to make good on this campaign promise. He has failed miserably. Recent headlines indicate that we could expect race riots if Obama loses. That's not unity - it's anarchy.

Romney has shown an ability to work with the opposition in every job he's held. In particular, the results he achieved while governor of Massachussetts is a far greater demonstration of this ability than President Obama has ever shown.

Fortunately, it appears that the country (or at least significant voting blocs of it) is waking up to the way things are, and just MIGHT demand real "change we can believe in" - this time. Recent polls indicate that in the "swing states," women are now moving toward Romney:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/po...

Further - in those swing states, NPR reports that Romney has opened a big lead with voters in large rural counties:

http://www.npr.org/2012/10/16/1629798...

Finally - in electoral college projections, Romney has almost pulled even where only last month he was more than 100 votes behind:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epol...

Romney clearly has the momentum, and it is up to him and his campaign team to keep it going. There are still three weeks to the election, and two Presidential debates are to come. The talking heads report that historically the winner of the first debate has been judged to be the overall debate winner after all the debates are over. Those of us who want to see this country move FORWARD can only hope that this part of history repeats itself in 2012.

We've had four years of President Obama. He has not earned four more. Tell him at in the voting booth next month.

Remember in November.

I couldnt agree more... Lets just remember a few things though....

President Obama and Gov Romney are not the only candidates. I would rather cast my vote for someone who i beleive in, even though they might not have a chance to win. I encourage everyone to study the platforms of the other candidates. They just might be what you are wanting but your just uninformed. (Link below)

Unfortunately their are gonna be votes for President Obama cuz hes the black candidate and votes for Gov. Romney cuz hes not the black candidate. It shows ignorance, but its true.

Lets just remember... ONE RACE OF PEOPLE CANNOT ELECT A PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

http://www.politics1.com/p2012.htm

HMJC, you are correct in your statement that if someone votes solely on the ethnic line it is the beginning of the end for this country.

Same can be said of someone voting strictly on party affiliation of candidate.

The beginning of the end for this still great nation was when the Republican party in partnership with the Democratic party (in their greatest partisan act ever) were able to lock the other parties out of the primary process.

Republicans and Democrats both allow candidates to qualify for primary elections by simply paying a qualifying fee (most of which goes to the party) while Libertarians or any others must go through a petition process which is made as difficult as possible.

hollabackk, a vote for a third party candidate is a vote for Obama.

I don't like that but is is reality.

Four more years of the current administration and it just might be impossible to ever get back on the right path.

This is the most important election in the past century in my opinion.

HMJC this is the best blog that I've seen on this site.

I don't know if I would say that but Thanks so much.

Timeontarget,

sorry you feel that way.

hollabackk, I wish I didn't feel the way I do.

I actually like Obama's apparent position regarding the use of our military.

Our misadventures with our military by both Republican and Democratic leadership has brought us into the war of terror on our soil.

I've not had any meaningful employment in the past three years.

I need a new tire for my tractor and I can't afford the five hundred dollars to purchase it.

Two tires for my truck recently set me back $350.00.

Tire cost has steadly increased for about fifteen years but they have skyrocketed in the past four years.

Gasoline has doubled since Obama took office.

As Romney says small business is the backbone of America.

As such it needs to be protected and nurtured by government but the reverse is actually what is happening.

TOT: Your above post tells the story of the current economic strife in this country, and - IMHO - is what most people will be thinking when they vote this time around. I, too, agree with your comments about President Obama and the military. I think he has done his best work in the prosecution of the "war on terror" (or whatever the Dems want to call it), and in continuing and improving upon the Bush policies for homeland security.

Also - IMHO - I think he has screwed up with some issues that send the wrong signal to the military (i.e., "Don't Ask, Don' Tell). But on balance, I think he has done a good job over the past four years in actions relating to the conflicts in Iraq/Afghanistan, and in protection of the homeland. I am concerned about the "flexibility" he expects to have with the Russians if he gets a second term.

However, it's just too bad Obama didn't focus primarily on foreign policy/homeland security and THE ECONOMY during his first term. If he had - instead of squandering his political capital and his two-year total control of the Executive and Legislative branches of the federal government on ObamaCare - Romney would have no argument and Obama would win the 2012 election in a landslide. By landslide, I'm talking about 300+ electoral votes and a popular vote which would be near 60%. Instead, he didn't and now Romney has the momentum and IT'S THE ECONOMY again just like 1980 and 1992.

That is what drives me the most nuts!! All of the sudden the "good idea fairy" has all of these great ideas to make up for the previous four. Didn't he also have a bunch of good ideas for the first four. It time for this cat to go back to originizing picnics and blood drives....

(In the second to last sentence in my above post, I meant to say 400+ electoral votes....)