The Election

I was wrong.  I suspected Romney was going to win because I vibed people were more passionate about Obama losing than they were about Obama winning.  I actually think my analysis was correct, judging by the reaction to the election - the despondency of libertarian blogs I read versus the not-very-excited-more-like-we-avoided-disaster reaction of all the Obama supporters.  Where I was wrong, was my conclusion:  you don't unseat an incumbent in a referendum vote.  You unseat an incumbent by providing an inspiring candidate.

When it comes down to the Presidential vote, I think agenda matter less than personality.  And more importantly, the enthusiasm and love of core supporters, or a strong "base."  Looking at the last couple Presidents:  Obama, GW Bush, Clinton, all of these candidates had bases who really loved them.  Sure, Bush had many haters, as does Obama, but both candidates enjoy very passionate support of a certain segment.  If you look at the losers:  Gore, Kerry, McCain, and now Romney, none of these candidates seem to arouse passion in their core supporters.  They each seem like journeyman politicians, good sons, good holders of the torch kind of candidates, but none of them transformative.

The one election I'm curious about:  1988 when G Bush Senior won.  In that election, it seemed like neither candidate had particularly passionate support.  But Reagan did.  And I wasn't around before that.

Anyhow, looking forward to paying more taxes the next four years...