[Antoninus]

And your plan is...? Please provide the outcome from said plan.

Did you read what I wrote? The outcome is gridlock from 2012-2014, more conservative Republican gains in the 2014 midterms and a big conservative Republican victory in 2016, riding the anti-Obama lame-duck wave.

This is a medium- to long-term strategy. It's not a pleasant one, mind you. But none of our options are terribly good at this moment.

[freedumb2003]

>>Did you read what I wrote?

You wrote a small sarcastic “Rombot” line — it held no information on your plan.

>>The outcome is gridlock from 2012-2014, more conservative Republican gains in the 2014 midterms and a big conservative Republican victory in 2016, riding the anti-Obama lame-duck wave.<<

So your plan is to vote for obama and then ride an anti-obama wave in 2016?

>>This is a medium- to long-term strategy. It’s not a pleasant one, mind you. But none of our options are terribly good at this moment.
<<

Voting for obama is certainly not a “terribly good” option, but at least you stated that as your intention. Many others just dance around the question.

[norwaypinesavage]

"Did you read what I wrote? The outcome is gridlock from 2012-2014"

You're forgetting executive orders and Supreme Court Justices. Obama Executive Orders will give us $8 per gallon gasoline, multiple trillion dollar deficits, elimination of coal mining, no Canadian oil, tripling of electric bills, and unsafe cars, just to name a few.

I am aware of the response you will give that "Romney will appoint liberal Supreme Court Justices". Even if that were true, he still would not appoint the Marxist puppets that Obama picks. If you look objectively at the Romney judicial picks as governor, you would be surprised at the number of right leaning jurists he got through a super majority Democrat legislature.