They are significantly Catholic, and predominantly socially conservative. They overwhelmingly repudiated John Kerry in 2004. On the other hand, they are union workers susceptible to the tawdry campaign ads generated by the Obama campaign accusing Romney of destroying GST Steel and contributing to the death of Joe Soptic’s wife in 2006, and ignoring completely the fact that Romney left Bain Capital in 1999.
How will Ohioans respond to the fact that Barack Obama destroyed domestic coal industry, as he promised to do in 2008, contributing to the unemployment of tens of thousands of Americans? Presently, Appalachian Coal unions are lining up behind Romney.
Recent polls indicate that likely voters continue to support Barack Obama 49% to Romney 46%, but the three-point differential is within the margin of error. Essentially, it is a dead-heat race for Ohio’s 18 electoral votes. Moreover, Obama leads in the race for Ohio women, but trails Romney among Ohio men. Independent voters favor Romney 51% to Obama’s 39%. When asked about the best candidate for controlling government spending, Romney wins among likely voters; most Ohioans think Obama has the edge on Medicare and foreign policy —which is puzzling.
• He must be an adaptive leader: one with the ability to avoid taking a hard stance on issues, who can cater to what voters most want to hear, and concurrently conceal or explain away any changes in policy.
• He must demonstrate compassion: the ability to empathize with the common man, regardless of socio-economic group, race, or gender.
• He must be an excellent communicator: an aptitude that allows a candidate to display his strengths in the two other areas.
Are these things attributes, or character flaws? This is the dilemma of politics. We want our candidate to win the election, but in order to achieve that win, he must become as unprincipled as his opponent.