Hence OWS, which hopefully as warmer spring weather gets here will morph into hundreds of thousands in the streets (and surrounding the DNC)?

So far, the media's election blitz has proven remarkably successful.  The audience for the very first Republican debate of 2011 almost doubled the audience for the first Republican debate of the 2008 campaign.  And as this round of debates has gained steam, it has nearly doubled its own initial numbers.  Meanwhile, the media version of the election campaign is visibly becoming a too-big-to-fail juggernaut.  In the process, it seems that we, the citizens, the viewers, have been given an election life sentence.  Our job is to sit and watch while the action happens elsewhere.

It's true that, on November 6, 2012, Americans will enter voting booths and choose a candidate for president, and that makes this an "election." But thinking of it that way won't get you far.  It's also true, that, on January 20, 2013, a newly elected president will step into the Oval Office.  What any of this has to do with democracy, as opposed to spectacle, influence, corruption, the power of the incredibly wealthy to pay for and craft messages, and the power of media owners to enhance their profits is certainly an open question. Think, at least, how literally the old phrase "money talks" is being updated every time you hear the candidates, or see their ads, or get a robocall from one of them, or receive a geo-targeted mobile ad of theirs on your iPhone or Android.

It's clear enough -- or should be by now -- that the electoral process has been occupied by the 1%; which means that what you hear in this "campaign" is largely refracted versions of their praise, their condemnation, their slurs, their views, their needs, their fears, and their wishes.  They are making money off, and electing a president via, you.  Which means that you -- that all of us -- are occupied, too.

So stop calling this an "election."  Whatever it is, we need a new name for it.

-- How to Turn Election Year Into Election Life: Their Bread, Our Circus

Look at how the super pacs killed Newt.  There is that and more coming out of Team Romney in the general election.

I hate the rules too, but you cannot win without a gargantuan amount of money.  It is not possible.

One of them will win, and everyone else will lose.

Funny thing is, if he had been pursuing populist policies, particularly domestic, and standing between the bankers and the people for the past three years, he could win by a landslide this year without the need for billions of dollars of corporate donations.

He could have led the discontent that became OWS right out of the gate after his inauguration, when he still had the popularity, and surrounded Congress with thousands of people, as Conyers has suggested he do.

what do you think happens if Santorum comes from, what is it 5% now, to within 10 points of so of Romney and comes in second?

I honestly have no idea if that will happen but some people are predicting that with the large Catholic population in NH Ricky could surprise again.

Gerrymandering only makes waves before, no one, or at least me, pays attention once it's done.  I went from Delay's district, through a move, to Jackson Lee's, so with the pant loads I had/have representing me, I pay little attention.