As someone who can't in good conscious vote for either candidate it's interesting to watch how enthralled people are by the election. I remember how actively I followed the day to day events of the last campaign, but now I just live my life. I teach my child her letters, take her to the park, go to work, shop for the bar I'm going to buy. So many people around me are on fire with election fever.
I recall that you are a boxing fan. I have been looking forward to the debates to see two "heavyweights" square off in a battle of rhetoric. In my line of work I have to "debate" and speak publicly often. I enjoy seeing people that should be at the top of their game perform. Unfortunately, that's not what I saw last night. Obama was amateurish, Romney was solid but in no way "heavy-weight" material. Like you, I was much more engaged last election. My wife marvels at the amount of coverage the election gets. She thinks it should just be two well stated policy platforms and a few debates. Should only take a month. -I agree. Enjoy the time with your daughter and good luck with the bar. Seems you've got your priorities straight IMO.
I actually wish that I felt engaged by a candidate. I would like to feel one of the two valid choices could make a positive difference in the lives of everyday americans. Maybe Obama has a better chance at enacting positive change for most people and I should support him, but I just can't get over the many things he has done to erode the basic civil rights that the constitution should grant everyone of us. I also think that he has been ineffective at pushing a sensible domestic agenda, he starts from compromise and proceeds to compromise more ending up with unfocused policies that underachieve. I think Romney is probably a decent guy but I also think he has no idea how hard it is for the average Joe to get ahead. If many Americans don't pay much taxes it's because most their money goes toward trying to put food on the table at a time when there really aren't many employment prospects. His solution is to give more breaks to the business and finance sector which is already way below capacity having no incentive to invest as long as what they already have isn't operating at it's natural capacity. Basically the guy is operating on trickle down fallacies. I've read enough history to know that sometimes things go to shit, sometimes for a few years, sometimes for a few generations sometimes for good. I think things are going to shit now. Stupid wars, erosion of basic rights, a surveillance state, out of control government finance, harsh polarization and all encompassing bullshit and populism as the only solution. These kind of situations can turn on a dime if the right person or conditions come around, I guess I can only hope for better days.