"For the sake of innovation on the Republican side, the best thing that could happen to them is that they lose narrowly on Tuesday, that the story becomes how Obama and his allies ran a mechanically superior campaign, and Republican donors, party leaders, and consultants [say], 'We’re going to lose forever unless we figure out how to make our campaigns better.'"
Political scientists Michael Tomz and Robert van Houweling, of Stanford and Berkeley respectively, have found that vagueness is actually an asset for political candidates. Which is good news for Mitt Romney.
I'll take political scientists looking at thousands of polls over multiple elections over pundits freaking out after the first few polls following the first presidential debate. This, in my view, is exactly what political science does well: Reminds you to calm down and to take the long view.
Obama has consistently out-advertised Romney, but his advantage has been mitigated or even eliminated by the efforts of independent groups on the Republican side and, to a lesser extent, the Republican National Committee.