Losing it. The youth vote, that is. “President Obama could be in big trouble when it comes to the youth vote, according to a new poll. Less than half of 18-to-24-year-old voters want Obama to win reelection, and he leads a generic Republican candidate by just 7 percentage points. . . . ” The price of going mega-negative?

Losing it. His vote, that is. “Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., who has done more than any other Democrat up for reelection this year to distance himself from President Obama, said he does not know if he will vote for Obama or presumptive GOP nominee Mitt Romney in November.” Shouldn’t he tell the voters before November?

Losing it. Freedom, that is. “Authoritarian governments have not disappeared, and the victories of Islamist parties have raised fears that the ‘Arab Spring’ might produce more of them. The fear is, in part, of regimes that might be democratically elected but would be incapable of dealing with current economic problems, would blame all problems on their predecessors, and would impose Islamist social mores on the populace.”

Losing it. Any shred of decency, that is. “Brian Schweitzer: Mitt Romney’s ‘Family Came From a Polygamy Commune in Mexico’.” I feared this was coming.

Winning it. The slugfest, that is. “What is interesting about all the recent wars of Team Obama and its supporters — the Romney dog caper, the Sandra Fluke/war on women episode, the punditry and commentary hinting about Romney’s ancestors’ polygamy — is not just that they are distractions designed to turn attention from vast new debt, record deficits, high unemployment, sluggish growth, and spiraling gas prices, but that Romney’s team — and his defenders and supporters — did not feel it was too big to respond to these trivialities, and instead hit back hard and quick.”

Winning it.The third-party money race, that is. “Two of the biggest Republican Super Pacs have raised a staggering [$100 million] . . . since last year, about half of it in the first three months of this year, ominous for Barack Obama, who could be facing one of the biggest negative ad blitzes ever seen in the US.”

Winning it. The slimy, opportunistic vote, that is. “ Charlie Crist Admires Obama.”

Winning it. The chutzpah award, that is. He doesn’t have the nerve to run and is now the self-appointed pundit, a wrongheaded one at that. “[Indiana Gov. Mitch] Daniels: Romney campaign too negative.” And of course it’s Obama who’s the negative one.

Winning it. The upscale suburban vote, that is. “Romney’s political message this cycle has been relentlessly focused on the economy, in sharp contrast to his more cultural pitch in 2008 (not to mention the party’s typically heavy focus on cultural issues since about 1992). This is exactly what these upscale suburbanites should be looking for. . . .[H]is background in business and his stint as Massachusetts governor gives him a social affinity to these sorts of upscale voters. There really has not been a GOP nominee with this kind of background since George H.W. Bush, whom these voters supported in 1988. They should be able to relate to him. Preliminary evidence suggests that there is an opening for Romney here. In the 2012 GOP primary, his best voters tended to be upscale suburbanites, particularly the very well-to-do.” The other reason for Romney’s opportunity: Obama turned out to be a hyperpartisan lefty.