An interesting dynamic in presidential elections is the hype gap. I remember people fainting and swooning over Clinton, Obama, even Kerry and Dukakis albeit to a lesser degree. I don't recall seeing the same kind of pop hero status for Republican candidates---enthusiasm, yes, but no contrived hype.
Some may point to the main stream media and say it just isn't presented in a balanced way, always doing what they can to support the liberal.
When Gore was running against Bush, there was absolutely more hype behind Gore. We could bicker about how the final 255 votes were counted, but I think we'd agree it wouldn't have been a landslide either way. My liberal friends point to the disparity in fervor and predict outcome based on that---whoever has the tide of excitement will win. There's always a danger, though, in painting your opponent with the same brush as your view.
Conservatives, however, want LESS government. We want more individual freedom, more liberty. We don't want our potential stifled by progressive taxes or our innovations quashed by out of control regulations. We believe in the free market, and any government meddling only hurts the economy.
So we're suspicious of all politicians. We want to support the government official who is entrenched in government but for the individual, not the government. We want a candidate who sees the Constitution as an important protection of the citizens from an overly intrusive government, not a stumbling block to work around and manipulate in order to force programs on us that are way outside of the ennumerated powers (Healthcare for all under the interstate commerce clause? Give me a break. That's so far outside of what the framers intended and you know it.)
So I'll still quietly support the candidate that's headed in the least wrong direction. Being anti-Gore does not make me a huge Bush supporter (Thanks for all the illegal immigrants and the TSA, George) and I've got some serious concerns about Romney's record, so don't expect me to defend every action he has. He's worth investing in since he will de-fund Obamacare. It will take decades to undo the dmamge Obama has caused, and having him for 4 more years as a lame duck, with no need to please future voters and a desire to 'fundamentally change' America (which he has proven to be in a socialist direction---a system that has never once led to prosperity) my hype and enthusiasm lie behind not giving him a second term.
I get it---Obama's cool. I might even prefer to spend an evening in a bar with Obama than Romney, but it's hard to tell about people through the press....Back in school, though, if I needed help with homework I wouldn't have asked the coolest kid, I'd ask the one who knew what he was doing.