Which Candidate Will Kill the Fewer Number of Jobs?
I think this frame of reference makes it easy to choose between the two. Obviously, Romney is Catwoman. Catwoman sometimes helps Batman and sometimes goes against him, and Romney has a record of being on both sides of a lot of issues. So as president, he may help us and stay out of the way as we create jobs, but eventually he'll probably turn on us and enact some awful regulations that get in our way. We'll think he's on our side, and suddenly the royal crown we are protecting will be nowhere to be found and neither will Romney. I can't believe we trusted you, Cat-Mitt!
Obama, on the other hand, is obviously the Joker. He's a job killing maniac who can't be reasoned with. There's just no method to his madness. One moment he's creating some giant new government program that no one wanted in Obamacare, and the next he's spending a trillion dollars in "stimulus" money that has so little effect you'd swear he just put the money in a warehouse and burned it. If we're going to elect a job killer, we should at least get one who can destroy jobs without having to spend trillions doing it. But Obama doesn't care about anything logical or rational like the deficit or America's long-term well-being. He just wants to watch the economy burn.
So there's our choice: We can have untrustworthy Romney or more of Obama and his job-killing madness. And now I have an image of Romney in a skin-tight outfit in my head. Ah! Why did I pick this analogy?