This is what we are up against.

It only appears that way because you're trying to use the term so loosely that you're using it wrong and hoping no one notices, which isn't exactly a new tactic. The hell you taking about? You created a hypothetical possible scenario trying to make the actual story that was presented seem better, and now you're defending your assumption like it were reality, all the while not realizing that it's you being criticized, not Romney. You're like the Jehova's Witnesses of the Republican party.