Ever try to come up with the number of concerts/plays/operas you've seen in your life?  It's gotta be up there.  I lost count, and I can't even imagine how far behind you I am.  

Given that he so obviously struggled to secure the GOP nomination against a weak field of candidates, despite his overwhelming funding advantage, one can only conclude that a lot of those people who neither like not trust Romney apparently include a not-insignificant number of Republicans.

Certainly, Romney's negatives are the highest for any prospective candidate since Walter Mondale won the Democratic nomination back in 1984, and he didn't help his cause any with those repeated pratfalls on his overseas tour.

Further, from a campaign standpoint, I find the Mittster's flatfootedness on the subject of his tenure at Bain Capital and his personal tax situation to be inexplicable.

I mean, he's been running for president since 2007, for Christ's sake, and surely someone on his campaign staff had to have warned him that these questions were bound to come up and that he was going to have to explain himself. These issues should've all been resolved by the campaign years ago. With a five-year head start, and only three months before the election, why is he still mired in the weeds on this stuff? It makes him look like a Grade-A putz.

Convention planners are considering featuring a centrist Republican leader on at least two of the three nights. Nightly remotes from swing states may include a CEO or "major Republican." On Wednesday night, a "notable GOP woman" is among the possible participants. And on the final night, Democrats may include a Republican leader -- someone like former Sens. John Warner or Chuck Hagel -- or a GOP woman.

"This segment would speak directly to independents, noting we are all `Americans first,' " the documents say. "Depending on the speaker's background, the President's military accomplishments might be highlighted."

Thursday also may include a former military leader, perhaps paired with a former enlisted man or woman. "Ideally they would have witnessed first-hand the difficult decisions [Obama has] made," the documents say. "A Republican leader would be ideal."

I guess they're confident that the liberals/progressives have nowhere else to go, so best to concentrate on showcasing "sane" Republicans.

Yaaaa....y...

And if this doesn't just scream "pandering," I don't know what would:

The most innovative -- and harshest -- element of the preliminary program is a nightly "social contrast" in which two people describe their personal experience with a hot-button issue -- one person lauding the president's actions, the other taking Romney to task. "Each paired-testimonial should have an `unexpected' participant," the documents say.

But the plans show organizers intent on steering clear of controversy as well. For the gay marriage social contrast, for instance, the documents state the participants should be "not a gay couple" -- but a "parent and gay son or daughter."

Other examples: "Don't Ask Don't Tell: Gay soldier and fellow (straight) soldier who served together in Iraq or Afghanistan (ideally the straight soldier was helped by the gay soldier, i.e., medic, in fire fight) ... Planned Parenthood: Husband who talks about how a PAP smear saved his wife's life and his spouse ... Immigration: Two young people from the same family, one who was born here, the other a few years older who was not ... Choice: A couple who has children, but wants to make their own decisions, not have the government do it for them (or who has confronted a difficult medical situation)."