"Qualified" Is a Ridiculous Analytical Lens for this Election

Can I tell you what irks the shit out of me?  Of course I can because it's my blog, so let me tell you that it irks the shit out of me that a dominant strain of political analysis hews to the notion that voters need to see that Romney is qualified to replace Obama.  Qualified to replace Obama?  Huh?  WTF?  Are you effing kidding me? 

Let's get this straight America.  Obama was never qualified.  Ever.  And still isn't.  We gambled on an unqualified candidate.  We lowered the bar for this man.  We all know this.  But we bought what he was selling.  Romney is infinitely more qualified than Obama, that is not in dispute and not the relevant question.  The question is 'are you buying what the more qualified guy, Romney, is selling'?  Or is it time to raise the bar again?  Those are the questions.  Toss out this rubbish about who is qualified or not.

The only sense in which we can view Obama as qualified for the job is by virtue of having done the job for nearly four years, albeit poorly.  Why on earth is anybody who has analyzed this election concluding that Unqualified + Failed should trump Qualified + Untested?  Clint Eastwood gets it, fire the guy and move on.