In my opinion, this is pretty much a spot on set of observations by Peter Morici, a University of Maryland professor:
http://www.cnbc.com/id/49240341
As the author notes, Obama at least promises to appeal to voters' desires for a greater sense of "social justice", even though he obviously has failed to articulate an effective plan for fixing anything. But neither has Romney, and that may be why he's losing.
It isn't good enough to simply offer another set of unsustainable promises. He won't even give us details concerning what tax loopholes he intends to close for high income earners in return for lowering the statutory rate, and that's costing him heavily. It makes it easy for Obama to charge that he'll need to raise taxes on the middle class to make up the shortfall. The campaign ads practically write themselves. In a number of ways, Romney needs to put some more "meat on the bones."
If both candidates offer nothing more than simplistic platitudes, which is obviously the case, the one who promises the most goodies to the largest number of voters will win by default.