I love election season. I love everything from volunteering on campaigns, to the debates, to the various jargon used by the politicians. And yes, I even love the great quotes that can come from them, such as Sarah Palin’s “I can see Russia from my house” or Rick Perry’s “Newt isn’t perfect, but who among us is?” Beyond these quips, what is their plan to help Americans like me?

With 47 days left until Nov. 6, election coverage will amp up to an even higher degree. Networks will focus more on the election, canvassing and phone calls will seem like daily events, and attacks amongst politicians will become commonplace. Why? Because in just 48 days, candidates can no longer change the mind of a voter.

And even though only a month and a half is left, there are still circumstances in which it is appropriate to suspend campaigning for a day. For this to happen, there needs to be a major event  — something horrific, like the death of a diplomat or explosions at an embassy. But no one would be crazy enough to use a situation like that to try to gain an advantage over his or her opponent.

What was that? Gov. Romney did? The same man who thinks the middle class makes somewhere between $200,000 and $250,000? Oh Mitt, you and your foolish, out of touch ways have struck again.

As many of you are aware, four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, were killed in a bombing at the U.S. Embassy in Benghazi, Libya this past Sept. 11. To many of us, Sept. 11 is a day of remembrance — a day to stand together as Americans and remember the lives that were lost 11 years ago. To the Romney campaign, it was just another day to attack the opponent. I will be the first to admit I know very little about foreign policy. Like many Americans, I forget to branch out of the American politics bubble. Too often, I rely on my former roommate, a State Department intern, to tell me what is happening outside the United States.

However, I would like to think I know some of the basic guidelines to a good campaign, none of which include a statement like “It’s disgraceful that the Obama Administration’s first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks.” Sorry Mitt, but I think you are the disgraceful one here. Four Americans died and your response is to attach Obama to terrorists on the same day. Way to show the American public what it means to stand together.

I know I was shocked when it backfired on him.

But that must be the worst of it. There is no way the Romney campaign could make it any worse. Oh, but don’t worry, they did.

According to CNN’s political ticker, one of Romney’s foreign policy advisers, Richard Williamson, stated the attacks on the embassy “could have been averted if Romney were president.”

Continuing the attack, Mr. Williamson reminded the American people that this was the first death of an ambassador since the Jimmy Carter Administration — a Democratic one, no less  — in the 1980s. Clearly the whole situation was the president’s fault. How dare he not give every foreign post the strictest of security on the 11th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. I did not realize everyone should assume there is going to be an attack on the same day every 11 years.

It is not surprising the Obama administration came back with a statement claiming their shock over Romney’s political attack.

A more appropriate response would have been to leave well enough alone; releasing a statement to retaliate is just as bad as Romney’s attack. It reminds me of two children tattling to the teacher or parent — no one wins and everyone around them is just annoyed.

I would have thought a winning plan would have been to work together to release a joint statement on a day when everyone else in this country stood together. But with 47 days left until the election, I guess it is too naive to believe the two politicians could work together, even for just that one day.

Joanna is a senior in LAS. She can be reached at [email protected].