|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Aug 11, 2012 8:09:25 GMT -5
Romney/Ryan it is. Think it was a good pick - no Palinesqe mistake this time around!
|
|
|
Post by Let It 🩸 on Aug 11, 2012 9:04:52 GMT -5
Romney/Ryan it is. Think it was a good pick - no Palinesqe mistake this time around! is Ryan a big enough bigot to fit the Romney/republican profile? God bless.
|
|
|
Post by RocketMan on Aug 11, 2012 9:44:05 GMT -5
Romney/Ryan it is. Think it was a good pick - no Palinesqe mistake this time around! so this is the man you want to be the new president? nice one
|
|
|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Aug 11, 2012 10:05:01 GMT -5
Romney/Ryan it is. Think it was a good pick - no Palinesqe mistake this time around! so this is the man you want to be the new president? nice one You do know that Ronald Reagan was once a Democrat, right? My point: People can change. Edit: And a similar video can be made regarding Obama criticizing Bush's policies, and then adopting them once he became president - along with the issues of gay marriage, raising taxes in a recession, and on Superpacs!
|
|
redlandsman87
Oasis Roadie
Because something is happening here, But you don't know what it is...Do you, Mister Jones ?
Posts: 321
|
Post by redlandsman87 on Aug 11, 2012 10:57:39 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2012 12:04:51 GMT -5
Romney/Ryan it is. Think it was a good pick - no Palinesqe mistake this time around! not that i like ryan but it is a decent pick by ronmey.
|
|
|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Aug 11, 2012 13:15:56 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Let It 🩸 on Aug 11, 2012 13:38:27 GMT -5
do you really watch c-span? i thought c-span was a joke channel along with the speed channel on american cable listings. you really need to get out more. God bless.
|
|
|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Aug 11, 2012 13:44:27 GMT -5
Those are interesting numbers. But do you know what are even more interesting numbers? Ohio unemployment rate: 7.3% and dropping for 10 straight months Virginia unemployment rate: 5.6% Wisconsin unemployment rate: 6.8% Minnesota unemployment rate: 5.6% New Hampshire unemployment rate: 5% Michighan unemployment rate: 8.5% (seems very high, but as of August of 2009 their unemployment rate was 14.2%. That's a near 6 point drop in 3 years) It's the economy, stupid. You can't continually make the case that economy will due him in and then someone shows you some good unemployment rates in states that he's ahead in and needs to win and then run away from it NL4E. In the end, if the economy continues to improve in those states at the rate they've been improving, then Obama will win. If the map looks like this on election day he will win: www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map.htmlI cannot stress this enough, if I were in the Romney campaign looking at that electoral map, I'd be worried. The math is getting harder and harder, yet easier and easier. September, September, September. It's not a god given rule, but it's clearly a trend (see below). If Mitt is still behind by the middle to the end of September, I'll still be holding out hope, but that's when I'll be worried. 2012 vs. 2004: www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/obama_vs_romney_compared_to_bush_vs_kerry.html2012 vs. 2008: www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/obama_vs_romney_compared_to_obama_vs_mccain.htmlLook at September in both of the above links. September seems to be the crucial month, going off of the past 2 elections. Interesting, no?
|
|
|
Post by Let It 🩸 on Aug 11, 2012 13:51:54 GMT -5
Those are interesting numbers. But do you know what are even more interesting numbers? Ohio unemployment rate: 7.3% and dropping for 10 straight months Virginia unemployment rate: 5.6% Wisconsin unemployment rate: 6.8% Minnesota unemployment rate: 5.6% New Hampshire unemployment rate: 5% Michighan unemployment rate: 8.5% (seems very high, but as of August of 2009 their unemployment rate was 14.2%. That's a near 6 point drop in 3 years) It's the economy, stupid. You can't continually make the case that economy will due him in and then someone shows you some good unemployment rates in states that he's ahead in and needs to win and then run away from it NL4E. In the end, if the economy continues to improve in those states at the rate they've been improving, then Obama will win. If the map looks like this on election day he will win: www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map.htmlI cannot stress this enough, if I were in the Romney campaign looking at that electoral map, I'd be worried. The math is getting harder and harder, yet easier and easier. September, September, September. It's not a god given rule, but it's clearly a trend (see below). If Mitt is still behind by the middle to the end of September, I'll still be holding out hope, but that's when I'll be worried. 2012 vs. 2004: www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/obama_vs_romney_compared_to_bush_vs_kerry.html2012 vs. 2008: www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/obama_vs_romney_compared_to_obama_vs_mccain.htmlLook at September in both of the above links. September seems to be the crucial month, going off of the past 2 elections. Interesting, no? Romney has the least likability rating of any presidential candidate in years. you can go on about statistics all you want. as fucked up as the world is these days, past statistics/percentages aren't really relevent. Romney's not getting elected president. God bless.
|
|
|
Post by spaneli on Aug 11, 2012 15:58:16 GMT -5
Romney/Ryan it is. Think it was a good pick - no Palinesqe mistake this time around! I think it's a horrible pick. It takes him too far from center in my opinion. Which probably won't affect him too much because in the end, you vote the lead candidate in a Presidential election. But I don't think Paul Ryan is a team player, nor does he help Romney with any independent voters. Ryan isn't a polished politician, also he's never run for a national campaign. The spotlight gets a lot hotter in a national campaign. In my opinion, Ryan has far too many negatives. All Ryan is there to do is sure up the base and try to bring excitement to a campaign that quite frankly has been sputtering. I thought Portman would have been a choice of confidence. Because it would have been Romney choosing someone that would have been ready to be President on day 1 if anything happened to him and that he would be confident enough of the course of his campaign that he wouldn't have to choose someone like Ryan to energize the base. In my opinion, the Ryan pick hints a little bit too much as one of desperation (not the right the word I want because it's a tad too strong) and a need to energize the party, rather than one that shows a strong governing decision by a confident candidate.
|
|
|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Aug 11, 2012 16:03:50 GMT -5
Romney/Ryan it is. Think it was a good pick - no Palinesqe mistake this time around! Ryan isn't a polished politician, also he's never run for a national campaign. The spotlight gets a lot hotter in a national campaign. In my opinion, Ryan has far too many negatives. That's what they said about Obama four years ago, too, though.... But overall, you're right. Running mates don't make or break the election. People fail to remember that McCain was destined to lose - it was just that Palin made it seem all that much worse, but she didn't cost him the election (Bush and the economy did). I think Ryan is a fine pick. He'll dominate Biden in the debates, too. McCain tried playing demographics with his choice by hoping Palin would tie in women voters. Look how that back fired. Instead of looking to the demographics, Romney seems to be looking at the major issue of the electorate and bringing in a guy to help cement the idea that he's serious. In my opinion, this is a better strategy: Obama isn't exactly popular, so if you can convince the electorate that your ticket can simply do a better job then you'll be president regardless - picking Ryan will help Romney do just that. He didn't need a gimmick this time around..... So while it doesn't really matter, it does show Mitt is serious.
|
|
|
Post by spaneli on Aug 11, 2012 16:12:20 GMT -5
Ryan isn't a polished politician, also he's never run for a national campaign. The spotlight gets a lot hotter in a national campaign. In my opinion, Ryan has far too many negatives. That's what they said about Obama four years ago, too, though.... But overall, you're right. Running mates don't make or break the election. People fail to remember that McCain was destined to lose - it was just that Palin made it seem all that much worse, but she didn't cost him the election (Bush and the economy did). I think Ryan is a fine pick. He'll dominate Biden in the debates, too. McCain tried playing demographics with his choice by hoping Palin would tie in women voters. Look how that back fired. Instead of looking to the demographics, Romney seems to be looking at the major issue of the electorate and bringing in a guy to help cement the idea that he's serious. In my opinion, this is a better strategy: Obama isn't exactly popular, so if you can convince the electorate that your ticket and simply do a better job then you'll be president regardless - picking Ryan will help Romney do just that. He didn't need a gimmick this time around..... So while it doesn't really matter, it does show Mitt is serious. Difference between Obama and Ryan: Obama was riding a huge wave. People wanted to vote the first black President in. And technically Obama had already been on the nation stage with his DNC speech. Secondly, Obama's positives and likablity were far higher than Ryan's. Thirdly, Obama was not coming into that campaign with the baggage that Ryan is. Lastly, Obama had at least run for statewide office and won. Ryan has run in a district and that's it. You're comparing apples and oranges. At least make the comparison a good one. Don't go for a comparison for the sake of it. Ryan is a gimmick. There's nothing in his record that would support what you're hoping he will do or represent. Nothing. You're letting wishful thinking sink into your opinions. What has Ryan done to supposedly prove that Mitt Romney is serious. Take a serious thought to that before you respond. What in his record says that he makes Romney look serious other than he's serious about not wanting to lose? Nothing.
|
|
|
Post by spaneli on Aug 11, 2012 16:57:17 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2012 17:00:05 GMT -5
ryan is a decent pick, he may help bring out republicans to vote that aren't big romney supporters, but he won't bring any independents to the republican side.
An equal part of the vote is going to be how many democrates that are dissapointed with obama will see the republican ticket as bad enough to turned out and vote against it.
|
|
|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Aug 11, 2012 17:43:27 GMT -5
ryan is a decent pick, he may help bring out republicans to vote that aren't big romney supporters, but he won't bring any independents to the republican side. An equal part of the vote is going to be how many democrates that are dissapointed with obama will see the republican ticket as bad enough to turned out and vote against it. I think it's more likely Democrats will stay at home...which, of course, would essentially be a vote for Romney. Voter enthusiasm is heavily swayed to the GOP this time around. Let's not downplay that aspect.....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2012 17:47:59 GMT -5
ryan is a decent pick, he may help bring out republicans to vote that aren't big romney supporters, but he won't bring any independents to the republican side. An equal part of the vote is going to be how many democrates that are dissapointed with obama will see the republican ticket as bad enough to turned out and vote against it. I think it's more likely Democrats will stay at home...which, of course, would essentially be a vote for Romney. Voter enthusiasm is heavily swayed to the GOP this time around. Let's not downplay that aspect..... all depends on how much hate for the republicans can be built up, it's going to get very nasty from both sides.
|
|
|
Post by Let It 🩸 on Aug 11, 2012 17:53:46 GMT -5
I think it's more likely Democrats will stay at home...which, of course, would essentially be a vote for Romney. Voter enthusiasm is heavily swayed to the GOP this time around. Let's not downplay that aspect..... all depends on how much hate for the republicans can be built up, it's going to get very nasty from both sides. it'd be nice if the democrats didn't go that route, but they already are. it's a given the republicans will. God bless.
|
|
|
Post by spaneli on Aug 11, 2012 20:18:17 GMT -5
ryan is a decent pick, he may help bring out republicans to vote that aren't big romney supporters, but he won't bring any independents to the republican side. An equal part of the vote is going to be how many democrates that are dissapointed with obama will see the republican ticket as bad enough to turned out and vote against it. I think it's more likely Democrats will stay at home...which, of course, would essentially be a vote for Romney. Voter enthusiasm is heavily swayed to the GOP this time around. Let's not downplay that aspect..... I think this is a pick that will cause far more Democrats to come out to vote, than if Portman had been picked. It has to do with the "baggage" that Ryan is has. When you inject a highly Partisan candidate into an election, it's fool hearty to believe that that is going to be an incentive to make one party stay in and the other come out. Ryan will liven the GOP base because he is extremely conservative, but conversely he will liven up a Democratic base that seems to be in a lull. It's just the nature of politics. It's why it's incredibly difficult to inject that partisan of a candidate on the bill (even if he isn't on the top) into a national election and not expect that his past rhetoric will not cause your opposition to vote against you. As I said, I think Ryan will sure up the Republican base and make them a bit more energized, but conversely he may also sure up the Democratic base and make them a bit more energized too.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2012 21:00:41 GMT -5
Obama won in large part due to the ridiculous turn out of first time voters and those who rarely vote. People saw his election as historic and came out in droves. That WILL NOT happen this time around and the election will be much closer as a result.
Does this mean Romney can win, who knows. But the election will be more interesting either way. Voter turn out will be down dramatically this year, and that should bode better for Romney than Obama.
But we shall see.
|
|
|
Post by spaneli on Aug 14, 2012 16:12:37 GMT -5
what I seriously don't get about the Ryan pick is: why pick someone with this much baggage. If you're Romney this election is about one thing: the economy. Why choose someone that takes the debate from being about the economy and how Obama has done poorly, to a solid philosophical choice? Why change the debate from the thing that you want the debate to be on? Why are you talking about medicare, instead of the economy? Why put yourself in a position to talk medicare, instead of the economy? Days after the choice of Ryan, it makes less sense to me now than it did before. www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2012/08/the-gops-fretting-over-ryan-132044.html
|
|
|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Aug 14, 2012 19:23:51 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by spaneli on Aug 14, 2012 19:25:19 GMT -5
It gets a pass because Joe Biden said it and no one can actually takes him seriously. What do you think of the above Politico article?
|
|
|
Post by NYR on Aug 15, 2012 10:42:15 GMT -5
what I seriously don't get about the Ryan pick is: why pick someone with this much baggage. If you're Romney this election is about one thing: the economy. Why choose someone that takes the debate from being about the economy and how Obama has done poorly, to a solid philosophical choice? Why change the debate from the thing that you want the debate to be on? Why are you talking about medicare, instead of the economy? Why put yourself in a position to talk medicare, instead of the economy? Days after the choice of Ryan, it makes less sense to me now than it did before. www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2012/08/the-gops-fretting-over-ryan-132044.html he definitely has baggage. he voted repeatedly to curtail a woman's right to abortions (even if it was a product of rape or incest), voted against letting shareholders vote on executive compensation, supported SOPA, voted against fighting anti-gay hate crimes and voted yes on barring the EPA from regulating greenhouse gases. after his father’s death, he was given social security benefits until his 18th birthday, which allowed him to go to college. now he wants to undermine the same program so others can't have the same opportunity that he had. meanwhile, his budget would not balance the budget for at least 28 years and would destroy anyone not making over $250,000 a year by heavily taxing the middle class so the upper class would pay less than 1% of taxes each year. hell, in 2010--the only year mitt romney has released a full tax return, he would have paid an effective tax rate of around 0.82% under ryan's plan. ( source)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2012 10:56:36 GMT -5
he definitely has baggage. he voted repeatedly to curtail a woman's right to abortions (even if it was a product of rape or incest) For that alone he shouldnt be elected, outrageous proposal!
|
|