Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
At the end of the day, this is why I think Ryan was a bad choice. Before Romney had an excellent chance as long as he could redefine himself and boost his favorables. Now there is the potential of turning the election into a referendum on Medicare, rather than a referendum on Obama's stewardship over the economy.
I am not saying that Romney has no chance with Ryan on the ticket, but I think Ryan being on the ticket increases the potential for things to go very, very wrong.
I hear you and the Ryan choice carries risks as you describe but if seniors are so self-centered that all they think of is Medicare and not leaving a psuedo- Socialist state for their children and grandchildren then so be it.
I feel the Ryan choices offers a stark contrast do you want a country where individual inititive is not attacked but respected or a country where equal outcomes are guarenteed. We are a democracy if folks want socialism then there is not much we can do.
I would really love to hear Romney's plan other than raise taxes on the middle class and give tax breaks to his wealthy cronies. While I am a Obama supporter, I am an Independent and have an open mind and these past two elections these Republicans have offered nothing new to change the economy that Bush created. Yes, Obama inherited this 3 trillion dollar crap, not created it and the Right conveniently forget how this all started. BUSH. The only plan I have heard thus far is tax breaks for all which has been proven NOT to work time and time and time again. Trickle down economics has been proven not to work guys. Romney also wants to repeal Obamacare which is essentially his same exact healthcare, Romneycare for MA. So, really I would love to know what he is going to do differently for the American people. All he talks about is what Obama didn't do but how about giving specifics Mr. Romney on exactly what you would do. So, thus far we know the following which will do absolutely nothing to help stimulate this economy: Tax breaks for the wealthy Cut and gut Medicare and make it a voucher program Repeal Obamacare Invade Iran - guarantee that one! Repeal a women's right to choose Continue to send job overseas as he has done at Bain Privatize social security
Doesn't sound like any of the above is a change the American people are look for and the truth is, he has no new plans to help the economy and some new bad ones I might add. Romney already has some of Bush's advisers on his team which means disaster is on the horizon if this man gets elected! It will Bush on steroids. Heaven help us all!
How can anyone claim to be an "independant" while spouting the same lies that the Dems do?
Tax breaks for the wealthy.... You do realize it's tax breaks for EVERYONE, including the middle class? Repealing obamacare would do just that! Take away Obamacare and continue the payroll tax cuts etc. and everyone gets breaks, not just the rich.
Invading Iran is not guaranteed, but there will be a situation with Iran no matter who is in power because they are crazy and building nukes. Don't be fooled by the dems saying that it's just Romney, because any president would do something... except maybe Ron Paul, but he's insane.
Continue to send jobs overseas... like President Obama has already done?? LOL!
Cut and gut Medicare... medicare is already being cut and gutted with Obamacare, and that will affect those who are on it now! The Ryan plan (which has been modified and compromised on, unlike Obamacare) will only affect those who are not on medicare now. The voucher program will be much better, because it will give people more choices! Much like the voucher programs for schools, choice equals more control for the individual, more ability to get what you need for the price you can afford.
The right to choose is something that all 50 states have to figure out for themselves. If GW Bush couldn't take it away, no one else will either, not as president. Each state has their own laws, and that's the way it should be.
This election will all be about medicare now. For a person who has paid into medicare all his life, is in his laet forties/ mid fifties to be told that tough luck bud, take this $6000 coupon and get lost is a slap in his face and will lead to a massive revolt.
Most people in their 50's have a tough time even getting insurance, let alone be given a measly coupon to buy insurance with.
Yet according to the Obama lovers on this forum, Romney intentionally ceded the election by picking Ryan.
As you allude to, this is when there have been a lot more anti-Romney/pro-Obama ads than anti-Obama/pro-Romney ads which will change after the convention. I'd really like to hear a serious, logical explanation of why they would throw away the election when they're sitting on so much money and will have the structural advantage as far as ads go in just a few short weeks, not far behind at all even though they've been at a huge disadvantage as far as ads go so far, and when Obama still can't get to 50% in most polls and when Obama's approval is still lower than any incumbent president has ever been re-elected with.
Reality check, Obama lovers - they didn't throw away the election. They think Ryan is a good choice.
Because Ryan is absolutely a good choice. As I have said before, this decision was not made by shaking the Magic 8 ball...lol. There was internal polling done out the wazoo to verify who the best choice would be for VP. Paul Ryan is an asset in many areas and a liability in very few.
Voter enthusiasm for Romney also seems to be based more in anti-Obama sentiment than pro-Romney enthusiasm: 52 percent of those who said they were supporting Romney considered their support a vote against Obama, while only 39 percent said their vote would be a vote for Romney.
On the Democratic side, enthusiasm for Obama is almost twice as high: 77 percent of Obama supporters said they were voting for him, versus just 18 percent who were voting against Romney.
Twenty percent of those surveyed said they’d consider voting for the candidate who they are not currently backing. Almost two-thirds of those possible switchers — 62 percent — were Romney supporters who could go with Obama, compared with 38 percent who said they back Obama now but could end up behind the Republican candidate.
Despite the close nature of the race, a majority of Americans think Obama will be reelected in November: 56 percent predicted Obama will win, compared with 33 percent who believe Romney will win.
There were some great bits of information in that article, thanks.
Though in the end, it never said anything about those states that could go either way, it doesn't matter if it is an even race if it is an uneven race in battleground states.
At the end of the day, this is why I think Ryan was a bad choice. Before Romney had an excellent chance as long as he could redefine himself and boost his favorables. Now there is the potential of turning the election into a referendum on Medicare, rather than a referendum on Obama's stewardship over the economy.
I am not saying that Romney has no chance with Ryan on the ticket, but I think Ryan being on the ticket increases the potential for things to go very, very wrong.
The truth of the matter is that Obama already gutted Medicare and that message has to told. Medicare benefits for current seniors have already been reduced so that Obamacare can cover all of those people who do not already receive Medicaid and do not work where they can be covered by insurance on the job or by some other means. So seniors have already lost out to Obamacare.
Romney has already had Ryan modify his plan to some extent and has said he doesn't agree with all of it as it is written.
The choice of Paul Ryan will engergize the base, which was what was lacking in the last election for McCain. It's just sad that the base wasn't free thinking enough to get energized for Romney anyway, but you have to work with what you have.
didn't read the link did ya? The poll was pre Ryan.
Technically Obama picked up support since the last poll.
Quote:
Obama takes 48 percent of likely voters in the new poll, compared with 47 percent for Romney – a statistical tie and well within the margin of error. In May, the numbers were flipped: Romney was at 48 percent and Obama was at 47 percent. The poll found 5 percent of voters are undecided.
support for mittens softened.
Quote:
Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok
Yet according to the Obama lovers on this forum, Romney intentionally ceded the election by picking Ryan.
As you allude to, this is when there have been a lot more anti-Romney/pro-Obama ads than anti-Obama/pro-Romney ads which will change after the convention. I'd really like to hear a serious, logical explanation of why they would throw away the election when they're sitting on so much money and will have the structural advantage as far as ads go in just a few short weeks, not far behind at all even though they've been at a huge disadvantage as far as ads go so far, and when Obama still can't get to 50% in most polls and when Obama's approval is still lower than any incumbent president has ever been re-elected with.
Reality check, Obama lovers - they didn't throw away the election. They think Ryan is a good choice.
At the end of the day, this is why I think Ryan was a bad choice. Before Romney had an excellent chance as long as he could redefine himself and boost his favorables. Now there is the potential of turning the election into a referendum on Medicare, rather than a referendum on Obama's stewardship over the economy.
I am not saying that Romney has no chance with Ryan on the ticket, but I think Ryan being on the ticket increases the potential for things to go very, very wrong.
This . It also baffles me that Romney selected someone who brings nothing to the table--no foreign policy experience, no swing states. Ryan's selection shifts the discussion from the economy to a fight over medicare and SS, and it's a fight that lots of conservatives, let alone independents, are uncomfortable with. The Ryan plan is going to overshadow everything that Romney tries to propose on his own. I personally think Romney was terrified that he wasn't going to carry the base at convention, or his big donors put pressure on him to go far right, so selecting a tea party favorite solidified the base and major donors for him, but I'm not sure what it does for him with any other demographic. Right now Ryan, and the Ryan plan, aren't well known with voters. That's about to change in the coming weeks, and I think it's going to get very ugly. The tea party is jumping up and down with glee over this choice, but so are the democrats. The folks who matter are in the middle between the two.
I respectfully disagree. Ryan seems eager and willing to take any question and answer anything. He is very capable of being a man who can explains things clearly and take on liberals and the media/Obama attack machine with intelligence and calm.
Except running against Ryan's Medicare reform plans has been basically the one thing that's worked for the liberals in their campaigns over the past few years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BucsLose
Remember, his plans arent even a go just because he's VP. But him together with Romney, I think they can come up with an excellent plan for most situations. And plus, let them attack on his past Medicare plan, Obama still has to answer for his $700 billion take away, something even the liberal praised Maddow couldnt even answer on Sunday morning.
Their attacks are full of lies. But they have worked before. That's my concern.
I am very conflicted on this. Part of me thinks there's no point in even trying to win the election without a mandate or without a bold proposal. That being said, I'm also a realist and I think that winning the election is what should currently be of utmost importance.
The electorate is currently very reform-minded. We've seen this over the past few years. Liberals are really living in a dream world when they think voters are not in the mood for serious reforms. However, reforms to Social Security and Medicare cross a line that many voters are not in the mood for. It is absolutely imperative that they be reformed, but I think Romney should not have chosen Ryan and proposed his own modest reforms (as he had already done quietly). While I think reforms need to be bold and absolutely must include SS and Medicare, I think other reforms such as cutting other government programs, reducing the number of government employees, and the like would have been far less politically risky. I hate to say it, but it's reality.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. It also baffles me that Romney selected someone who brings nothing to the table--no foreign policy experience, no swing states. Ryan's selection shifts the discussion from the economy to a fight over medicare and SS, and it's a fight that lots of conservatives, let alone independents, are uncomfortable with. The Ryan plan is going to overshadow everything that Romney tries to propose on his own. I personally think Romney was terrified that he wasn't going to carry the base at convention, or his big donors put pressure on him to go far right, so selecting a tea party favorite solidified the base and major donors for him, but I'm not sure what it does for him with any other demographic. Right now Ryan, and the Ryan plan, aren't well known with voters. That's about to change in the coming weeks, and I think it's going to get very ugly. The tea party is jumping up and down with glee over this choice, but so are the democrats. The folks who matter are in the middle between the two.
