The last time we have a conservative that didn't campaign to moderates, he won in a landslide. That was 1984.
Turnout will decide this election.
Will Ryan change the turnout? History says the VP pick has virtually no effect on the outcome of the election. It's always funny to me how much is made of the VP pick given this fact. I always get a laugh when so much is made of Benson's pwning of Quayle, yet in the end it didn't make one bit of difference. Americans vote for president not vice president.
I agree about the VP pick. I was reading that, at the very very best, a VP pick doesn't sway over 2% of the votes.Turnout will decide this election.
Will Ryan change the turnout? History says the VP pick has virtually no effect on the outcome of the election. It's always funny to me how much is made of the VP pick given this fact. I always get a laugh when so much is made of Benson's pwning of Quayle, yet in the end it didn't make one bit of difference. Americans vote for president not vice president.
Great postTurnout will decide this election.
Will Ryan change the turnout? History says the VP pick has virtually no effect on the outcome of the election. It's always funny to me how much is made of the VP pick given this fact. I always get a laugh when so much is made of Benson's pwning of Quayle, yet in the end it didn't make one bit of difference. Americans vote for president not vice president.
Of course. Everyone knows that Romney is as wildly popular as Reagan was in 1984.
I do not know how you quantify the effect of VP candidates.
Quayle was a stud fund raiser. At the time, he was setting record windfalls. Lieberman was the same thing. It's pretty obvious the effects that will have on an election.
Are you going to argue that LBJ's influence did not galvanize the southern base?
If you say that VP desirability ratings do not correlate with voting results then you have a point. OTOH, that is not all there is to it.
There is a split in the GOP. Paul is a blatant attempt to suck the Tea Party .
It won't mean a thing. Obama will win regardless. John McCain chose Palin over Romney in 08'. We all know how moronic Palin is so that should give you an idea right there of how useless Romney's campaign is right now. The usual re s from the far right will obviously vote for Romney because they believe the bull he spews out and most of the conservatives are painting Ryan as their savior when it comes to the economy. These people sure have a talent for making middle class conservatives thinking they are rich. Romney becoming president would be bad for this country in so many ways. .I wish we could vote for Clinton again
I know you're being funny. You're right, he isn't that popular. I'm only saying that conservatives should not play to the left of what they are. Real conservatives have a better chance of beating liberals than those who are liberal light.
The GOP already has people such as yourself in the bag. Romney could come out with a swastika on his forehead and you would just buy a faster car to get to the polling station.
Stupid is bad enough, quit adding naive to it as well.
progressive/moderate Gecko, wimpily scared less of every faction of Repugs and tea baggers, bends over and grabs his ankles to let all of them have their way, while running away from his MAJOR POLITICAL ACCOMPLISHMENT of MA health care.
Bishop Gecko also refuses to speak about his Mormonism, trembling in fear about Southern Baptists (created by racists), when he could appease them by pushing Mormon racism!
Now he panders to deficit hawks/fiscal conservative 1%ers by naming fake "fiscal/budget policy wonk" Ryan.
Gecko's WIMP label has become a tatoo, a cattle brand (which might appeal to cow- ing bubba cowboys).
Some OPPO research on Paul Ryan
Fussbudget
How Paul Ryan captured the G.O.P.
His father’s death also provoked the kind of existential soul-searching that most kids don’t undertake until college. “I was, like, ‘What is the meaning?’ ” he said. “I just did lots of reading, lots of introspection. I read everything I could get my hands on.” Like many conservatives, he claims to have been profoundly affected by Ayn Rand. After reading “Atlas Shrugged,” he told me, “I said, ‘Wow, I’ve got to check out this economics thing.’ What I liked about her novels was their devastating indictment of the fatal conceit of socialism, of too much government.” He dived into Friedrich Hayek, Ludwig von Mises, and Milton Friedman.
In a 2005 speech to a group of Rand devotees called the Atlas Society, Ryan said that Rand was required reading for his office staff and interns. “The reason I got involved in public service, by and large, if I had to credit one thinker, one person, it would be Ayn Rand,” he told the group. “The fight we are in here, make no mistake about it, is a fight of individualism versus collectivism.” To me he was careful to point out that he rejects Rand’s atheism.
As in 2009, Republicans are divided between those who think they can win by pointing out Obama’s failures and those who want to run on a Ryan-like set of ideas. Romney seems to want to be in the first camp, but during the primaries he championed the ideas in Ryan’s budget. Ryan is frequently talked about as a future leader of the House Republicans and even as a long shot to be Romney’s running mate. He surely would take either job, but he seems better suited to continuing what he’s been doing since 2008: remaking the Republican Party in his image. You can’t “run on vague pla udes and generalities,” he told me earlier this month. He was speaking about Bush in 2004 and Obama four years ago. But he clearly believes that the same holds true for Romney in November.
“He’s already endorsed these things,” Ryan said. “I want a full-throated defense for an alternative agenda that fixes the country’s problems. I want to show the country that we have a solution to get us out of the ditch we’re in, and to be proud about it.”
Ryan seemed unconcerned that pushing his policy agenda on Romney might damage the candidate. “I think life is short,” Ryan said at the end of our final conversation. “You’d better take advantage of it while you have it.”
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2...urrentPage=all
Anybody who's intellectual life is guided by ing SocailSecurity-loving bull ter Ayn Rand is a fake, a loser.
Last edited by boutons_deux; 08-11-2012 at 06:43 AM.
How The House GOP Budget Would Decimate America’s Cities And States
As difficult as the current spending caps will be for states and localities, the Ryan budget would impose much deeper cutbacks. Since 1976, federal discretionary funding to states and localities has averaged 1.4 percent of the nation’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP). By 2021, the Ryan budget would reduce this funding to about 0.6 percent of GDP, less than half the historical average and well below the BCA caps.
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/201...es-and-states/
Tax expert: Paul Ryan’s ‘smoke and mirrors’ budget would increase deficit
Bottom line: By McIntyre’s calculations, the Ryan budget cuts taxes by $4.3 trillion over 10 years; and it cuts spending by $4.2 trillion over the same period. Since the former is larger than the latter, the deficit would marginally go up.
And it’s much, much worse than this, McIntyre says, because he doesn’t believe that the Ryan budget would only cut taxes by $4.3 trillion. His budget doesn’t specify any of the deductions and loopholes he’d close to offset the huge cost of the tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy, McIntyre points out — meaning the overall tax cut would likely be far larger than he says, and that the deficit would likely soar.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...cyPS_blog.html
Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan’s Budget
Mr. Ryan’s proposals would substantially phase out the federal government’s role in providing basic social insurance for older people by sharply reducing Medicare and by eliminating almost all nonmilitary discretionary spending.
The House Budget Committee is also proposing to remove the only safeguard we have against the failure of another megabank. Some libertarians praise these proposals. But these Republicans’ strategy is not so much to remove government in favor of abstract “markets” but to shift the balance of power away from government and toward entrenched private lobby groups, particularly in the health care sector and on Wall Street.
On Medicare, Mr. Ryan’s proposal is very simple. He wants to cap increases in spending on Medicare below the rate at which health care costs increase. By his own estimates, the share of Medicare spending relative to the size of the economy would shrink sharply over the coming decades. (Mr. Ryan proposes to keep Medicare in place for people currently retired and soon to reach the eligibility age of 65, so his proposal would affect people 55 and under today. I, by the way, am not yet 55).
Mr. Ryan’s approach certainly reduces this dimension of government spending over time. But keep in mind how the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has assessed these ideas: according to the C.B.O., this approach would increase total health care costs as a share of the economy and as paid by you (see Figure 1 on Page 22 of this C.B.O. do ent, which analyzes the proposal Mr. Ryan presented last year; while some details are different this year, the essential substance is the same).
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/20...-ryans-budget/
Barry can truly, devastatingly add another hammer to his campaign: Gecko-endorsed Ryan budget destroys Medicare (senior vote) and Medicaid.
Romney’s Stunning, Terrible Choice of Ryan for VP
Paul Ryan? Really? It’s a stunning choice. A terrible one too. By making it, Mitt Romney tells America that he is not his own man and hasn’t even the remotest fleeting desire to be his own man. He is owned by the right wing. Did I write a couple of weeks ago that Romney was insecure? Well—Q.E.D
Ryan will immediately become the flashpoint of this campaign. Yes, he’ll get the usual soft-focus biographical rollout. Expect Republicans to talk endlessly about his authenticity, his blue-collar roots, the fact that he once drove an Oscar Mayer weiner truck—and, certainly, his Catholicism. Also, his brains. He’s a smart guy, no doubt of that, although as I’ve written many times, it says something deeply pathetic about the GOP that Ryan has managed to become a star just because he’s bothered to learn policy.
The Ryan controversy will overtake the campaign. Romney will become in some senses the running mate—the ticket’s No. 2.
Think of it: The candidate will be running on his vice president’s ideas! It’s a staggering thought. Ryan might as well debate Obama this October, and Romney can square off against Biden.
It’s just very hard to imagine that middle-of-the-road voters want harsh future cuts to Medicare, massive tax cuts for the rich, and huge reductions to domestic programs that most swing voters really don’t hate. Does this choice work in Florida, with all those old people? If Romney just sacrificed Florida, he’s lost the election already.
And why? To placate a party that doesn’t even want him as its nominee anyway. It’s psycho-weird. But at least it will carry the benefit, if this ticket loses, of keeping conservatives from griping that they lost because their ticket was too moderate. Conservatism will share—will own—this loss.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...d%20Exclusives
Romney's is as wildly popular as Reagan was in 1979, though. In fact, Reagan was 9 points behind Jimmy Carter at this point.
however that may be, Romney's unfavorable rating has gone up, not down. the more people find out about Romney, the less they like him.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...able-1134.html
To extend the 1984 reference, Romney is about as popular right now as Mondale was in that election. Obama is clearly not as popular as Reagan was -- and we're far more politically polarized now than we were in 1984 -- so the callback is sort of meaningless. But a statistical comparison to Mondale cannot be a good thing.
Mitt Romney is spineless. This pick doesn't help him at all, but it temporarily satisfies the Fox News talking heads screaming in his ear who are obsessed with making Paul Ryan VP.
Ryan is the reason Barack Obama broke his promise to keep the Health Care debate transparent and to hold every meeting on C-Span.
Paul Ryan is a good choice for completely destroying Obama narrative about his own economic policies.
by voting for the TARP, the stimulus and the GM bailout, Paul Ryan utterly destroyed Obama's narrative about his own economic policies.
hey Yoni, when have you ever disliked a republican nominee
What's not to like about him?hey Yoni, when have you ever disliked a republican nominee
oh I'm sure you like him, but how exactly does Ryan help Romney win is the question you should be asking yourself. Baseline already asked the key question, how does Ryan help Romney with the centrists and Obama's disillusioned?? or is it you think he doesn't need them?
Short answer? He brings the same thing to the ticket that Scott Walker brought to Wisconsin and Chris Christie brought to New Jersey and that served them well.
Scott Walker and Chris Christie took on liberal economic policy in their states and were successful in not only breaking union strongholds but improving the situations for their respective states' citizens.
Ryan is as, if not more, knowledgeable on economic issues, particularly the federal budget, than almost anyone in the nation. He has a bead on the damage being caused by Obamacare and he has a plan.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
