Romney selecting Paul Ryan as is running mate

[Drachen]

So, they're voting for Barack Obama.

Relevant to another thread, Ron Paul is the worst religion right now. His zealous followers are willing to hand the country back to Barack Obama to make a self-serving point.

This is a horrible argument, they are voting their conscience. They are making as self-serving of a point as all of the other voters. Also, there are just as many left wing people enamored by ron paul as there are right side. ing Planet K painted a mural to ron paul on one of their stores in 2008 for crying out loud.

[boutons_deux]

I'm sorry, when was the last time an in bent president won with over 8% unemployment? I understand if you want to dispute whose fault that is, but even so, the stimulus was oversold and has underperformed.

Polls show that a large percentage of people don't blame Obama for the destruction of middle class jobs, nor the Banksters Great Depression. This will very probably be the election where the in bent wins with 8% unemployment. It would be 7% or less if the Repug states hadn't slashed the govt employee rolls.

The way-too-small stimulus, too small by at least $1.5T, is far enough back now that economic stats showed it saved/created a few million jobs, while Repug-dominated states pushed up the unemployment rate by destroying 100Ks of state employees. Underperformance was predicted accurately. the Dem stimulus worked very well as far as it went.

When it was seen to be too small and economy still not up to speed, Repug and Fox/hate-media profoundly dishonest/hypocrtical deficit hawking made any talk of more stimulus impossible.

As McConnell said, the Repugs' overwhelming priority was to defeat Obama, deny him and the Dems ANY successes, so Repugs creating jobs or stimulating the economy was/in non-existent.

Repugs have proposed dozens of amendments and bills about abortion.

Again, list the Dem economic policies that failed.

[TheProfessor]

Polls show that a large percentage of people don't blame Obama for the destruction of middle class jobs, nor the Banksters Great Depression. This will very probably be the election where the in bent wins with 8% unemployment. It would be 7% or less if the Repug states hadn't slashed the govt employee rolls.

The way-too-small stimulus, too small by at least $1.5T, is far enough back now that economic stats showed it saved/created a few million jobs, while Repug-dominated states pushed up the unemployment rate by destroying 100Ks of state employees. Underperformance was predicted accurately. the Dem stimulus worked very well as far as it went.

When it was seen to be too small and economy still not up to speed, Repug and Fox/hate-media profoundly dishonest/hypocrtical deficit hawking made any talk of more stimulus impossible.

As McConnell said, the Repugs' overwhelming priority was to defeat Obama, deny him and the Dems ANY successes, so Repugs creating jobs or stimulating the economy was/in non-existent.

Repugs have proposed dozens of amendments and bills about abortion.

Again, list the Dem economic policies that failed.

So...when you say that the stimulus was too small, is that not a failure of the Obama administration? Democrats controlled both houses and still rolled out an insufficient stimulus. I would also point to HARP, which the administration has essentially admitted was ineffective in assisting underwater homeowners.

Humorously, I actually agree with you as far as insufficient stimulus, slashing of government employees, and Obama's likely victory. But the president has still had missteps along the way.

[boutons_deux]

"the stimulus was too small, is that not a failure of the Obama administration? "

The too-small stimulus barely passed, go look at the votes. That was all that was politcally (iow, Repug passable). That's exactly why Repugs screamed and shut down any discussion of a 2nd stimulus.

" Democrats controlled both houses"

You Repeat (Yoni/Fox) Lies.

"HARP, which the administration has essentially admitted was ineffective in assisting underwater homeowners."

the banks en masse essentially refused to reduce mortgage principal, since they were "booking" those toxic and underwater mortgages as assets.

"the president has still had missteps along the way"

I've destroyed you puny list so far. Care to add other "missteps"?

[Yonivore]

This is a horrible argument, they are voting their conscience. They are making as self-serving of a point as all of the other voters. Also, there are just as many left wing people enamored by ron paul as there are right side. ing Planet K painted a mural to ron paul on one of their stores in 2008 for crying out loud.

I think once you realize your candidate has absolutely no chance in of winning the election you need to throw your support to the person likely to do the least amount of damage to this country and who is most aligned with your principles.

For Paulbots, that's Romney.

At this point a vote for Paul is a vote for Obama.

And, to your point about left-wing Paulbots, as dubious as I am that they equal in number to conservative Paulbots, they'll vote for Obama.

[leemajors]

No, they'll vote for Ron Paul, write him in, or vote for Gary Johnson, but the majority of Paul supporters CERTAINLY won't vote for either Fed-loving warmonger....

I'm considering writing in Stanhope

[TheProfessor]

"the stimulus was too small, is that not a failure of the Obama administration? "

The too-small stimulus barely passed, go look at the votes. That was all that was politcally (iow, Repug passable). That's exactly why Repugs screamed and shut down any discussion of a 2nd stimulus.

" Democrats controlled both houses"

You Repeat (Yoni/Fox) Lies.

"HARP, which the administration has essentially admitted was ineffective in assisting underwater homeowners."

the banks en masse essentially refused to reduce mortgage principal, since they were "booking" those toxic and underwater mortgages as assets.

"the president has still had missteps along the way"

I've destroyed you puny list so far. Care to add other "missteps"?

If Obama knew the stimulus was too small and did not use his momentum/political capital to hold Republicans' feet to the fire, he capitulated. And the administration's revision of HARP in 2011 showed how ineffective it was. At some point, this administration takes blame for these failings. Continue to do your boutons-cheerleader thing, it changes nothing.

[Koolaid_Man]

According to NBC. This helps Romney how?

Vulture/Voucher 2012

[Koolaid_Man]

I think once you realize your candidate has absolutely no chance in of winning the election you need to throw your support to the person likely to do the least amount of damage to this country and who is most aligned with your principles.

For Paulbots, that's Romney.

At this point a vote for Paul is a vote for Obama.

And, to your point about left-wing Paulbots, as dubious as I am that they equal in number to conservative Paulbots, they'll vote for Obama.

Ryan excites the base but - his votes against women's health; against the 9-11 first responders bill - against FEMA funding after the tornadoes - against cutting taxes for the middle class - etc., etc. etc., will turn off most Independents.

Who picks a Republican Congressman when Congress has an 8% approval rating since the Republicans took over the house? Election finished....

[boutons_deux]

If Obama knew the stimulus was too small and did not use his momentum/political capital to hold Republicans' feet to the fire, he capitulated. And the administration's revision of HARP in 2011 showed how ineffective it was. At some point, this administration takes blame for these failings. Continue to do your boutons-cheerleader thing, it changes nothing.

Momentum? bull . If you don't have 60 in the Senate, and Barry never did, any talk of momentum is bull . simple math.

"administration's revision of HARP in 2011 showed how ineffective it was."

... you're ignoring how totally the banks refused to give up anything.

[boutons_deux]

Paul Ryan? Seriously?

The hyper-ambitious political careerist—who has spent his entire adult life as a Congressional aide, think-tank hanger-on and House member—is looking for a road up. And he is sly enough to recognize that, like Cheney with George Bush, he could be more than just a vice president in the administration of so bumbling a character as Romney.

Ryan figured Romney out months ago.

The two men bonded during the Wisconsin presidential primary campaign in late March and early April. They got on so well that Ryan was playing April Fool’s Day jokes on the Republican front-runner—giving Romney a rousing introduction before the candidate came from behind a curtain to find the room where he had expected to be greeted by a crowd of supporters was empty.

But Ryan would be a burden, not a booster, for a Romney-led ticket.

Like Romney, Ryan is a son of privilege who has little real-world experience or understanding. He presents well on Sunday morning talk shows and in the rarified confines of Washington think tanks and dinners with his cons uents—the Masters of the Universe on Wall Street—but his record in Congress and the policies he now promotes are political albatrosses.

Some Republicans, perhaps even Romney, do not get this.

That’s because the Republican congressman from Wisconsin, for all his bluster, is anything but a consistent advocate for fiscal responsibility and balanced budgets. He is, in fact, a hypocrite,

Or, to be more precise, a hypocritical big spender—at least when Wall Street, the insurance industry and the military-industrial complex call.

Ryan has been a steady voter for unwise bailouts of big banks, unfunded mandates and unnecessary wars. Few members of Congress have run up such very big tabs while doing so little to figure out how to pay the piper. How has Ryan gotten away with his fool-most-of-the-people-most-of-the-time politics?

For the most part, he has until recently flown under the radar—dazzling fellow Republicans with fiscal fancy footwork, while dancing around weak Democratic opposition in his home district.

But no more. This year, Ryan is being called out by an able challenger with actual experience in the private sector, as well as local government. Rob Zerban, the congressman’s Democratic challenger, is not fooled by Ryan’s budgetary blathering.

Zerban is familiar with Ryan’s record. And he has been calling the budget committee chairman out on his “faux fiscal credentials.”

”Congressman Paul Ryan can grandstand about the debt all he wants, but at the end of the day, Ryan is a root cause of many of the financial issues our country faces today,” says Zerban.”From supporting two unfunded wars, to dumping millions of senior citizens into the Medicare Part D ‘donut hole’ while tying the hands of the government to negotiate prescription drug prices, and from fighting for subsidies for Big Oil that his family personally benefits from, to supporting the unfunded Bush tax cuts for his wealthiest campaign contributors, Paul Ryan’s hypocrisy is astounding.”

Ryan’s first vulnerability would be the legitimate concern about his willingness to rip apart the social safety net, under the guise of “reforms” that would undermine and eventually destroy Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.

But under the serious scrutiny to which he would finally be subjected, Ryan would be revealed as something worse than a fiscal fabulist.

He would be revealed as a hypocrite of the highest order. Americans can handle hard truths and bold ideas. But they’re not so good with hypocrisy.

And they wouldn’t be so good with Paul Ryan.

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/08/09-3

So the non-Repug take on Ryan is that he is a total fraud, a hypocrite, a liar.

[Drachen]

I think once you realize your candidate has absolutely no chance in of winning the election you need to throw your support to the person likely to do the least amount of damage to this country and who is most aligned with your principles.

This way, neither of the two main partys have any reason to change their platform to align with the growing amount of people who feel disenfranchised. (8% of the people want to vote for candidate C because of such and such issue? That is alright, don't worry about them they will fall in line anyway because they don't want candidate D in office). You are who people talk about when they say that we have the government we voted for.

For Paulbots, that's Romney.

How?

At this point a vote for Paul is a vote for Obama.

You already said this. I already said this is a horrible argument, unclear, and to take it a little further, is quite sickening.

And, to your point about left-wing Paulbots, as dubious as I am that they equal in number to conservative Paulbots, they'll vote for Obama.

and you know this how???

[djohn2oo8]

Romney doesn't like the Ryan plan as well

http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/20...yan-budget.php

Within minutes of physically embracing his new running mate Paul Ryan on a Norfolk, Va., stage, Mitt Romney was distancing himself from Ryan’s controversial House budget proposal.

NORFOLK, Va. — Does Mitt Romney’s selection of Paul Ryan as his running mate mean that the former Massachusetts governor will embrace the Wisconsin congressman’s budget plan?
Not exactly, according to a set of internal talking points produced by the Romney campaign and obtained by ABC News.

“Gov. Romney applauds Paul Ryan for going in the right direction with his budget,” according to the talking points, “and as president he will be putting together his own plan for cutting the deficit and putting the budget on a path to balance.”

[boutons_deux]

Oops! Romney Introduces Ryan as President

Mitt Romney introduced Paul Ryan as 'the next President of the United States' this morning—and promised to uphold Medicare, which Ryan's budget gutted.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/videos/...president.html

[boutons_deux]

With Ryan, Romney Has the Plutocrat Ticket

By choosing Paul Ryan—the guy who wants to slash taxes on the rich and gut the government—Romney shows he’s decided to go nuclear in the class war.


http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...at-ticket.html

[Drachen]

No, they'll vote for Ron Paul, write him in, or vote for Gary Johnson, but the majority of Paul supporters CERTAINLY won't vote for either Fed-loving warmonger....

I wish you guys would get together and figure this out instead of being so fractured. I mean if either guy is acceptable, it would behoove y'all to coordinate (especially since ron paul has a very organized base, it would seem that this wouldn't be too hard, HE should show some leadership on this). A third party will never get the 5% required for federal matching funds if everything stays so fractured.

[boutons_deux]

Why Ryan?

1) Like many Republicans, Mitt Romney has been genuinely radicalized since 2008. He has adopted Ryan's ideas as his own and sincerely wishes to campaign on them, and—if elected—govern by them.

2) Romney's internal polling shows that he is not holding the GOP base. Possibly some of his slide in the polls over the past weeks represents leakage from his right flank, not his left. He may imagine that he needs Ryan as his best hope to unify his party.

3) The donors demanded it. Romney is raising huge sums of super PAC money from comparatively few people. The result of this financial strategy is to empower donor preferences—and they may prefer Ryan.

4) Romney may be thinking ahead to after the election. If the Republicans should win in 2012, a House budget chairman Ryan would emerge as the effective leader of the Republicans in the House. Romney may calculate that it's safer to have Ryan inside the administration under his control than acting as an independent power on Capitol Hill.

5) Romney may just have crumbled and yielded to pressure.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...paul-ryan.html

[jack sommerset]

Nice safe choice. God bless

[Clipper Nation]

So, they're voting for Barack Obama.

Relevant to another thread, Ron Paul is the worst religion right now. His zealous followers are willing to hand the country back to Barack Obama to make a self-serving point.

Nope... voters like you, who will blindly support anyone your team puts in front of you, are the absolute worst part of our political process, tbh....

"Why won't you people compromise all your principles so you can help Team Red's big-spending, controlling warmonger beat Team Blue's big-spending, controlling warmonger?"

[Clipper Nation]

I think once you realize your candidate has absolutely no chance in of winning the election you need to throw your support to the person likely to do the least amount of damage to this country and who is most aligned with your principles.

Willard and Obama are equally unaligned with our principles in every single way, from their out-of-control foreign policy, to their lack of any economic plan beyond vague pla udes, to their love of the Federal Reserve and fiat money, to their support of Big Brother measures such as SOPA and PIPA, tbh...

At this point a vote for Paul is a vote for Obama.

No, a vote for Paul is a vote for Paul... maybe if we'd all stop looking at politics as a team sport where you have to carry water for your team at all costs even if the candidate isn't different from the other team's candidate, we wouldn't have such a ed-up political process, tbh.... Ron bless

[LnGrrrR]

N

According to NBC. This helps Romney how?

Talk about lackluster. Is anyone excited for this election? No way Obama loses this... Where's the enthusiasm on the Republican side?

[Clipper Nation]

I wish you guys would get together and figure this out instead of being so fractured. I mean if either guy is acceptable, it would behoove y'all to coordinate (especially since ron paul has a very organized base, it would seem that this wouldn't be too hard, HE should show some leadership on this). A third party will never get the 5% required for federal matching funds if everything stays so fractured.

With the way the GOP has completely dismissed their greatest member and alienated his supporters, there is ZERO chance of the entire party coordinating around Willard, especially since people who like Ron Paul naturally aren't going to support a spendthrift neocon warmonger.... , even a lot of neocons don't like Willard, tbh...

[ElNono]

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.

crofl

[Drachen]

With the way the GOP has completely dismissed their greatest member and alienated his supporters, there is ZERO chance of the entire party coordinating around Willard, especially since people who like Ron Paul naturally aren't going to support a spendthrift neocon warmonger.... , even a lot of neocons don't like Willard, tbh...

Well then Ron Paul himself should come out and tell his supporters to vote for gary johnson. He should tell them that they should do this, not only to vote for someone who is at lease somewhat aligned with his principals, but to also do this to make the libertarian party a viable third alternative. I would even vote for him in this case even if I think some of the ideas espoused by paul are a little too far (for me personally), since I think that a third party cracking the system would be all that would be necessary to open the flood gates to a true multi-party system.

I think if Ron Paul told his supporters to do this that he would be pretty successful in motivating his base to do so.

[AFBlue]

Ummm...called it!