Paul Ryan-Romney VP

pittbulll · August 14, 2012, 7:34pm

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

I think the best thing they could do for Mitt is not allow any questions [/quote]

Confused again?

It’s Obama that doesn’t respond very well without his teleprompter.

Romney is great on his feet and will no doubt give a good accounting of himself in the debates.[/quote]

How about you formulate your opinion and allow me to formulate mine
[/quote]

I have formulated my opinion, that is you’re opinion is wrong!

[/quote]

It is my opinion that it is not possible you have the ability to formulate anything. Your so called opinions are right out of the Republican play book

Sloth · August 14, 2012, 7:35pm

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Gotta’ jump in REAL quick, AC.

I think that the hate for President Obama has to go AT LEAST as deep as it did for President Bush (or deeper for some).

Now this may be debatable…but I think there was more hate for what Bush DID…the hate for the President is more for what he REPRESENTS to many. (Note: I’m NOT talking about absolutes here…just in general).

Disagree?

Mufasa[/quote]

Huh?

pittbulll · August 14, 2012, 7:39pm

[quote]angry chicken wrote:

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

Just curious as Fletch and Irish both expressed their disgust at THE GOPZ KEEPING THE PEOPLES DOWN…

Why does this even have legs, I hear it on MSNBC and CNN all the time.

It’s only a fucking I.D. card.[/quote]

Oh I agree - that’s why I point out this polling data (which I will try to find) - if the GOP is out to “suppress votes”, does that mean self-identified liberals and Democrats are, too?[/quote]

From the liberals I’ve spoken with, the root of this accusation (the thing they’re building on with this current “ID issue”) is that they are still bitter about the clusterfuck that was the Bush/Gore election with all the “dimpled chad”,“Jeb gave it to his brother”, “high disqualification rates in democratic counties” and other “questionable” events that led up to the SCOTUS declaring Bush the winner… That cut went deep. Also there was a story back around that time where the republicans were attempting to “re-district” people in a way that would gain the republicans more electoral votes. And on election day in some “blue areas”, there was insufficient staff, voter intimidation, etc… So this is nothing new - they are simply wrapping the old resentment in a new accusation (albeit an illogical one, but it still gains traction because of the deep seated resentment). They are just adding a new verse to and all familiar song that liberals love to sing.

But in reality, where there’s smoke, there’s usually fire. So there is probably some truth to the accusations, in which case the publicity and subsequent ill will towards the republican party are well deserved…

I think many of you forget how much so many people HATE George W. Bush… I mean I lived in Washington DC at the time of the 2008 election and let me tell you I’ve never seen anything like it… It was CRAZY… I’ve never seen such a visceral response here in the US. It’s going to take a long time to repair the resentment that Bush’s presidency generated. Even if we went full blown recession with food shortages and power loss, I know people who would STILL vote for Obama simply so that the republicans don’t get in.
[/quote]

I have only paid attention from a far . The way I understand it the Republicans are creating an issue where none exists . I personally know a lot of old people (Not over 30) over 70 that would have no way of obtaining a birth certificate if their life depended on it. Especially if you take that into poor uneducated areas where internet access is uncommon .

Mufasa · August 14, 2012, 7:48pm

Hey…take it whatever way you want to, Sloth.

On this site alone, the President has been portrayed as the very antithesis of what is American…(and for many, he isn’t even an American. And for some is actually the Anti-Christ).

Who is IS.

President Bush drew a lot of hate for two Wars from the Left…spending and broadening of Government’s reach from the Right AND Left…a lot of his Legislation; and the “stealing” of an election.

Things he DID.

These are GENERALITIES. Of COURSE the President has “done” things (like the Affordable Care Act)…but hate for who he is runs, again, AT LEAST as deep as for what President Bush did.

Hey…tear it apart, guys. This IS discussion.

Mufasa

countingbeans · August 14, 2012, 7:50pm

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

I have only paid attention from a far . The way I understand it the Republicans are creating an issue where none exists . I personally know a lot of old people (Not over 30) over 70 that would have no way of obtaining a birth certificate if their life depended on it. Especially if you take that into poor uneducated areas where internet access is uncommon .
[/quote]

My wife’s 97 year old grandmother can’t see, can’t drive, can barely stand up and is cold in 90 degree weather.

She has an ID.

This is 2012.

It isn’t that hard.

Sloth · August 14, 2012, 7:55pm

And Bush didn’t represent his actions (and the thoughts that informed them)? And Obama doesn’t represent his? I don’t get the distinction.

Sloth · August 14, 2012, 7:57pm

[quote]Mufasa wrote:

These are GENERALITIES. Of COURSE the President has “done” things (like the Affordable Care Act)…but hate for who he is runs, again, AT LEAST as deep as for what President Bush did.

Mufasa[/quote]

So…he’s HAS done things, which he is now associated with (what he represents). I’m just not following the distinction.

Tiribulus · August 14, 2012, 8:50pm

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Hey…take it whatever way you want to, Sloth.

On this site alone, the President has been portrayed as the very antithesis of what is American…(and for many, he isn’t even an American. And for some is actually the Anti-Christ).

Who is IS.

President Bush drew a lot of hate for two Wars from the Left…spending and broadening of Government’s reach from the Right AND Left…a lot of his Legislation; and the “stealing” of an election.

Things he DID.

These are GENERALITIES. Of COURSE the President has “done” things (like the Affordable Care Act)…but hate for who he is runs, again, AT LEAST as deep as for what President Bush did.

Hey…tear it apart, guys. This IS discussion.

Mufasa[/quote]I hate what he is and not who he is and there’s huge difference. The ideology. Not the man. He IS “the very antithesis of what is American…”, but he IS NOT the anti-Christ. People are involved in many things I hate, but that does not equate to hatred for them. Yes, I not only CAN do that, but am commanded to. I HATE, in all CAPS, Mormonism AND Catholicism AND Marxism, but that would play no part in my decision to save these men or their families from danger if it were to providentially fall to me to do so. I would. Without hesitation. Even Chucky Shumer. I am not allowed to hate ANYBODY, but I am commanded to hate the godlessness they promote in the world. Every Christian loves what God loves and hates what God hates.

countingbeans · August 14, 2012, 7:59pm

Thoughts?

angry_chicken · August 14, 2012, 8:07pm

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Gotta’ jump in REAL quick, AC.

I think that the hate for President Obama has to go AT LEAST as deep as it did for President Bush (or deeper for some).

Now this may be debatable…but I think there was more hate for what Bush DID…the hate for the President is more for what he REPRESENTS to many. (Note: I’m NOT talking about absolutes here…just in general).

Disagree?

Mufasa[/quote]

From what I’ve observed within my various social circles is that the less intelligent/educated of my liberal friends make no distinction between the Man and his actions. If they could get away with it, they would have Bush drawn and quartered. For them, there is no convincing - the perfect candidate (even if he had the cure for cancer and promised to pay off the national debt with his own personal fortune) could be running against Obama and as long as he was a republican, they’d still vote for Obama. They are clueless and convinced and angry.

The second set of my liberal friends (more educated and reasonable) CAN distinguish between the person and his actions and while they are very angry because they felt “cheated” back in 2004, and felt lied to with the excuse to invade Iraq - those are their two big issues. But they blame Bush and his administration for that and don’t necessarily carry that forward to the current GOP candidates. They all still luv Obama, but when I challenge them with some tough questions on his performance, they begrudgingly agree that A) he has not kept several campaign promises that were important to them and B) they are worse off than they were four years ago and don’t see a light at the end of the tunnel.

Then I have my independent (like me) friends, some of whom voted for Obama simply to punish the republicans for W. but who have seen that was a mistake and will most likely vote for Romney/Ryan this time around.

I think the KEY people to focus if Romney is going to win this thing is on the second set of ‘intelligent liberals’ (oxymoron? possibly LOL) and independents. Romney needs to focus on the Economy and stay away from aligning himself lock-step with the Cristian influenced social issues (gay marriage, abortion, stem cell research, etc…) or he’s going to completely alienate those people.

pittbulll · August 14, 2012, 8:12pm

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

I have only paid attention from a far . The way I understand it the Republicans are creating an issue where none exists . I personally know a lot of old people (Not over 30) over 70 that would have no way of obtaining a birth certificate if their life depended on it. Especially if you take that into poor uneducated areas where internet access is uncommon .
[/quote]

My wife’s 97 year old grandmother can’t see, can’t drive, can barely stand up and is cold in 90 degree weather.

She has an ID.

This is 2012.

It isn’t that hard.[/quote]

Your Grand Mother also has a really wonderful Grand Son that would go all out to get her what ever she needs . Not all old people are so fortunate

Sloth · August 14, 2012, 8:21pm

[quote]angry chicken wrote:
aligning himself lock-step with the Cristian influenced social issues (gay marriage, abortion, stem cell research, etc…) or he’s going to completely alienate those people.
[/quote]

He’s already aligned himself with us. As in, his platform is anti-gay marriage, pro-life, anti-embryonic stem cell research.

Neuromancer · August 14, 2012, 8:13pm

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

Sorry the point slipped right over your head Sloth. Here you go just for you:

Why pick someone that is controversial and who cannot deliver key demographic groups and must have states?

There you go![/quote]

Right. So how in the hell did you back Romney?[/quote]

Easy question.

We had a choice between a bunch of candidates who could NEVER win and one that could possible win. That one is Mitt Romney —I know you don’t like him so he can’t win.

Funny stuff![/quote]

Can win? Then why are you here acting as if he needed Jesus himself as a running mate to have a hope against Obama? When the VP is the better candidate than the nominee, and the VP still isn’t good enough, then your nominee is terrible. Zeb, it just seems like you noticed Romney was tanking even prior to the VP pick, and now you need to retroactively make Ryan the cause.
[/quote]

Sloth you may have missed my many posts which clearly state the contrary. Let me recap it for you:

Never said or implied that he needed “Jesus” to be his running mate. And in fact I’ve said many times (right here on this thread) that almost any other candidate would have been better. I even rattled off a short list of the people I thought would be better. Those who could deliver support that he does not currently have. In my opinion Ryan can’t help him and may very well hurt him with key groups.
I also pointed out that Romney was making serious mistakes in the campaign long before he took Paul Ryan as his running mate. One thing I mentioned was that he was slow on the draw to respond early when the Obama scum machine was painting him as a tax cheat and a murderer. That is Romney’s fault no one else’s.
I also went on to point out that his second big mistake was picking someone who cannot deliver Florida or Ohio, two must win states. Furthermore, he fails to attract independents and women, two important demographic groups where the GOP is lagging behind.

Essentially, Ryan adds nothing to the ticket. If you were going to vote for Romney before you’ll probably still vote for him. But a Presidential candidate needs to add power to the ticket when choosing a VP nominee. Either geographically, or within key demographic groups. The Ryan pick while getting all the conservatives exicted did none of that.

Are we clear now as to why I don’t like Paul Ryan as the VP pick?

Keep in mind that it has nothing to do with me not liking Paul Ryan as a politician, I do. I just don’t like him in the VP slot. He would have made a heck of a treasurery secretary.

Many people here on T Nation confuse who THEY like with who can actually help the ticket. [/quote]

With your view of the mismanagement by Romney of his campaign in so many instances, do you think that gives confidence to the voter of his abilities in actually governing as president?

Or is it just the ‘anyone but Obama’ view that you think makes him the better choice?[/quote]

All political stereotyping aside Mitt Romney is a very capable guy. He has a resume that Obama wishes he had. However, campaigns at this level can get very convoluted for a myriad of reasons. In the end perhaps Romney thought that running negative attack ads on Obama would have backfired. So he decided to take the shots thus taking the high road. From my experience that rarely works as it allows your opponent the opportunity to color you as something you’re not. Will Romney forever be the rich evil guy that some think he is? Or, will he be able to recast himself in a more positive accurate light?

My feeling is that Romney wanted to keep his powder dry until at or around the republican national convention. By that time he will have roughly two and a half times the amount of cash that the Obama campaign has. And no doubt he will spend every dime explaining to the American people just how bad this President has failed.

Why did he pick Paul Ryan? That is anyone’s guess but I can only assume he wants to look like the candidate who is talking about issues. And that main issue is the economy. However, I think he had the credentials to be the expert on the economy and didn’t need Ryan. Whereas, if he had chosen someone to shore up his weaker areas, foreign policy for example, that would have played better long-term. And as I’ve already said many times, I would have chosen someone who could deliver Florida and in addition to that the independent vote which we must win and a better share of the female vote which is currently off the cliff! How does Ryan help with those two key demographics? I don’t see how he does.

A poor campaign decision does not disqualify Romney from the highest office in the land, not at all. And quite honestly I have no idea if Ryan was a poor decision. I obviosuly think he was but I could easily be proven wrong in the coming weeks. Look for the very next poll to give him a slight bump simply because of all the news coverage. If there is no bump then he’s in trouble. If there is a bump and it holds into the convention Ryan will be looking better. But if the Obama scum machine is able to tarnish Ryan (as they are now trying hard to do) and the gain evaporates then perhaps it was a bad move. It’s all about moving the ball down the field. If Ryan can help him do that then it’s a brilliant choice, if he cannot do that then he’s a poor choice. And by moving the ball down the field I mean gaining ground in the key battle ground states.

[/quote]

Fair enough, thanks for the thoughtful reply there.

pittbulll · August 14, 2012, 8:16pm

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

Thoughts?[/quote]

man they are preaching to the choir

Mufasa · August 14, 2012, 8:17pm

[quote]angry chicken wrote:

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Gotta’ jump in REAL quick, AC.

I think that the hate for President Obama has to go AT LEAST as deep as it did for President Bush (or deeper for some).

Now this may be debatable…but I think there was more hate for what Bush DID…the hate for the President is more for what he REPRESENTS to many. (Note: I’m NOT talking about absolutes here…just in general).

Disagree?

Mufasa[/quote]

From what I’ve observed within my various social circles is that the less intelligent/educated of my liberal friends make no distinction between the Man and his actions. If they could get away with it, they would have Bush drawn and quartered. For them, there is no convincing - the perfect candidate (even if he had the cure for cancer and promised to pay off the national debt with his own personal fortune) could be running against Obama and as long as he was a republican, they’d still vote for Obama. They are clueless and convinced and angry.

The second set of my liberal friends (more educated and reasonable) CAN distinguish between the person and his actions and while they are very angry because they felt “cheated” back in 2004, and felt lied to with the excuse to invade Iraq - those are their two big issues. But they blame Bush and his administration for that and don’t necessarily carry that forward to the current GOP candidates. They all still luv Obama, but when I challenge them with some tough questions on his performance, they begrudgingly agree that A) he has not kept several campaign promises that were important to them and B) they are worse off than they were four years ago and don’t see a light at the end of the tunnel.

Then I have my independent (like me) friends, some of whom voted for Obama simply to punish the republicans for W. but who have seen that was a mistake and will most likely vote for Romney/Ryan this time around.

I think the KEY people to focus if Romney is going to win this thing is on the second set of ‘intelligent liberals’ (oxymoron? possibly LOL) and independents. Romney needs to focus on the Economy and stay away from aligning himself lock-step with the Cristian influenced social issues (gay marriage, abortion, stem cell research, etc…) or he’s going to completely alienate those people.
[/quote]

Outstanding, AC. (and I agree).

And Tiribulus…I actually see what you saying. I don’t agree with all of it, but I do understand.

Thanks.

Mufasa

UtahLama · August 14, 2012, 8:17pm

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

I have only paid attention from a far . The way I understand it the Republicans are creating an issue where none exists . I personally know a lot of old people (Not over 30) over 70 that would have no way of obtaining a birth certificate if their life depended on it. Especially if you take that into poor uneducated areas where internet access is uncommon .
[/quote]

My wife’s 97 year old grandmother can’t see, can’t drive, can barely stand up and is cold in 90 degree weather.

She has an ID.

This is 2012.

It isn’t that hard.[/quote]

Your Grand Mother also has a really wonderful Grand Son that would go all out to get her what ever she needs . Not all old people are so fortunate
[/quote]

So she can get a ride to vote, but not to go get an I.D. card?

You realize that the 90 year old lady needs I.D. to pick up prescriptions and when she gets her Medicare benefits…right?

Also, Birth Certificates can be obtained by mail, or by carrier pigeon if your lady lives that far in the sticks.

Come on Pitt…this has to be a FAUX news conspiracy…right?

angry_chicken · August 14, 2012, 8:23pm

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

Thoughts?[/quote]

http://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/2010/lr21491.htm

Stockman’s credibility is ZERO. He just settled a huge case and lost a shit ton of money while the SEC “declined to prosecute” him for fraud. I think someone had him by the nuts and called in a favor. This is smoke and mirrors.

ZEB · August 14, 2012, 8:25pm

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

I think the best thing they could do for Mitt is not allow any questions [/quote]

Confused again?

It’s Obama that doesn’t respond very well without his teleprompter.

Romney is great on his feet and will no doubt give a good accounting of himself in the debates.[/quote]

How about you formulate your opinion and allow me to formulate mine
[/quote]

I have formulated my opinion, that is you’re opinion is wrong!

[/quote]

It is my opinion that it is not possible you have the ability to formulate anything. Your so called opinions are right out of the Republican play book
[/quote]

It’s people like you that the Obama people speak to when they spread their lies about the republicans being racist, and the rich not paying taxes and scaring granny about republicans taking away her social security check. And the rest of the endless nonsense bla bla bla… They’ve been lying to you for a long time and you’ve been eating it up like homemade brownies.

You and about 35% of the democratic base are incapable of an original thought. All you know is vote democrat and the sad part is you don’t even know why the hell you’re you’re doing it!

ZEB · August 14, 2012, 8:30pm

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Hey…take it whatever way you want to, Sloth.

On this site alone, the President has been portrayed as the very antithesis of what is American…(and for many, he isn’t even an American. And for some is actually the Anti-Christ).

Who is IS.

President Bush drew a lot of hate for two Wars from the Left…spending and broadening of Government’s reach from the Right AND Left…a lot of his Legislation; and the “stealing” of an election.

Things he DID.

These are GENERALITIES. Of COURSE the President has “done” things (like the Affordable Care Act)…but hate for who he is runs, again, AT LEAST as deep as for what President Bush did.

Hey…tear it apart, guys. This IS discussion.

Mufasa[/quote]I hate what he is and not who he is and there’s huge difference. The ideology. Not the man. He IS “the very antithesis of what is American…”, but he IS NOT the anti-Christ. People are involved in many I hate, but that does not equate to hatred for them. Yes, I not only CAN do that, but am commanded to. I HATE, in all CAPS, Mormonism AND Catholicism AND Marxism, but that would play no part in my decision to save these men or their families from danger if it were to providentially fall to me to do so. I would. Without hesitation. Even Chucky Shumer. I am not allowed to hate ANYBODY, but I am commanded to hate the godlessness they promote in the world. Every Christian loves what God loves and hates what God hates.
[/quote]

(counting the posts it took you to steer the discussion toward religion and say that you hate Catholicism)

Hmm…I think you’re slipping.

angry_chicken · August 14, 2012, 8:30pm

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

Sorry the point slipped right over your head Sloth. Here you go just for you:

Why pick someone that is controversial and who cannot deliver key demographic groups and must have states?

There you go![/quote]

Right. So how in the hell did you back Romney?[/quote]

Easy question.

We had a choice between a bunch of candidates who could NEVER win and one that could possible win. That one is Mitt Romney —I know you don’t like him so he can’t win.

Funny stuff![/quote]

Can win? Then why are you here acting as if he needed Jesus himself as a running mate to have a hope against Obama? When the VP is the better candidate than the nominee, and the VP still isn’t good enough, then your nominee is terrible. Zeb, it just seems like you noticed Romney was tanking even prior to the VP pick, and now you need to retroactively make Ryan the cause.
[/quote]

Sloth you may have missed my many posts which clearly state the contrary. Let me recap it for you:

Never said or implied that he needed “Jesus” to be his running mate. And in fact I’ve said many times (right here on this thread) that almost any other candidate would have been better. I even rattled off a short list of the people I thought would be better. Those who could deliver support that he does not currently have. In my opinion Ryan can’t help him and may very well hurt him with key groups.
I also pointed out that Romney was making serious mistakes in the campaign long before he took Paul Ryan as his running mate. One thing I mentioned was that he was slow on the draw to respond early when the Obama scum machine was painting him as a tax cheat and a murderer. That is Romney’s fault no one else’s.
I also went on to point out that his second big mistake was picking someone who cannot deliver Florida or Ohio, two must win states. Furthermore, he fails to attract independents and women, two important demographic groups where the GOP is lagging behind.