- Joined
- Feb 19, 2012
- Messages
- 29,957
- Reaction score
- 14,683
- Location
- Netherlands
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
His best asset is his opponent.
His best asset is his opponent.
Meaning what?
I didn't understand it either because Obama has all the trump cards in his hands, Romney only has loads of money to back him, not much else.
WHich trump card would those be? Killing jobs? Out of control spending? Obamacare, the most hated piece of legislation in history? More rounds of golf than any other prez? Cutting veterans bennies?
Get real, Obama isn't going to run on his record. I think we all know that.
...Get real, Obama isn't going to run on his record. I think we all know that.
sure he will. and his record will help him win.
the other help will come from the idiocy & insanity of his right-wing opponent, or GOPers staying home if Romney is the nominee.
either way, its four more years of Obama.
Followed by 8 years of Hillary Rodham Clinton
I personally will say no.
Not just because it is difficult to win against a sitting president that is not very unpopular. And not just because the economic situation has started on it's way upward. No, it is much more basic than that.
1. Let's begin with the simple mathmetics of the race, last presidential campaign bank on McCain to bring his home state to the GOP. Romney does not stand any chance of personally bringing any states to which he is connected. He will not win his birth state of Michigan. He was barely able to fend off Santorum there and in a state that has gone Democratic in the last 5 elections, one must conclude that this state will almost certainly go to Obama.
The same can be said for the state he was governor of, Massachusetts, in the past 4 elections no democratic presidential candidate scored under 60% of the vote (average was 61.5%) compared to the highest for a GOP candidate of 37%. On average, the democratic presidential candidate wins there with a 28% lead (in the past 4 elections that is). So in Massachusetts Romney is also not going to carry that state.
2. Next is his public image, he is a rich, white, a guy and a mormon. And when I say rich, I mean proper filthy rich. He is proper fithly rich In a country where most people are not. In a lot of polls about Obama people are asked ""He understands the problems of ordinary Americans", think about when that question is asked about Romney, the man of slip ups like:
- My wife drives a couple of cadillacs
- “I have some great friends who are NASCAR team owners.”
- I too, had feared the “pink slip” during my life.
- “I’ll tell you what. Ten thousand bucks. A $10,000 bet.”
- “I’m also unemployed.”
- “Corporations are people, my friend.”
- “I like being able to fire people who provide services to me.”
- says he 370,000$ fee was "not very much"
He is the perfect sitting duck for shows like the Today show and even a little bit the Colbert Report.
He also seems to put his foot in his mouth and still keep babbling on, like when he spoke in Michigan and he said:
“I was born and raised here. I love this state. It seems right here. The trees are the right height,” he told the crowd. “I like seeing the lakes. I love the lakes. There’s something very special here. The Great Lakes, but also all the little inland lakes that dot the parts of Michigan. I love cars.”
3. The man is stiff, he is does not look very inspirational to me and I think to many people might see it that way too.
4. He is not republican/conservative enough on social issues
5. he is a great target the Super Pacs from the democratic side, because the man flip flops on very fundamental issues:
He was pro-choice before he became pro-life:
Romney, Oct. 29, 2002: “I will preserve and protect a woman’s right to choose”
Romney, Dec. 16, 2007: “The right next step in the, in the fight to preserve the sanctity of life is to see Roe v. Wade overturned.”
he flopped on immigration (big issue for the Latino vote)
he flopped on Reagan
he flopped on embryonic stemcell research
Romney has flip flopped on a lot of issues, which is not strange because he wanted the job in Massachusetts so his he set his moral compass to "not too conservative" with all the opinions that belong to that, now he wants the big job, president of the USA so he needs all the really republican very conservative voters on his side so he is flopping like mad to look as conservative as he could possibly look like.
So we have had electability issues, in he does not bring in any big states to which he was formerly connected and steal them away from Obama. Then we had personality issues with his wealth, the connection issues he has with normal people, the boring personality, the fact that he likes to put his foot into his mouth and still keep babbling nonsense, the fact that he flip flops almost as bad as John Kerry did and the fact that he is in no way the best liked candidate for the strong conservative base of the party.
Then there is still one big issue left, number 6 on the list of issues for Romney, that last one is his faith.
6. Mormon. Mitt Romney is a Mormon, a faith that has been connected to cults that allow multiple wives, a faith where some have the nasty habit of performing baptisms on people they have no business in baptising. People like Obama's mother, Anne Frank, Simon Wiesenthal, Adolf Hitler and many jews who died in concentration camps. En then there are more issues, about the stuffs they ingest (or do not ingest like alcohol, coffee, tea, etc. etc.) and even about them having mormon underwear.
It was hard enough for the first Catholic to be chosen into office and for the first African American to be chosen as a president. I just do not think the US is ready willing and able to welcome a mormon as the next president.
Finallly,what is the upside to Romney? Well, he is a member of the GOP, he is really rich (advertising), has rich buddies (Superpacs), is white and for a lot of voters, he is not Obama.
Please remember, this is my personal observation based on the campaign I have seen so far, my following of US politics for many years and my views as an outsider, I do not hate or dislike mr. Romney but tried (from my point of view) to see what chances are that Romney will/can defeat Obama, and I just don't think it is going to happen.
Obama? Obama has much more positives than Romney has when one looks at the polls.
Obama's debt, the lingering economy and his overall economic record is the best thing Romney can run on.Meaning what?
Obama's debt, the lingering economy and his overall economic record is the best thing Romney can run on.
The first two stats you mentioned are positives without a doubt, but unemployment hasn't gone down 2 percent, and corporate profits aren't exactly a populist message. That factored in with around 5 trillion in debt are great talking points for Romney.you mean 3% GDP, stock market rising 55%, unemployment going down 2%, corporate profits at an all-time-high?
The first two stats you mentioned are positives without a doubt, but unemployment hasn't gone down 2 percent, and corporate profits aren't exactly a populist message. That factored in with around 5 trillion in debt are great talking points for Romney.
Bush did a awful job with the economy, although it appears Obama isn't exactly a superstar either.And Obama will respond, or superpacs from unions or Soros will respond if Obama takes the highground, that rich fat cats and their political mouth pieces i.e. the Republicans have insulated the rich from paying their fair share and that without the Bush taxcuts there would be a lot less deficit. If I remember correctly, before Bush the budget deficit was non-existent (but I am going to have to look that up). It was Bush and the republcans who ran the US into the ground with bad policies and worse supervision over the budget and the economy.
It is not Obama's fault that he has been cleaning up the Republican mess while trying to kickstart the economy. Bush, Romney, Santorum and the entire GOP are to blame for the bad finances the US is in. Their wars and their failed fiscal policies have wrecked the US fiscal situation and their poor oversight into their republican supporters in big business have caused the 2008 stock crash and the housing market collapse.
It is a republican game plan, wreck the country and blame it on the opposition when they are forced to clean up their mess. It won't fly this time, people are wising up IMHO.
Bush did a awful job with the economy, although it appears Obama isn't exactly a superstar either.
Somewhat true, although I don't see how Romney or Santorum are somehow more responsible for the debt incurred than the sitting president.
I'm not that conspiracy minded so I wouldn't go that far.
Yes, although that hardly incriminates Romney for someone else's irresponsibility it's simply voting along party lines and protecting his future as a candidate.He was a governor who supported George Bush when a democrat from his state was trying to become president, did he not?
He was member of the republican party, right?
He is rich, and for him and people like him, the republican made their tax policies which have been very bad for fiscal responsibility.
Yes, although that hardly incriminates Romney for someone else's irresponsibility it's simply voting along party lines and protecting his future as a candidate.
Are you implying anyone who is a Republican is somehow more responsible for the debt incurred than the sitting President?
Fiscal irresponsibility is not a lack of revenue, it's a excess of spending which our last two presidents have demonstrated.
fiscal responsibility is making sure that what comes into the pocket of government is the same as what goes out. With the war and the economic downturn in 2008 it is not strange that some more money needs to go into the economy. With the lack of revenue coming in that has lead to problems.
2013 United States federal budget - $3.8 trillion (submitted 2012 by President Obama)
2012 United States federal budget - $3.7 trillion (submitted 2011 by President Obama)
2011 United States federal budget - $3.8 trillion (submitted 2010 by President Obama)
2010 United States federal budget - $3.6 trillion (submitted 2009 by President Obama)
2009 United States federal budget - $3.1 trillion (submitted 2008 by President Bush)
2008 United States federal budget - $2.9 trillion (submitted 2007 by President Bush)
2007 United States federal budget - $2.8 trillion (submitted 2006 by President Bush)
2006 United States federal budget - $2.7 trillion (submitted 2005 by President Bush)
2005 United States federal budget - $2.4 trillion (submitted 2004 by President Bush)
2004 United States federal budget - $2.3 trillion (submitted 2003 by President Bush)
2003 United States federal budget - $2.2 trillion (submitted 2002 by President Bush)
2002 United States federal budget - $2.0 trillion (submitted 2001 by President Bush)
Last year of Bush the mandatory expenditures were $1.89 trillion and the discretionary spending was $1.21 trillion
2013 for Obama has mandatory expenditures is $2.293 trillion the discretionary spending is $1.261 trillion
That proves that Obama has not been spending wildly, mandatory spending is set by existing laws, discretionary spending has just went by not that much so I don't know where you get the spend happy Obama from but I don't see that in the budgets.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?