Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      

*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.

Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds


CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ----> Connect



  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 1
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
RCO





Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 6241
Reputation: 228.1
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Sat Aug 11, 2012 2:24 pm    Post subject: Congressman Paul Ryan to be Romney's VP choice Reply with quote

( don't know much about him but he seems like a good pick at this time , its hard to tell how he will play out in the coming weeks though )


Mitt Romney running mate Paul Ryan a link between Tea Party and Republican establishment
Associated Press and Reuters | Aug 11, 2012 10:46 AM ET | Last Updated: Aug 11, 2012 12:29 PM ET


Win McNamee/Getty Images
Mitt Romney (L) announces Rep. Paul Ryan as his running mate on August 11, 2012 in Norfolk, Virginia.

Twitter Google+ LinkedIn Email Comments More
Tumblr Pinterest Reddit Digg StumbleUpon Mitt Romney introduced Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan as his vice-presidential running mate Tuesday, turning to a deeply conservative, budget-cutting specialist to shore up trust in the party ticket among the small-tax, anti-big government tea party movement.

Ryan is the architect of a deeply conservative and intensely controversial long-term budget plan to cut trillions in federal spending, and his conservative credentials are highly regarded by fellow Republicans who control the House of Representatives.

Romney chose Ryan as a means of mollifying the Republican right wing which has shown only modest enthusiasm for his candidacy, given the former Massachusetts governor’s history, until his presidential campaign, of acting from a moderate political philosophy.

Related
Mitt Romney sluggish in new poll but at least his family has free McDonald’s for life

U.S. Presidential Race 2012 Analysis: Out of context ads increasing from Mitt Romney campaign

Mitt Romney says more Fed stimulus would not help struggling U.S. economy

Barack Obama, Mitt Romney head to battleground states with competing economic messages

Aboard the retired battleship USS Wisconsin, Romney slipped up while introducing of Ryan.

“Join me in welcoming the next president of the United States, Paul Ryan,” a beaming Romney told the energized crowd in Norfolk, Virginia.

Some facts about Ryan:

- Ryan, 42, has served seven terms in the U.S. House of Representatives since first being elected in 1998.

- As chairman of the powerful House Budget Committee, Ryan offered a controversial plan in January 2010 to reform the tax code and eliminate the federal deficit via tax cuts and drastically overhauling Medicare.

- Because of Ryan’s plan to cut Medicare, Romney also runs the risk of alienating seniors, who narrowly backed Republicans in recent elections.

- Ryan could help Romney gain ground in his home state of Wisconsin, a battleground state that seems to be leaning toward Obama.

- Before being elected to Congress, Ryan was an aide to conservative U.S. Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas. He also worked for former New York congressman and one-time Vice Presidential candidate Jack Kemp.

- Ryan is a fifth-generation Wisconsin resident. He grew up in Janesville before attending college at Miami University in Ohio.

- Ryan’s father and grandfather died of heart attacks in their 50s, making him mindful of a healthy lifestyle.

Reuters
After he walked off stage, Romney’s wife Ann immediately told him he had made a mistake, prompting him to return to the podium to correct it.

“Every now and then I’m known to make a mistake. I did not make a mistake with this guy,” he said at Ryan’s side, then telling the crowd that the Wisconsin congressman was “going to be the next vice president of the United States.”

Romney’s flub comes after his gaffe-filled tour of Europe during which he offended the British by questioning their readiness to host the Olympics and the Palestinians by suggesting they were culturally inferior to the Israelis.

Apparently, the president-vice president slip-up is a fairly easy one to make.

During President Barack Obama’s first joint rally with Joe Biden in 2008, Obama told an Illinois crowd, “Let me introduce to you, the next president – the next vice president of the United States of America: Joe Biden.”

The campaign team of John McCain, then the Republican presidential candidate, quickly pounced on the mistake to suggest that Biden, a veteran Delaware senator, might wield the real power in an Obama administration.

Romney also needs to repair his image after a summer filled with political gaffes, especially during a trip abroad, and the incessant drumbeat of negative advertising by President Barack Obama’s campaign apparatus. In combination, those realities have harmed the Republican’s campaign momentum and seen him lose ground to Obama.

Ryan came out swinging early Saturday, blaming Obama for the country’s sluggish economy.

“Regrettably, President Obama has become part of the problem, and Mitt Romney is the solution” to an economy that has yet to make a strong recovery from the worst recession in decades, he said.

Romney exulted in his choice, telling cheering supporters at an outdoor rally that “I did not make a mistake with this guy.”

In the campaign to come, Republicans will present economic solutions “that are bold, specific and achievable,” Romney said. “We offer our commitment to create 12 million new jobs and bring better take home pay to middle class families.”

The ticket-mates made their first joint appearance at a naval museum, in front of the battleship USS Wisconsin, the initial stop of a bus tour that will take them through four battleground states — Virginia, North Carolina, Florida and Ohio — in as many days.

First Romney, then Ryan, a generation younger than his patron, jogged down the ship’s gangplank to the cheers of hundreds and the stirring soundtrack from the movie “Air Force One.”

Having Ryan on the ticket also could help Romney become more competitive in Wisconsin, a state Obama won handily four years ago in the state-by-state race for the presidency, but that could be much tighter this November. Ryan is a seven-term congressman from a district in the southeast of the state.


http://news.nationalpost.com/2.....blishment/
Progressive Tory





Joined: 04 Dec 2010
Posts: 1178
Reputation: 110.8
votes: 1

PostPosted: Sat Aug 11, 2012 4:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

He looks good on paper.
Dolphin





Joined: 30 Sep 2007
Posts: 31
Reputation: 61
Location: California, USA

PostPosted: Sun Aug 12, 2012 2:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ryan will energize the Republican base for sure.

But in the end this will be seen as a disastrous pick or a brilliant one. It all depends on who succeeds in defining Ryan first, team Obama or team Romney.
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 4123
Reputation: 238
votes: 8

PostPosted: Sun Aug 12, 2012 9:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think the biggest reason Ryan is such a great selection as a running mate is that he will bring the Tea Party and independents into the Romney camp in far greater numbers.

I know, I know, the media are telling us the Tea Party is no more. They wish ... the point is the Tea Party is working at the local level of the Republican party, getting rid of RINOs.

Ryan is one of their favourites because he talks about the debt and deficit, rather than just job-creation. His selection means that entitlement reform is definitely on the agenda. As one wag said, Ryan brings to the campaign that which Obama fears most -- math!

This is shaping up to be a landslide for the Republicans, a continuation of what happened in 2010.
cosmostein





Joined: 04 Oct 2006
Posts: 7420
Reputation: 297
votes: 21
Location: The World

PostPosted: Mon Aug 13, 2012 10:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ryan is a solid pick;

You have a guy like Romney that despite the Democrats best efforts has a solid record in Government and the Private Sector, and now you have added one of the best political minds pertaining to Government Economics to the ticket.

The GOP strategy should be simple and was finally outlined correctly by Ryan during his speech on Saturday.

The Democrats had two years of unfiltered power to pass whatever legislation they wanted when they had a majority in the House and the Senate and they failed miserably.

The Presidents record is available for all to see;
We have seen what Democrat economic policy has done in action, we have all largely lived it.

There is nothing different about what the Democrats want to do over the next four years then what they have done over the last nearly four years.

Why would you opt for that again?
We know it doesnt work.

Ryan makes this an election about an issue;

The Economy.

Moving the debate from "Is Obama Kenyan" and "Is Romney too much of a millionaire" to an issue which a Presidential election is worthy of.

The question becomes is the US population willing to have a debate about the real issues, or are they more concerned with Romney's after tax income?
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 4123
Reputation: 238
votes: 8

PostPosted: Mon Aug 13, 2012 2:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

cosmostein wrote:
Ryan is a solid pick;
Ryan makes this an election about an issue;

The Economy.

Moving the debate from "Is Obama Kenyan" and "Is Romney too much of a millionaire" to an issue which a Presidential election is worthy of.

The question becomes is the US population willing to have a debate about the real issues, or are they more concerned with Romney's after tax income?


You are screening out the fact that the media isn't just covering the issue, it is a player in determining the outcome. Most of it, outside of talk radio and the bloggers, are covering the election with an eye to ensuring a Democrat victory. Obama's gang couldn't have pretended this issue was the "birthers" against the "class warriors" alone.

The media, seen in its totality, have done all they can to marginalize the real issues, those of jobs and debt. My view: Without Rachel Maddow and her ilk, nobody would think either of these things were important.

Addendum: This via Instapundit ...

Quote:

Email Panic From Democrats: ‘Disturbing Report’ of Overflow Crowds at Romney/Ryan Events
Posted by Jammie on Aug 13, 2012 at 2:43 pm
baby

Four years ago it was a sign of burgeoning Hopenchange sweeping the land.

Now as massive crowds appear to see Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan, it’s disturbing.

Quote:
Wall Street Journal: Crowds Swell at Romney Rallies After Ryan Pick

Jammie –
I just got this disturbing report: Yesterday’s Romney-Ryan rally in North Carolina pulled in an overflow crowd of 15,000 people.

There’s no spinning that number. It’s a LOT of people, and the Republican base in energized.

And that’s not all. Since the VP announcement, Romney’s campaign has brought in over 70,000 donations from his Tea Party base.

We’ve got to step up our game and mobilize our supporters — starting right now.


Donate $3 or right now to help us rally our base around President Obama’s agenda >>

Listen to what one Republican supporter said about Paul Ryan: “I love him…He’s going to excite the Tea Party and get them on board…”

We can’t let the Republicans claim the momentum. Donate $3 or whatever you can:

http://dccc.org/Stand-With-President-Obama

Thanks,

Brynne

Brynne Craig
DCCC Field Director
cosmostein





Joined: 04 Oct 2006
Posts: 7420
Reputation: 297
votes: 21
Location: The World

PostPosted: Mon Aug 13, 2012 4:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bugs wrote:


You are screening out the fact that the media isn't just covering the issue, it is a player in determining the outcome. Most of it, outside of talk radio and the bloggers, are covering the election with an eye to ensuring a Democrat victory. Obama's gang couldn't have pretended this issue was the "birthers" against the "class warriors" alone.


That,
Or the fact that Romney has done a terrible job making this election about the Economy by releasing any significant policy or platform pertaining to it outside of three clicks in on his website.

He has been the presumptive GOP nominee for months and this:

http://www.mittromney.com/site.....rd_1_1.pdf

Is his front page plan to create jobs, a one pager?

Why am not seeing ads in prime time covering this:
http://www.mittromney.com/issues/tax

or this:
http://www.mittromney.com/issues/trade

If you look at the "quick facts" on the side right of nearly every page regarding policy that is damning stuff;

-Corporate Tax Rates not cut since 1988

-75 Countries have Cut Corporate Tax in the last four Years

-Free Trade Agreements Negotiated by Obama since 2008: 0
By China and the EU in that same period 19 and 25 respectively.

-60 Billion spent on "Green Stimulus" 3584 graduates from the "Green Jobs" program, and 466 found jobs in the "Green" industry

-0.36 of every Government Dollar spent is borrowed money

All of this stuff appears buried on his website, yet rarely in his ads?

Its not the Media's job to promote his platform, he has more money then the Democrats do yet he keeps wasting it on muck racking rather then policy.

You have the smartest Ticket from an economic stance in a very long time in Romney/Ryan, why not promote that by turning everyone of those quick facts into a 30 second TV spot?

Let the Democrats scream about tax returns and seniors off a cliff while Romney takes advantage of the fact that from a policy stance he is miles ahead, but done little to actually show the public that.

Romney/Ryan can win the White House on sound policy, but we are two and a half months away from election day they need to get started now.

Obama is going to win on the "who you want to have a beer with" factor but Romney can win on the "who's the smartest guy in the room" factor he just seems content attacking Obama rather then taking target at the fact that after two years of passing whatever the Dems wanted nearly everyone of their initiatives flamed out and did not produce the desired effect.

Romney should be ahead by double digits in any manufacturing State based on what he is got on his website, but he isnt selling it well.
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 4123
Reputation: 238
votes: 8

PostPosted: Mon Aug 13, 2012 10:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Cosmo ... so, given the poisonous atmosphere coming from Obama HQ, how would you run an ad that put 'entitlements' in focus?

This has been described as the 'third rail' of American politics for a long time -- in Canada, too. Sadly for the Americans, they have a more open political process where it isn't so easy to fool the people -- unlike Canada, where hidden elites, including civil service elites, control the agenda to the exclusion of the population.

Consider this -- if the US national debt, heading up to $16 trillion at the moment, is staggering, what about the unfunded liabilities involved in US social security? $50 trillion, perhaps? And add to that the untold $trillions that Medicare and Obamacare will add to the mix?

Why doesn't Romney just lay his head on the chopping block?

For someone who demonstrates a certain respect for political reality as well as an appreciation for political strategy, this is weak.

Addressing a democratic forum with all this bad news is going to require leadership, and the problem isn't going to be made any easier with the corrupt machine that is the Democratic Party, now at one of its lowest ebbs ... (consider the Harry Reid smear, the 'friend of a friend' who told him that Romney paid no taxes for a decade ...)

The Democrats are obviously laying a trap meant to destroy the Republican Party for a generation or two, by holding them responsible for all depression that will necessarily result from any plan to reform the system into something where the money spent is in proportion to the money raised through taxation.

How did we address our debt problems in Canada? Did that ever get into electoral politics? It seems to me that the threat that it would is what made the civil service amenable to the changes that Paul Martin introduced, all done in a way that We, the People, (as usual) never got to put our two cents in.

Under the circumstances, I don't know how you expect a democratically elected politician to go to the people for a mandate to deconstruct the welfare state to affordable levels when so many people have assumed that its programs provided them with at least some protection in their old age. Social Security, like the CPP, were sold to people as 'pensions' and the ruse was maintained for decades that there was a special fund of monies held in trust to fund it.

I don't even know the sequence of policy moves that would diminish the pain for the public. I doubt if anyone does.

They say that what will end US medicare and social security is US medicare and social security. In other words, the other choice is an implosion, like happened in Russia.

In my view, Romney is winning this election, and by directly revealing whatever plans he might be settled on, he would do his campaign damage that might well be irreparable. (Look, after all, at the way that Obama treated Ryan and his budget. You want a replay of that, in the middle of an election campaign?)

It's the Democrats who are running the terrible campaign, a campaign based on avoiding the real issues, going to any length to demonize their opponents, and corrupting the media and turning them into mischief-makers. Conservatives should recognize that, even at the risk of revealing themselves as having some kind of ethical standards. That's my view.
cosmostein





Joined: 04 Oct 2006
Posts: 7420
Reputation: 297
votes: 21
Location: The World

PostPosted: Tue Aug 14, 2012 1:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Which part of the above targeted entitlements exactly?
The fact that the US spent 60 billion on green jobs and only 466 students found work in that industry?

The point needs to be made that every economic recovery in history has been lead by private sector job creation, not public sector job creation and the above very effectively outlines just how "efficiently" the government spends tax dollars under the cloak of job creation.

The reality is for the US to get into the black they need to raise taxes or cut spending AND increase tax revenue by means of economic growth.

The success of the US Economy has been their ability to globalize their product, the fact that the current President has done nothing over the last four years to attempt to expand his nations economies access to international markets is pretty damning.

You claim the Democrats are running a terrible campaign;
What if they win?

The problem with Romney is that he allows himself to be define because he is vague, maybe Ryan helps with that maybe not.

However if the election campaign continues to unfold in this manner Romney will suffer the same fate as Ignatieff did.

I think the GOP wins this election on smart policy, making the Democrats look like children throwing mud while the GOP are the grown ups trying to govern.

However that is not the tone we have taken to this point.
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 4123
Reputation: 238
votes: 8

PostPosted: Tue Aug 14, 2012 5:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

What 'entitlements'? you ask. All of them, pretty much. Remember how the Democrats 'demagogued' Ryan's budget proposal? Obama invited Ryan to attend a speech he was giving, which Ryan took as a conciliatory gesture ... and no doubt hoped that the two parties were heading towards an 'adult discussion' ... but instead he was publicly humiliated by the President.

The Democrats went so far as to run a commercial, showing a Ryan look-alike dumping his granny over a cliff. Ryan was personally demonized, and all his proposal did was raise the issue of funding the entitlements and suggesting a plan that would put those entitlements on a secure footing. It ought to have been the start of a negotiation.

And that budget took 20 years to achieve a balanced budget, hardly 'draconian' in the circumstances.

Just for the reader's information, US medicare alone has been calculated to consume 100% of the US tax revenues by 2040 if present trends continue. Of course, it will never get to that because of competing claims on those tax revenues. It's simply a way of saying that the system is in crisis now, and that there's not much time to address these issues. The baby-boomers are starting to retire. Social security and medicare will be bankrupt in the next decade, and the boomers have lost much of the equity in their homes, and a chunk of their 401(k)s. Those with their retirement money trapped in those accounts are likely to lose more. Many of them will be dependent upon the state for support for the 15-20 years of retirement that the average boomer can expect to live.

=================================

What if the Democrats win? I suppose you would have to say that the noble experiment in Democracy failed, because four more years of Obama is likely to be disastrous. It won't mean they ran a good campaign.

Can you imagine four more years of the Obama foreign policy? No doubt, Iran and Israel will be into it ... which has catastrophic consequences if the big powers get involved. And what will the economy look like after four more years?

==================================

Perhaps you don't know what 'community organizers' believe, and what is their approach. In fact many of the most radical elements of the 60ies Weather Underground, and the wannabes that came after them, went into 'community organizing' and 'education'. What is 'community organizing'? They use Alinsky tactics to create mass protests, and using them in the glare of news media to extract benefits for specific groups. Jersse Jackson was a pioneer of these tactics, and he shook down corporation after corporation for racial benefits, under threat of public exposure of false claims of racism.

Community organizers have expanded the Cloward-Piven strategy as a form of revolutionary struggle. The tactic involves never revealing the final goals they seek to achieve. The idea is to overload the US public welfare system to such a degree that it brings the US to a financial crisis. (You might recall that the odious Rahm Emmanuel said, on assuming power, that a crisis was a terrible thing to waste.) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C.....n_strategy

Tell me that an expanded version of the Cloward-Piven strategy isn't what Obama is about. He has spent money like water without even bothering to draft a budget for three years. He has fostered ACORN, and lax voting laws so that the system can be more easily jimmied. He has encouraged such things as Fast and Furious and the New Black Panthers. He is all about racial politics, as you can now see.

There's no reason to believe that he won't continue down this path to oblivion. Yes, the Democrats are running a bad -- bad as in evil -- campaign.

The Democratic Party has been dominated by these folks, organizationally -- they have infiltrated the civil service unions -- ever since the Mondale election. Clinton was part of a reaction against them, and the two of them kept the public face of the Democrats more moderate that it really was ... but those days are over. Obama's ascendancy means that the right wing of the Democratic Party has lost control. We are now seeing the left wing of that party in power, and they are not going to waste the crisis.

=======================================

This is not, therefore, a normal election. The groups in control of the Democratic Party are not conventional politicians representing the people in various ways. They are revolutionaries attempting to cripple 'capitalism'.

You and I have little real idea of the TV attacks that Romney has been exposed to. What we do know is that Romney probably hasn't even been 'defined' yet, despite the most valiant efforts and one-sided coverage of the media. He hasn't won, but he hasn't lost, and he has weathered some of the cheapest shots ever, from the way he transported his dog to his wife's work record, with an extended stop-over dwelling on his morals as a 'rich guy'.

This isn't some technical exercise of playbook electioneering. If Romney revealed more of his plans earlirt, it would only have given the Democrats more material to distract and make mischief with. The Democrats are already accusing him of all manner of attacks on poor people, for the benefit of his rich friends. Do you really believe that opening up another years tax returns would help his candidacy?

Or raising the issue of the unfunded liabilities of social security and all the other entitlements would lead to anything other than a campaign to demonize him?

In all of this, what have the Democats advanced as the next step in solving America's problems? Nothing, that's what. Yes, they are running a dispicable, dishonest, ugly campaign. Vital as 'winning' is. there are better criteria for a 'good campaign' than that.
cosmostein





Joined: 04 Oct 2006
Posts: 7420
Reputation: 297
votes: 21
Location: The World

PostPosted: Fri Aug 17, 2012 11:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I guess I am confused by what you would like the end goal to be;

While we disagree on who would win the White House if an election was held today, I think the larger disagreement is that you seem to feel the GOP doesnt need to run on policy because you feel that sound policy will be eviscerated by the Democrats and would cost them an election?

I may be misreading, which is why I am asking for clarification.
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 4123
Reputation: 238
votes: 8

PostPosted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 11:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

You're right, I mixed a lot of issues into a melange that it too complex ...

What I dislike is that you blame Romney for failing to overcome the combined ideological might of the Democratic Party, whereas I see it as a huge challenge. Obama, after all, enjoys the benefits of (1) incumbancy, (2) the huge financial and manpower advantage of organized labour, and (3) the backing of a media that has become almost an adjunct of the Democratic Party.

I think you underestimate the power of the media by a big margin. Consider, for example, that Jon Corzine is walking away from a $200 million heist of customer funds while Mitt Romney is being pilloried for revealing only two years of his tax returns. (Corzine, the one-time CEO of MF Global, is a major fund-raiser for Obama.) The examples could proliferate.

The other thing is your narrow focus on polling, but we've already explored that.

Responding to the "if-the-election-were-held-today" question ... if the election were held today, we'd have already seen a debate between the contestants, and the great mainstream of the US electorate would have given the campaign serious attention ... and the results would be quite different that what the August polls show.

To me, the fact that Mitt Romney is doing as well as he is, with all his handicaps, means that he may not be winning the campaign, but he isn't losing. My view is that no part of the Obama campaign is working. He has abandoned any positive program in favour of mischief-making and distrating issults, class and racial warfare, and mounting attacks on any ideas on what to do about the actual economic situation the US is in ... and even this is failing.

My question really was ... How could you realistically present a reform of entitlements, for example, without running into a shit-storm of vile accusations and mis-characterizations? The details are too complex, the issues too important, and the media are off-side on the discussion, if not the issues. Social security reform wasn't called the 'third rail' of American politics for nothing.

I would be interested in your ideas on this. I know it isn't easy, but your assessment would be of great interest to me because I respect your experience and general approach to these things.
cosmostein





Joined: 04 Oct 2006
Posts: 7420
Reputation: 297
votes: 21
Location: The World

PostPosted: Tue Aug 21, 2012 10:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bugs wrote:
What I dislike is that you blame Romney for failing to overcome the combined ideological might of the Democratic Party, whereas I see it as a huge challenge. Obama, after all, enjoys the benefits of (1) incumbancy, (2) the huge financial and manpower advantage of organized labour, and (3) the backing of a media that has become almost an adjunct of the Democratic Party.


Romney spent millions making this election about "Obama the man" till Ryan was picked then it became about "Obama and his record" and poof you started seeing favorable numbers trend his way.

Romney's approach during the start of the summer was ineffective;
Had it been effective you would see Tim Pawlenty on the ticket right now and not Paul Ryan.

There is no question that Romney's original approach was less effective then his current approach yet "I am blaming him" for not being able to overcome the Democratic machine?

His approach stunk;
Now it doesn't and he is now running a fairly effective campaign about issues.

Where exactly have I been unfair to Mitt?

Bugs wrote:
I think you underestimate the power of the media by a big margin. Consider, for example, that Jon Corzine is walking away from a $200 million heist of customer funds while Mitt Romney is being pilloried for revealing only two years of his tax returns. (Corzine, the one-time CEO of MF Global, is a major fund-raiser for Obama.) The examples could proliferate.


I see where you are coming from;
and I see the bias you mention every day when I see the difference in tact when someone with a (D) beside their name is interviewed as opposed to (R)

However I do not give them the credit that many seem to;
If the 2010 midterms had not happened the way they did showing one of the largest voter rebellions against the Democrats in US history, because Ted Kennedy's former seat was won by a Republican and because Chris Christie and Bob McDonnell are both Governors in States that voted Obama and all this has happened since the 2008 Presidential Election then sure, the media would have been very effective;

The thing is since 2008, they just haven't been if the goal is "Obama all the time"

Do I think there is a bias in media?
Yes.

Do I think that it has the power to change elections?
Perhaps, simply not on the scale you are implying.

In 2010 we saw what I can only call a seismic shift in support;
The GOP added nearly 10% on to their previous vote totals and a 63 seat shift in the GOP's favor, that is the single largest shift during a midterm since 1938.

A Six Senate Seat shift, the largest since 1994, and six governors mansions changed hands into the GOP camp.

If the media's impact and favor of the President was that strong and the American people so weak minded we wouldn't have seen the result we did.

The GOP lost the White House in 2008 because they ran a 72 year old moderate who selected a half term Governor who had zero Washington experience and had no appeal in the States you needed to win, not because the media overwhelmed the minds of the voters.

Yeah, there is a media bias.
However its not brainwashing nor has it proven effective in every election since 2008,

Romney doesn't seem to want to grant interviews;
I think that hurts him in the eyes of voters more then whatever CNN may be spewing.

He is genuinely a good man, a family man, a guy who built his success like the American Dream implied he should.

He should stop running from that.

Bugs wrote:
The other thing is your narrow focus on polling, but we've already explored that.


Won't go there today :)

Bugs wrote:
Responding to the "if-the-election-were-held-today" question ... if the election were held today, we'd have already seen a debate between the contestants, and the great mainstream of the US electorate would have given the campaign serious attention ... and the results would be quite different that what the August polls show.


Yet I have already established that rarely happens.

Not to say that its impossible because Bush was ahead in August 1992 with Perot in second, but historically there is rarely a massive shift on a State level from August onward, you get what you get.

You have the links above in this thread, you can take issue with them if you wish but it doesn't make them any less correct.

Its not impossible for Romney to win, but it would be a historic rarity.
One I would be thrilled to see occur, but a rarity none the less.

To unseat a President you need to go to the hoop early and often.

Bugs wrote:
To me, the fact that Mitt Romney is doing as well as he is, with all his handicaps, means that he may not be winning the campaign, but he isn't losing.


From a Moral high-ground stance;
100% agreed;

However our goals are the same;
270 Electoral votes, that is the race I need him to win.

Bugs wrote:
My view is that no part of the Obama campaign is working. He has abandoned any positive program in favour of mischief-making and distrating issults, class and racial warfare, and mounting attacks on any ideas on what to do about the actual economic situation the US is in ... and even this is failing.


Here is something we agree on fully;
Obama can't run on his record, because its terrible.

He had two years of unfiltered power to pass whatever he wanted and implement his economic and social plans without compromise and while "failed" may be a harsh word to use its pretty close to reality.

He is attempting to make this election about Mitt Romney the man, attempting to paint his success as "wrong" and taking the attention off the fact that we have seen what this President brings to the table economically;

Its a disaster;

The problem is that Romney can't delve down into the muck;
He needs to remind the population that we have already seen an Obama plan in action from 2008 to 2010.

And while it seems that the addition of Paul Ryan has changed that focus;
I hope it continues.

Bugs wrote:
My question really was ... How could you realistically present a reform of entitlements, for example, without running into a shit-storm of vile accusations and mis-characterizations? The details are too complex, the issues too important, and the media are off-side on the discussion, if not the issues. Social security reform wasn't called the 'third rail' of American politics for nothing.


Isn't that part of the job running as a Conservative?
The attacks on Chris Christie during the 2009 Gubernatorial Election were some of the most vile and unfair I have seen in politics.

But he held the line, ran an election on cutting spending and brutalizing Unions and attacking those very entitlements in a State that voted basically 60 - 40 for Obama just a year prior.

While this may not be the popular sentiment;
Votes like Obama the man better then Romney the man;

Having a war over who is a worse person will not end well for the GOP,

Christie stuck to policy and held the line on platform; there were certainly attack ads focused on his opponent but he didn't win on rhetoric.

Conservatives rarely do, that is the domain of the left.

Bugs wrote:
I would be interested in your ideas on this. I know it isn't easy, but your assessment would be of great interest to me because I respect your experience and general approach to these things.


Give me good policy simple enough and I will move even the most partisan voter into my camp.

Why is Harper the Prime Minister of Canada?
We could discuss policy, AdScam, his lackluster opposition, etc.

However it comes down to one simple moment;

5% GST

Martin was ahead by a fairly wide margin till Harper made that announcement in a Mississauga Best Buy.

Then within two days Harper something strange happened;
Harper broke 30% in Ontario, he surpassed the Liberals in Quebec.

Martin scrambled to push a 0.5% tax cut in the middle tax bracket, while Harper solid a simple "tax cut on everything"

Sure, it was a gimmick but its been 6 years, 196 days of good governance thanks to that gimmick

Romney and Ryan need to play to their strengths;
And the reality is that a Romney/Ryan ticket may be one of the strongest tickets in terms of Economic savvy in American history.

If you go to Mitt Romney's website;
And you look at his policy points he has these small "factoids" on the sides of his website.

Its all brilliant, easy to grasp, smart, policy.

The Economy is the number one issue with a bullet in this US Election;
Romney Economically makes Obama look like a high schooler;
And Ryan makes Biden look like an infant on the topic

If you need to win the midwest, you have a lot of smart voters who will vote for good ideas.

You don't need to attack the entire system or every entitlement; but simply approach the voters as if they are willing to vote on the best policy and not for the best attack ad.
cosmostein





Joined: 04 Oct 2006
Posts: 7420
Reputation: 297
votes: 21
Location: The World

PostPosted: Mon Aug 27, 2012 9:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think the one success the Democrats can take away from this campaign so far is that this healthcare debate has become about if its a good program or not.

When President Obama was sworn in early 2009 he had a super majority in the House and the Senate coupled with one of the worst recessions in American history;

The Democrats decided that Healthcare and not the Economy was the issue to use all that political capital chasing.

In the midst of an economic crisis House Democrats battled Senate Democrats over Healthcare while nearly a trillion dollars in Stimulus money was spent with little debate or oversight.

The discussion shouldn't be about if Heath care is good, bad, or otherwise it should be why the President and his party opted to pass a political plank of their party rather then focus all their efforts on the Economy.

In the two years that the Democrats had free reign they opted for politics over people and in the process sacrificed 64 House Democrats and 6 Senate Democrats to pass a piece of legislation which may ultimately end up being the most expensive program and spending legislation in US history.

The question isnt if Health care is good policy, the question should be why the Democrats didn't make the Economy a priority during a recession.
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 4123
Reputation: 238
votes: 8

PostPosted: Tue Aug 28, 2012 11:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Cosmo ... thanks, once again, for your long and serious response. You make some points that it's good to remember.

Let's use a boxing metaphor rather than a race-track one.

Whether right or wrong, the Romney camp have been afraid that releasing more specific plans would do them damage because it would start the process of identifying whose ox is to be gored first. You have to say -- that's what Obama's side is prepared for. It lies in ambush, waiting for the moment that such statements are made. Then, the demonization begins.

The Democrats have no specific policies on the table either. They don't even have a budget to defend. The media have blacked this out enough that most people don't know even the mutterings about policy on the Democrats' side.

So, in the early rounds, Romney has taken some jabs, but he has parried some of his opposition's most formidable attacks, and landed the odd stinger himself. The champion is tired. He has expended a lot of energy in trying to knock out Romney early, and it shows. He seems tired and confused.

Now we move into the middle rounds, and already, Mitt has established himself as scoring higher than the president on almost everything except 'likeability'. You'd have to say he's ahead on points.

The movement in the electorate is away from the President, towards Mitt. It just that the support only trickles in, at the moment ... and it has to get to the tipping point in several specific states before it has an effect. But this choice involves abandoning someone who the electorate likes, a lot. It wishes Obama had been a success. This is the kind of decision that people generally try to avoid.

In the end, though, they either face up to the change, or they just don't vote.

In boxing terminology, Mitt isn't in a bad spot. He has identified weaknesses in the President's presentations, and a way to discredit him on a number of points. He is getting better at parrying the blows of an increasingly arm-weary President. If he seems robotic in his body language, and too mid-western simple in his boxing style, at least he has a dogged fortitude in him, along with that stainless steel smile.

=========================================

As for the role of media in defining 'normalcy' ... it is huge. For instance, if I measure myself against some refined group of Globe & Mail readers, my attitudes are simply dismissed with a 'tsk, tsk' ... too extreme, too right-wing for their tastes ... that, alone, is reason to close the mind, and turn off the ears.

But, compared to a cross section of my demographic ... my attitudes are entirely mainstream.

There's a voting studies academic, interviewed at uncommonknowledge.com, who pulls a lot of this voting data together, along with his own, and comes to the conclusion that the average American feels that New York attitudes were 'normal', when, in fact, the real normal American thinks closer to the way Texans think.

Think of the financial media. Do they maintain a confusion, or do they clarify the risks and rewards in the market? Does one understand from the financial media where all the money is finally coming from, the source of all this 'liquidity'? ...

Surely it's the same with politics.

======================================

My attitude: we are watching an epic struggle in American politics. Only watching. I have a preference, but I can be objective. The media filter is part of the puzzle.

Romney won the nomination because the Republican party couldn't find another champion more to their liking. It's like having your brother take you to the prom.

To me, this contest is looking more and more ominous for the Democrats because their evasions are becoming more obvious. They have their 'tax cuts for the rich' theme, and not much else. Romney is saying the things you suggest -- but he's saying them on the stump, and these comments aren't much reported.

The press has been involved in 'creating the narrative' for Romney ... they see a 21st century Daddy Warbucks! That they haven't succeeded already is the one of the measures of the success of the Romney campaign.
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 1

  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Congressman Paul Ryan to be Romney's VP choice

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB