Political trends

[Tampa Turtle]

For me the biggest issue with Romney is the poor campaign and foreign policy gaffes. It does not inspire me for him as Presidential material. It is not like he didn't have a favorable economic scenario to unseat an incumbent, campaign money, and time to build an organization from top to bottom. I was talking to some of my friends who are in the political consulting business and they state that in central Florida they are having a hard time keeping the locals out here. It is a much different feel for the two Bush races.

[packsaddle]

That aspect distresses me as well. But remember how Romney turned the Olympics around. And he's obviously a very shrewd businessman. I credit his current woes to the run-up to the nomination. He took on political nonsense baggage that is, I fear, going to torpedo his success. I have no doubt that once in office he will take the objective, pragmatic approach that needs to be taken...and ignore the crazies in his party. But they are taking a terrible toll on his campaign right now.

 

His choice of Paul Ryan is symptomatic of this. I almost fell out of my chair when he made that choice. That was truly a Faustian bargain. Trouble is, I have my doubts that it did what it was supposed to do..and that was to placate the extreme elements of his party. I suspect that they still have their doubts....and the relative silence in these forums on the part of persons whom I thought would have supported Romney is evidence of that, I think.

 

Again, if I was a conspiracy theorist and if I thought the Tea Party had brains enough to do it, I'd think this was all by design in order to make sure there IS no plan for the future. If you think this is far-fetched, think about it every time Ryan makes the statements he makes to AARP meetings, unapologetically. There's a reason he does those things. It's as if they WANT to fail.

 

Romney is a good guy. He's pragmatic. He's not afraid to speak the inconvenient truth (even if it hurts him politically). I think he'll do a good job if we'll just put him in office. Ryan, I'll just have to hold my nose.

[moosetracker]

So, what if Romney gets elected, then something happens to him (run over by a plane).. And Ryan then becomes President?..

 

My husband did not like Obama, but had the idea some racist would eventually assassinate him before the 4 years was up. He voted Obama, thinking Biden would be a great president.. Surprise, Surprise..

 

This year, he was geared to vote Republican until he got a whiff of your canidate AND his running mate.. So this year, still not liking Obama, he will vote for him..

[ghjim]

I am a Democrat and a big Obama fan. But I am very aware that a majority of Americans do not share my views.

 

This entire election has been the Republican's to lose.

The party rejected some candidates early on that would have swept the independent vote. But the Republicans keep nominating extremists.

[Beavah]

Romney's obvious willingness to change with circumstances and needs means that I can't take his promises seriously.

 

Well, I can agree with that.

 

But remember how Romney turned the Olympics around. And he's obviously a very shrewd businessman.

 

I do remember how Romney turned the Olympics around.

 

He got a massive government bailout. A taxpayer bailout so huge that it exceeded the combined budget of a half-dozen Olympic games.

 

Now, in some ways, I reckon that is shrewd business practice, eh?

 

Private reward but public risk is what da modern GOP extols as business virtue.

 

I was undecided until da last two weeks. It's become clear, though, that in the one area where da President really has the most impact - foreign policy - Governor Romney is a complete neophyte. Worse, he lacks da temperament for it.

 

Ultimately, the economy is out of da President's hands, eh? Da U.S. economy depends a bit on sound and stable tax law and spending, a bit on regulation, a bit on a transparent and predictable monetary policy. All those things da President can influence only indirectly. Mostly, though, the economy depends on da productivity and fairness of the American people, not on anyone in da government. So I've never been inclined to vote for anybody for da executive's job based on any wishful thinking that they can affect the economy.

 

Beavah

 

[ghjim]

President Obama appointed a bi-partisan committee to come up with a plan to balance the budget. Republicans and Democrats together came up with a plan to:

 

1. cut spending

 

2. raise taxes.

 

Both party leaders rejected the plan.

 

I don't know what more a president can do.

 

 

[packsaddle]

You guys are BRUTAL!

No, I'm not talking about Moosetracker or ghjim, or Beavah...YOU guys are like creampuffs. Big, fluffy, airfilled wads of empty calories.

No, I'm talking about the self-proclaimed 'conservatives' who are letting me play the part of Horatius at the bridge.

C'mon fellas, where the heck are you? Help me defend Romney. I'm being buried in creampuffs and there's only so many of those things I can eat. They're wearing me down with adipose tissue!

 

Edit: Ghjim, that plan would have had a chance if Obama had really put his shoulder into getting it passed. He didn't. He essentially abandoned it and left Simpson and Bowles hung out to dry, kind of like the so-called 'conservatives' are hanging ME out to dry with my support for Romney.

 

Edit Part Two: Am I really on scouter.com or is this some kind of contrary universe I got stuffed into during a mini-rapture? Of all people, here I am defending the Republican nominee and everyone who bothers to post seems to be in support of the Democrat. What the heck is going on here?(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

[moosetracker]

Awww.. Packsaddle.. I feel sorry for you Heres is the only thing I got.. Seems like what I have seen his sons they are very nice.. That Spanish speaking one seems like he has alot of personality.. Maybe someday they may get into politics and they have a better shot.. Also during the RNC, what I learned about his Mom & Dad, had I been of voting age, I may have voter for either of them. (Don't quite think much of Queen Anne though.. The "We Love you women!" comment did nothing for me.. Thought I needed to take a shower..) Maybe the Romneys are an every other generation type of family, because the polygamist GrandDad probably wouldn't have had my vote..

 

 

Anyway, your not alone! You got Callooh! Callay! in your corner.. Although he really hasn't said what he likes about Romney, just that he dislikes all Liberals.

[Tampa Turtle]

Politics aside all 4 guys running seem:

 

(1) Do be pretty nice guys at a personal level.

(2) Seem to be pretty good family men. No kinda Messy Reagan Family dynamics.

(3) Have nice families. No Billy Carters.

(4) Seem to exercise.

 

So I guess that is a step forward.

[Lisabob]

Packsaddle, maybe this is an indication of the depth of the problem for team Romney - even their own likely supporters (ex: BSA types, who tend to lean heavily to the right) don't care enough for the guy to get their hackles up when he's taking a hit.

 

Anyway, whether Romney is personally a decent guy, or a good business man, isn't really the question. Sure, he MIGHT be a moderate (hard to tell, with all the flip flopping he's done in the last 4 years, but maybe...). But suppose he wins, will he end up being hijacked by the more extremist tea party fringes of his own party? Will he be dragged to the right, to satisfy them?

 

Given his behaviors in the primaries, I'd put money on it, except I'm reasonably sure he'll lose the election and so we'll never find out.

 

I do know a lot of "independents" who are not so much voting FOR Obama, as AGAINST what the current Republican party seems to stand for - an issue much bigger than Mr. Romney.

 

Oh and by the way, the demographic transition we as a country are undergoing is going to be interesting, if the Republicans continue to ignore and diss the concerns of women and Latinos (and African Americans, but that's a group that typically votes Democratic already). Some day, and soon, the Republicans are going to discover that their core constituency consists of a handful of angry old white guys somewhere in the plains states, and the rest of us have just moved on.

 

 

[Callooh! Callay!1428010939]

"Callooh! Callay!, since you seem to be a passionate critic of things liberal, help me out with my support for Romney. Please bring to the discussion what you think the positive aspects of his Presidency will be."

 

Passionate? Maybe not so much as you've inferred. My vote for Romney will be perfunctory... not passionate. Positive aspects? Romney professes to be less eager to grow Leviathan. He'll have a tough fight against the current just to slow the rate. One may reasonably assume that his appointees and advisors will not be the likes of Eric Holder, John Holdren, Arne Duncan, Cass Sunstein, Susan Rice, Samantha Power, and Valarie Jarret.

 

In my previous posts, I did not mention and did not have in mind the upcoming election. Who wins that election is not so important as what the results of that election indicate about us... the American people. We go astray from the principles of individual liberty (and responsibility) if we look to the President to be the center of problem solving, wealth and job creation, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. No one should have that kind of power over us all.

 

[Callooh! Callay!1428010939]

 

"letting me play the part of Horatius at the bridge."

 

Hold the phone there, Horatius. Are you saying that in that battle, the Etruscans were excitedly milling about outside weapons' range, taunting Horatius and ostentatiously grappling with straw men while he speared a few fish over at the bridge before losing interest in fish confined to a barrel?

 

Your Etruscans aren't engaging any truths you might defend at this bridge. They're not open to persuasion. They're making noise, setting straw men alight and boasting that they've proved something if you won't do the same.

 

We find many of your Etruscans wielding personal narratives like.... "I'm a moderate and I've voted for candidates from both parties in the past..." or "I'm an independent..." Telling us these personal details as if this is evidence of how well considered and wise their political opinions are, when they might just as well be evidence of incoherence, instability, lack of guiding principle, failure to understand the difference between dependent and independent variables, vanity, wishful thinking, superficiality, susceptibility to being hornswoggled, or any number of other things.

 

Approaching the bridge we did witness one self styled "old school conservative" speaking up for conservativism the way Marc Antony spoke "beholden to Brutus" at Caesar's funeral. One wonders that this transparent rhetorical artifice is still employed... and then one notices the audience... and surmises that maybe the council for the prosecution understands the jury.

 

Oh look! ...a squirrel! http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/undecided-voter/1418227

(This message has been edited by Callooh! Callay!)

[moosetracker]

Well I did work out sense from the paragraph about independent voters, and got a kick out of the comedy video..

 

No one says the independent voters reasoning for which side they choose this election is any better than anyone elses reasons. It is just a statement that reflects current news analysis that as the Republican party shifts further & further right, it is becoming something the moderate voter can not vote for.

 

I disagree it means we do not have guiding principles.. It is just our guiding principles are not YOUR guiding principles.. Our guiding principles are telling us that the Republican party has stepped out of the mainstream of the modern world. You can not lead a super power like the USA by throwing us back into the dark ages.

 

I saw a poll that showed that in the last 6 months, Republicans were leaving the Republican party in droves. Becoming independent voters.. They do not feel this party reflects their values anymore.

 

Then those who are staying are at constant war with each other, because you have two warring interests trying to coexist.. Even half of your Republican party does not share YOUR guiding principles.. It is just that if your separate, you both would be too small to win any election.. So you are stuck together unable to live with each other, unable to live without each other.. Sending an unclear, confusing message to the world of what it is that you do stand for..(This message has been edited by moosetracker)

[Callooh! Callay!1428010939]

You're right about that... we do find greater diversity of thought among Republicans. If one wants to be among masses who strictly conform to the party line across a wide range of issues, the GOP isn't the place for that.

[packsaddle]

Lisabob, your observations are astute as usual. I really feel for Romney. He's an honest, honorable guy being whipped back and forth in the turbulence of Republican politics. I guess some of us criticize this as flip-flopping. To anyone who's ever tried to swim through the swift current of a river, this is little more than taking advantage of every short-term opportunity to find the safest passage. The last thing we want in turbulence like that is some monolithic hulk that's going to wrap itself around the next rock around the bend.

 

Callooh! Callay!, I accept that you're not passionate about Romney. But when I read what you write, I see passion for your ideas. Anyway, I think in this case poor Horatius is simply confused as to which side he's supposed to defend from. Poor Romney seems to be 'catching it' from within as well as without.

 

I will say this: if Romney loses this it won't be due to the strength of reasoning on the part of the Democrats nor will it be because of the superior skills and plan of action on the part of Obama. Like ghjim wrote, this is for the Republicans to lose and if that's what happens the responsibility will lie squarely at the feet of the Tea Party. And while reasonable persons would recognize this fairly easily, the Tea Party will likely point the finger at the rest of the Republicans and then continue their 'loose cannon' approach to politics. I guess in a sense, because the Republican party CAN'T seem to bring itself to repudiate these guys, the Tea Party might just be right.