Romney + Ryan = Fail

[Torakus]

OK so I probably wasn't going to vote for any Romney ticket anyway, but what the fuck were they thinking? It sure as fuck wasn't "....hmmmm Americans are so polarized, who can we get on this ticket to bridge the gap and bring in that swing vote?" I honestly think Romney shit the bed hard here and this election just went from a toss up to an easy re-election for Obama.

[Embar Angylwrath]

It remains to be seen. There's lots of time and plenty of economic twists that can happen between now and the election. That said, I think Ryan is a good choice for the voters, if not for the Romney election effort. Up until this point, Romney has been soft on the issues. He was basically running the "Im not Obama" campaign. However, with the addition of Ryan, the election becomes a choice of idealogies, which is what it should be. Americans now get to pick the vision they beleive in, no matter where on the political spectrum they stand. And I think thats a good thing, irrespective of the specific policy issues.

[Kulaf]

It certainly doesn't impress me or change my thinking for the vote.

[Fallakin Kuvari]

Its a hard one for me to really get behind, regardless that I think it was a good pick.

There are so many other choices that would've been just a good, and not hurt really good ideas coming out of the House. Someone will have to step up and fill that intellectual void being left when they win and I don't really have faith that they'll be as intelligent as Paul Ryan.

I think you could've run a stronger Campaign with a Christie or a Rand Paul (though the guy is definitely not as practiced(then again, Joe Biden...), and I think you would've brought along some Ron Paul supporters) on your ticket.

[Embar Angylwrath]

It certainly doesn't impress me or change my thinking for the vote.

I think you're in the majority on this. However, what Romney's choice did illuminate is the idealogical differences between the campaigns, which, to me, had been largely unestablished, other than to say "I'm not Obama".

Was it the right choice for Republicans? I don't know. But at least it was a defining choice. That was my point.

[Minute]

Probably hard to find someone who wanted to attach themselves to that losing train.

[Fallakin Kuvari]

Because Obama/Biden is a winning train?

[Minute]

Yes

[Fallakin Kuvari]

All I've seen come out of this administration is one failed policy after another. A willingness to blame the last president for every problem this president "inherited", but apparently has done nothing to own or correct. Then you have the overall malaise of the economy, which is also still Bush's fault, that they've done nothing but make worse. Real Unemployment (U6) is sitting at 15%, "Official" unemployment (U3) is at 8.3% and the economy is stagnant. Our dollar is losing value, due largely to the fact that our Representatives (Republican and Democrat alike) are selling us out to further their agendas and borrowing money that we have no hope of paying off during our lifetimes and this President continues to sign off on it. Add to that that there has been no official budget passed in a couple of years and this President is averaging 1.413 Trillion in deficit spending per year (compared to W's 410 Billion).

Tell me again, how is this a "winning train"?

[Ddrak]

this President continues to sign off on it.

Well, to be fair, not signing it would be far, far worse.

Dd

[Garrdor]

That'd be hilarious if he picked a Randian as a running mate. It'd almost be as funny if McCain picked a tea party princess.

[Fallakin Kuvari]

this President continues to sign off on it.

Well, to be fair, not signing it would be far, far worse.

Dd

It would either A) Cause us to stop borrowing money to keep our current expenditures afloat or B) Do something to change our current expenditures and balance our budget.

More than likely with our politicians, A would happen... but theres always hope for B.

[Ddrak]

@Fallakin: Defaulting on debt for no good reason is always a bad idea. Until the US Dollar gets abandoned as the world's reserve currency (not likely this decade given the Euro's troubles), QE is free money. The rest of the world will bitch and moan, but what are we really gonna do about it?


I should have also added that I think Romney (like any GOP candidate) had to pick up either someone Tea Party-ish or someone Democrat-ish. I think he would have been better off going for someone to the left side, as the Tea Party isn't going to vote for Obama anyway so you may as well try to grab as many votes as possible directly from him. Going TP side means giving the Dems a shooting target to fire up the base.

Dd

[Lurker]

However, with the addition of Ryan, the election becomes a choice of idealogies, which is what it should be.

Only if Romney tells the truth about the affect of his policy proposals, which he won't.

Then you have the overall malaise of the economy, which is also still Bush's fault, that they've done nothing but make worse.

Do you really think the economy is worse now than when Obama took office, or are you just repeating something you heard on Fox News? Then vs. Now. There's no question things are better now than they were when Obama took office. And that's even with the constant Republican sabotage of the economic recovery.

this President is averaging 1.413 Trillion in deficit spending per year (compared to W's 410 Billion).

Even Embar's learned not to repeat this dishonest talking point. The deficit was 1.2 trillion before Obama took office.

[Fallakin Kuvari]

this President is averaging 1.413 Trillion in deficit spending per year (compared to W's 410 Billion).

Even Embar's learned not to repeat this dishonest talking point. The deficit was 1.2 trillion before Obama took office.

L2read. Spending Per Year

And yes, I believe that the economy has not improved. That's not tacked to anything on Fox News because I don't watch Cable news anymore. It's based completely on personal experience.

[Fallakin Kuvari]

@Fallakin: Defaulting on debt for no good reason is always a bad idea. Until the US Dollar gets abandoned as the world's reserve currency (not likely this decade given the Euro's troubles), QE is free money. The rest of the world will bitch and moan, but what are we really gonna do about it?

Dd

I get that, but if you want to promote real change you have to apply real pressure in an are that will create controversy. The best way to solve the spending problem is to force them to tackle it head on, even if it causes a temporary flux in the monetary system.

Would the rest of the world hate us? Yes. Are we in dire need of balancing our budget? Yes.

[Lurker]

L2read. Spending Per Year

You didn't give figures for "spending per year"; you gave figures for deficit spending per fiscal year. And you seem to be going back to fiscal year 2008 for Bush and blaming deficit spending in fiscal year 2009 on Obama. Do I need to explain to you why that's moronic and misleading?

L2read indead. It's always funny when you try to act superior.

[Fallakin Kuvari]

L2read. Spending Per Year

You didn't give figures for "spending per year"; you gave figures for deficit spending per fiscal year. And you seem to be going back to fiscal year 2008 for Bush and blaming deficit spending in fiscal year 2009 on Obama. Do I need to explain to you why that's moronic and misleading?

L2read indead. It's always funny when you try to act superior.

Did you even read the article? It goes as far as including the Stimulus passed under Obama mostly as Bush.

And yes, it's deficit spending per year which can be considered unpaid for spending per year. Based on those figures Obama is spending 1.003 Trillion more per year, unpaid for, than Bush did.

Who's acting?

[Lurker]

Yes, I read the op-ed. The talking point is just as dumb and misleading as when Embar said it 2 1/2 years ago.

Obama has not dramatically increased spending. Nearly all of the current deficit is caused by Bush era policies and the recession.

Also, pretending to care about the deficit while supporting Romney/Ryan, candidates pushing policies that are guaranteed to bring larger deficits, leads to the conclusion that you either don't really care about deficits or you are a complete moron.

[Harlowe]

Definitely a polarizing choice. I think Romney would have been better off picking someone moderate to pull away moderates that have no deep love for Obama. Choosing Ryan is only assuring him he's going to get people that would have never voted Obama anyway.

ETA personally I think a choice like Condi Rice would have been really interesting, but I just don't think Romney is the type to run with a woman period.