Presidential election 2012: Romney v Obama

Politics US Politics
1

Since it is now pretty obvious that this will be a two horse (pig?)race, let the debate begin. There hasn’t been much of a debate to date, just people who hate Obama and those who don’t (and a couple who like him). No one seems to really like Romney-he’s just not likeable. I personally don’t like either candidate, but I severely dislike one more. To be fair, the people who don’t like Obama have good reasons:
pjmedia.com/victordavishanson/is … epage=true
There is a lot of ranting in that article, but some valid points. My main beef with Obama is that he has been a fairly weak leader. He should have completely went for the health plan he wanted, for example, and not bowed to the blue dogs. That was his fault entirely. He has never been as strong of a leader as Clinton was. Policy wise, I don’t always agree with him, but that leads me to Romney.

I don’t remember a candidate this weak since Dukakis. Romney has avoided being specific on any issue.

[quote] I’m not sure I’ve ever seen anything like this.

If this is the Etch A Sketch phase of Mitt Romney’s campaign, he seems to want to freeze it the moment after you shake the toy, before you turn the knobs again: blank.

Mitt Romney wants to run as the generic candidate, the every man and any man, undefined, nonspecific, the other guy, anybody but Obama.

Romney inserts “economy” into every sentence but recoils from specificity like a slug from salt… He can create jobs and make the economy grow, somehow. He can cut government spending and cut taxes, somehow. He can fix immigration and education, somehow. He can do a better job of dealing with the healthcare system and our entitlement programs, somehow.[/quote]

This strategy obviously cannot last. He is going to have to stand for something beyond “job creation” as if that is a principle or plan of some kind. For how long can he keep saying what Obama has done on immigration or the economy is wrong when he offers no plans for anything whatsoever. I have not heard a single plan put forth, which leads to his second big problem: regardless of what he says, he is going to contradict a previous position. He has zero credibility on health care or gay marriage,for example. No matter what position he takes, it will be easy for team-Obama to paint him as a flip flopper. Right now, team Romney seems to be keeping him on the fence on every issue. Have you seen this guy in interviews? It’s like watching a caricature of a slimy politician who will say anything to get elected, but it’s real. Additionally, all politicians lie, but Romney seems to lie as if he is running in the days before there was radio. He lies about his lies. I think the dem party should buy 30 minute prime time slots and just run his statements for a month up to the election, Jon Stewart style. At the rate he’s going, they will have enough material for it.

I will be interested to see if Romney comes up with any real plan for…uh, anything. I’m going to stay open minded for now, but I’m not swayed in his direction at all. Plus, I’m still convinced he will lose by wide margins.

2

I will vote for Obama, but I can accept Romney. Romney has all the money so I don’t see how he will lose. He seems like a nice enough fellow.

3

Except that he’s actually not a nice person. Much of his wealth was accrued at Bain Capitol by rigging his business’ services in such a way that, no whether or not his business did a good job, he made millions of dollars. Lots of times, Bain Capitol did not make a business any money at all, but still liquidated all of their assets through millions of dollars in fees. Romney is a sleazy car salesman, and he only looks out for himself, not the taxpayer.

Also, I’m not sure how you totally skipped the reality of the obvious problem that “oh hey, this guy has a boat-load of money, which will allow him to win” and arrived at “he seems like a nice enough fellow” without pointing out the endemic problem with our democracy.

Obama’s not weak, but he’s a politician, through and through. He’s clearly not on a “3 dimensional chess” level, since he sometimes makes breathtakingly wrong calculations, and misses opportunities. Then again, being a politician is probably just as bad as being weak, as both things mean that you are unlikely to stick to the values that allowed you to gain favor.

On the other hand, Republicans have gone insane since Bush “won” in 2000, and have used every lie and deceit tactic available to coerce Obama, the lackey compromiser, into adopting their policies. Remember, Obamacare was a Republican idea before Obama adopted it.

4

Romney had a very successful health care system in Mass. They have almost 100% of the people covered.

5

Romney appears to be writing the script for the Obama campaign…again:

I thought republicans hated people who enjoy water sports?

Remember how much stink republicans made about this? They actually tried to paint kite boarding, something that actually takes a small investment, as elitist. I kite board and even hang out with kite boarders at the beach. Elitist is not one of the adjectives that comes to mind…

I guess its ok if you’re riding bitch on an expensive jet ski, then hopping in a speed boat most Americans cannot afford, and then swimming with a shirt on. Obama is likely thinking: just do you, Mitt.

6

Drudge reports that Condi Rice is the frontrunner for Romney VP. I can’t believe anyone would think that would be a good idea. Plus, he’s fundraising with Cheney this weekend. I guess they looked at the polls and said that what the country needs is Bush/Cheney II.

7

Republican John Kerry (Romney) has way too many skeletons in his closet, and a fucked up religion if all those skeletons fail to turn off or scare voters. No amount of money can help him win.

Obama is teflon, people have called him:

-a foreigner
-a muslim
-a former madrassa student
-a socialist
-a wealth redistributor
-a Christian extremist
-a destroyer of America
-a murderer
-not a ‘real’ black person
-a drug user (admitted by Obama)

etc
etc
etc

And yet somehow people still think the media is in the bag for him.

Romney doesn’t have a hope in hell, Americans truly don’t want Romney (even his own party’s faithful dislike him) and you can bump this thread in November.

Real talk

8

Yes, and he’s sworn to repeal ObamaCare. Can you really “accept” that?

9

I’m a US citizen and this is the first election I can remember when I feel completely uninhibited about voting for a third party candidate.

This is not to say that there are no differences between Romney and Obama. The come from very different backgrounds.

Romney in no way can relate to the struggle of poor and the middle class to survive, nor could he give a damn if they all starved in the streets. All he cares about is the value of his stock portfolio. It’s obvious that Romney would be corrupt to the bone, working for Wall Street hedge fund interests. To use the #OccupyWallStreet expression, Romney represents the 1%. You might as well vote for Bernie Madoff for president. As red meat for his conservative base, Romney might ban abortion - if his daughter or granddaughter needs an abortion, he’ll ship her off to Canada or Europe.

Obama, on the other hand, was until recently a struggling member of the middle class. He understands what it’s like to be in the 99%. He also gives nice, reassuring speeches, to let us know that “he cares.” Unlike Romney, he is not worth hundreds of millions of dollars - yet. But he’s well on his way. Following in the steps of Bill Clinton, who sold us out big time by deregulating Wall Street (see here and here). For his efforts, Clinton is now worth well over $100 million - the bribes come mainly in the form of “speaking fees” paid to him by Wall Street bankers who don’t even show up to hear the speeches (why should they, they wrote them). As a reward for those $16 trillion in bankster bailouts, Obama can expect an even bigger payoff than Clinton. Obama’s two daughters will (just like Chelsea Clinton) be guaranteed high-paying jobs with a Wall Street hedge fund (where Chelsea met her bankster husband). “Hope and Change” was never anything but a slogan. Unlike Romney, Obama might toss us a few worthless crumbs, like “gay marriage,” an issue I don’t even care about.

So go ahead and vote third party, if you feel inspired enough to vote at all. If you’re a conservative, you might want to consider the Libertarian Party or Constitution Party (the latter especially big with the anti-abortion folks). Don’t be fooled by the “Tea Party” - it’s not a party, just a front for the Republicans. Liberals have several interesting choices, including the Green Party, Justice Party or (my personal favorite) the Pirate Party. The chances that any of these third parties could actually win the presidency is certainly nil, but at least voting third party might help you sleep at night. You’ll be able to tell your grand children after the USA has collapsed that at least you didn’t vote for that guy who declared martial law in 2015 (after the food riots broke out in the tent cities).


“Vote for me and I’ll shove this finger up your ass”

10

Right wing media claims that Obama is Gutting Welfare Reform.
This is why Romney has an excellent chance to win the election. He has an effective propaganda system that describes itself as news but has intense hatred for the president.
And also, he has all the money.

11

[quote=“Dr. McCoy”]Right wing media claims that Obama is Gutting Welfare Reform.
This is why Romney has an excellent chance to win the election. He has an effective propaganda system that describes itself as news but has intense hatred for the president.
And also, he has all the money.[/quote]

<Sigh.> “Those evil Repubs just won’t let us win.” Here’s a hankie.

Liberals control every branch of media there is except for perhaps AM radio, for God’s sake: NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, NYT, Washington Post, LA Times, Chicago Tribune, every movie studio, every major magazine like Time, Newsweek, etc. And you STILL aren’t satisfied. Fox News even caved and hired well known liberals like Jesse Jackson’s daughter

but that still ain’t enough for you.

I’m telling you: conservatives smell blood in the water. Liberals are WEAK and they know it. There’s fear in the air because they know Hussein is a weak guy and he’s been a weak president. His campaign is making stupid mistakes like:

Romney Demands Apology For Obama Campaign’s ‘Felon’ Lie

breitbart.com/Big-Government … ogy-demand

[quote]This morning, the Obama team, springboarding from mainstream media coverage it had likely astroturfed, said that Mitt Romney was either a “felon” or a liar. Its mainstream media lackeys quickly played it up. And this morning, the Obama team was completely debunked by members of its own media, who were shamed into telling the truth by an enraged New Media. Now, the Romney campaign is calling for an apology from the Obama campaign and a retraction from the Boston Globe.

“President Obama’s campaign hit a new low today when one of its senior advisers made a reckless and unsubstantiated charge to reporters about Mitt Romney that was so over the top that it calls into question the integrity of their entire campaign,” said Matt Rhoades, Campaign Manager of Romney For President. “President Obama ought to apologize for the out-of-control behavior of his staff, which demeans the office he holds. Campaigns are supposed to be hard fought, but statements like those made by Stephanie Cutter belittle the process and the candidate on whose behalf she works.”

Another day, another Obama campaign implosion on Bain Capital.[/quote]

Thing is, this charge has been repeatedly refuted by left wing factcheckers:
washingtonpost.com/blogs/fac … _blog.html

[quote]Why does it matter when Mitt Romney left Bain Capital?

Millions of dollars of attack ads by the Obama campaign are hanging in the balance. If Romney left Bain in February 1999, when he departed to run the Olympics, then a number of business deals that went sour (such as KB Toys) can’t be counted as part of Romney’s tenure. If he actually left in 2002, as the Obama campaign alleges, then those deals are fair game.

We have looked at this issue before, back in January, and thought we had settled it.

But now the Boston Globe has raised the issue again. The story seems to hinge on a quote from a former Securities and Exchange Commission member, which would have more credibility if the Globe had disclosed she was a regular contributor to Democrats. (Interestingly, “The Real Romney,” a book on the former Massachusetts governor, by Boston Globe reporters, states clearly that he left Bain when he went to run the Olympics and details the turmoil that ensued when he suddenly quit, nearly breaking up the partnership)

We’re considering whether to once again take a deeper look at this, though it really feels like Groundhog Day again. There appears to be some confusion about how partnerships are structured and managed, or what SEC documents mean. (Just because you are listed as an owner of shares does not mean you have a managerial role.)

To accept some of the claims, one would have to believe that Romney, with the advice of his lawyers, lied on government documents and committed a criminal offense. Moreover, you would have to assume he willingly gave up his share to a few years of retirement earnings — potentially worth millions of dollars — so he could say his retirement started in 1999.[/quote]
This piece from the WP is well worth reading.

Even Bill defended Romney:

This nonsense does not reflect the actions of a campaign that’s winning. They’re losing and they know it. Even their own factcheckers are calling them on their BS.

If Romney has the brains to pick Condoleezza Rice as a running mate, things well get very interesting very quickly.

12

Liberals are weak by definition. But that whole liberal mainstream media myth is as phony as Obama’s fake Kenyan birth certificate.

13

Finally saw a picture of this Romney chap. He has grey sideburns and normal-coloured hair. He’ll win for SURE.

14

This election is going to be a massacre. He’s the weakest candidate since Dukakis. I really hoped that the republicans sacrificed McCain in the last election and were regrouping. Obama gave them a lot of opportunities to take back the gov’t but they seem to be hellbent on destroying themselves. Maybe they will pull their heads out of their asses for 2016.

15

Which one’s tallest? That’s usually who wins, isn’t it?

16

As for the “Condi for Veep” boomlet, ain’t gonna happen- she’s on record as being pro-choice, and another convenient conversion from long-time views would be too much for the base to handle.

Besides, do the Republicans really want to go around reminding people of the glory days of Dubbya and the Iraq War?

17

I hope you’re right. But Republican politicians and kingmakers are dishonest to the very core of their beings, and will rig elections, lie, cheat, steal and manipulate to win.

I hope the entire Republican party self-destructs under the weight of its lunacy.

18

You’re kidding, right? The media are dominated by the right wing. There are very few liberal voices out there. If you’re lucky, you might live in an area where you can hear liberals like Randi Rhodes or Norman Goldman. Usually relegated to AM radio at inconvenient hours.

19

Yeah, Obama is all talk. I mean, it’s not as if he passed a trillion dollar stimulus that stopped the worst recession in 80 years. It’s not as if he fulfilled a century old liberal dream by passing health care reform that will expand coverage to tens of milions. It’s not as if he passed a financial reform bill to prevent Wall Street excesses and protect American consumers.

By all means, vote for a third party candidate with zero chance of winning and take a vote away from a liberal Democrat in what is sure to be a close election. If nothing else it will demonstrate your anger with the president for being “all talk”.

20

According to Forbes (not exactly a liberal mouthpiece), Obama has been the smallest spender since Eisenhower.

forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2 … ack-obama/

Looking at the chart, it certainly seems that them Republicans sure like a big government.