The American Politics Discussion Thread

I wonder if Romney has any chance of winning the presidency now. I know there are some in the right-wing base who want to hear him talk more like he did in the video, but the stuff he's been recorded saying doesn't seem like it would sit will with swing voters and independents. Romney's behind in most of the swing states like Virginia, Florida, Iowa, Ohio, and Colorado, (according to RealClearPolitics) and The only swing state where Romney has a lead is North Carolina.

Went said:

"My job is not to worry about those people."

Click to expand...

I think what he said was incredibly stupid, but also not surprising. He's known to speak out of both sides of mouth and cater to whatever crowd he's talking to at the time. Most politicians do

So in that instance? Rich folks. Friends of his. Financial backers and supporters. Do they want to hear that he cares about them or the poor? Certainly not the poor, that's not their interest. Later when he visits Florida (probably a great number of those 47% not paying taxes supposedly are elderly) he's going to be talking about how he supports them and protecting Medicare and whatever which else.

Besides... 47% is receiving some kind of support, yes. Not paying taxes though? No. More like half of that. Interestingly though, there would of course be a certain element of the poor or those who just don't give a damn - but also the elderly like I mention, and when you look at the demographics a lot of southern states. He's talking about his core voting base XD

With all that said though, I didn't take the "my job isn't to worry about these people" as having concern for them or not in his potential role as president. I took it as, "I can't get them to vote for me. I won't bother. I need you [people in the room] to lend me your support and get me elected"

I find his Israel stuff more interesting, really. For all the nonsensical flack he's given Obama on not being a good friend to Israel, Romney essentially says "Too tough to solve. I'll kick the can down to whoever the President is that follows me"

TRIFORCE89 said:

~

So in that instance? Rich folks. Friends of his. Financial backers and supporters. Do they want to hear that he cares about them or the poor? Certainly not the poor, that's not their interest. Later when he visits Florida (probably a great number of those 47% not paying taxes supposedly are elderly) he's going to be talking about how he supports them and protecting Medicare and whatever which else.

~

I find his Israel stuff more interesting, really. For all the nonsensical flack he's given Obama on not being a good friend to Israel, Romney essentially says "Too tough to solve. I'll kick the can down to whoever the President is that follows me"

Click to expand...

I believe that there really is a substantial number (don't know the exact number) who really don't pay federal income tax because they are too poor or they get tax deductions of some kind. Lots still pay state taxes, and of course sales tax. So I think it's true in a sense that lots of people don't pay certain taxes, but some of them are the kind of people who would vote for Romney.

All the other stuff he said about people being lazy, etc., is of course awful and wrong.

Also, to be fair, I think Romney was being critical of the peace process and saying that previous presidents have kicked the can down the road, not that it's what he planned to do. Of course, he doesn't have his own solution that I'm aware of so pointing out that others haven't solved the problem isn't doing him any good either.

I think Romney is making it too easy for Obama to win. Romney really isn't that smart, and for him to make it as the final Republican candidate is a bit too out of whack. Taking that into consideration, and Republican senators and reps being the shrude people they are, I think Obama is in for something very interesting besides your regular presidential election. Remember those "Bush Cheats '04" bumper stickers? Yeah. Who says it can't happen again?

If by chance something crazy happens, don't expect me to not quote the crap out of this post lol. XD

New, potentional, ****storm for Romney.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...2e5096-0417-11e2-91e7-2962c74e7738_story.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...e2-9132-f2750cd65f97_story.html?tid=obnetwork

Turns out, Romney decided to not file for all his deductions, just so his tax rate wouldn't fall under his earlier stated 13%. Had he taken all his deductions, he'd have had a ~10% tax rate.

"limited their deductions of charitable contributions to conform to the governor's statement in August, based on the January estimate of income, that he paid at least 13 percent in income taxes in each of the last 10 years."

Click to expand...

This is made even worse because of some of his earlier comments, back in January, about him paying all his required taxes and not a dollar more.

At a Republican presidential primary debate in January, on the same night he released his 2010 tax returns, Romney scoffed at the notion that he would pay more taxes than is legally required.

"I pay all the taxes that are legally required and not a dollar more," he said. "I don't think you want someone as the candidate for president who pays more taxes than he owes."

Click to expand...

Well, then the only coherent thing for him to do is leave the race, as he is, in his own words, "unfit to be a president".

Although when was the last time Romney did anything rational during this campaign?

Romney's only shown his taxes from the time he was already sure he would run for president and be in the public spotlight. Anyway, he still has a few years to get that 2 million back from the government. So he can do this after the election, and probably will.

Can I add yet another humorous blunder to the Mittens campaign:

After Ann Romney's plane started spewing smoke, the plane took an emergency landing in Denver, and he said,

"I appreciate the fact that she is on the ground, safe and sound. And I don't think she knows just how worried some of us were. When you have a fire in an aircraft, there's no place to go, exactly. The windows don't open. I don't know why they don't do that. It's a real problem. So it's very dangerous. You can't find any oxygen from outside the aircraft to get in the aircraft, because the windows don't open."

The main reason airplane windows don't open is because there isn't enough oxygen at cruising altitude to keep passengers alive. (The fear of window or cabin failures, which would lead to potentially fatal hypoxia, is why many planes are equipped with emergency oxygen masks.)

Later, he said it was all a joke, but I am not sure by the context of that discussion that he is actually joking!

Also, Mittens released tax returns a week or so ago.
He pays a 14 percent tax...but wait, he donated 30 percent of his money to charity!
Oh, but wait, the examiner also noted that in the 2009 tax return he had a similar percentage of charitable donations; 80 percent of which went to the Church of Ladder Day Saints. He also received a huge tax deduction because of this "charitable" donation. That tax break should not be afforded to the LDS Church, they are essentially a political special interest group. That tithe money should have come out of his own pocket, without receiving any government assistance to lower his effective tax by 3 million. These loop holds essentially allow the wealthy to direct their money into their own subjective causes at the expense of the nation as a whole. Not to mention, it is not equitable that my parents pay an effective federal tax rate of 17% when he is paying 14% with plenty of wealth to spare. Ugh, I am not completely sold on Obama, but without hesitation I would vote for him if I am posed with the question of Romney or Obama?

I don't know if any of this post makes any sense; I am practically falling asleep.

Romney's campaign and well, his entire presidential race deserve a deep, deep study because it's been an extraordinary disaster considering Obama's apparently weak position. To make a comparison, the average price of an Obama ad on TV is $125, as opposed to Romney's $900. And the incumbent payrolls twice as many grassroots supporters and campaigners than Romney, despite both having the same budget for that. Clearly there is something wrong somewhere.

Anyway, Romney right now is losing the national vote and, depending on the poll you look at, all the swing states or all but one. And he's trailing in the key state of Ohio by close to 10 points. The last train for Romney departs tomorrow night, and he needs a masterpiece of a debate or Obama to dance in his underpants on TV for it to be truly relevant.

It is pretty strange, given that every single thing Obama does gets criticized, that Romney isn't doing better. But I think it's not just his own failures - spectacular as they are - but the party's as a whole. Republicans are 89% white people. That alone should tell you something about their focus and priorities.

Went said:

To make a comparison, the average price of an Obama ad on TV is $125, as opposed to Romney's $900.

Click to expand...

That's because anything coming directly from a campaign gets special preference as far as costs, but anything outside (like, say, an ad from a Super PAC) gets no special privilege. Since more of Romney's support is coming Super PACs he's getting the worse deal even though he might have more money.

i hope Gary Johnson wins i like his work(ONE BILLION DOLLAR SURPLUS in New Mexico) socially liberal and financially conservative best of both worlds

Went said:

Anyway, Romney right now is losing the national vote and, depending on the poll you look at, all the swing states or all but one. And he's trailing in the key state of Ohio by close to 10 points. The last train for Romney departs tomorrow night, and he needs a masterpiece of a debate or Obama to dance in his underpants on TV for it to be truly relevant.

Click to expand...

I think that if Obama did that, he'd be getting more votes, if only for making a large part of the country laugh.

Anyway, Republican priorities. This picture is the best description about them.



And this describes my feelings about people trying to blame Obama for a lot of todays problems. (I'll agree that he is responsible for some of them, but the majority of them were not his doing.)

The first presidential debate is in, like 6 or so hours. I'm gonna miss it because of work, but will catch the highlights later.

Romney will probably try to portray Obama as ineffective, without good leadership, etc. and Obama will point to his accomplishments. Romney is going to say the economy sucks and it's Obama's fault. Obama will counter that the economy is improving and Romney's proposals would stifle the middle class.

The whole election circles around Obama now, or rather on how much we talk about Obama, with Republicans hoping to frame the discussion in terms of a referendum on the president rather than any particular strengths Romney has. If the discussion turns to any of the things that Romney has said or done (the 47% comment, Bane, his tax returns, etc.) it'll be bad for him. Jim Lehrer seems like a moderator who won't be pushed down when he puts a question to someone so I'm hoping he'll try to get Romney to address some of the things he's been avoiding talking about.

The key question for both candidates tonight, in my mind, is: what is your plan to improve the economy?

On Romney's side, a talking point like deregulation won't stick because Obama can easily shoot it down as that led to the environment that created this mess. He needs to offer something. Right now he's mostly saying "Obama's way doesn't work, so vote for me". That isn't a plan.

On Obama's side, his platform is the opposite. Essentially, just "not the Republican method". When they're not really offering anything to begin with, that just makes Obama all the more murky. Can he campaign on the status quo as it is? I don't think so. The economy is stagnant. So, also not a plan. Its tough to judge Obama because of the political gridlock. Had the jobs bill passed, or budgets, who knows what the environment would be right now. But since you can't tell what may have been... again, I want to see a plan

After watching the debate, it is clear that America is screwed economically with either candidate.

Also, they both conducted themselves like fools and I hope that behavior doesn't continue in the next few debates.

thank god their is jill stein and Gary Johnson cuz #obamaandromneyfail

The President needs to be more passionate. But otherwise substance wise, seeing "Moderate Mitt" is interesting.

Expect two weeks of "What if Romney turns the tide over" everywhere. Will this continue in the following debates? And the key question is, how will have this affected the independent vote in the swing states? That's the only thing that actually matters, you know.

I'm very surprised at how the debate went. I mean, I know politicians make lots of promises and skew the truth, but Romney totally disavowed like 90% of everything he's said up to this point and has taken the stance of "whatever is popular is what I stand for." I think that threw Obama off his game a little.

That was a really interesting and confusing debate

Romney totally threw off Obama. Looks like Obama was practicing (using John Kerry as a stand-in for some stupid reason) and preparing for the Romney that's been campaigning for the past year. The hard-lined, out of touch, Republican promoting the policies that caused the economic mess.

But who showed up was the Moderate Massachusetts Mitt.

So, Obama had some facts to stick to Romney that he would have had to try to explain or back up. But those don't apply to this incarnation. He just got to write them off outright and say "that's not my position" and then state a brand new position that came out of nowhere. That and Obama nodding or laughing almost in what looked like agreement (although, I'm sure it wasn't. But it came out weird), really did not do well for the President.

Romney's not for cutting taxes? Romney is for regulation? Just, wtf? Threw Obama off guard. And us viewers too.

It was just really really confusing.

He was counter to the party's position. But a lot of what he said also lacked background and context. And things were blamed on Obama that were not his doing.

It may be a debate, but it is still politics. So take everything with a grain of salt, on both sides of the spectrum