Paul Ryan: It’s “pretty amazing” that Romney is tied with the Obama campaign “machine”

posted at 2:21 pm on June 13, 2012 by Erika Johnsen

House budget guru Paul Ryan appeared on Fox News this morning to offer his take on the recent Obama-Romney economic back-and-forth. As ever, Ryan provides a very approachable breakdown of the situation, and I think it’s worth the seven minutes if you’ve got ‘em:

 

“In the fact that we’re running against a huge machine and Mitt Romney is still tied, I think that’s pretty amazing. Here in Wisconsin we had a pretty big test vote last week, and we passed with flying colors,” Ryan said, referencing the failed recall effort against Republican Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker. …

But Ryan, a prominent Romney surrogate, argued that the GOP candidate could draw a sharp contrast with the president over the expiration of the Bush-era tax cuts. The president has said he’d like to extend the cuts for all but the wealthiest Americans, while Republicans have argued to make the full slate permanent.

“Look, President Obama is promising one of the largest tax increases in American history in January, and we wonder why small businesses aren’t creating jobs?” Ryan said. “On day one, because we need a new president, Mitt Romney will fix this.”

What a boon of a surrogate Ryan is for the Romney campaign — those are some crackerjack communication skills he’s got there, and he manages to effectively elucidate some of the finer points of this larger free-enterprise debate over which Mitt Romney himself sometimes stumbles.

I have to agree that I’m pretty encouraged by (or, at least, I’m not wallowing in despair about) Mitt Romney’s position right now. Who knows what’s in store in the long campaign-summer ahead, but Romney’s already showing that he’s at least worth his salt against incumbent Obama’s formidably expansive campaign operation. Romney already out-raised Obama in May, Obama’s having a widely-recognized bad few weeks, and Rep. Ryan’s right that simple facts about the economy simply speak for themselves — the Federal Reserve’s recent estimate that Americans’ wealth plummeted a whopping 40 percent between 2007 and 2010 alone is enough to make anyone’s jaw drop. If I were President Obama, I’d be getting pretty dang worried right about now.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

…should be WAY ahead!

KOOLAID2 on June 13, 2012 at 2:22 PM

…JugEar’s machine is rusted!

KOOLAID2 on June 13, 2012 at 2:23 PM

…the machine from JugEars is in the ditch or going over a cliff!

KOOLAID2 on June 13, 2012 at 2:24 PM

VP Ryan….hmmmmmmm

Deano1952 on June 13, 2012 at 2:25 PM

If I were President Obama, I’d be getting pretty dang worried right about now.

And this might happen…if he ever stops gazing at himself in the mirror.

AubieJon on June 13, 2012 at 2:25 PM

…JugEar’s machine is running out of gas…wonder why?

KOOLAID2 on June 13, 2012 at 2:26 PM

Alternate headline: “Establishment goon tries to drum up sympathy for other establishment goon … in his fight against the ‘establishment’.”

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 2:26 PM

…should be WAY ahead!

KOOLAID2 on June 13, 2012 at 2:22 PM

You can’t be “WAY” ahead when most people aren’t paying attention.

Personally, I think Obama and the media have a couple of (dirty) tricks up their sleeves for the fall, but more and more I’m looking at a 5-8% win for Romney on the assumption that Obama’s current favorability rating might be as good as it gets for him.

Nessuno on June 13, 2012 at 2:26 PM

Under promise, over deliver.

Fallon on June 13, 2012 at 2:27 PM

If I were President Obama, I’d be getting pretty dang worried right about now.

If I were Obama, I’d be worried too. At some point Mooch is going to realize that the days of flying commercial again are on the horizon and it isn’t going to be pretty.

Happy Nomad on June 13, 2012 at 2:27 PM

…should be WAY ahead!

KOOLAID2 on June 13, 2012 at 2:22 PM

..patience, good sirrah!

The War Planner on June 13, 2012 at 2:28 PM

If I were President Obama, I’d be getting pretty double dang worried right about now.

Fixed it

tbrickert on June 13, 2012 at 2:29 PM

Under promise, over deliver.

Fallon on June 13, 2012 at 2:27 PM

In other words do the opposite of what Obama has done. It’s pretty hard to live up to promises that the sea levels would recede solely by one’s election.

Happy Nomad on June 13, 2012 at 2:29 PM

Alternate headline: “Establishment goon tries to drum up sympathy for other establishment goon … in his fight against the ‘establishment’.”

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 2:26 PM

Oh, Paul, there’s a lot of ignorance out there.

CherryBombsBigBrownBeaver on June 13, 2012 at 2:31 PM

Ryan for Speaker. VP slot is too small for him.

Archivarix on June 13, 2012 at 2:32 PM

Ryan is the face, and the brains, of the Future GOP.

Beyond serving as an intelligent, articulate spokesman on our toughest issues, he is a heat shield for Romney… absorbing a lot of the flame throwing from the Professional Left on Medicare, Social Security, etc.

It would be nice to see him in an Executive Branch role… but he’s so damn good in Congress. He’s a blessing; and at age 42, he has a lot of good years ahead.

VastRightWingConspirator on June 13, 2012 at 2:32 PM

If I were President Obama, I’d be getting pretty dang worried right about now.

#doingjustfine

ted c on June 13, 2012 at 2:37 PM

With Obama being the disaster that he is (Jindal is correct, he’s worse than Jimmy Carter) we should be running away with this instead of hyping up all these anemic 1- 2 point Romney advantage polls and having all this over the top pep rallying for Romney when things could turn and will turn badly. I agree with the posters that most of this is because people aren’t paying attention yet, but then they’re not paying attention to Romney yet – they’ve had 3 1/2 years of Obama and all the focus on how awful his administration is. But then we have to give people something to vote for instead of voting against Obama, and there’s nothing there. We’re getting pretty cocky and arrogant and I think that will lead to a lot of overconfident complacency. I’m worried if what we’re waiting for is the VP candidate to somehow push Romney over the top. We’ve been down this road before…

mozalf on June 13, 2012 at 2:38 PM

What a boon of a surrogate Ryan is for the Romney campaign

No kidding! And it really helps that he comes off as relaxed and confident which is sometimes tough for Romney to pull off.

To think the left was so sure that the GOP would be fractured and attacking one another at this point. The GOP needs to keep the campaign all about the economy and jobs because Obama is failing and no amount of distractions is going to take away from this fact.

Happy Nomad on June 13, 2012 at 2:38 PM

Ok I give up. Is there any way Romney can pick two VP’s?

Romney/Ryan/Rand Paul 2012

1984 in real life on June 13, 2012 at 2:38 PM

Speaking of “crackerjack communication skills”, I look forward to every Erika Johnsen post. Great stuff!

MTF on June 13, 2012 at 2:39 PM

…JugEar’s machine is running out of gas…wonder why?

KOOLAID2 on June 13, 2012 at 2:26 PM

It only ever ran on Hope, Dreams, and Unicorn Farts…but Hope has faded, Dreams have become Nightmares, and the nation has just discovered that unicorns don’t exist and never did.

squint on June 13, 2012 at 2:39 PM

Ryan represents a very very deep & young GOP bench for the future.

Now if we can just get rid of Boehner – McConnell – and a host of others in the old guard.. !!!

jake-the-goose on June 13, 2012 at 2:40 PM

Obama’s next campaign stop…France???…

PatriotRider on June 13, 2012 at 2:41 PM

This probably doesn’t happen much to Mitt Romney

“Not only do people not hug Mitt and tell him his philosophy changed their life, but when The American Conservative‘s intern asked a Mitt sign-waver at CPAC what his favorite Mitt policy was, the Mitt supporter was speechless. Finally all he could manage was, “Are you a member of the media?”

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 2:42 PM

Ryan for Speaker. VP slot is too small for him.

Archivarix on June 13, 2012 at 2:32 PM

I like that idea. Another that hadn’t crossed my mind until Mark Levin broached the subject: Scott Walker, although I’d rather be sure his reforms are not interrupted in any way. Personally I think Jindal is the best VP option available.

Either way I like the stable of young conservatives coming down the pike.

stout77 on June 13, 2012 at 2:43 PM

Here’s to hoping Paul Ryan can encourage and foster a new and much better generation of Republicans. A party my generation can rally around.

Blacksoda on June 13, 2012 at 2:43 PM

With Obama being the disaster that he is (Jindal is correct, he’s worse than Jimmy Carter) we should be running away with this instead of hyping up all these anemic 1- 2 point Romney advantage polls and having all this over the top pep rallying for Romney when things could turn and will turn badly.

mozalf on June 13, 2012 at 2:38 PM

Well aren’t you a ray of sunshine! You really think Romney is going to lose because there is some cause to be happy in June? The fact of the matter is that historically, an incumbent President should have to be worried about re-election this far from November and yet Obama’s people are for good reason. It is the kind of enthusiasm that you condemn that is going to set up the grassroots effort that kicks the jug-eared Kenyan out of the White House.

Happy Nomad on June 13, 2012 at 2:43 PM

Ryan is the face, and the brains, of the Future GOP.

VastRightWingConspirator on June 13, 2012 at 2:32 PM

You mean same old, same old.

Ryan represents a very very deep & young GOP bench for the future.

Now if we can just get rid of Boehner – McConnell – and a host of others in the old guard.. !!!

jake-the-goose on June 13, 2012 at 2:40 PM

Let’s get rid of those who voted for TARP, the auto bailouts, and confiscating CEO bonuses. Whoops! That would include Ryan.

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 2:44 PM

Speaking of “crackerjack communication skills”, I look forward to every Erika Johnsen post. Great stuff!

MTF on June 13, 2012 at 2:39 PM

No doubt – she has come out of the gates swinging and has been an invaluable addition to HA thus far.

stout77 on June 13, 2012 at 2:44 PM

Rush Limbaugh was laughing at 2 things:

1. It was always said Obama was so pretty he was going to raise a billion. And this was taken as truth.
2. The MINIMUM donation now accepted to be considered for Dinner With Sarah Jessica and Barack is now 3 dollars.

Marcus on June 13, 2012 at 2:45 PM

Ryan represents a very very deep & young GOP bench for the future.

Now if we can just get rid of Boehner – McConnell – and a host of others in the old guard.. !!!

jake-the-goose on June 13, 2012 at 2:40 PM

From your keyboard, to God’s browser!

squint on June 13, 2012 at 2:45 PM

Representative Vice President Paul Ryan.

Old Fritz on June 13, 2012 at 2:49 PM

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 2:42 PM

The whole “Not Obama” thing is policy enough for many of us. I know that in the grand scheme of things there are policies that I agree with President Romney and there others that I will not but that sure beats another four years of bad stewardship by the jug-eared America-hating Kenyan socialist.

And make no mistake about it. Getting rid of Obama and all the truly evil people of this adminstration (Holder, Nepolatano, Jarrett, etc.) will result in fundamental changes for all of our lives whether or not anybody hugs Romney and tells him so.

Happy Nomad on June 13, 2012 at 2:50 PM

Let’s get rid of those who voted for TARP, the auto bailouts, and confiscating CEO bonuses. Whoops! That would include Ryan.

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 2:44 PM

shhhh you might upset erika. her head is so far up mitt, if she hears anything negative she may start to cry.

renalin on June 13, 2012 at 2:50 PM

Getting rid of Obama and all the truly evil people of this adminstration (Holder, Nepolatano, Jarrett, etc.) will result in fundamental changes for all of our lives whether or not anybody hugs Romney and tells him so.

Happy Nomad on June 13, 2012 at 2:50 PM

the sad thing is having oromney will change nothing. the names and faces will change, but the policies will remain the same.

you have just been suckered by the GOPe. stand in line with crosspatch and the rest. thumb in mouth a requirement.

renalin on June 13, 2012 at 2:53 PM

And it is only going to keep getting better. Watch barack squirm and whine. Just like the petulant child he is.

I am hoping for the blow-out of a lifetime.

DuctTapeMyBrain on June 13, 2012 at 2:57 PM

the sad thing is having oromney will change nothing. the names and faces will change, but the policies will remain the same.

renalin on June 13, 2012 at 2:53 PM

Please provide facts to back up your claims. Actual facts.

AubieJon on June 13, 2012 at 2:57 PM

This probably doesn’t happen much to Mitt Romney

“Not only do people not hug Mitt and tell him his philosophy changed their life, but when The American Conservative‘s intern asked a Mitt sign-waver at CPAC what his favorite Mitt policy was, the Mitt supporter was speechless. Finally all he could manage was, “Are you a member of the media?”

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 2:42 PM

Since our choices appear to be Obama and Romney at this point, what is your choice for a wasted vote… sorry… write in?

Seriously. Who would you endorse to vote for or what is your solution now?

Or are you just content to stand on the sidelines throwing tomatoes and shaking your fist at the sky?

kim roy on June 13, 2012 at 2:57 PM

kim roy on June 13, 2012 at 2:57 PM

Come on, Kim. Dante pro’lly has a huge photo on Ronulan glued to the ceiling over his bed.

annoyinglittletwerp on June 13, 2012 at 3:01 PM

Paul Ryan for VP.

magicbeans on June 13, 2012 at 3:01 PM

The whole “Not Obama” thing is policy enough for many of us.

Happy Nomad on June 13, 2012 at 2:50 PM

That’s not a policy. That’s the backwards thinking that has continued to keep us in this mess. Whether Obama is reelected or not, his follower is going to continue the same policies that have been in place for the past few decades, regardless of what the letter is behind his name.

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 3:02 PM

the sad thing is having oromney will change nothing. the names and faces will change, but the policies will remain the same.

you have just been suckered by the GOPe. stand in line with crosspatch and the rest. thumb in mouth a requirement.

renalin on June 13, 2012 at 2:53 PM

It’s not going to happen at the executive branch and trickle downwards. It’s happening at the local level and needs time to work its way upward. Do you really think Obama will yield as much to a more conservative congress as Romney? I sure as hell don’t.

stout77 on June 13, 2012 at 3:04 PM

Since our choices appear to be Obama and Romney at this point, what is your choice for a wasted vote… sorry… write in?

kim roy on June 13, 2012 at 2:57 PM

I have no doubt there will be other candidates on your ballot. There will be on mine. Why are you presenting a false choice?

But I love the “wasted vote” argument. Did everyone who voted for McCain, for example, waste their vote? According to you, yes. If you didn’t vote for the candidate who won, then you wasted your vote. This is what your intellectually devoid argument boils down to.

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 3:05 PM

The whole “Not Obama” thing is policy enough for many of us.

Happy Nomad on June 13, 2012 at 2:50 PM

That’s not a policy. That’s the backwards thinking that has continued to keep us in this mess. Whether Obama is reelected or not, his follower is going to continue the same policies that have been in place for the past few decades, regardless of what the letter is behind his name.

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 3:02 PM

Wrong – Step #1 is removing Obama from office. After all that’s happened over the past 5 years, conservatives are not about to go back to sleep just because Romney gets elected. Ain’t happening.

stout77 on June 13, 2012 at 3:06 PM

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 2:44 PM
renalin on June 13, 2012 at 2:53 PM

Ron Paul is OUT?
Ron Paul is OUT?

Dr. Carlo Lombardi on June 13, 2012 at 3:07 PM

Do you really think Obama will yield as much to a more conservative congress as Romney? I sure as hell don’t.

stout77 on June 13, 2012 at 3:04 PM

by the time we get a conservative congress it’ll be too late. its the most important election of our lifetime remember? the elites have the masses brainwashed. miit is being painted as the anti-obama, when in fact he is the flip side of the same coin.

renalin on June 13, 2012 at 3:07 PM

I’ve been saying this for 30 years or more, “It’s amazing that a Republican EVER wins, given the liberal bias of the media”.

Luckily, there are just enough Americans paying attention to reverse the progressive insanity every few years…

kirkill on June 13, 2012 at 3:08 PM

Since our choices appear to be Obama and Romney at this point, what is your choice for a wasted vote… sorry… write in?

kim roy on June 13, 2012 at 2:57 PM

I have no doubt there will be other candidates on your ballot. There will be on mine. Why are you presenting a false choice?

But I love the “wasted vote” argument. Did everyone who voted for McCain, for example, waste their vote? According to you, yes. If you didn’t vote for the candidate who won, then you wasted your vote. This is what your intellectually devoid argument boils down to.

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 3:05 PM

Nice try to avoid the question. I’ll try again:

What is your feasible solution?

Do you agree or disagree that voting for someone who is going to get less than 1% of the vote is not feasible?

PS: McCain had a chance to win. Do your preferred candidate(s)?

I would be nice if you showed some intellectual honesty and answered my first question. I don’t expect one for the second or third, but it would be nice.

kim roy on June 13, 2012 at 3:10 PM

Please provide facts to back up your claims. Actual facts.

AubieJon on June 13, 2012 at 2:57 PM

LOL. You’re kidding, right?

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 3:11 PM

Nice try to avoid the question. I’ll try again:

What is your feasible solution?

Do you agree or disagree that voting for someone who is going to get less than 1% of the vote is not feasible?

PS: McCain had a chance to win. Do your preferred candidate(s)?

I would be nice if you showed some intellectual honesty and answered my first question. I don’t expect one for the second or third, but it would be nice.

kim roy on June 13, 2012 at 3:10 PM

I didn’t avoid your question. I shot down your fallacy by pointing out that you were offering a false choice.

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 3:13 PM

kim roy on June 13, 2012 at 2:57 PM

Come on, Kim. Dante pro’lly has a huge photo on Ronulan glued to the ceiling over his bed.

annoyinglittletwerp on June 13, 2012 at 3:01 PM

I’d like to establish for the cheap seats whether he actually has a useful solution or just a RP sore loser and fist shaker.

But yeah, your comment probably gets more to the point and faster.

kim roy on June 13, 2012 at 3:13 PM

Do you really think Obama will yield as much to a more conservative congress as Romney? I sure as hell don’t.

stout77 on June 13, 2012 at 3:04 PM

by the time we get a conservative congress it’ll be too late. its the most important election of our lifetime remember? the elites have the masses brainwashed. miit is being painted as the anti-obama, when in fact he is the flip side of the same coin.

renalin on June 13, 2012 at 3:07 PM

So your reality is that we’re already screwed. What are you doing talking politics? Shouldn’t you be out fishing or sailing or something if the cause is lost? Look, I see your point, but if we all adopt the same defeatist attitude, defeat will be inevitable. The worm really is starting to turn but it needs help and you’re not helping by voting for Mickey Mouse.

stout77 on June 13, 2012 at 3:14 PM

PS: McCain had a chance to win.

But he didn’t. Therefore who voted for him everyone wasted their vote. This is what your argument boils down to: if you don’t vote for the winner, you’ve wasted your vote.

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 3:14 PM

LOL. You’re kidding, right?

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 3:11 PM

1. I wasn’t asking you.

2. You won’t answer the question either.

AubieJon on June 13, 2012 at 3:14 PM

Not only do people not hug Mitt and tell him his philosophy changed their life, but when The American Conservative‘s intern asked a Mitt sign-waver at CPAC what his favorite Mitt policy was, the Mitt supporter was speechless. Finally all he could manage was, “Are you a member of the media?”

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 2:42 PM

Unlike the Obama supporters who vote for him so that he will pay their mortgage and buy their gas with money from his stash.

So, out of curiousity, what is your favorite Obama policy? Favorite Santorum policy? Paul policy? Newt policy? (OK, my favorite Newt policy/goal is building a moonbase, but that’s just me) Do people really go up to politicians and hug them and tell them their philosophy has changed their lives? Are you confusing politicians with self-help gurus?

talkingpoints on June 13, 2012 at 3:15 PM

Nice try to avoid the question. I’ll try again:

What is your feasible solution?

Do you agree or disagree that voting for someone who is going to get less than 1% of the vote is not feasible?

PS: McCain had a chance to win. Do your preferred candidate(s)?

I would be nice if you showed some intellectual honesty and answered my first question. I don’t expect one for the second or third, but it would be nice.

kim roy on June 13, 2012 at 3:10 PM

I didn’t avoid your question. I shot down your fallacy by pointing out that you were offering a false choice.

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 3:13 PM

No, you’re building a strawman in order to avoid the question. There was absolutely nothing wrong with my comment. I’ll even ask THAT question again: Do you think it’s feasible (or not a wasted vote) to vote for someone who will get less than 1% of the vote?

Feel free to show some intellectual honesty and perhaps get some supporters through your argument rather than avoiding it.

I’ll repeat my initial question: What is your solution?

kim roy on June 13, 2012 at 3:16 PM

Fist off to Obamas’ speech clip:

“Shipping jobs overseas” I learned today we have a contract to build helicopters in Russia that is supplying Syria with helicopters, and the WH will not cancel the contract.

Ryan did great when he said “Only in President Obama’s’ Washington is a disagreement about raising taxes, is a tax cut”

He lost me after “propped up by stimulus spending” but got me back at “A majority of Americans think we are on the wrong track” from then to the end.

He is an awesome surrogate.

boogaleesnots on June 13, 2012 at 3:17 PM

renalin on June 13, 2012 at 2:50 PM

You don’t add much to HA…..but, that apparently isn’t your intention.
Kind of a despicable comment.

a capella on June 13, 2012 at 3:18 PM

Nice try to avoid the question. I’ll try again:

What is your feasible solution?

Do you agree or disagree that voting for someone who is going to get less than 1% of the vote is not feasible?

PS: McCain had a chance to win. Do your preferred candidate(s)?

I would be nice if you showed some intellectual honesty and answered my first question. I don’t expect one for the second or third, but it would be nice.

kim roy on June 13, 2012 at 3:10 PM

I didn’t avoid your question. I shot down your fallacy by pointing out that you were offering a false choice.

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 3:13 PM

How is it a false choice? One of two people will be elected president, end of story.

“If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice”.

stout77 on June 13, 2012 at 3:18 PM

PS: McCain had a chance to win.

But he didn’t. Therefore who voted for him everyone wasted their vote. This is what your argument boils down to: if you don’t vote for the winner, you’ve wasted your vote.

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 3:14 PM

And I’m telling you directly, as the one who posed the question, that you are incorrect in your attempt to hijack the question.

McCain had a chance of winning. Whether he did or not is irrelevant, but the chance was there and it was better than 10%, 20%, 30%, 40% and even close to 50% at the time.

Nice try, though. You are not going to avoid the question by trying to change the parameters because as the one who posed the question I am directly stating your attempt is 100% incorrect.

Do answer the original question: What is your solution?

kim roy on June 13, 2012 at 3:19 PM

…JugEar’s machine is running out of gas…wonder why?

KOOLAID2 on June 13, 2012 at 2:26 PM

Because the algae clogged up the gas line?

bayview on June 13, 2012 at 3:21 PM

PS: McCain had a chance to win.
But he didn’t. Therefore who voted for him everyone wasted their vote. This is what your argument boils down to: if you don’t vote for the winner, you’ve wasted your vote.

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 3:14 PM

No, you seem to be burdened by flaws in your concepts of logical constructs. At the time the McCain vote was cast, the outcome was uncertain. If a McCain loss had been certain prior to the vote, then it would have been wasted, otherwise the vote was partially determinative of the outcome, and therefore critical.

talkingpoints on June 13, 2012 at 3:22 PM

How is it a false choice? One of two people will be elected president, end of story.

“If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice”.

stout77 on June 13, 2012 at 3:18 PM

Dante attempting the “SQUIRREL” maneuver in order to avoid actually answering a direct question.

Dante has no solution or else he would have readily and eagerly offered it. Dante just wants to be a tomato lobber and fist shaker off on the sidelines.

kim roy on June 13, 2012 at 3:22 PM

Unlike the Obama supporters who vote for him so that he will pay their mortgage and buy their gas with money from his stash.

So, out of curiousity, what is your favorite Obama policy? Favorite Santorum policy? Paul policy? Newt policy? (OK, my favorite Newt policy/goal is building a moonbase, but that’s just me) Do people really go up to politicians and hug them and tell them their philosophy has changed their lives? Are you confusing politicians with self-help gurus?

talkingpoints on June 13, 2012 at 3:15 PM

The word is philosophy, not policy.

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 3:22 PM

i never read the authors when i click on an article, just skim the headlines and go where its interesting and start reading never even noticing the byline. once i started reading, after about 4 sentences, when its erika, i jump up to check who the author is. i like you erika. you got spunk! and i like spunk, unlike ed asner.

t8stlikchkn on June 13, 2012 at 3:23 PM

And I’m telling you directly, as the one who posed the question, that you are incorrect in your attempt to hijack the question.

McCain had a chance of winning. Whether he did or not is irrelevant, but the chance was there and it was better than 10%, 20%, 30%, 40% and even close to 50% at the time.

Nice try, though. You are not going to avoid the question by trying to change the parameters because as the one who posed the question I am directly stating your attempt is 100% incorrect.

Do answer the original question: What is your solution?

kim roy on June 13, 2012 at 3:19 PM

Hijack your question? Please. You are the one trying to change the parameters by insisting that there is a false choice. As I pointed out, there will be other candidates on the ballot. The choice is not between Romeny and Obama. That you refuse to acknowledge this, that you refuse to even consider this, is your attempt at changing the parameters. Look, I get that you are in favor of the status quo. You wouldn’t be arguing this foolish “wasting your vote” nonsense otherwise.

What is my solution to what? To returning to limited, Constitutional government? The answer is easy but hard for those mired in establishment-think to do: vote for limited government candidates. Most of whom will not be found in the Republican Party.

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 3:26 PM

If a McCain loss had been certain prior to the vote, then it would have been wasted, otherwise the vote was partially determinative of the outcome, and therefore critical.

talkingpoints on June 13, 2012 at 3:22 PM

Precisely – Anyone besides Romney or Obama is the “false choice” at this point, not the other way around. Romney was my last choice for the nomination, but I will do cartwheels to the polls in November to get help rid of the proven disaster that is his alternative.

stout77 on June 13, 2012 at 3:26 PM

How is it a false choice? One of two people will be elected president, end of story.

“If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice”.

stout77 on June 13, 2012 at 3:18 PM

Because there are more than one candidates on the ballot. Presenting it as a choice between only two options when there is a third option makes it a false choice, regardless of who wins.

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 3:29 PM

What is my solution to what? To returning to limited, Constitutional government? The answer is easy but hard for those mired in establishment-think to do: vote for limited government candidates. Most of whom will not be found in the Republican Party.

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 3:26 PM

Viable candidates or Mickey Mouse? Hardly a solution if your guy cannot get elected to, you know, actually accomplish something.

stout77 on June 13, 2012 at 3:29 PM

No, you seem to be burdened by flaws in your concepts of logical constructs. At the time the McCain vote was cast, the outcome was uncertain. If a McCain loss had been certain prior to the vote, then it would have been wasted, otherwise the vote was partially determinative of the outcome, and therefore critical.

talkingpoints on June 13, 2012 at 3:22 PM

Take it up with Kim. It’s her argument.

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 3:30 PM

No, you’re building a strawman in order to avoid the question. There was absolutely nothing wrong with my comment. I’ll even ask THAT question again: Do you think it’s feasible (or not a wasted vote) to vote for someone who will get less than 1% of the vote?

Feel free to show some intellectual honesty and perhaps get some supporters through your argument rather than avoiding it.

I’ll repeat my initial question: What is your solution?

kim roy on June 13, 2012 at 3:16 PM

I have in no way misrepresented your words; I’ve built no straw man.

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 3:33 PM

How is it a false choice? One of two people will be elected president, end of story.

“If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice”.

stout77 on June 13, 2012 at 3:18 PM

Because there are more than one candidates on the ballot. Presenting it as a choice between only two options when there is a third option makes it a false choice, regardless of who wins.

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 3:29 PM

Let me see if I can help with a crude example:

When I was a kid, sometimes after school we would get to go to “the treat store” to get a candy bar, coke, whatever. If the candy bar I really wanted was not available, I opted for the next best alternative. Otherwise I left the store with nothing.

stout77 on June 13, 2012 at 3:34 PM

Renalin must be giving another tour of grease traps.

AubieJon on June 13, 2012 at 3:34 PM

Let me see if I can help with a crude example:

When I was a kid, sometimes after school we would get to go to “the treat store” to get a candy bar, coke, whatever. If the candy bar I really wanted was not available, I opted for the next best alternative. Otherwise I left the store with nothing.

stout77 on June 13, 2012 at 3:34 PM

What is this supposed to be an example of?

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 3:38 PM

Please provide facts to back up your claims. Actual facts.

AubieJon on June 13, 2012 at 2:57 PM

romneycare

renalin on June 13, 2012 at 3:42 PM

romneycare

renalin on June 13, 2012 at 3:42 PM

Let him be. He obviously believes to his core there is an actual difference between the Republican and Democrat Parties, and that they occupy opposite ends of the spectrum instead of really being only millimeters apart.

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 3:45 PM

Let me see if I can help with a crude example:

When I was a kid, sometimes after school we would get to go to “the treat store” to get a candy bar, coke, whatever. If the candy bar I really wanted was not available, I opted for the next best alternative. Otherwise I left the store with nothing.

stout77 on June 13, 2012 at 3:34 PM

What is this supposed to be an example of?

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 3:38 PM

Ron Paul is not on the menu. Choose something that is or go hungry. I’m not going to hold your hand through basic logic. While I respect your principled stand, I think it is destructive and I think deep down if you were honest with yourself you know it to be true. It’s a free country – vote for who you will, but for all practical purposes you throw away your vote (or worse) when you cast it for someone who literally cannot win under any circumstances.

stout77 on June 13, 2012 at 3:46 PM

Hijack your question? Please. You are the one trying to change the parameters by insisting that there is a false choice. As I pointed out, there will be other candidates on the ballot. The choice is not between Romeny and Obama. That you refuse to acknowledge this, that you refuse to even consider this, is your attempt at changing the parameters. Look, I get that you are in favor of the status quo. You wouldn’t be arguing this foolish “wasting your vote” nonsense otherwise.

What is my solution to what? To returning to limited, Constitutional government? The answer is easy but hard for those mired in establishment-think to do: vote for limited government candidates. Most of whom will not be found in the Republican Party.

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 3:26 PM

My frame of mind and opinion is irrelevant to YOU answering on YOUR opinion, but you know that.

Building strawmen about what I want and changing the goalposts of my question(s) are not answering my question, which is rather basic and I will clarify since it seems you are having difficulty:

What is your solution to this election if not Obama and not Romney? You are scoffing at Romney as one of our viable choices. You do not appear to be an Obama voter, who is our other viable choice. So what is your solution for this election? It’s not a hard question – just explain your rationale and who you’re voting for and what you hope to gain from that vote and the outcome.

This is a discussion site and I have been asking you to discuss “your solution”, which you are aggressively avoiding. I wonder why.

kim roy on June 13, 2012 at 3:49 PM

s

tout77 on June 13, 2012 at 3:46 PM

Sarah isn’t on the “menu” either.

looks like a lot of us will be eating at a different restaurant this november.

renalin on June 13, 2012 at 3:50 PM

Ron Paul is not on the menu. Choose something that is or go hungry. I’m not going to hold your hand through basic logic. While I respect your principled stand, I think it is destructive and I think deep down if you were honest with yourself you know it to be true. It’s a free country – vote for who you will, but for all practical purposes you throw away your vote (or worse) when you cast it for someone who literally cannot win under any circumstances.

stout77 on June 13, 2012 at 3:46 PM

I have no idea why you are telling me this. If you’ll look above, you’ll see that I told Kim that there are other candidates on the ballot besides Romney and Obama after she presented her false choice. I said nothing about Ron Paul to her. Regardless, write-ins are “on the menu”. I appreciate your not holding my hand through basic logic, because I’m afraid you’d get lost immediately.

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 3:52 PM

Sarah isn’t on the “menu” either.

looks like a lot of us will be eating at a different restaurant this november.

renalin on June 13, 2012 at 3:50 PM

Yeah, well, when steak isn’t on the menu, sometimes you have to order what is in order to get sustenance and live to see the next day.

Starving to death isn’t really a choice, is it?

kim roy on June 13, 2012 at 3:53 PM

My frame of mind and opinion is irrelevant to YOU answering on YOUR opinion, but you know that.

Building strawmen about what I want and changing the goalposts of my question(s) are not answering my question, which is rather basic and I will clarify since it seems you are having difficulty:

What is your solution to this election if not Obama and not Romney? You are scoffing at Romney as one of our viable choices. You do not appear to be an Obama voter, who is our other viable choice. So what is your solution for this election? It’s not a hard question – just explain your rationale and who you’re voting for and what you hope to gain from that vote and the outcome.

This is a discussion site and I have been asking you to discuss “your solution”, which you are aggressively avoiding. I wonder why.

kim roy on June 13, 2012 at 3:49 PM

I have built no straw man and have not once misrepresented your argument, nor have I changed any goalposts.

Do you deny that there will be other candidates on the ballot other than Romney and Obama?

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 3:54 PM

stout77 on June 13, 2012 at 3:46 PM

Anyway … what was that supposed to be an example of?

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 3:55 PM

I have no idea why you are telling me this. If you’ll look above, you’ll see that I told Kim that there are other candidates on the ballot besides Romney and Obama after she presented her false choice. I said nothing about Ron Paul to her. Regardless, write-ins are “on the menu”. I appreciate your not holding my hand through basic logic, because I’m afraid you’d get lost immediately.

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 3:52 PM

Maybe if you’d actually answer the question people wouldn’t have to assume things.

I’ll repeat:

“What is your solution to this election if not Obama and not Romney? You are scoffing at Romney as one of our viable choices. You do not appear to be an Obama voter, who is our other viable choice. So what is your solution for this election? It’s not a hard question – just explain your rationale and who you’re voting for and what you hope to gain from that vote and the outcome.

This is a discussion site and I have been asking you to discuss “your solution”, which you are aggressively avoiding. I wonder why.”

kim roy on June 13, 2012 at 3:55 PM

I have built no straw man and have not once misrepresented your argument, nor have I changed any goalposts.

Do you deny that there will be other candidates on the ballot other than Romney and Obama?

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 3:54 PM

My opinion is irrelevant to you answering ON YOUR OPINION.

I’ll repeat:
“What is your solution to this election if not Obama and not Romney? You are scoffing at Romney as one of our viable choices. You do not appear to be an Obama voter, who is our other viable choice. So what is your solution for this election? It’s not a hard question – just explain your rationale and who you’re voting for and what you hope to gain from that vote and the outcome.

This is a discussion site and I have been asking you to discuss “your solution”, which you are aggressively avoiding. I wonder why.”

kim roy on June 13, 2012 at 3:57 PM

Well aren’t you a ray of sunshine! You really think Romney is going to lose because there is some cause to be happy in June? The fact of the matter is that historically, an incumbent President should have to be worried about re-election this far from November and yet Obama’s people are for good reason. It is the kind of enthusiasm that you condemn that is going to set up the grassroots effort that kicks the jug-eared Kenyan out of the White House.

Happy Nomad on June 13, 2012 at 2:43 PM

I’m just saying that using the same don’t pay attention to our candidate but look at how horrible their candidate is may have worked for Obama in 2008, but the republicans suck when they try to act like the democrats. We need to offer an alternative and all this hyping Romney as not as bad as Obama isn’t cutting it when it’s basically a wash. So people need to get their heads out of their a$$es and take off the rose colored glasses because we’re not in good shape contrary to the Drudge Romney-orgasmathon and we have a LOT of work to do.

mozalf on June 13, 2012 at 3:58 PM

My opinion is irrelevant to you answering ON YOUR OPINION.

I’ll repeat:
“What is your solution to this election if not Obama and not Romney? You are scoffing at Romney as one of our viable choices. You do not appear to be an Obama voter, who is our other viable choice. So what is your solution for this election? It’s not a hard question – just explain your rationale and who you’re voting for and what you hope to gain from that vote and the outcome.

This is a discussion site and I have been asking you to discuss “your solution”, which you are aggressively avoiding. I wonder why.”

kim roy on June 13, 2012 at 3:57 PM

I’m not asking you for your opinion. I’ve never once asked you for your opinion. This began by your presenting a false choice, which I shot down by telling you there are other candidates on the ballot, which obviously hasn’t penetrated your skull since you keep asking for my solution, even though I’ve given it.

Now. Yes or no, and this is not a matter of opinion, do you deny that there will be candidates other than Obama and Romney on your ballot?

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 4:02 PM

Do not want to get ahead of ourselves but this is TOTALLY AWESOME

sdbatboy on June 13, 2012 at 4:06 PM

Stop!

Dante has no argument and is refusing to even defend himself. Leave it be. I realize that there are a number of people on this site not fond of Romney – myself included. He thinks like an etablishment guy and sees a more active role for govt in my daily life than I think is appropriate. However, the other guy is an absolute nutjob. Of the people who don’t like Romney and have decided they don’t want to or will not vote for him and want to build a strawman how that isn’t at least half a vote for Obama let them build the fantasy. There aren’t enough of them to make a difference. Dante has decide to go off to his sandbox and play by himself – let him, its a free country and if he likes Obama so much he can work to increase his odds of getting re-elected.

We need to get strong House and Senate candidates. Candidates who don’t see our solutions as originating in DC. We didn’t get the nominee we wanted for President. lets work to put as many conservatives in the congress so Mitt will shift in the wind in a direction we would like. And we need to keep doing that every election cycle.

Zomcon JEM on June 13, 2012 at 4:11 PM

Regardless, write-ins are “on the menu”. I appreciate your not holding my hand through basic logic, because I’m afraid you’d get lost immediately.

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 3:52 PM

You might be able to put one on layaway but you’re not leaving the store with it. Therefore it is not on the menu for 2012.

I used to be you, so I know where you are. Denial does not help – the GOP needs to be reclaimed from within, and it is happening slowly but surely in spite of your efforts, not because of them.

stout77 on June 13, 2012 at 4:13 PM

Because what folks like Dante and others don’t realize – is that Europe is buying us time – the rose is fading on the euroweenie socialist state as a viable long term governing model. Lets start to turn the ship around. Mitt will end being the guy who works to point the nose away from the One’s path. Someone else will come later to fix on a better path.

Zomcon JEM on June 13, 2012 at 4:14 PM

s
tout77 on June 13, 2012 at 3:46 PM
Sarah isn’t on the “menu” either.

looks like a lot of us will be eating at a different restaurant this november.

renalin on June 13, 2012 at 3:50 PM

I’ll be eating at one of the two that serves actual food instead of food, ideally.

stout77 on June 13, 2012 at 4:15 PM

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 3:55 PM

Why bother with this guy? It’s like trying to staple jello to the wall. “Clever” rhetorical BS that he probably considers “debate”.

His solutions to everything are probably a Paulian wetdream of unworkable nonsense. But we’re the sheeple and he’s super enlightened, so why even bother?

strictnein on June 13, 2012 at 4:25 PM

Who ARE these 38%??
90% of black voters = 11ish%
60% of Latino voters = 7ish%
90% of lib voters = 18ish%
11 + 7 + 18 = 36% + 2% random idiots = 38%

El_Terrible on August 23, 2011 at 5:27 PM

Modified to;

11 + 7 + 18 = 36% + 10% random idiots = 46% which is about as low as Øbama’s popularity will go.

Dasher on June 13, 2012 at 4:27 PM

I would wonder if Obama would or could get worried about his re-election chances.

He has his ideology. He has made [to him] big strides towards bringing that ideology to fruition. He probably does not believe that the progress towards the Liberal-Progressive goals would be in danger of being rolled back.

If he wins in November, it is vindication of his agenda. No problem, the good guys won.

If he loses in November, it is because the wealthy, big business, racists, bigots, bitter clingers, etc. managed to cheat and win, so the good guys lost a battle but not (in his mind) the war.

So he can look at the poor climate for his re-election as just a bump in the road to the end goal.

Russ808 on June 13, 2012 at 4:29 PM

romneycare

renalin on June 13, 2012 at 3:42 PM

Let him be. He obviously believes to his core there is an actual difference between the Republican and Democrat Parties, and that they occupy opposite ends of the spectrum instead of really being only millimeters apart.

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 3:45 PM

And neither of you understand the difference between what a state enacts and what Obama has tried to foist off on the entire nation. State vs. Federal??? Nothing??

The two of should go get a room, if you want to continue your circle-jerk.

AubieJon on June 13, 2012 at 4:30 PM

Ryan represents a very very deep & young GOP bench for the future.

Now if we can just get rid of Boehner – McConnell – and a host of others in the old guard.. !!!

jake-the-goose on June 13, 2012 at 2:40 PM

This!

lucyvanpelt on June 13, 2012 at 4:46 PM

And neither of you understand the difference between what a state enacts and what Obama has tried to foist off on the entire nation. State vs. Federal??? Nothing??

The two of should go get a room, if you want to continue your circle-jerk.

AubieJon on June 13, 2012 at 4:30 PM

You just made my point. See if you can figure it out.

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 4:49 PM

You just made my point. See if you can figure it out.

Dante on June 13, 2012 at 4:49 PM

I said “circle-jerk” and it’s been a given about you two for quite a while. The fact that you two still are incapable of putting together facts to back up your libertarian viewpoints is also a given. Ron Paul would be ashamed of you.

AubieJon on June 13, 2012 at 4:59 PM

Comment pages: 1 2