Romney is funny

[Sea Dangles]

Running a business is about the bottom line,when a new leader comes in loyalty is not the issue.Profit margin is pretty much the only factor stockholders are concaerned with.
Romney has business experience
Romney knows youmust balance a checkbook
Romney will not tolerate giving money to the sad sacks of society
So all the armchair patriots who drive imported automobiles or hire immigrants workers on the cheap can speak up about how to be an American.
If Obama is still inspiring hope with anyone,raise your hand and be ridiculed.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Sea Dangles

Running a business is about the bottom line,when a new leader comes in loyalty is not the issue.Profit margin is pretty much the only factor stockholders are concaerned with.
Romney has business experience

So we should run the USA on the basis of shareholder value?

It is incredibly rare for a large company to have a compact with it's employees where everybody is genuinely in it to keep the ship afloat. Perhaps the only one I can think of is Lincoln Electric Corp...

Romney knows youmust balance a checkbook

Didn't MA lead the country in debt per person when he was Gov?

Romney will not tolerate giving money to the sad sacks of society

Sure he will.

It's easy to make grand promises about letting the poor fend for themselves when you're on the campaign trail pandering to ex-Palin devotees.

But once that decision will be recorded in real statistics of child malnourishment and homelessness under your watch things get a bit more tricky.

So all the armchair patriots who drive imported automobiles or hire immigrants workers on the cheap can speak up about how to be an American.

Every car these days is imported. Your GM or Ford is jacked with nearly 1/2 it's parts parts made in Mexico or other countries. That Toyota or BMW might have just been assembled by Americans in South Carolina, Indiana or Tennessee depending on the model.

If Obama is still inspiring hope with anyone,raise your hand and be ridiculed.

Bush wasn't inspiring hope in 2004 and yet he won. People don't vote for the best choice, they vote for the least worst choice.

-spence

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

Bush wasn't inspiring hope in 2004 and yet he won. People don't vote for the best choice, they vote for the least worst choice.

-spence

when you are doing a decent job, inspiring hope isn't essential to getting re-elected....

when you are doing a lousy job...well...you say stuff like this

AP Interview: Obama Says Romney Holds "Extreme" Views | RealClearPolitics

this election will be about changing vectors....we know where the current vector is taking us and consistently 60% don't like the current vector RealClearPolitics - Election Other - Direction of Country
....which means that the guy resposible for the current vector in large part is going to have to convince most of the country that it makes sense to continue on, despite the lack of any substantial improvement now or on the horizon for the important indicators, or he's going to have to convince a majority that the vector proposed by his opponent will be worse...that'll be a tough sell, particularly if the current economic/employment vector continues to slide...


http://www.tnr.com/blog/plank/106512...four-years-ago
You Are Probably Worse Off Than You Were Four Years Ago

All told, this is a stunningly bad economic record for an incumbent president to run on. The fact that Obama’s still the favorite testifies to how uniquely terrible the Romney-Ryan ticket is, and perhaps also to how much blame extremist congressional Republicans deserve for consistently blocking nearly every plausible avenue to economic recovery. Still, there’s no avoiding the fact that the economy has worsened over four years for the typical American household, even as it has improved for the one percent. Thank goodness Mitt Romney is about the last person on earth who would ever want to point that discrepancy out.

[spence]

Originally Posted by scottw

when you are doing a decent job, inspiring hope isn't essential to getting re-elected....

when you are doing a lousy job...well...you say stuff like this

AP Interview: Obama Says Romney Holds "Extreme" Views | RealClearPolitics

Actually Obama appears quite lucid in that article. He's also exactly right, on big issues like abortion, immigration, health care etc... the GOP platform has taken a hard right stance which compared to Romney's history is quite a radical shift.

this election will be about changing vectors....we know where the current vector is taking us and consistently 60% don't like the current vector RealClearPolitics - Election Other - Direction of Country
....which means that the guy resposible for the current vector in large part is going to have to convince most of the country that it makes sense to continue on, despite the lack of any substantial improvement now or on the horizon for the important indicators, or he's going to have to convince a majority that the vector proposed by his opponent will be worse...that'll be a tough sell, particularly if the current economic/employment vector continues to slide...

I don't believe people assign the current vector to Obama, they're smart enough to understand the issues that face the country are much, much larger than the past 3+ years.

I also don't believe most people think the country needs a big ideological shift but rather just basic governmental responsibility. This is independent of party...

-spence

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

Actually Obama appears quite lucid in that article. yeah, "small" is the word I would use He's also exactly right, on big issues like abortion, immigration, health care etc... the GOP platform has taken a hard right stance which compared to Romney's history is quite a radical shift. where has the GOP platform shifted radically or otherwise on these BIG issues?


I don't believe people assign the current vector to Obama .....some applaud and some disdain the better living through more encompassing government vector...he is the assignee , they're smart enough to understand the issues that face the country are much, much larger than the past 3+ years. you (and Zimmy) can't seem to decide whether they're smart enough or not smart enough, either way another gross generalization

I also don't believe most people think the country needs a big ideological shift but rather just basic governmental responsibility. This is independent of party...if most people(reference the RCP poll) feel the country is headed in the wrong direction consistently over a long period, that might indicate the desire for a big idealogical shift which is actually not a shift but a return to our founding ideals and principles in response to the BIG idealogical shift currently being forced on us...most people can't help it, it's ingrained in us as Americans...at least "most people"

-spence

tossing around the "extreme" card is a little silly and desperate sounding...it's been grossly overused

[likwid]

Originally Posted by scottw

tossing around the "extreme" card is a little silly and desperate sounding...it's been grossly overused

Then stop using it.

Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating - Search Results

[scottw]

Originally Posted by likwid

Then stop using it.

Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating - Search Results

you probably should have done a bit more investigation before posting that...

these are great examples of where extreme has appeared in my posts, can't promise I haven't used in the context I mentioned ("extreme" card) myself but ...truly apples and oranges as Spence would say

thanks to an extreme negative phase of the Arctic Oscillation

economic slumps by use of extreme monetary stimulus

“I am a socialist. I live to the extreme left, the extreme left of you mere liberals,” O'Donnell said:

Instead, privileged, wealthy, white Democrats attacked Brown as an "extreme right-wing" judge who didn't care about "civil rights" or the "down-trodden." They were unconstrained by accusations of racism and sexism.

Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) ridiculed Bush nominees including Brown, as "Neanderthals." He attacked Brown as "another extreme right-wing candidate ... a judicial activist who will roll back basic rights."

Sen. #^&#^&#^&#^& Durbin (D-Ill.) said: "Janice Rogers Brown is one of President Bush's most ideological and extreme judicial nominees."


but at least you got a self satisfied chuckle

oh, this is a good one where I quoted Spence

Originally Posted by spence
Any good engineer knows you make something better by taking it to the extreme to see where it breaks

and quoting the one and only Zimmy

Originally Posted by zimmy
and extreme eastern Montana

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

He's also exactly right, on big issues like abortion, immigration, health care etc the GOP platform has taken a hard right stance which compared to Romney's history is quite a radical shift.


spence

not exactly....


"The 2012 platform adopted the identical pro-life language that has been in the platform since the late Rep. Henry Hyde inserted it in 1984 in Dallas."

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...form-best-yet/


"The platform sections on immigration are examples of how closely social and fiscal issues and costs are intertwined. It is in favor of the rule of law, against any kind of amnesty, and supports requiring employers to use e-Verify to make sure their employees are legally in the United States. It also takes a strong stand for approving photo IDs before allowing someone to vote."
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...discrimination
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...t_work_permits
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ..._control_first
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...mmigration_law


"the platform calls for repealing Obamacare"
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...ealth_care_law\

"Most voters still support repeal of President Obama’s national health care law "


what was he "exactly right" about Spence?
what and where "exacty" is this "radical shift" and/or "hard right stance" in the GOP Platform ?
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...same_of_romney
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...or_wrong_track

[Sea Dangles]

Originally Posted by spence

So we should run the USA on the basis of shareholder value?

It is incredibly rare for a large company to have a compact with it's employees where everybody is genuinely in it to keep the ship afloat. Perhaps the only one I can think of is Lincoln Electric Corp...


Didn't MA lead the country in debt per person when he was Gov?


Sure he will.

It's easy to make grand promises about letting the poor fend for themselves when you're on the campaign trail pandering to ex-Palin devotees.

But once that decision will be recorded in real statistics of child malnourishment and homelessness under your watch things get a bit more tricky.



Every car these days is imported. Your GM or Ford is jacked with nearly 1/2 it's parts parts made in Mexico or other countries. That Toyota or BMW might have just been assembled by Americans in South Carolina, Indiana or Tennessee depending on the model.


Bush wasn't inspiring hope in 2004 and yet he won. People don't vote for the best choice, they vote for the least worst choice.

-spence

When he ran that company he was not auditioning for the presidency,he was merely trying to make it profitable.

Debt per person isa deceiving statistic if you don't understand what debt really is;wealthy people can incur more more debt as a result of their wealth and per capita income. (see CT)

Spence,like most dems the picture you paint regarding the nations sad sacks is purely sensationalism.Put the broad brush away,anyone with common sense can understand there is too much abuse of the current system.The Palin comment is puzzling to me but typical of one who may be grasping at straws.

Thank you for explaining the ins and outs of car assembly but either you missed the point or didn't understand it.

Do you really think another 4 years of Obama is going to benefit the United States Jeff?

[spence]

Originally Posted by Sea Dangles

When he ran that company he was not auditioning for the presidency,he was merely trying to make it profitable.

He was trying to deliver shareholder value. The point being that the type of leadership that requires might not be what the country needs, yet that's what he's selling...

Debt per person isa deceiving statistic if you don't understand what debt really is;wealthy people can incur more more debt as a result of their wealth and per capita income. (see CT)

The stat was state debt per capita. As I've noted this in the other thread there are many reasons for this, but if the current US debt is owned by Obama I'd think Romney would own MA at that time, and it wasn't that good.

Spence,like most dems the picture you paint regarding the nations sad sacks is purely sensationalism.Put the broad brush away,anyone with common sense can understand there is too much abuse of the current system.The Palin comment is puzzling to me but typical of one who may be grasping at straws.

There's abuse all around. For every welfare cheat or public employee with a fat pension you have corporate abuse of the same system.

Thank you for explaining the ins and outs of car assembly but either you missed the point or didn't understand it.

Then what was it?

Do you really think another 4 years of Obama is going to benefit the United States Jeff?

I'd like to see more leadership, but the proposed changes from the GOP I don't see as offering an attractive alternative. There's significant risk of making things even worse.

-spence

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by spence

People don't vote for the best choice, they vote for the least worst choice.

-spence

Who are we kidding,in the real world, people will vote for the canidate who will most line
their pockets.