"I must admit, I scratch my head at the capacity of the president to take four hours off on such a regular basis to go golfing," Romney told WLW Radio in Cincinnati, responding to a question about the president's hobbies. "I would think you could kind of suck it up for four years particularly when the American people are out of work."
When asked about vacations taken by the Obama family, who travel to the president's native Hawaii annually, Romney said his family would not use four or eight years in the White House to "see the world." Instead, the former Massachusetts governor said he would frequent Camp David, the presidential retreat in the Catoctin Mountain Park of Frederick County, Maryland.
Also Camp David has a driving range and single hole course. Not sure why it's okay to dick around at David but not on a course either.
The real take away here is that while Obama is spending his own money on family vacations, Mitt Romney is content to let the tax payer foot the bill for his.
It's not possible for Obama to only spend his own money on family vacations, for the rest of his life.
One, they only get secret service protection for ten years post leaving the white house.
Two, considering they footed almost the entire trip themselves, with secret service being the one exception, this seems like a goosey, hair-splitting complaint.
All complaints about Obama are flawed, false, or forgettable if you're a supporter.
Nice two-fer there. A straw man and a goose at the same time.
Especially as I, and numerous others, have griped many many times about Obama's flaws.
That's the forgettable part: you're going to vote for him regardless. No complaint you or anyone else may have, will dissuade you from voting for Obama. They will always have some aspect that allows you to dismiss them.
That's because, for the millionth time after you bringing this up, the alternative is unthinkable.
Voting isn't a zero sum game for people who aren't stupid. If the GOP challenger was better than Obama, I'd vote for him. For my money, he isn't.
How is going on vacation for about the normal amount for a president a problem? Do we now expect our presidents to be emotionless robots who can work day in, day out without going nuts now?
0
Options
AstaerethIn the belly of the beastRegistered Userregular
"I must admit, I scratch my head at the capacity of the president to take four hours off on such a regular basis to go golfing," Romney told WLW Radio in Cincinnati, responding to a question about the president's hobbies. "I would think you could kind of suck it up for four years particularly when the American people are out of work."
When asked about vacations taken by the Obama family, who travel to the president's native Hawaii annually, Romney said his family would not use four or eight years in the White House to "see the world." Instead, the former Massachusetts governor said he would frequent Camp David, the presidential retreat in the Catoctin Mountain Park of Frederick County, Maryland.
Also Camp David has a driving range and single hole course. Not sure why it's okay to dick around at David but not on a course either.
The real take away here is that while Obama is spending his own money on family vacations, Mitt Romney is content to let the tax payer foot the bill for his.
It's not possible for Obama to only spend his own money on family vacations, for the rest of his life.
One, they only get secret service protection for ten years post leaving the white house.
Two, considering they footed almost the entire trip themselves, with secret service being the one exception, this seems like a goosey, hair-splitting complaint.
All complaints about Obama are flawed, false, or forgettable if you're a supporter.
Nice two-fer there. A straw man and a goose at the same time.
Especially as I, and numerous others, have griped many many times about Obama's flaws.
That's the forgettable part: you're going to vote for him regardless. No complaint you or anyone else may have, will dissuade you from voting for Obama. They will always have some aspect that allows you to dismiss them.
It's much more emotionally satisfying to be able to rationalize Obama's flaws and missteps as nothing important, because as the thread discussed earlier, nobody's shifting their votes from Mr. Not-Quite-Perfect to Mitt "Satan" Romney. Everybody post-justifies the choices they make, but the situation is especially tricky here because even skewing the facts Republican won't allow us to change that choice.
That's the forgettable part: you're going to vote for him regardless. No complaint you or anyone else may have, will dissuade you from voting for Obama. They will always have some aspect that allows you to dismiss them.
Here's a challenge for you, @spool32: name three ways Romney is better than Obama.
"I must admit, I scratch my head at the capacity of the president to take four hours off on such a regular basis to go golfing," Romney told WLW Radio in Cincinnati, responding to a question about the president's hobbies. "I would think you could kind of suck it up for four years particularly when the American people are out of work."
When asked about vacations taken by the Obama family, who travel to the president's native Hawaii annually, Romney said his family would not use four or eight years in the White House to "see the world." Instead, the former Massachusetts governor said he would frequent Camp David, the presidential retreat in the Catoctin Mountain Park of Frederick County, Maryland.
Also Camp David has a driving range and single hole course. Not sure why it's okay to dick around at David but not on a course either.
The real take away here is that while Obama is spending his own money on family vacations, Mitt Romney is content to let the tax payer foot the bill for his.
It's not possible for Obama to only spend his own money on family vacations, for the rest of his life.
One, they only get secret service protection for ten years post leaving the white house.
Two, considering they footed almost the entire trip themselves, with secret service being the one exception, this seems like a goosey, hair-splitting complaint.
All complaints about Obama are flawed, false, or forgettable if you're a supporter.
Nice two-fer there. A straw man and a goose at the same time.
Especially as I, and numerous others, have griped many many times about Obama's flaws.
That's the forgettable part: you're going to vote for him regardless. No complaint you or anyone else may have, will dissuade you from voting for Obama. They will always have some aspect that allows you to dismiss them.
Well yeah, but that's because the only viable alternative is Mitt Romney. I can be convinced Obama has flaws. Hell, I'm not a big fan of Obama's, really, but I'll take him half assedly pursuing watered down versions of things I generally support over Romney rubbertamping the Ryan budget in 203 in a heartbeat.
"I must admit, I scratch my head at the capacity of the president to take four hours off on such a regular basis to go golfing," Romney told WLW Radio in Cincinnati, responding to a question about the president's hobbies. "I would think you could kind of suck it up for four years particularly when the American people are out of work."
When asked about vacations taken by the Obama family, who travel to the president's native Hawaii annually, Romney said his family would not use four or eight years in the White House to "see the world." Instead, the former Massachusetts governor said he would frequent Camp David, the presidential retreat in the Catoctin Mountain Park of Frederick County, Maryland.
Also Camp David has a driving range and single hole course. Not sure why it's okay to dick around at David but not on a course either.
The real take away here is that while Obama is spending his own money on family vacations, Mitt Romney is content to let the tax payer foot the bill for his.
It's not possible for Obama to only spend his own money on family vacations, for the rest of his life.
One, they only get secret service protection for ten years post leaving the white house.
Two, considering they footed almost the entire trip themselves, with secret service being the one exception, this seems like a goosey, hair-splitting complaint.
All complaints about Obama are flawed, false, or forgettable if you're a supporter.
Nice two-fer there. A straw man and a goose at the same time.
Especially as I, and numerous others, have griped many many times about Obama's flaws.
That's the forgettable part: you're going to vote for him regardless. No complaint you or anyone else may have, will dissuade you from voting for Obama. They will always have some aspect that allows you to dismiss them.
That's because, for the millionth time after you bringing this up, the alternative is unthinkable.
Voting isn't a zero sum game for people who aren't stupid. If the GOP challenger was better than Obama, I'd vote for him. For my money, he isn't.
What is so hard to understand about that?
Because clearly you're just a delusional believer of Obama being "The One," if you're going to vote for him in the election. Instead vote for the Gordon Gekko empty suit who continuously puts his foot in his mouth and couldn't even stay committed as a state governor before trying to run for president!
"I must admit, I scratch my head at the capacity of the president to take four hours off on such a regular basis to go golfing," Romney told WLW Radio in Cincinnati, responding to a question about the president's hobbies. "I would think you could kind of suck it up for four years particularly when the American people are out of work."
When asked about vacations taken by the Obama family, who travel to the president's native Hawaii annually, Romney said his family would not use four or eight years in the White House to "see the world." Instead, the former Massachusetts governor said he would frequent Camp David, the presidential retreat in the Catoctin Mountain Park of Frederick County, Maryland.
Also Camp David has a driving range and single hole course. Not sure why it's okay to dick around at David but not on a course either.
The real take away here is that while Obama is spending his own money on family vacations, Mitt Romney is content to let the tax payer foot the bill for his.
It's not possible for Obama to only spend his own money on family vacations, for the rest of his life.
One, they only get secret service protection for ten years post leaving the white house.
Two, considering they footed almost the entire trip themselves, with secret service being the one exception, this seems like a goosey, hair-splitting complaint.
All complaints about Obama are flawed, false, or forgettable if you're a supporter.
Nice two-fer there. A straw man and a goose at the same time.
Especially as I, and numerous others, have griped many many times about Obama's flaws.
That's the forgettable part: you're going to vote for him regardless. No complaint you or anyone else may have, will dissuade you from voting for Obama. They will always have some aspect that allows you to dismiss them.
That's the forgettable part: you're going to vote against him regardless. No promotion you or anyone else may have, will persuade you to vote for Obama. They will always have some aspect that allows you to dismiss them.
How is going on vacation for about the normal amount for a president a problem? Do we now expect our presidents to be emotionless robots who can work day in, day out without going nuts now?
Romney would love it if we wanted to elect a robot.
How is going on vacation for about the normal amount for a president a problem? Do we now expect our presidents to be emotionless robots who can work day in, day out without going nuts now?
No one actually cares about this, it's just a stupid thing to argue about when nothing of substance is going on in the news.
That's the forgettable part: you're going to vote for him regardless. No complaint you or anyone else may have, will dissuade you from voting for Obama. They will always have some aspect that allows you to dismiss them.
Here's a challenge for you, @spool32: name three ways Romney is better than Obama.
Clearly, this isn't one of them.
1: He's held an actual job, with employees, in a leadership role, outside of politics.
2: He would nominate conservative judges to replace the old conservatives on the supreme court, if they decide to retire.
3: He'll be able to control the GOP right wing and get moderate policies implemented.
4: You hate him.
That's the forgettable part: you're going to vote for him regardless. No complaint you or anyone else may have, will dissuade you from voting for Obama. They will always have some aspect that allows you to dismiss them.
Here's a challenge for you, @spool32: name three ways Romney is better than Obama.
Clearly, this isn't one of them.
1: He's held an actual job, with employees, in a leadership role, outside of politics.
2: He would nominate conservative judges to replace the old conservatives on the supreme court, if they decide to retire.
3: He'll be able to control the GOP right wing and get moderate policies implemented.
4: You hate him.
1, 2, & 4 are all (semi-)valid points. Point #3 is so laughable that I'm having a hard time even typing this post.
That's the forgettable part: you're going to vote for him regardless. No complaint you or anyone else may have, will dissuade you from voting for Obama. They will always have some aspect that allows you to dismiss them.
Here's a challenge for you, @spool32: name three ways Romney is better than Obama.
Clearly, this isn't one of them.
1: He's held an actual job, with employees, in a leadership role, outside of politics.
2: He would nominate conservative judges to replace the old conservatives on the supreme court, if they decide to retire.
3: He'll be able to control the GOP right wing and get moderate policies implemented.
4: You hate him.
1. Has he? Wiki says he has been a management consultant and (my own words) a corporate raider at Bain Capital.
2. I can't argue with you there. Romney would nominate conservative judges that feel strip searches without suspicion are okay.
3. Parts A and B are a fever dream. Romney spent the entire primary courting the GOP right wing and they regularly told him to get bent. Romney also would not implement moderate policies, because the reactionary wing of the GOP controls the house and would continue to pass batshit insane legislation that Romney would sign into law.
4. Is an okay reason.
Switch Friend Code: SW-6732-9515-9697
0
Options
AManFromEarthLet's get to twerk!The King in the SwampRegistered Userregular
I'd like you to expand on number three from your list there because all evidence is that the far right has the GOP by the balls. Case in point, how many times has Boehner's office floated a sensible compromise but when Cantor gets wind of it there's a "meeting between the Speaker and Conservative leadership" and all of a sudden that compromise is unthinkable.
Mitt Romney is not a man I believe can stand up to anything. He couldn't even tell Limbaugh he was off base for attacking a law student. He will do and say whatever he needs to to get people to vote for him.
Romney as president with a Democrat majority in Congress, that probably won't be so bad. Romney as president with the current Congress? Hello rubber stamp for the Tea Party agenda.
The far right is uncontrolable because they don't think they owe shit to anyone, which is why Boehner can't corral them in the House.
Also the President has done plenty outside of "politics". Also, why should someone who chooses to work for the government and work to improve citizens lives be dismissed as "not real work"?
That's the forgettable part: you're going to vote for him regardless. No complaint you or anyone else may have, will dissuade you from voting for Obama. They will always have some aspect that allows you to dismiss them.
Here's a challenge for you, @spool32: name three ways Romney is better than Obama.
Clearly, this isn't one of them.
1: He's held an actual job, with employees, in a leadership role, outside of politics.
2: He would nominate conservative judges to replace the old conservatives on the supreme court, if they decide to retire.
3: He'll be able to control the GOP right wing and get moderate policies implemented.
4: You hate him.
How is 1 helpful? The US economy is nothing like the balance sheet of a business. In a leadership role you tell your employees what to do or you fire them. As the president you theoretically should be trying to work with those inside and outside of your party to get legislation written and passed. Plus most of his work consisted of getting great returns for shareholders but did nothing to really create jobs.
As for 3, what sort of moderate policies has he suggested recently? Or are you just assuming that once he is president he will revert back to Governor Mitt?
CommunistCow on
No, I am not really communist. Yes, it is weird that I use this name.
That's the forgettable part: you're going to vote for him regardless. No complaint you or anyone else may have, will dissuade you from voting for Obama. They will always have some aspect that allows you to dismiss them.
Here's a challenge for you, @spool32: name three ways Romney is better than Obama.
Clearly, this isn't one of them.
1: He's held an actual job, with employees, in a leadership role, outside of politics.
2: He would nominate conservative judges to replace the old conservatives on the supreme court, if they decide to retire.
3: He'll be able to control the GOP right wing and get moderate policies implemented.
4: You hate him.
Thank you for this, I needed the laugh! Also, I hear he eats rainbows and shits living wage American jobs!
0
Options
AManFromEarthLet's get to twerk!The King in the SwampRegistered Userregular
Control of the narrative passes to a moderate, for one. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I think it'd happen.
He's the sort of man that bends in the wind. If his party is extreme, he is extreme. If his party is moderate, he is moderate. And, at the moment, his party is extreme.
He'll be more moderate than Santorum would be, but if you want a real moderate, vote Obama.
I'd like you to expand on number three from your list there because all evidence is that the far right has the GOP by the balls. Case in point, how many times has Boehner's office floated a sensible compromise but when Cantor gets wind of it there's a "meeting between the Speaker and Conservative leadership" and all of a sudden that compromise is unthinkable.
Mitt Romney is not a man I believe can stand up to anything. He couldn't even tell Limbaugh he was off base for attacking a law student. He will do and say whatever he needs to to get people to vote for him.
Romney as president with a Democrat majority in Congress, that probably won't be so bad. Romney as president with the current Congress? Hello rubber stamp for the Tea Party agenda.
The far right is uncontrolable because they don't think they owe shit to anyone, which is why Boehner can't corral them in the House.
Also the President has done plenty outside of "politics". Also, why should someone who chooses to work for the government and work to improve citizens lives be dismissed as "not real work"?
To tackle the also: experience as a boss is not the same as experience on a board or as an organizer or a law firm drone or even a professor. Being President was the first experience Obama had running a team or being a boss, and I prefer to have a President who isn't learning as he goes.
I think the problem in the house is not the Tea Party - it's Boehner vs. Cantor. Cantor has been undermining him like crazy - I think a moderate Republican at the top can control the right wing better than a Democrat, if for no other reason than they have much more to lose being reactionary gooses when they're screwing their own President by doing it.
I like the idea of a politician being a huge liar being a selling point. "Sure, he says he is an extremist and will pass extremist laws when in office, but I am sure he will totally be a moderate and show him for the dishonest motherfucker he is."
0
Options
AManFromEarthLet's get to twerk!The King in the SwampRegistered Userregular
I'd like you to expand on number three from your list there because all evidence is that the far right has the GOP by the balls. Case in point, how many times has Boehner's office floated a sensible compromise but when Cantor gets wind of it there's a "meeting between the Speaker and Conservative leadership" and all of a sudden that compromise is unthinkable.
Mitt Romney is not a man I believe can stand up to anything. He couldn't even tell Limbaugh he was off base for attacking a law student. He will do and say whatever he needs to to get people to vote for him.
Romney as president with a Democrat majority in Congress, that probably won't be so bad. Romney as president with the current Congress? Hello rubber stamp for the Tea Party agenda.
The far right is uncontrolable because they don't think they owe shit to anyone, which is why Boehner can't corral them in the House.
Also the President has done plenty outside of "politics". Also, why should someone who chooses to work for the government and work to improve citizens lives be dismissed as "not real work"?
To tackle the also: experience as a boss is not the same as experience on a board or as an organizer or a law firm drone or even a professor. Being President was the first experience Obama had running a team or being a boss, and I prefer to have a President who isn't learning as he goes.
I think the problem in the house is not the Tea Party - it's Boehner vs. Cantor. Cantor has been undermining him like crazy - I think a moderate Republican at the top can control the right wing better than a Democrat, if for no other reason than they have much more to lose being reactionary gooses when they're screwing their own President by doing it.
But that ignores all evidence to the contray.
The Tea Party doesn't care about the GOP leadership.
They started attacking Marco Rubio for his Dream Without a Dream Act proposal.
I'll agree that Cantor is probably a large part of the problem, he's able to use the Tea Party to get power (which the entire Republican party has been doing) but Cantor isn't going to go away unless he loses (which I think unlikely) and would in fact be empowered by the kinds of people Romney's coattails would bring into office.
I understand the hope, most Republicans believe the same thing you do (I've had this convo a thousand times with my old roommate who now works for the party), it's just unrealistic when you look at the last two years.
That's the forgettable part: you're going to vote for him regardless. No complaint you or anyone else may have, will dissuade you from voting for Obama. They will always have some aspect that allows you to dismiss them.
Here's a challenge for you, @spool32: name three ways Romney is better than Obama.
Clearly, this isn't one of them.
1: He's held an actual job, with employees, in a leadership role, outside of politics.
2: He would nominate conservative judges to replace the old conservatives on the supreme court, if they decide to retire.
3: He'll be able to control the GOP right wing and get moderate policies implemented.
4: You hate him.
1) Obama has had multiple jobs in the private sector as a community organizer, a lawyer, a constitutional law professor and as a manager for a non-profit.
2) I see this as a negative.
3) I do not believe this to be true. If there's a single defining characteristic of Mitt Romney as a politician, its his supreme lack of courage of conviction. He will change positions on a dime if he thinks its beneficial to him. Believing he'll stand up to his power base doesn't make much sense.
ed
To tackle the also: experience as a boss is not the same as experience on a board or as an organizer or a law firm drone or even a professor. Being President was the first experience Obama had running a team or being a boss, and I prefer to have a President who isn't learning as he goes.
I think the problem in the house is not the Tea Party - it's Boehner vs. Cantor. Cantor has been undermining him like crazy - I think a moderate Republican at the top can control the right wing better than a Democrat, if for no other reason than they have much more to lose being reactionary gooses when they're screwing their own President by doing it.
Well Obama has been President for 4 years and Romney was Governor for a bit under 4. Obama was also Chief executive/director for two non-profits with paid employees as well as volunteers, but claiming Romney has more experience "as a boss" than the incumbent President of the United States of America is beyond laughable.
I like the idea of a politician being a huge liar being a selling point. "Sure, he says he is an extremist and will pass extremist laws when in office, but I am sure he will totally be a moderate and show him for the dishonest motherfucker he is."
This applies equally well to Obama, who blew smoke up everyone's asses. Gitmo, transparent administration, non-politicized justice dept. More drilling, less drilling, evolving gay rights opinions, etc etc etc.
People aren't happy with those. You want Romney to be a dirty lying motherfucker.
I like the idea of a politician being a huge liar being a selling point. "Sure, he says he is an extremist and will pass extremist laws when in office, but I am sure he will totally be a moderate and show him for the dishonest motherfucker he is."
This applies equally well to Obama, who blew smoke up everyone's asses. Gitmo, transparent administration, non-politicized justice dept. More drilling, less drilling, evolving gay rights opinions, etc etc etc.
0
Options
AManFromEarthLet's get to twerk!The King in the SwampRegistered Userregular
Also also, I don't think you can say Obama is "learning the job as he goes" anymore. I think his first two years were kind of wasted, and his third was wasted because he thought you could negotiate with political terrorists, but he's not "learning as he goes" anymore than any President now.
I hesitate to say that we need all our presidents to come from the same background. That seems incredibly limiting and antithetical to the idea of the American President in general.
"I must admit, I scratch my head at the capacity of the president to take four hours off on such a regular basis to go golfing," Romney told WLW Radio in Cincinnati, responding to a question about the president's hobbies. "I would think you could kind of suck it up for four years particularly when the American people are out of work."
When asked about vacations taken by the Obama family, who travel to the president's native Hawaii annually, Romney said his family would not use four or eight years in the White House to "see the world." Instead, the former Massachusetts governor said he would frequent Camp David, the presidential retreat in the Catoctin Mountain Park of Frederick County, Maryland.
Also Camp David has a driving range and single hole course. Not sure why it's okay to dick around at David but not on a course either.
The real take away here is that while Obama is spending his own money on family vacations, Mitt Romney is content to let the tax payer foot the bill for his.
It's not possible for Obama to only spend his own money on family vacations, for the rest of his life.
One, they only get secret service protection for ten years post leaving the white house.
Two, considering they footed almost the entire trip themselves, with secret service being the one exception, this seems like a goosey, hair-splitting complaint.
All complaints about Obama are flawed, false, or forgettable if you're a supporter.
Nice two-fer there. A straw man and a goose at the same time.
Especially as I, and numerous others, have griped many many times about Obama's flaws.
That's the forgettable part: you're going to vote for him regardless. No complaint you or anyone else may have, will dissuade you from voting for Obama. They will always have some aspect that allows you to dismiss them.
That's because, for the millionth time after you bringing this up, the alternative is unthinkable.
Voting isn't a zero sum game for people who aren't stupid. If the GOP challenger was better than Obama, I'd vote for him. For my money, he isn't.
What is so hard to understand about that?
Because the GOP mindset right now is just that.
us vs them. be afraid of * . the other side is just as mean as we are! stop hitting yourself!
*darkies/homosexuals/mexicans/foreigners/socialists/the poor (but never the rich!!)/loss of FREEDOM(for companies to destroy America's ecological and economical future for their own gain)
"I must admit, I scratch my head at the capacity of the president to take four hours off on such a regular basis to go golfing," Romney told WLW Radio in Cincinnati, responding to a question about the president's hobbies. "I would think you could kind of suck it up for four years particularly when the American people are out of work."
When asked about vacations taken by the Obama family, who travel to the president's native Hawaii annually, Romney said his family would not use four or eight years in the White House to "see the world." Instead, the former Massachusetts governor said he would frequent Camp David, the presidential retreat in the Catoctin Mountain Park of Frederick County, Maryland.
Also Camp David has a driving range and single hole course. Not sure why it's okay to dick around at David but not on a course either.
The real take away here is that while Obama is spending his own money on family vacations, Mitt Romney is content to let the tax payer foot the bill for his.
It's not possible for Obama to only spend his own money on family vacations, for the rest of his life.
One, they only get secret service protection for ten years post leaving the white house.
Two, considering they footed almost the entire trip themselves, with secret service being the one exception, this seems like a goosey, hair-splitting complaint.
All complaints about Obama are flawed, false, or forgettable if you're a supporter.
Gotta love how us pointing out that you're full of shit and have no standing in reality is evidence of our doublethink. The fact is that you said that Obama is vacationing on the government's dime. The fact that your claim is false is not and will never be spin.
That's the forgettable part: you're going to vote for him regardless. No complaint you or anyone else may have, will dissuade you from voting for Obama. They will always have some aspect that allows you to dismiss them.
Here's a challenge for you, @spool32: name three ways Romney is better than Obama.
Clearly, this isn't one of them.
1: He's held an actual job, with employees, in a leadership role, outside of politics.
2: He would nominate conservative judges to replace the old conservatives on the supreme court, if they decide to retire.
3: He'll be able to control the GOP right wing and get moderate policies implemented.
4: You hate him.
1. Community organizer? Teaching constitutional law at the University of Chicago? And either of those things are better than "corporate pillager."
2. From the perspective of the rest of us, that isn't "better."
3. You mean like how he really stuck to his guns, and showed them what-for in the primary? I would like any sort of citation that would indicate that this is even possible, let alone likely.
4. This puts pretty much everything except dogs, cats, and French & Mexican foods on the same level.
So, really, you kind of gave us one. You keep saying nothing anyone will say will dissuade us from voting for Obama; that's mostly because when you look at the objective reality of the situation, there's no reason for us to ever vote for Romney.
Most of the stuff Obama didn't do or did do was for ultimately self serving reasons such as wanting to increase the power of his office or at least not have it lose power, ignoring the shit he tried but couldn't do because of Congress like Guantanamo. Given the increasingly polarized nature of the electorate and how a large chunk of the Republicans in Congress are certainly very far right, what self serving reasons would Romney have to be moderate. Being moderate could actually hurt his chances of reelection.
Also Obama has pretty much destroyed what was left with the Constitution with assassinating an American citizen, extending the patriot act, signing the NDAA, prosecuting medical marijuana dispensaries, and prosecuting whistleblowers on an unprecedented scale. It makes the Cheney administration look good.
Also also, I don't think you can say Obama is "learning the job as he goes" anymore. I think his first two years were kind of wasted, and his third was wasted because he thought you could negotiate with political terrorists, but he's not "learning as he goes" anymore than any President now.
I hesitate to say that we need all our presidents to come from the same background. That seems incredibly limiting and antithetical to the idea of the American President in general.
I'd agree with this - he has his feet under him now. Oddly, that's sort of a downside for me, as I much prefer a feckless Democrat getting his ass handed to him than a strong and confident one... especially a strong and confident one who now knows his bread is buttered on the progressive side.
Regarding background, I also agree - but Obama never had much of a background. His speaking ability carried him through, but I think his most impressive trait has been his ability to come up to speed tolerably well as a leader when he was starting out with little more than raw ability and dulcet tones.
People don't hate Romney because he's republican. They hate him because he's a corporate parasite that would suck america dry for his rich friends just like the companies Bain capital did.
If Romney was a democrat, no democrat would be voting for him in a hypothetic primary against obama either.
Posts
That's because, for the millionth time after you bringing this up, the alternative is unthinkable.
Voting isn't a zero sum game for people who aren't stupid. If the GOP challenger was better than Obama, I'd vote for him. For my money, he isn't.
What is so hard to understand about that?
It's much more emotionally satisfying to be able to rationalize Obama's flaws and missteps as nothing important, because as the thread discussed earlier, nobody's shifting their votes from Mr. Not-Quite-Perfect to Mitt "Satan" Romney. Everybody post-justifies the choices they make, but the situation is especially tricky here because even skewing the facts Republican won't allow us to change that choice.
He is richer.
I mean, thats gotta be one way, isn't it?
Because clearly you're just a delusional believer of Obama being "The One," if you're going to vote for him in the election. Instead vote for the Gordon Gekko empty suit who continuously puts his foot in his mouth and couldn't even stay committed as a state governor before trying to run for president!
That's the forgettable part: you're going to vote against him regardless. No promotion you or anyone else may have, will persuade you to vote for Obama. They will always have some aspect that allows you to dismiss them.
Romney would love it if we wanted to elect a robot.
Well, I mean, if robots could love, anyways.
1) Romney is already rich and therefore incorruptible
2) Romney loves America
3) Romney was born in America
No one actually cares about this, it's just a stupid thing to argue about when nothing of substance is going on in the news.
1: He's held an actual job, with employees, in a leadership role, outside of politics.
2: He would nominate conservative judges to replace the old conservatives on the supreme court, if they decide to retire.
3: He'll be able to control the GOP right wing and get moderate policies implemented.
4: You hate him.
1, 2, & 4 are all (semi-)valid points. Point #3 is so laughable that I'm having a hard time even typing this post.
So, reward the mafia tactics of the GOP then?
1. Has he? Wiki says he has been a management consultant and (my own words) a corporate raider at Bain Capital.
2. I can't argue with you there. Romney would nominate conservative judges that feel strip searches without suspicion are okay.
3. Parts A and B are a fever dream. Romney spent the entire primary courting the GOP right wing and they regularly told him to get bent. Romney also would not implement moderate policies, because the reactionary wing of the GOP controls the house and would continue to pass batshit insane legislation that Romney would sign into law.
4. Is an okay reason.
I'd like you to expand on number three from your list there because all evidence is that the far right has the GOP by the balls. Case in point, how many times has Boehner's office floated a sensible compromise but when Cantor gets wind of it there's a "meeting between the Speaker and Conservative leadership" and all of a sudden that compromise is unthinkable.
Mitt Romney is not a man I believe can stand up to anything. He couldn't even tell Limbaugh he was off base for attacking a law student. He will do and say whatever he needs to to get people to vote for him.
Romney as president with a Democrat majority in Congress, that probably won't be so bad. Romney as president with the current Congress? Hello rubber stamp for the Tea Party agenda.
The far right is uncontrolable because they don't think they owe shit to anyone, which is why Boehner can't corral them in the House.
Also the President has done plenty outside of "politics". Also, why should someone who chooses to work for the government and work to improve citizens lives be dismissed as "not real work"?
Control of the narrative passes to a moderate, for one. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I think it'd happen.
How is 1 helpful? The US economy is nothing like the balance sheet of a business. In a leadership role you tell your employees what to do or you fire them. As the president you theoretically should be trying to work with those inside and outside of your party to get legislation written and passed. Plus most of his work consisted of getting great returns for shareholders but did nothing to really create jobs.
As for 3, what sort of moderate policies has he suggested recently? Or are you just assuming that once he is president he will revert back to Governor Mitt?
How would he control the narrative? There is a history of the party in Congress telling their president to get bent.
1. Capital
2. Gains
3. Tax
4. Rates
Absolutely none.
If Boehner can't control the House GOP, Romney sure as shit isn't going to be able to.
He's the sort of man that bends in the wind. If his party is extreme, he is extreme. If his party is moderate, he is moderate. And, at the moment, his party is extreme.
He'll be more moderate than Santorum would be, but if you want a real moderate, vote Obama.
Remember when Bush totally got Republicans on board with immigration reform?
To tackle the also: experience as a boss is not the same as experience on a board or as an organizer or a law firm drone or even a professor. Being President was the first experience Obama had running a team or being a boss, and I prefer to have a President who isn't learning as he goes.
I think the problem in the house is not the Tea Party - it's Boehner vs. Cantor. Cantor has been undermining him like crazy - I think a moderate Republican at the top can control the right wing better than a Democrat, if for no other reason than they have much more to lose being reactionary gooses when they're screwing their own President by doing it.
But that ignores all evidence to the contray.
The Tea Party doesn't care about the GOP leadership.
They started attacking Marco Rubio for his Dream Without a Dream Act proposal.
I'll agree that Cantor is probably a large part of the problem, he's able to use the Tea Party to get power (which the entire Republican party has been doing) but Cantor isn't going to go away unless he loses (which I think unlikely) and would in fact be empowered by the kinds of people Romney's coattails would bring into office.
I understand the hope, most Republicans believe the same thing you do (I've had this convo a thousand times with my old roommate who now works for the party), it's just unrealistic when you look at the last two years.
2) I see this as a negative.
3) I do not believe this to be true. If there's a single defining characteristic of Mitt Romney as a politician, its his supreme lack of courage of conviction. He will change positions on a dime if he thinks its beneficial to him. Believing he'll stand up to his power base doesn't make much sense.
ed
Well Obama has been President for 4 years and Romney was Governor for a bit under 4. Obama was also Chief executive/director for two non-profits with paid employees as well as volunteers, but claiming Romney has more experience "as a boss" than the incumbent President of the United States of America is beyond laughable.
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
People aren't happy with those. You want Romney to be a dirty lying motherfucker.
This applies equally well to Obama, who blew smoke up everyone's asses. Gitmo, transparent administration, non-politicized justice dept. More drilling, less drilling, evolving gay rights opinions, etc etc etc.
I hesitate to say that we need all our presidents to come from the same background. That seems incredibly limiting and antithetical to the idea of the American President in general.
us vs them. be afraid of * . the other side is just as mean as we are! stop hitting yourself!
*darkies/homosexuals/mexicans/foreigners/socialists/the poor (but never the rich!!)/loss of FREEDOM(for companies to destroy America's ecological and economical future for their own gain)
1. Community organizer? Teaching constitutional law at the University of Chicago? And either of those things are better than "corporate pillager."
2. From the perspective of the rest of us, that isn't "better."
3. You mean like how he really stuck to his guns, and showed them what-for in the primary? I would like any sort of citation that would indicate that this is even possible, let alone likely.
4. This puts pretty much everything except dogs, cats, and French & Mexican foods on the same level.
So, really, you kind of gave us one. You keep saying nothing anyone will say will dissuade us from voting for Obama; that's mostly because when you look at the objective reality of the situation, there's no reason for us to ever vote for Romney.
I'd agree with this - he has his feet under him now. Oddly, that's sort of a downside for me, as I much prefer a feckless Democrat getting his ass handed to him than a strong and confident one... especially a strong and confident one who now knows his bread is buttered on the progressive side.
Regarding background, I also agree - but Obama never had much of a background. His speaking ability carried him through, but I think his most impressive trait has been his ability to come up to speed tolerably well as a leader when he was starting out with little more than raw ability and dulcet tones.
If Romney was a democrat, no democrat would be voting for him in a hypothetic primary against obama either.