The Romney campaign has a new strategy: paint President Obama as a worn-out politician running a dirty campaign. Obama’s campaign isn’t just nasty, Romney says. It’s the nastiest.
This new tactic was on full display Tuesday night in Chillicothe, Ohio, where Mitt Romney summoned some strong words about the president.
“[H]e’s intellectually exhausted, out of ideas, and out of energy,” Romney said, according to prepared remarks. “And so his campaign has resorted to diversions and distractions, to demagoguing and defaming others. This is an old game in politics; what’s different this year is that the president is taking things to a new low.”
The proof? Romney accused Obama and his surrogates of unleashing “reckless accusations that disgrace the office of the presidency.” On Tuesday, the Romney campaign released an ad in Iowa holding Obama accountable for a super PAC ad that connects Mitt Romney with a woman’s death.
On Tuesday, according to the Romney, the Obama campaign hit a “new low” when Vice President Joe Biden used the word “chains” in front of a largely black audience in Virginia, purportedly injecting racial “code words” into his campaign.
“Another outrageous charge came a few hours ago in Virginia,” Romney said. “And the White House sinks a little bit lower. This is what an angry and desperate Presidency looks like.”
Early on in the campaign, President Obama’s personal likability among voters shielded him from these more personal kinds of attacks. But recently, the Romney campaign has decided they need to up the attacks on the president and has seen openings, such as the infamous Priorities USA ad, to get personal. Since adding Paul Ryan to the ticket, the Romney campaign has also sought to build off of Ryan’s reputation as a serious politician who cares about the issues.
“So, Mr. President, take your campaign of division and anger and hate back to Chicago and let us get about rebuilding and reuniting America,” Romney said.
Despite Romney’s indignation, his campaign is currently attacking Obama in two new ads over Medicare and Welfare, both of which are demonstrably false.
The Obama campaign called Romney’s comments “unhinged” in a terse response from press secretary Ben LaBolt.
“Governor Romney’s comments tonight seemed unhinged, and particularly strange coming at a time when he’s pouring tens of millions of dollars into negative ads that are demonstrably false.”
Burn.
He's using racial code words when speaking to those welfare queens!
when the group you're being compared to is 'politicians,' all that's really required to be considered attractive is a full head of hair and a relatively clear complexion. Not much there in the way of competition.
Also, Romney, "Fuck you, you entitled, tax dodging, shitbird. Take your secret plan to fight the economy back to Nixon's tit. Now that's a personal attack."
Well, there went my career in Politics...
fugacity on
0
Options
HacksawJ. Duggan Esq.Wrestler at LawRegistered Userregular
Paul Ryan has articulated his own crazy beliefs frequently and thoroughly enough that I don't see any particular need to try and tie him to Rand, even if it's pretty obvious he's a fan.
Too bad there are videos and taped interviews of him explicitly saying Ayn Rand is the reason he got into politics. No one's trying to tie him to Rand; he's already done that to himself.
I think there is a larger point behind behind Nasty Pig's assertions, though: I have a copy of Atlas Shrugged here at home. It clocks in at just under 1,100 densely-packed pages of print so fine that I can't read it for more than six pages at a sitting without getting a headache. It would take me a year to tell you what this fucking brick of a book is about, and that would probably be a waste of your time and mine because (a) the inauguration will be over by then, and (b) your understanding of why Paul Ryan's policy proposals are terrible is not dependent upon your ability to understand why Atlas Shrugged is terrible.
I'm not sure what you're arguing against here. Are you trying to say it's a bad thing to try to tie Ryan to Rand? Because if so, I don't believe that's the case. Anyone with half a brain and any knowledge of her works and the views she espouses within them knows how utterly toxic they are when you try to practice governance based upon them. I think it's entirely fair to shackle that ideological anchor to his neck, right alongside all the other nasty bits of insane idiocy he so enthusiastically spouts at the slightest provocation.
0
Options
spacekungfumanPoor and minority-filledRegistered User, __BANNED USERSregular
Paul Ryan has articulated his own crazy beliefs frequently and thoroughly enough that I don't see any particular need to try and tie him to Rand, even if it's pretty obvious he's a fan.
Too bad there are videos and taped interviews of him explicitly saying Ayn Rand is the reason he got into politics. No one's trying to tie him to Rand; he's already done that to himself.
I think there is a larger point behind behind Nasty Pig's assertions, though: I have a copy of Atlas Shrugged here at home. It clocks in at just under 1,100 densely-packed pages of print so fine that I can't read it for more than six pages at a sitting without getting a headache. It would take me a year to tell you what this fucking brick of a book is about, and that would probably be a waste of your time and mine because (a) the inauguration will be over by then, and (b) your understanding of why Paul Ryan's policy proposals are terrible is not dependent upon your ability to understand why Atlas Shrugged is terrible.
I'm not sure what you're arguing against here. Are you trying to say it's a bad thing to try to tie Ryan to Rand? Because if so, I don't believe that's the case. Anyone with half a brain and any knowledge of her works and the views she espouses within them knows how utterly toxic they are when you try to practice governance based upon them. I think it's entirely fair to shackle that ideological anchor to his neck, right alongside all the other nasty bits of insane idiocy he so enthusiastically spouts at the slightest provocation.
If Obama starts talking about books and philosophy, then Romney will switch to a message that Obama is a nerd. Of course this well backfire when Romney tries to give Obama a wedgie during the debates and gets later out on his ass, because Obama is bad ass like that.
Mitt Romney called an independent review of his tax plan by the Tax Policy Center "garbage" for claiming that his plan would give a tax break to the wealthy but increase taxes on the middle class in an interview with Fortune magazine. Romney claimed that TPC ignored the premise of his plan: that the wealthy would pay the same share they do today and that the middle class would see their tax burden reduced.
"Instead they made various assumptions about what they thought I would do which are not in fact accurate," Romney said. "They made an assumption that I would reduce the home mortgage-interest deduction. I will not do that for middle-income taxpayers, as I have already indicated. There's an old expression in the computer world: garbage in, garbage out. They made garbage assumptions and they reached a garbage conclusion."
Wouldn't the garbage in this case be the plan itself? Romney bitches about them making reasonable assumptions because they have to in order to make any analysis of his vague as ass plan. Wouldn't not eliminated the home mortgage deduction for middle-income taxpayers pretty much make the savings small?
Simpson-Bowles laid out a formula that shows that you can do just as I described. That you can bring down the rates, limit deductions and exemptions for people at the high end, and with additional growth that comes by virtue of the stimulative action you can reach a balanced budget. I will follow a model similar to Simpson-Bowles and work with Congress to identify which of the alternative methods we should apply to reduce deductions, benefits, and exemptions. Those reductions will occur for people at the high end. I have noted before my commitment to preserve tax preferences for middle-income taxpayers such as homeownership, charitable giving and health care.
What? No, it did not show that. Simpson-Bowles increased taxes overall.
Edit:
In 2002, tax experts who had served in the Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and Bill Clinton administrations established the Tax Policy Center to provide unbiased analysis of tax issues. The following year TPC developed a comprehensive tax simulation model to analyze the federal income tax and proposals to change it. That model has evolved to incorporate new and additional data, changes in federal tax law, and other aspects of the tax system and the economy.
Asked for specific examples of how Romney's budget differed from Ryan's proposal, Romney reiterated that the two are on the "same page" but noted that under his plan, "I'd get us to a balanced budget faster than the plan [Ryan] originally put forward" and that Ryan's proposed highest tax rate, at 25 percent, is lower than that of Romney, which is 28 percent.
"There are some differences, but they're very similar," he said.
“So, Mr. President, take your campaign of division and anger and hate back to Chicago and let us get about rebuilding and reuniting America,” Romney said.
This is why I hate politics. How are you supposed to take anything these guys do seriously when you see this kind of rhetoric spewed out (on both sides mind you)? I really want to know.
0
Options
spacekungfumanPoor and minority-filledRegistered User, __BANNED USERSregular
Mitt Romney called an independent review of his tax plan by the Tax Policy Center "garbage" for claiming that his plan would give a tax break to the wealthy but increase taxes on the middle class in an interview with Fortune magazine. Romney claimed that TPC ignored the premise of his plan: that the wealthy would pay the same share they do today and that the middle class would see their tax burden reduced.
"Instead they made various assumptions about what they thought I would do which are not in fact accurate," Romney said. "They made an assumption that I would reduce the home mortgage-interest deduction. I will not do that for middle-income taxpayers, as I have already indicated. There's an old expression in the computer world: garbage in, garbage out. They made garbage assumptions and they reached a garbage conclusion."
Wouldn't the garbage in this case be the plan itself? Romney bitches about them making reasonable assumptions because they have to in order to make any analysis of his vague as ass plan. Wouldn't not eliminated the home mortgage deduction for middle-income taxpayers pretty much make the savings small?
Simpson-Bowles laid out a formula that shows that you can do just as I described. That you can bring down the rates, limit deductions and exemptions for people at the high end, and with additional growth that comes by virtue of the stimulative action you can reach a balanced budget. I will follow a model similar to Simpson-Bowles and work with Congress to identify which of the alternative methods we should apply to reduce deductions, benefits, and exemptions. Those reductions will occur for people at the high end. I have noted before my commitment to preserve tax preferences for middle-income taxpayers such as homeownership, charitable giving and health care.
What? No, it did not show that. Simpson-Bowles increased taxes overall.
Edit:
In 2002, tax experts who had served in the Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and Bill Clinton administrations established the Tax Policy Center to provide unbiased analysis of tax issues. The following year TPC developed a comprehensive tax simulation model to analyze the federal income tax and proposals to change it. That model has evolved to incorporate new and additional data, changes in federal tax law, and other aspects of the tax system and the economy.
Hahahaha.
There is no way to reduce rates and keep deductions on a revenue neutral basis. Either his plan is incoherent or he is cutting revenue.
Mitt Romney called an independent review of his tax plan by the Tax Policy Center "garbage" for claiming that his plan would give a tax break to the wealthy but increase taxes on the middle class in an interview with Fortune magazine. Romney claimed that TPC ignored the premise of his plan: that the wealthy would pay the same share they do today and that the middle class would see their tax burden reduced.
"Instead they made various assumptions about what they thought I would do which are not in fact accurate," Romney said. "They made an assumption that I would reduce the home mortgage-interest deduction. I will not do that for middle-income taxpayers, as I have already indicated. There's an old expression in the computer world: garbage in, garbage out. They made garbage assumptions and they reached a garbage conclusion."
Wouldn't the garbage in this case be the plan itself? Romney bitches about them making reasonable assumptions because they have to in order to make any analysis of his vague as ass plan. Wouldn't not eliminated the home mortgage deduction for middle-income taxpayers pretty much make the savings small?
Simpson-Bowles laid out a formula that shows that you can do just as I described. That you can bring down the rates, limit deductions and exemptions for people at the high end, and with additional growth that comes by virtue of the stimulative action you can reach a balanced budget. I will follow a model similar to Simpson-Bowles and work with Congress to identify which of the alternative methods we should apply to reduce deductions, benefits, and exemptions. Those reductions will occur for people at the high end. I have noted before my commitment to preserve tax preferences for middle-income taxpayers such as homeownership, charitable giving and health care.
What? No, it did not show that. Simpson-Bowles increased taxes overall.
Edit:
In 2002, tax experts who had served in the Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and Bill Clinton administrations established the Tax Policy Center to provide unbiased analysis of tax issues. The following year TPC developed a comprehensive tax simulation model to analyze the federal income tax and proposals to change it. That model has evolved to incorporate new and additional data, changes in federal tax law, and other aspects of the tax system and the economy.
Hahahaha.
There is no way to reduce rates and keep deductions on a revenue neutral basis. Either his plan is incoherent or he is cutting revenue.
with additional growth that comes by virtue of the stimulative action
If Obama starts talking about books and philosophy, then Romney will switch to a message that Obama is a nerd. Of course this well backfire when Romney tries to give Obama a wedgie during the debates and gets later out on his ass, because Obama is bad ass like that.
I almost said that Obama could mention he collects Conan and Spider-Man comics, but that probably wouldn't help a 'not a nerd' depiction.
“So, Mr. President, take your campaign of division and anger and hate back to Chicago and let us get about rebuilding and reuniting America,” Romney said.
This is why I hate politics. How are you supposed to take anything these guys do seriously when you see this kind of rhetoric spewed out (on both sides mind you)? I really want to know.
It could have been worse, Romney could've told him to go back to Kenya, which would be unsurprising.
0
Options
lu tzeSweeping the monestary steps.Registered Userregular
Paul Ryan has articulated his own crazy beliefs frequently and thoroughly enough that I don't see any particular need to try and tie him to Rand, even if it's pretty obvious he's a fan.
Too bad there are videos and taped interviews of him explicitly saying Ayn Rand is the reason he got into politics. No one's trying to tie him to Rand; he's already done that to himself.
I think there is a larger point behind behind Nasty Pig's assertions, though: I have a copy of Atlas Shrugged here at home. It clocks in at just under 1,100 densely-packed pages of print so fine that I can't read it for more than six pages at a sitting without getting a headache. It would take me a year to tell you what this fucking brick of a book is about, and that would probably be a waste of your time and mine because (a) the inauguration will be over by then, and (b) your understanding of why Paul Ryan's policy proposals are terrible is not dependent upon your ability to understand why Atlas Shrugged is terrible.
I'm not sure what you're arguing against here. Are you trying to say it's a bad thing to try to tie Ryan to Rand? Because if so, I don't believe that's the case. Anyone with half a brain and any knowledge of her works and the views she espouses within them knows how utterly toxic they are when you try to practice governance based upon them. I think it's entirely fair to shackle that ideological anchor to his neck, right alongside all the other nasty bits of insane idiocy he so enthusiastically spouts at the slightest provocation.
It's also fair to shackle that ideological anchor to his neck because he's apparently never had a real job.
Espousing self determinism and "bootstraps" while sucking the public tit bone dry has got to rank right up there on the shitbag hypocrite scale, surely?
World's best janitor
0
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
“So, Mr. President, take your campaign of division and anger and hate back to Chicago and let us get about rebuilding and reuniting America,” Romney said.
This is why I hate politics. How are you supposed to take anything these guys do seriously when you see this kind of rhetoric spewed out (on both sides mind you)? I really want to know.
The thing is... is it really isnt both sides. The days of a semi-reasonable Republican presence in Washington is as long gone as the days of 2 dollar gas (coincidentally, both disappearing about the same time). There is nasty, hard-hitting rhetoric from the left but a great vast majority of it is based in fact and figures. From what I've seen of Obama's campaign, his claims are fairly non-specific and can be spun various ways, but the basic message is solid and can be backed up by checking facts and figures. The entirety of the modern GOP is based on "Well I Think" situations, all of them theoretical and used as fear mongering:
Obama cut $716 bil from medicare. Obama's college was paid for by terrorists. Obama is a secret mooslim. Obama's birth certificate is fake. Every data source that contradicts the Right's policies is a "liberal propaganda machine". Wikipedia is a tool of the left wing. Health care reform is strengthening the war on affluent, white Christians and you'll get arrested/beaten for singing Christmas carols in public. Death panels. Selling the country to China. The debt is our only economic problem. Cut taxes/Keep offshoring accounts alive because the job creators will leave the country if we don't. Welfare Queens are our biggest problem. Remove Founding Fathers from the history books when their political views don't match ours. Global Warming is fake. Green Energy is a waste of time, drill baby drill! Marriage is under attack. Religion is under attack. Christmas is under attack. Being a minority in this country is better than being rich. Illegal immigration is destroying our job market. Liberals are committing voter fraud, and the election of Obama proves it. We need a bigger military because of the Commie Red Resurgence from Slanty Eye Joe.
This is the GOP of today, and I dare you to find that kind of left-leaning fear mongering and absolute ridiculousness on a national platform. It doesn't exist, at all.
I find it concerning that someone who, at a broad stance wants to make america better, isn't actively pushing and fighting for a policy that will make it better, instead of keeping it secret. Thats half the point, if someone steals your idea and puts it in, you have succeded. I guess you can exclude mccain's 'osama' plan in this, as revieling the plan while not ready to take action could give lead time for defense preperation of the enemy. But even then thats "we cant give a timeline, theill wait us out" mentality.
It would be nice getting having the Democrats get the House back if Romney tries to touch any of the actually big tax breaks. That would be one huge campaign issue.
I find it concerning that someone who, at a broad stance wants to make america better, isn't actively pushing and fighting for a policy that will make it better, instead of keeping it secret. Thats half the point, if someone steals your idea and puts it in, you have succeded. I guess you can exclude mccain's 'osama' plan in this, as revieling the plan while not ready to take action could give lead time for defense preperation of the enemy. But even then thats "we cant give a timeline, theill wait us out" mentality.
This would require that you actually have a policy beyond "Cut Taxes, Fuck The Poor."
Right now the Romney campaign is doing so much handwaving, it's like Pat Morita is secretly teaching them karate.
First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKERS
Meh, at this point I don't think the judge could have stopped it anyway. They court and the governor both blocked it in Michigan, and the ballots were still printed with the citizenship check on them, and it was still enforced. The Secretery of State didn't get in trouble because they put out a press conference around noon telling poll workers to stop enforcing it, but of course poll workers were working the polls and not watching the news, so they of course missed it.
Dear lord, Romney is projecting so hard he's going to burn out a bulb. Obama's just a tired politician who has nothing left but distract from his record? A Romney says what? The TPC's report is garbage in/garbage out because the initial plan they used wasn't actually a plan, it was just called a plan and campaigned on like a plan but really a duck? Simpson-Bowles proves you can reduce the deficit without raising taxes?
What the shit is going on with this election? And how the fuck does Obama always wind up with his political opponents imploding on their own?
0
Options
spacekungfumanPoor and minority-filledRegistered User, __BANNED USERSregular
Dear lord, Romney is projecting so hard he's going to burn out a bulb. Obama's just a tired politician who has nothing left but distract from his record? A Romney says what? The TPC's report is garbage in/garbage out because the initial plan they used wasn't actually a plan, it was just called a plan and campaigned on like a plan but really a duck? Simpson-Bowles proves you can reduce the deficit without raising taxes?
What the shit is going on with this election? And how the fuck does Obama always wind up with his political opponents imploding on their own?
As Stephen Colbert would say, this is wikiality. Romney will say anything he wants, with the goal of having people who hear him say these things believe they are true.
Dear lord, Romney is projecting so hard he's going to burn out a bulb. Obama's just a tired politician who has nothing left but distract from his record? A Romney says what? The TPC's report is garbage in/garbage out because the initial plan they used wasn't actually a plan, it was just called a plan and campaigned on like a plan but really a duck? Simpson-Bowles proves you can reduce the deficit without raising taxes?
What the shit is going on with this election? And how the fuck does Obama always wind up with his political opponents imploding on their own?
Happy coincidence, he took the stage at a time when the Republican party was heading into a death spiral, finally becoming accountable to the crazies they've played for votes all these years. I think any candidate who wasn't a complete phone-in would have had the same thing happen, possibly even more so since the citizenship baloney wouldn't have worked with any of the alternatives.
when the group you're being compared to is 'politicians,' all that's really required to be considered attractive is a full head of hair and a relatively clear complexion. Not much there in the way of competition.
D.C. isn't known among its residents as "Hollywood for Ugly People" for nothing.
Paul Ryan has articulated his own crazy beliefs frequently and thoroughly enough that I don't see any particular need to try and tie him to Rand, even if it's pretty obvious he's a fan.
Too bad there are videos and taped interviews of him explicitly saying Ayn Rand is the reason he got into politics. No one's trying to tie him to Rand; he's already done that to himself.
I think there is a larger point behind behind Nasty Pig's assertions, though: I have a copy of Atlas Shrugged here at home. It clocks in at just under 1,100 densely-packed pages of print so fine that I can't read it for more than six pages at a sitting without getting a headache. It would take me a year to tell you what this fucking brick of a book is about, and that would probably be a waste of your time and mine because (a) the inauguration will be over by then, and (b) your understanding of why Paul Ryan's policy proposals are terrible is not dependent upon your ability to understand why Atlas Shrugged is terrible.
Or look up the plot on wikipedia. There's also a thread on Atlas Shrugged in the archives, too.
Alright, I'll be less metaphorical. Atlas Shrugged is about as relevant to the topic of this thread as any other book that Paul Ryan has ever read in his life because neither campaign is going to waste time and money educating voters about the book first so that they can then explain the merits of the Ryan Budget. It's an election, not a book club.
SammyF on
+3
Options
HacksawJ. Duggan Esq.Wrestler at LawRegistered Userregular
Paul Ryan has articulated his own crazy beliefs frequently and thoroughly enough that I don't see any particular need to try and tie him to Rand, even if it's pretty obvious he's a fan.
Too bad there are videos and taped interviews of him explicitly saying Ayn Rand is the reason he got into politics. No one's trying to tie him to Rand; he's already done that to himself.
I think there is a larger point behind behind Nasty Pig's assertions, though: I have a copy of Atlas Shrugged here at home. It clocks in at just under 1,100 densely-packed pages of print so fine that I can't read it for more than six pages at a sitting without getting a headache. It would take me a year to tell you what this fucking brick of a book is about, and that would probably be a waste of your time and mine because (a) the inauguration will be over by then, and (b) your understanding of why Paul Ryan's policy proposals are terrible is not dependent upon your ability to understand why Atlas Shrugged is terrible.
I'm not sure what you're arguing against here. Are you trying to say it's a bad thing to try to tie Ryan to Rand? Because if so, I don't believe that's the case. Anyone with half a brain and any knowledge of her works and the views she espouses within them knows how utterly toxic they are when you try to practice governance based upon them. I think it's entirely fair to shackle that ideological anchor to his neck, right alongside all the other nasty bits of insane idiocy he so enthusiastically spouts at the slightest provocation.
If Obama starts talking about books and philosophy, then Romney will switch to a message that Obama is a nerd. Of course this well backfire when Romney tries to give Obama a wedgie during the debates and gets later out on his ass, because Obama is bad ass like that.
Yeah, I don't think Romney's going to pull the "Obama is a nerd" card. He tried that with the "Obama is an elitist" play, to which everyone did a double take and pointed out to Mr. Romney that he had not one, but fucking two degrees from Harvard, was born into a super rich family, and spent years abroad in Europe in the 60s and 70s. Dude's chuckin' sea shells from a raft; he's got no ground to fight on.
Never tell the press you won't do x, y, or z. This just makes them more rabid to see what you are hiding. Especially if you can't hide behind national defense or something similar.
There have to be some serious, serious skeletons in that closet.
I would say I called it, but... That's like predicting noon when it's 11:45, I don't think I'm allowed to take credit.
On the bright side, Romney has now hit three of the five worst employees in Office Space - Joanna (doing the bare minimum, nothing more), Tom (having a job without actually doing anything), and Lumburgh (being a monolithic tool). Think he can get Peter and Milton by the end of the race?
There have to be some serious, serious skeletons in that closet.
I don't really understand WHAT could be both legal and bad enough to keep hiding it. I mean, everyone already thinks that
a) The Romneys didn't pay taxes, it's terrible and I hate them
or
b) The Romneys didn't pay taxes, but taxes are too high anyway and they are heroes for avoiding them! I want to be just like them one day
So if the thing inside is just 'We barely paid any taxes' then who cares. Noone really thinks they paid much in tax, considering the years they did release already had them taxed at around 14%.
There has to be something TERRIBLE to their own base in there. Like he actually donated a million to build abortion clinics in canada. Or he bought and bulldozed a series of churches to build Mormon apocalypse bunkers.
Needless to say, this is at odds with the argument he is making today, which is that the best way to speed the recovery is to cut spending. And it again raises a question: Is Mitt Romney a closet Keynesian?
In 2008, Romney was running for president, and during a debate in January of that year, John McCain was asked what short term government fix he’d support, given that the economy looked like it was headed for a downturn. McCain said: “the first thing we need to do is stop the out-of- control spending.”
Romney, seeking to distinguish himself from McCain, rolled out his own $250 billion stimulus plan in an interview with John Harwood later that month, a plan that mostly consisted of tax cuts, some of which were targeted at low and moderate incomes. He explicitly criticized McCain’s claim that cutting spending would help the economy, claiming: “That’s not stimulative.”
When Harwood followed up by asking him whether his own stimulus plan would boost the deficit, Romney replied: “If we go into recession, the cost to our balanced budget is going to be far more severe than the cost of this program.”So it’s okay to allow the deficit to increase in the short term to help the economy?
To be sure, Romney defended his stimulus plan at the time by noting it contained no additional federal spending. But his criticism of McCain’s spending cuts, his own stimulus plan, and his justification for it were pure Kenyesianism, said Jared Bernstein, a former White House adviser.
“That’s an absolutely cogent, Keynesian idea, about the impact of spending cuts on jobs in a down economy,” Bernstein told me. “And it would be great if Governor Romney would remember his former view on that.”
The broader context here is that before Obama was president, none of this stuff was really controversial. Bush passed a stimulus in 2008; Romney’s proposed stimulus was far bigger than that of the former president. Indeed, as Jonathan Cohn has written, even Paul Ryan used to agree that Keynesian fiscal policy during bad economies is not only a good idea, but should err in the direction of making it bigger.
Not long ago, Romney accidentally revealed his closet Keynesianism when he said that sharply cutting the budget during his first year would harm the economy. This was widely treated as a momentary lapse on his part, but we now see he’s said something very similiar before. And it’s directly at odds with the central case about spending and deficits the GOP has made against Obama for years now.
Think he can get Peter and Milton by the end of the race?
Romney's scheme to steal from the poor and give to the rich (by cutting taxes on the wealthy to fractions of cents) will be derailed by allegations of insider trading involving Staples.
+2
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
There have to be some serious, serious skeletons in that closet.
The statements, "We have nothing to hide," and "Showing our returns will only give [the opposition] more ammunition," are mutually inclusive statements.
Someone should explain to her what "nothing to hide" means.
I means "the state of not withholding damaging, illegal, and/or incriminating materials."
Stop attacking Ann Romney guys, jeez its not like she's a campaign spokesman! But did you hear about moochels fat ass? Damn that girl is fucking fatty fat, I bet Obama is cheating on her with Monica Lewinsky.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
I feel like the Ryan pick will leave politically savvy people baffled for years.
Essentially, as has been said by others in this thread...
VP picks do little to help win the election, but they surely can sink one.
Ryan has no skeletons in his closet, has some base cred and has gotten people to stop talking about Bain and Tax returns. In that sense, the pick is money.
Seruko on
"How are you going to play Dota if your fingers and bitten off? You can't. That's how" -> Carnarvon
"You can be yodeling bear without spending a dime if you get lucky." -> reVerse
"In the grim darkness of the future, we will all be nurses catering to the whims of terrible old people." -> Hacksaw
"In fact, our whole society will be oriented around caring for one very decrepit, very old man on total life support." -> SKFM
I mean, the first time I met a non-white person was when this Vietnamese kid tried to break my legs but that was entirely fair because he was a centreback, not because he was a subhuman beast in some zoo ->yotes
I feel like the Ryan pick will leave politically savvy people baffled for years.
Essentially, as has been said by others in this thread...
VP picks do little to help win the election, but they surely can sink one.
Ryan has no skeletons in his closet, has some base cred and has gotten people to stop talking about Bain and Tax returns. In that sense, the pick is money.
He has no skeletons in the closet because his largest skeleton (the budget) is lying out in plain sight. Of course, one can debate how big a skeleton that is.
There have to be some serious, serious skeletons in that closet.
I would say I called it, but... That's like predicting noon when it's 11:45, I don't think I'm allowed to take credit.
On the bright side, Romney has now hit three of the five worst employees in Office Space - Joanna (doing the bare minimum, nothing more), Tom (having a job without actually doing anything), and Lumburgh (being a monolithic tool). Think he can get Peter and Milton by the end of the race?
You don't think the constant blubbering from the Romney camp sounds a lot like "I think you have my stapler, it was a red Swingline stapler, I want my stapler back..."?
Posts
He's using racial code words when speaking to those welfare queens!
I'm not sure what you're arguing against here. Are you trying to say it's a bad thing to try to tie Ryan to Rand? Because if so, I don't believe that's the case. Anyone with half a brain and any knowledge of her works and the views she espouses within them knows how utterly toxic they are when you try to practice governance based upon them. I think it's entirely fair to shackle that ideological anchor to his neck, right alongside all the other nasty bits of insane idiocy he so enthusiastically spouts at the slightest provocation.
If Obama starts talking about books and philosophy, then Romney will switch to a message that Obama is a nerd. Of course this well backfire when Romney tries to give Obama a wedgie during the debates and gets later out on his ass, because Obama is bad ass like that.
What? No, it did not show that. Simpson-Bowles increased taxes overall.
Edit: Hahahaha.
This is why I hate politics. How are you supposed to take anything these guys do seriously when you see this kind of rhetoric spewed out (on both sides mind you)? I really want to know.
There is no way to reduce rates and keep deductions on a revenue neutral basis. Either his plan is incoherent or he is cutting revenue.
Ah yes, the magic of trickle down.
Which hasn't worked a single time, ever, but will bring 3% unemployment, higher household income, and negative inflation this time for realsies.
I almost said that Obama could mention he collects Conan and Spider-Man comics, but that probably wouldn't help a 'not a nerd' depiction.
It could have been worse, Romney could've told him to go back to Kenya, which would be unsurprising.
Espousing self determinism and "bootstraps" while sucking the public tit bone dry has got to rank right up there on the shitbag hypocrite scale, surely?
The thing is... is it really isnt both sides. The days of a semi-reasonable Republican presence in Washington is as long gone as the days of 2 dollar gas (coincidentally, both disappearing about the same time). There is nasty, hard-hitting rhetoric from the left but a great vast majority of it is based in fact and figures. From what I've seen of Obama's campaign, his claims are fairly non-specific and can be spun various ways, but the basic message is solid and can be backed up by checking facts and figures. The entirety of the modern GOP is based on "Well I Think" situations, all of them theoretical and used as fear mongering:
Obama cut $716 bil from medicare. Obama's college was paid for by terrorists. Obama is a secret mooslim. Obama's birth certificate is fake. Every data source that contradicts the Right's policies is a "liberal propaganda machine". Wikipedia is a tool of the left wing. Health care reform is strengthening the war on affluent, white Christians and you'll get arrested/beaten for singing Christmas carols in public. Death panels. Selling the country to China. The debt is our only economic problem. Cut taxes/Keep offshoring accounts alive because the job creators will leave the country if we don't. Welfare Queens are our biggest problem. Remove Founding Fathers from the history books when their political views don't match ours. Global Warming is fake. Green Energy is a waste of time, drill baby drill! Marriage is under attack. Religion is under attack. Christmas is under attack. Being a minority in this country is better than being rich. Illegal immigration is destroying our job market. Liberals are committing voter fraud, and the election of Obama proves it. We need a bigger military because of the Commie Red Resurgence from Slanty Eye Joe.
This is the GOP of today, and I dare you to find that kind of left-leaning fear mongering and absolute ridiculousness on a national platform. It doesn't exist, at all.
This would require that you actually have a policy beyond "Cut Taxes, Fuck The Poor."
Right now the Romney campaign is doing so much handwaving, it's like Pat Morita is secretly teaching them karate.
Meh, at this point I don't think the judge could have stopped it anyway. They court and the governor both blocked it in Michigan, and the ballots were still printed with the citizenship check on them, and it was still enforced. The Secretery of State didn't get in trouble because they put out a press conference around noon telling poll workers to stop enforcing it, but of course poll workers were working the polls and not watching the news, so they of course missed it.
What the shit is going on with this election? And how the fuck does Obama always wind up with his political opponents imploding on their own?
As Stephen Colbert would say, this is wikiality. Romney will say anything he wants, with the goal of having people who hear him say these things believe they are true.
D.C. isn't known among its residents as "Hollywood for Ugly People" for nothing.
Alright, I'll be less metaphorical. Atlas Shrugged is about as relevant to the topic of this thread as any other book that Paul Ryan has ever read in his life because neither campaign is going to waste time and money educating voters about the book first so that they can then explain the merits of the Ryan Budget. It's an election, not a book club.
Yeah, I don't think Romney's going to pull the "Obama is a nerd" card. He tried that with the "Obama is an elitist" play, to which everyone did a double take and pointed out to Mr. Romney that he had not one, but fucking two degrees from Harvard, was born into a super rich family, and spent years abroad in Europe in the 60s and 70s. Dude's chuckin' sea shells from a raft; he's got no ground to fight on.
source
There have to be some serious, serious skeletons in that closet.
Penny Arcade Rockstar Social Club / This is why I despise cyclists
This is a lame attempt at rebranding Ryan as a devout Catholic to try to win so contraceptive hating votes from a historically liberal voting group
I would say I called it, but... That's like predicting noon when it's 11:45, I don't think I'm allowed to take credit.
On the bright side, Romney has now hit three of the five worst employees in Office Space - Joanna (doing the bare minimum, nothing more), Tom (having a job without actually doing anything), and Lumburgh (being a monolithic tool). Think he can get Peter and Milton by the end of the race?
I don't really understand WHAT could be both legal and bad enough to keep hiding it. I mean, everyone already thinks that
a) The Romneys didn't pay taxes, it's terrible and I hate them
or
b) The Romneys didn't pay taxes, but taxes are too high anyway and they are heroes for avoiding them! I want to be just like them one day
So if the thing inside is just 'We barely paid any taxes' then who cares. Noone really thinks they paid much in tax, considering the years they did release already had them taxed at around 14%.
There has to be something TERRIBLE to their own base in there. Like he actually donated a million to build abortion clinics in canada. Or he bought and bulldozed a series of churches to build Mormon apocalypse bunkers.
Romney's scheme to steal from the poor and give to the rich (by cutting taxes on the wealthy to fractions of cents) will be derailed by allegations of insider trading involving Staples.
The statements, "We have nothing to hide," and "Showing our returns will only give [the opposition] more ammunition," are mutually inclusive statements.
Someone should explain to her what "nothing to hide" means.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Essentially, as has been said by others in this thread...
VP picks do little to help win the election, but they surely can sink one.
Ryan has no skeletons in his closet, has some base cred and has gotten people to stop talking about Bain and Tax returns. In that sense, the pick is money.
"You can be yodeling bear without spending a dime if you get lucky." -> reVerse
"In the grim darkness of the future, we will all be nurses catering to the whims of terrible old people." -> Hacksaw
"In fact, our whole society will be oriented around caring for one very decrepit, very old man on total life support." -> SKFM
I mean, the first time I met a non-white person was when this Vietnamese kid tried to break my legs but that was entirely fair because he was a centreback, not because he was a subhuman beast in some zoo ->yotes
pleasepaypreacher.net
He has no skeletons in the closet because his largest skeleton (the budget) is lying out in plain sight. Of course, one can debate how big a skeleton that is.
You don't think the constant blubbering from the Romney camp sounds a lot like "I think you have my stapler, it was a red Swingline stapler, I want my stapler back..."?
Uncanny Magazine!
The Mad Writers Union