Originally Posted by daewoo

Really? That is the best Romney could come up with?

Yes, it probably was. Out of the three finalists he had, Paul Ryan was the worst, except for the other two. Paul Ryan's budget plan was so bad Rand Paul voted against it. Rand is fairly reasonable and if he votes against it, it's not worth the paper it's printed on. The only good thing I can say about Ryan is that he has brought the budget to the forefront...if only he had real solutions.

And honestly, who cares. Romney doesn't have a great shot to win anyway. In Virginia every other commercial is an Obama ad talking about how Romney is going to personally give me cancer. Apparently those ads can persuade a lot of people. I thought the swiftboat thing with Kerry was a fluke...WRONG...it's the way to win elections now.

While he is popular with the retards and nitwits that hang out with the teabaggers, I don't see him inspiring traditional republicans to show up to vote.

They were voting for Romney anyway which is the sad thing. I believe I broke down the average voter not too long ago. Elections come down to the 10% to 20% of people who vote for the most popular kid in school. This is why negative ads work so well. Romney killed a guy? I better vote for Obama.

Oh yeah, we are talking about Ryan. Does anyone else feel like this is a repeat of 2008, only Paul Ryan is probably 100 times more intelligent than Palin (which puts him about average)? We have a candidate who no one really likes but was nominated because he can "beat Obama" and then we get a radical VP pick that inspires people like Doc and scares the "undecided" because they don't know if Granny will get her monthly check.

Kinda sad, I think Romney would have done a slightly better job than Obama.

those of us who wish for intelligent conservatives in the white house can just go screw ourselves.

Don't worry, all 20 of us can meet up at the closest Denny's and discuss these things.

I personally believe the Paul Ryan VP pick was the final nail in his political coffin. Ryan might help shore up the base but he's not going to bring in the independents and that will hurt Romney more. Also he has to win in Florida or his chance of becoming president ends. Rubio would have been the safer pick to help him in Florida. Now he not only will lose out on any Hispanics that Rubio might have drawn but he most likely drove a wedge in the retired communities in Florida with Ryan. Medicare plays big in Florida elections. Considering Obama has huge leads with blacks, Hispanics, women, young people, now add the independents and the Elderly... I don't see Romney over coming that.

I gave up on the Presidential election when it turned all negative. At this point I'm just hoping that the Congress can be changed enough either way to allow for something to get accomplished. I would prefer the Democrats and Republicans work together but I don't see that happening so all one can hope for is a Majority in both Houses. The Paul Ryan pick has the Congressional Democrats excited that they can take back the House but I honestly think that's a long shot. The Senate will most likely be split.. or the Republicans will take the Majority. So considering the options for getting something done I'm kind of hoping the Republicans hold the House and take the Senate With Obama in the White House. If he is on and island he may find it in himself to work with a republican congress and can water down some of their legislation enough to get Some kind of Jobs bill passed.

I think that your analysis is pretty much the same as mine. The only differences I hold is that I think that Romney was finished before the Ryan pick but I do agree that the Ryan pick makes it even harder to win now. However, the one chance that does exist is for Romney to appeal to those who are worried about the deficit. According to the poll below the deficit is #2 in importance for electing a president this year. Ryan should soundly win over the majority of the 23% that consider that a priority.

Priorities

Jobs - 35
Budget deficit - 23
Health care - 19
Social Security - 11
Immigration - 5
Gay marriage - 4
Other (vol.) - 2
Unsure - 2

According to this older (but probably still relevant) poll 92% of Republicans, 80% of independents, and 66% of Democrats consider the deficit an important issue. To independents the only issue more important than the deficit is the economy. So the Ryan pick should sway some independents.

Economy Is Paramount Issue to U.S. Voters

If Romney/Ryan have any chance of winning they need to find a way to get a leg up on Obama in the economy debate which at this point they have struggled to do and they need to get people to understand the importance of getting the budget under control. Obama is currently bashing away at the Ryan pick by pointing out all of the things the Ryan plan would take away from people. This is a very easy and effective message to get support with so it makes sense for Obama to do this. What Romney/Ryan has to do is explain why it is better to give up something now in order to preserve programs in the future. They have to make it well known what the benefits of cutting Social Security, Medicare, and Obamacare are otherwise having Ryan on the ticket is only going to hurt them. This is going to be a very difficult message to make people understand IMO. Ryan is a great speaker but so is Obama and Obama has the easier message to understand for the average person.

Originally Posted by AMD4EVER

If Romney/Ryan have any chance of winning they need to find a way to get a leg up on Obama in the economy debate which at this point they have struggled to do and they need to get people to understand the importance of getting the budget under control. Obama is currently bashing away at the Ryan pick by pointing out all of the things the Ryan plan would take away from people. This is a very easy and effective message to get support with so it makes sense for Obama to do this. What Romney/Ryan has to do is explain why it is better to give up something now in order to preserve programs in the future. They have to make it well known what the benefits of cutting Social Security, Medicare, and Obamacare are otherwise having Ryan on the ticket is only going to hurt them. This is going to be a very difficult message to make people understand IMO. Ryan is a great speaker but so is Obama and Obama has the easier message to understand for the average person.

I think it's the Paul Ryan budget that will be the thorn in the side of Romney though. They both talk big about bringing the debt and deficits under control but they put forth budgets that would increase the debt and deficits. Romney's plan to further cut taxes while increasing Defense spending will add another 6 trillion to the debt and expand the deficits over ten years. Paul Ryan's budget isn't much better. Under his budget plan it will take 28 years to balance the budget, and add to the debt while doing so. Neither Romney or Ryan is willing to support tax increases or big cuts in defense spending.. and those two things are why we are running Deficits now. Obama cutting the payroll tax didn't help with Social Security either.
Unfortunately I don't think at this point it matters much who ends up in the White House. The political divide is in the Congress and there doesn't seem to be a way to break the divide enough to get anything substantial passed. There's not enough available seats in the Senate for a Super Majority, and after The ACA was passed I doubt there will be for years to come. Apparently all we can hope for is more of the same deadlock and Bull*** that we've had for the last 4 years.

Originally Posted by Steeeeve

Yes, it probably was. Out of the three finalists he had, Paul Ryan was the worst, except for the other two. Paul Ryan's budget plan was so bad Rand Paul voted against it. Rand is fairly reasonable and if he votes against it, it's not worth the paper it's printed on. The only good thing I can say about Ryan is that he has brought the budget to the forefront...if only he had real solutions.

I was actually hoping for a Romney/Paul (Rand) ticket. It was pretty much the only thing I could see that would actually give Romney a fighting chance....unless the left becomes so sure of victory that the become complacent and don't show up to vote.

My representative did not vote for the Ryan budget either, and he upset a lot of teabaggers by failing to do so. He pointed out that the proposed budget did not actually cut any spending NOW, it was all theoretical future cuts, and that it did not actually contain any details about how we would be funding the government, just a vague statement about "closing loopholes". I think that is about what pretty much EVERY traditional conservative was saying about it. I know I was.

Oh yeah, we are talking about Ryan. Does anyone else feel like this is a repeat of 2008, only Paul Ryan is probably 100 times more intelligent than Palin (which puts him about average)? We have a candidate who no one really likes but was nominated because he can "beat Obama" and then we get a radical VP pick that inspires people like Doc and scares the "undecided" because they don't know if Granny will get her monthly check.

This is, IMO, pretty much an indicator that the republican party is dead. We have a republican controlled house that cant agree to fund its own operating expenses, and we cant seem to get anybody who is worth spit to run for president on the republican ticket. I don't think that Romney ended up winning because people actually thought he could beat Obama. Independents don't like him and never have. Traditional republicans don't like him and never have. If you had told me that the evangelicals would be lining up to put the first non christian in history in the white house, and a pagan at that, I would have laughed at you (turns out the evangelicals are dumber than I thought, though). But look at who else was running. Santorum was a complete and utter mess. He was extremely interesting in that he both managed to have moral views that were so outrageously uptight that they made the folks at the vatican look like drunken frat boys, while at the same time having such a sordid ethical past that he lost his senate seat because of corruption. That is not a combination you see very often. Course...you dont see somebody trying to sell the US senate very often. Perry was a complete and utter joke. He was pretty much just after the retard vote. Everybody else (except Paul) was also a joke. Paul was...well...Paul. It was fun to imagine a Paul presidency, but deep down we all knew it was not going to happen.

So, NO, I don't think it was because they thought he could beat obama...I think he just sucked SLIGHTLY less than the other candidates.

Kinda sad, I think Romney would have done a slightly better job than Obama.

I don't know. I think it all depends. If he kowtowed to the tea party crowd, it would have been good because riots and looting are always fun, and there would be plenty of it with the foolish ideas those folks seem to champion.

The problem I see is that there seems to be a faction in the republican party that has pretty much decided the time has come to just start looting and pillaging as we burn this place to the ground. The Koch brothers. Paul Ryan. Newt Gingrich. These guys are all ready and willing to put policies in place that absolutely WILL lead to the destruction of everything good and decent about America, as long as they turn a buck doing it. They find allies in the teabaggers, and nitwits like Sleazyrider because those dumb SOBs don't realize that when the "burn it to the ground" folks talk about less taxes, they mean "Less taxes for US and screw the middle class". They are talking about cutting taxes for the wealthy while raising "usage fees" and eliminating tax credits for the middle class...a effective tax increase for the middle class. They are talking about less taxes for the 1% while cutting services and infrastructure that is critical to the daily lives of the other 99% of us.

Ron Paul talked about eliminating the DOE and kicking that money back to the states where it belongs so the states could decide how to use it most effectively to get better educated kids. Paul Ryan wants to cut the DOE, but KEEP the money, and screw you, if you cant afford a private education for your kid then they just need to learn how to say "yes sir" and sweep floors anyway.

How far down that road Romney is I don't know, but THOSE are the guys who are funding his campaign, and those are the guys he is beholding to.

Don't worry, all 20 of us can meet up at the closest Denny's and discuss these things.

No kidding.

Originally Posted by Xcaliber

I gave up on the Presidential election when it turned all negative. At this point I'm just hoping that the Congress can be changed enough either way to allow for something to get accomplished. I would prefer the Democrats and Republicans work together but I don't see that happening so all one can hope for is a Majority in both Houses. The Paul Ryan pick has the Congressional Democrats excited that they can take back the House but I honestly think that's a long shot. The Senate will most likely be split.. or the Republicans will take the Majority. So considering the options for getting something done I'm kind of hoping the Republicans hold the House and take the Senate With Obama in the White House. If he is on and island he may find it in himself to work with a republican congress and can water down some of their legislation enough to get Some kind of Jobs bill passed.

I don't really see it. First of all, public confidence in congress, particularly the House, is at an all time low, and people blame the republicans. They have been complete obstructionists and have gone completely off the reservation and the public knows it. I think the odds are about even when it comes to whether or not the republicans hold the house.

If they do hold the house, nothing will get done for the next 4 years. So far house republicans have shown that they are simply unwilling to be reasonable. They bluster, bluff, and BS, but they will not compromise. One of the first things I learned about doing business is that you never want to push so hard or be so difficult that you burn any chance for reconciliation later. If you screw a guy over today, you are going to be in big trouble if tomorrow, or a week from now, or next month, you need to do business with him. That is the position the republicans in the house have put themselves in with Obama. Ever since they took control of the house their one, single, overriding goal has been to screw the president every chance they get. They have been dealing in bad faith since the first day they took control. Obama would be an absolute fool to try to go back now and cut any kind of deal with them.

[QUOTE=AMD4EVER;460920]I think that your analysis is pretty much the same as mine. The only differences I hold is that I think that Romney was finished before the Ryan pick but I do agree that the Ryan pick makes it even harder to win now. However, the one chance that does exist is for Romney to appeal to those who are worried about the deficit. According to the poll below the deficit is #2 in importance for electing a president this year. Ryan should soundly win over the majority of the 23% that consider that a priority.[quote]

Only if for some reason the 23% of people worried about the deficit are, for some reason, of below average intelligence.

The Ryan deficit reduction plan is a joke. The entire thing is based on phantom revenue and hypothetical cuts. It is so incomplete that it is not even possible to do an analysis of it, and the proposals that actually are somewhere near complete are pretty much all a nightmare. When he presented it in the house, people did not actually pay that much attention to it because it never had any chance of passing. As a VP candidate, if they are going to try to pull it out to bolster his deficit fighting credentials, it is actually going to get read and picked apart and exposed for the pathetic joke that it is.

If Romney/Ryan have any chance of winning they need to find a way to get a leg up on Obama in the economy debate which at this point they have struggled to do and they need to get people to understand the importance of getting the budget under control. Obama is currently bashing away at the Ryan pick by pointing out all of the things the Ryan plan would take away from people. This is a very easy and effective message to get support with so it makes sense for Obama to do this. What Romney/Ryan has to do is explain why it is better to give up something now in order to preserve programs in the future. They have to make it well known what the benefits of cutting Social Security, Medicare, and Obamacare are otherwise having Ryan on the ticket is only going to hurt them. This is going to be a very difficult message to make people understand IMO. Ryan is a great speaker but so is Obama and Obama has the easier message to understand for the average person.

It is a difficult message for them to make people understand because the Ryan budget has a lot of giving up, but no "preserving programs in the future". If you look at just the parts of the Ryan budget that actually ARE complete enough to analyze, we are probably not even going to have a country in the future because it results in a 65% revenue shortfall. Our decaying transportation infrastructure cost us $129 billion last year...and that cost increased by roughly 20% each year, and Ryan thinks that cutting transportation spending by 25% is a nifty idea. He cuts education spending by 30%, but the federal government keeps the money, unlike the Paul plan where we cut education spending, but stop taking the money from the states so they can fund their own educational programs. In the Ryan plan we just stop paying for that wasteful education. And there are NO revenue numbers at all in the thing, he just assumed that revenue will be a fairly constant 19% of GDP, despite the fact that he is cutting trillions in taxes. In fact, with his tax cuts he is proposing, in order for his revenue projections to pan out, the economy would have to grow at an annual pace of 9.6% without any inflation, every year, in order for him to hit his target in 2022. And apparently we will be doing that with an uneducated public and (by 2022) a trillion dollars a year in excess costs cause by our infrastructure collapsing because he only budgets $70 billion a year for it, while experts agree that we need to spend a MINIMUM of $209 billion a year JUST to stop its deterioration.....that is not enough to actually IMPROVE it so we are not trying to compete in a global market using 1950s infrastructure.

Good luck on that,

That's right daewoo, anyone who would vote for someone you don't like is flat out mentally challenged. It was so clever of you to get a monopoly on intelligence so you wouldn't have to worry about debating the commoners.

Well guess what, all I have to say to your so called analysis is that it is wrong, silly, and ignorant and we are all less intelligent for having read it. By the way, only nitwits and retards could possibly disagree with tea baggers or this statement.

and now that I have summarized for you the extent of your own tactics I shall gladly watch you deny their validity

Originally Posted by daewoo

Ron Paul talked about eliminating the DOE and kicking that money back to the states where it belongs so the states could decide how to use it most effectively to get better educated kids. Paul Ryan wants to cut the DOE, but KEEP the money, and screw you, if you cant afford a private education for your kid then they just need to learn how to say "yes sir" and sweep floors anyway.

I'm not disagreeing with you but I, at least, can appreciate where Paul Ryan is coming from. Ryan goes out there and says "We have a messed up way of spending money on education and nothing to show for the massive amount we spend". No arguments from me on that. His proposal for Higher Education was to cut Pell and make everything else a loan (unsubsidized) because this will lower tuition. This is where things get messed up. None of his proposals will lower tuition. If anything, it shows why the federal government shouldn't be involved with funding education; they don't know what the f*ck they are talking about.

You mentioned Paul's plan vs Ryan's plan for education. Ryan's plan actually doesn't go far enough while Paul's plan is spot on. Ryan doesn't say "get rid of the money and screw the states", it says "get rid of half the grant money but keep the federal bureaucracy and regulations that goes with it". This screws the students, taxpayers, and the states. Paul's plan is to tell the states to raise their taxes and fund education as they see fit. So no federal money and no federal bureaucracy. It worked incredibly well during the 50s and 60s.

The difference between Paul and Ryan (ha, get it), is that Ryan wants to cut funding while maintaining control. Ron and Rand Paul want to give up control and thus the funding is someone else responsibility.

Props to Paul Ryan for correctly identifying the serious problems we face but in terms of solutions, I award no points.

Originally Posted by daewoo

I don't really see it. First of all, public confidence in congress, particularly the House, is at an all time low, and people blame the republicans. They have been complete obstructionists and have gone completely off the reservation and the public knows it. I think the odds are about even when it comes to whether or not the republicans hold the house.

If they do hold the house, nothing will get done for the next 4 years. So far house republicans have shown that they are simply unwilling to be reasonable. They bluster, bluff, and BS, but they will not compromise. One of the first things I learned about doing business is that you never want to push so hard or be so difficult that you burn any chance for reconciliation later. If you screw a guy over today, you are going to be in big trouble if tomorrow, or a week from now, or next month, you need to do business with him. That is the position the republicans in the house have put themselves in with Obama. Ever since they took control of the house their one, single, overriding goal has been to screw the president every chance they get. They have been dealing in bad faith since the first day they took control. Obama would be an absolute fool to try to go back now and cut any kind of deal with them.

Although I won't disagree that Congress is the real problem, particularly the Republicans that came in after the Mid terms.. But the Democrats are as much to blame . People seem to forget that the Democrats did pass Obama's first budget, the fiscal 2010 budget resolution, but then because of in fighting the budget never made it though Committee so it was shelved and a continuing resolution has been our budgets since. The republicans had nothing to do with blocking that one, and the 2010 budget was the one that was supposed to cut the deficits in half by 2012.

A also agree, at this point it looks like either way it goes we're looking at 4 more years. I do think If given the opportunity Obama would be best served if he were to try and work with republicans, because I don't imagine a super Majority on either side will happen again for a long time.

Whew, bunch of drama queens here. I was hoping for more numbers and logical analysis but every paragraph is just oozing with contempt and anger. Can we maybe set our emotions aside for a moment and write up as non-bias of a response as possible? What is the good and what is the bad? There has to be some of both. What numbers and polls can you show in support of your opinions?

Originally Posted by AMD4EVER

What is the good and what is the bad? There has to be some of both.

Not always.

Originally Posted by AMD4EVER

What numbers and polls can you show in support of your opinions?

Polls are opinions.

Originally Posted by AMD4EVER

Whew, bunch of drama queens here. I was hoping for more numbers and logical analysis but every paragraph is just oozing with contempt and anger. Can we maybe set our emotions aside for a moment and write up as non-bias of a response as possible? What is the good and what is the bad? There has to be some of both. What numbers and polls can you show in support of your opinions?

What are we supposed to analyze, the Ryan Budget?.. Paul Ryan himself?.. I personally don't have any polls.. Although they have run a few since he was picked. I am biased as well, freely admitted that I would never support Either Willard or Paul Ryan because I fundamentally disagree with their idea of a budget and I don't align with them on social issues. But if you want my opinion I can gladly give that...

Paul Ryan is the absolute worst pick Willard could have made for VP for several reasons...

1: He is called a "Fiscal Hawk"..but if you check over his voting record as a Congressman he voted for the Medicare Part D expansion, For 2 wars, For TARP, for pretty much all of the spending that drove the deficits and the debt to record highs Paul Ryan agreed to. Now he wants us to believe he will change that with his budget.
2: his Budget proposal is in my opinion nothing more than a symbolic gesture to garner votes in his district and for other republican house members to latch onto so they can claim credit for passing a budget. The Budget itself , Like has been pointed out, doesn't even include the numbers to really tell us where all these magical spending cuts take place. What they did manage to score shows that under this plan not only will medicare be cut by 700 billion dollars but it will become a voucher program that will eventually lead to eliminating Medicare all together. On top of that the budget adds about 6 trillion in spending and doesn't produce a balanced budget until the year 2030 or more.
3: his plan also comes with more tax cuts for the rich which the elimination of tax loopholes and credits . The Middle class will also be getting a tax cut, but they get the added cost of all the eliminated credits and loopholes so in effect this tax cut will cost middle class tax payers around 2000 dollars a year more on average. Effectively he's cutting taxes for the top 2 % and strapping the Middle class with paying for it, and then calling it deficit neutral...
4: Paul Ryan has been a Congressman for 13 years and to date he has managed to pass two pieces of legislature that he has sponsored. One was renaming a post office in his state, the other concerned a new tax on arrow shafts... not exctly the record of legislating I would expect from a long time congressman...

Willard was losing, his base was splitting between traditional republicans and tea party republicans... He chose Paul Ryan to bring the base back into the fold. Given Paul Ryans record voting for big spending he's not going to win any favors with some Conservatives. He is also radically extreme on social issues like the fact that he introduced to congress a bill for a federal personhood amendment .

Biased, most likely, but you asked.....

Geeze! But he's such a pretty face!

I'm sure that millions of American women are dying to vote for him and vote away their rights to their own bodies, their own souls, their own economic security.