Romney Not Accepted

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from UserName99. Show UserName99's posts

    Romney Not Accepted

    In Defense of Romney
    By DAVID BROOKS

    Over the past several months, Mitt Romney has been an excellent presidential candidate. He has performed superbly in the debates. He has outorganized his rivals. He has relentlessly stayed on his core theme of putting Americans back to work. He has taken Rick Perry apart with a cold ruthlessness that is a wonder to behold.

    And throughout this period of excellence, he has done almost nothing to endear himself to Republican activists. They have spent this season of excellence searching for anyone else: Palin, Trump, Bachmann, Perry, Cain and now (Please! Please!) Christie. On Nov. 4, 2010, Romney earned the support of 23 percent of Republican voters, according to the RealClearPolitics average of polls. Today, he also has support from 23 percent of Republicans nationwide.

    The central problem is that Mitt Romney doesn’t fit the mold of what many Republicans want in a presidential candidate. They don’t want a technocratic manager. They want a bold, blunt radical outsider who will take on the establishment, speak truth to power and offend the liberal news media.

    They don’t want Organization Man. They want Braveheart.

    It’s exciting to have charismatic leaders. But often the best leaders in business, in government and in life are not glittering saviors. They are professionals you hire to get a job done.

    The strongest case for Romney is that he’s nobody’s idea of a savior.



    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/04/opinion/brooks-in-defense-of-romney.html?_r=1&hp

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from BobinVa. Show BobinVa's posts

    Re: Romney Not Accepted

    Establishment moderate-to-the-core Brooks is right about Romney and his campaign and his debate performances so far. Top notch.

     But, did Brooks expect no competition for the nomination, that we all bow to Zog?
    "They don’t want Organization Man. They want Braveheart."
    They don't want Bob Dole or John McCain, losing mushy moderate. They want Ronald Reagan, unabashed conservative landslide winner.
    We don't need a technocratic manager to run the federal government machine.
    We need to dismantle the machine.
    Will Romney lead a conservative prairie fire like 2010, which will run out the liberal zealots from Washington? Or will he kowtow to the NY Times editorial board, hoping to be seen as 'reasonable'?
     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from UserName99. Show UserName99's posts

    Re: Romney Not Accepted

    In Response to Re: Romney Not Accepted:
    [QUOTE]I think eventually Mitt will win the gop nod.   Christie is set to make an annoucement today at 1:00 p.m.  I doubt if he is going to throw his hat in the ring.  If he does, he still will not be able to keep pace with Mitt.
    Posted by jackbu[/QUOTE]

    Christie is officially out. 

    Romney has just put his money where his mouth is and released a very large economic recovery plan to tackle complex problems, while his opposition continues to campaign with sound bites, 10 second zingers, and tweets.....and the tea party types seem to be just fine with that strategy, which speaks volumes about the pathetic nature of our country 

    Personally, i'm tired of all of that bull....t.  I'm ready for some details. 
    It takes real leaders to implement a strategy. Its fine to say cut government, but that is NOT leadership. Leadership means getting people to work together to achieve a goal. Romney’s goal is 4% growth and 11 million new jobs in this economy. We need an experienced leader to get America moving again.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from BobinVa. Show BobinVa's posts

    Re: Romney Not Accepted

    "Leadership means getting people to work together to achieve a goal. "

    It is not so complex. If the goal is to save the private sector economy from the leftist zealots, Romney would be wise to ally with the Tea Party, and show passion for the conservative cause. We need to kick out the liberal Democrats nationwide.

    If we.. and he...are stuck with the same dinosaur leftist Democrats in Congress  in 2013, it matters little what the President-elect's leadership skills are, it will be more of the same.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Romney Not Accepted

    Still looking through Mitt's "jobs" plan...

    So far: cut taxes on the wealthy; repeal all regulations and consumer protections; no more unions; gut medicare; repeal ACA, etc.

    Some details here; lots of platitudes...unclear how any of these succeed at creating jobs....
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Romney Not Accepted

    In Response to Re: Romney Not Accepted:
    [QUOTE]Still looking through Mitt's "jobs" plan... So far: cut taxes on the wealthy; repeal all regulations and consumer protections; no more unions; gut medicare; repeal ACA, etc. Some details here; lots of platitudes...unclear how any of these succeed at creating jobs....
    Posted by MattyScornD[/QUOTE]

    These ideas won't create jobs.  What they will do is prevent government from killing jobs. 

    That being said, Mitt is a centrist Democrat at best.  That's why repbublicans can't warm up to this Ken doll.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from UserName99. Show UserName99's posts

    Re: Romney Not Accepted

    In Response to Re: Romney Not Accepted:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Romney Not Accepted : These ideas won't create jobs.  What they will do is prevent government from killing jobs.  That being said, Mitt is a centrist Democrat at best.  That's why repbublicans can't warm up to this Ken doll.
    Posted by skeeter20[/QUOTE]

    Expanding domestic energy programs won't create jobs?

    Making it more difficult for the Chinese to sell products in the US won't create jobs?

    Lowering the corporate tax rate won't create jobs?
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from BobinVa. Show BobinVa's posts

    Re: Romney Not Accepted

    "That being said, Mitt is a centrist Democrat at best.  That's why repbublicans can't warm up to this Ken doll."


    Wouldn't go so far as to call him a Democrat. If Romney gets nominated and selects a good running mate like Rubio... runs as a conservative,  gets smeared for his religion and otherwise attacked by the NY Times and liberal media,
    ....we may warm to him. 

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from BobinVa. Show BobinVa's posts

    Re: Romney Not Accepted

    "In prison, every time we complained about our conditions, the guards would immediately remind us of comparable conditions at Guantanamo Bay," - Shane Bauer, one of the two American hikers released after 781 days of detention in Iranian prison."

    A zealot leftist grand slam, in one idiotic statement. Hits all the bases of moonbat delusion.
     
    -Gitmo was a torture chamber!
    -Poor Iran had no choice to do what it did!
    -It is America's fault !
    -It is George Bushs fault !!
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from UserName99. Show UserName99's posts

    Re: Romney Not Accepted

    In Response to Re: Romney Not Accepted:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Romney Not Accepted : Nope.
    Posted by WhatDoYouWantNow[/QUOTE]

    If you level the playing field and close the loopholes, then you can reduce the rate and spur job growth.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Romney Not Accepted

    In Response to Re: Romney Not Accepted:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Romney Not Accepted : These ideas won't create jobs.  What they will do is prevent government from killing jobs.  Posted by skeeter20[/QUOTE]

    True...they won't create jobs...at least based on previous tries.

    But the only jobs the govt "kills" are those it cuts through its own spending reductions...as well as the many, many private contractors who work for the govt on a regular basis....
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Romney Not Accepted

    In Response to Re: Romney Not Accepted:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Romney Not Accepted : If you level the playing field and close the loopholes, then you can reduce the rate and spur job growth.
    Posted by UserName99[/QUOTE]

    That's the theory...except people likes them loopholes.

    Part of the problem, though is that corporate tax rate is only on profits earned above a certain threshold (allowing for new equipment, loan offsets, etc.), so mildly profitable or unprofitable companies don't pay anything to the fed.
     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from BobinVa. Show BobinVa's posts

    Re: Romney Not Accepted

    "Reagan believed in supply side, voodoo economics, that if you cut taxes businesses will hire and produce more. Even on it's face that sounds dumb."

    Yeah, real dumb.
    Yet almost 20 million jobs were created in the Reagan boom in just seven years. The job creation during the Reagan expansion was broad-based, spanning all sectors and providing good wages throughout the expansion.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Romney Not Accepted

    In Response to Re: Romney Not Accepted:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Romney Not Accepted : Expanding domestic energy programs won't create jobs? Making it more difficult for the Chinese to sell products in the US won't create jobs? Lowering the corporate tax rate won't create jobs?
    Posted by UserName99[/QUOTE]

    Energy "programs", i.e. drill, baby, drill. That's government getting out of the way. 

    Lowering corporate taxes is gettign government out of the way.

    Tariffs won't help.  It will drive cost up locally, driving demand down.

    Look, government has never has created jobs, government jobs aside.  We are talking about private sector jobs, right?  

    In order for government to create a job, it would have to be an owner/decision maker for  that job.  Throwing around buckets of money, raising/lowering regulations and taxes, all things that impact those who create jobs, but none of this creates a private sector job.  Demand creates private sector jobs.

    The only thing government can do is limit job creation by raising taxes, tariffs, or regulations.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Romney Not Accepted

    In Response to Re: Romney Not Accepted:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Romney Not Accepted : True...they won't create jobs...at least based on previous tries. But the only jobs the govt "kills" are those it cuts through its own spending reductions...as well as the many, many private contractors who work for the govt on a regular basis....
    Posted by MattyScornD[/QUOTE]


    I used to think that way, until I really looked at the economics behind it.  Government does not create private sector jobs, period.

    It's like this.  If government has its' hands around your neck, you can't breathe.  If government loosens it's grip, did it create the ability for you to breathe, or just stop restricting it? 

    Same with creating jobs.
     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Romney Not Accepted

    In Response to Re: Romney Not Accepted:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Romney Not Accepted : Man, you are clueless about economics. Why don't you name all the businesses that are successful that have no customers? Throwing around buckets of money, as you call it, is nothing more than the gov't in the role of customer.  The most basic truth about business? Is that you can't have one without a client. The gov't doesn't build it's own ships. It doesn't build it's own roads or airports or schools. The gov't doesn't have a construction wing to build such huge projects.  Guess what spanky, it contracts with the private sector. That means the demand created by gov't spending on these projects is what creates the jobs. A company doesn't create a job. The client/customer creates the demand for a product and the company only hires to fulfill that demand. What do you call a company with no clients,...... besides bankrupt? A squeeter investment. It's painfully obvious you haven't a clue about business or economics. 
    Posted by airborne-rgr[/QUOTE]

    Are you feeling ok? 

    do you think the word "demand" somehow is the term used for "clients", as you put it?

    Geesh.  Stay in the military.  I doubt you will make it in the private sector.

    I guess the government with its hands around you neck too good of an analogy.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Romney Not Accepted

    In Response to Re: Romney Not Accepted:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Romney Not Accepted : Man, you are clueless about economics. Why don't you name all the businesses that are successful that have no customers? Throwing around buckets of money, as you call it, is nothing more than the gov't in the role of customer.  The most basic truth about business? Is that you can't have one without a client. The gov't doesn't build it's own ships. It doesn't build it's own roads or airports or schools. The gov't doesn't have a construction wing to build such huge projects.  Guess what spanky, it contracts with the private sector. That means the demand created by gov't spending on these projects is what creates the jobs. A company doesn't create a job. The client/customer creates the demand for a product and the company only hires to fulfill that demand. What do you call a company with no clients,...... besides bankrupt? A squeeter investment. It's painfully obvious you haven't a clue about business or economics. 
    Posted by airborne-rgr[/QUOTE]


    Oh, and if you want to learn about economics, start small, with maybe a picture book.  I wouldn't want your head to explode.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from BilltheKat. Show BilltheKat's posts

    Re: Romney Not Accepted

    Yikes, airbornes contracting concept makes sense to me, yet skeeters response seems a bit childish. 

    Maybe skeeter can explain why, without being insulting....

    are their any adults in the room?
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Romney Not Accepted

    In Response to Re: Romney Not Accepted:
    [QUOTE]Yikes, airbornes contracting concept makes sense to me, yet skeeters response seems a bit childish.  Maybe skeeter can explain why, without being insulting.... are their any adults in the room?
    Posted by BilltheKat[/QUOTE]

    Not trying to be insulting.  Its just that you libs do not understand economics at all, and I am sick and tired of every post from airborne starting with: "well, you obviously don't know anything about "x"x at all"  Now, that's childish.

    Government contracts are not the entire economy, and are paid for through taxes ( and borrowing).

    Private sector jobs that do not do government work create jobs by having an economic proposition that is bigger than the job, i.e. profit and force multiplying.  you build a car, a car is bought,by someone who uses it to drive to work, where they build computers, that are bought by car companies to design cars.  And so on.  This is lacking in governemnt jobs.  that's the best I can do with people who don't understand supply and consumption models and the like, and when I am tired.


    Still interested why neither you or airhead have picked up on the hands around the neck metaphor. Releasing you hands so someone can breath is not creating breath, just like lessenign regulation and taxation so someone can hire is not creating jobs, it is just stopping doing the bad thing.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from bobc33. Show bobc33's posts

    Re: Romney Not Accepted

    If the Republicans nominate someone currently in the race besides Romney obama wins a second term.

    If Romney gets the nod he will win in a close race. 

    If Mitch Daniels were running he would be a lock to win 49 states.

    If Sarah Palin gets in the race she will be a total flop.

    The feckless has obama has three things going for him:
    1. He has the normal advantage of being the incumbent.
    2. He will have tons of money. Wall Street is on his side same as in 2008.
    3. Almost all of the media is completely in the bag for him.  Any gaffe, or blemish on his record, will be ignored or explained away.  Any gaffe, or blemish by his opponent will be magnified to no end.

    However, more and more the American people, sans the radical left, now know obama is a phony and just your run of the mill Chicago thug politician.  2012 will be ugly and mean and devoid of rational discussion, and I of course will lend my irrational thought from time to time.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: Romney Not Accepted

    Romney just doesn’t grab your typical GOP voter.  He comes with the baggage of repackaging himself to become the Governor of Mass where only a RINO (as defined by what a republican is in the non-northeast states) can get elected.  Mitt has flip flopped on core GOP beliefs and his lodestone is Romney-care to which he has a good answer but it doesn’t play well in mid-America red states.  Given all these problems if the economy remains stagnant where it is today Romney will win a very tight race because the right really won’t be energized and the GOP elite are only grudgingly onboard and he is still plastic-man.  If the economy slips into an official double dip recession then Romney and just about anyone but Obama would win handily.

     

    I’m still watching the primary process closely and I don’t expect any other entrants, especially where Florida has mucked up the schedule and forces an earlier process.  The NH primary shift will result in a candidate cut off later this month.  Romney is in for the long haul and he believes it’s his turn and destiny another reason I’m against him.  Perry has shown himself not to be ready for prime time and the media has chewed him up with vetting that Obama never experienced, he’ll run the duration but isn’t going to make it.  Bachmann will soon look like a shooting star whose only accomplishment is taking out Pawlenty an uninspiring but qualified candidate, but she’s out of money. Santorum just doesn’t have a message that grabs anyone, he’s a little angry and he also is running on empty.  Gingrich most likely the smartest guy in the bunch just has too much baggage and he’s credited with shutting down the government and fails to resonate. 

     

    For Romney alternates we’re left with Ron Paul, Herman Cain and Jon Huntsman.  Ron Paul is financed but his legion of followers but he is so black and white on issues that although portions of his message resonate he just frightens away broad support, so he’s in till the end but no chance at the nomination.  Herman Cain has been the surprise, he has energy and a good folksy charisma and a great voice; but he has zero foreign policy credibility, he may survive to the end and could emerge as a VP, but no chance at the nomination.   Jon Huntsman to me is the obvious choice he has strong credibility in business government and foreign policy. 

     

    Huntsman does have a jobs plan titled “Time to Compete” and focuses on rebuilding a manufacturing base in the US through four initiatives; Tax Reform (simplify, cut loopholes and reduce rates) Regulatory Reform so businesses can compete, Energy Independence ensuring we spend our energy dollars in the US and Free Trade while addressing the elephant in the room China. Huntsman is a great general election candidate who has struggled to be heard.  He is a proven strong fiscal conservative, but he’s a little left of the right conservative views, although still right of center on social issues, which really shouldn’t be drivers for political office.  

    Huntsman has decided to go for the Hail Mary pass and place all his eggs in the NH Primary.  He’s almost in NH 24/7 and you can personally meet him on any given weekend.  He’s playing strong NH retail politics and he has started to pick up speed, I look for a further increase in his standing after the next debate on Oct 11th.  Huntsman is playing the McCain strategy in NH which worked well 2008 where McCain beat Romney and went on to win the GOP Nomination.
     

Share