You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 10, 2016, 04:54:45 AM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: Mitt Romney For President  (Read 973 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline rick957Topic starter

Mitt Romney For President
« on: April 11, 2012, 09:07:14 PM »
Now that Romney's candidacy seems all but assured, now seems as good a time as any to make this thread.

Alright, let's set some ground rules.

Please don't post here if you hate Mitt Romney or hate Republicans.  Please don't post here if you have an overwhelming urge to convince other people that Mitt Romney would make a bad President, or Republicans are evil.  You can start your own thread for that purpose.

Those are the ground rules; next, let's make a public plea.

Please don't judge or look down on anyone who does post here and admits to liking Mitt Romney or being a Republican.  Republicans deserve as much respect and consideration as any other people.

Now, the purpose of the thread is for anyone who has anything positive or supportive to say about Mitt Romney to share those things with me (and thereby with the rest of Elliquiy).  I will not argue with anyone who posts here and try to convince them they're wrong about anything, even if I think they are; please don't anybody else do that either.  I may, however, ask questions to help understand things better, as anyone else is welcome to do also.

Let's be upfront and admit that it's a brave thing to openly support Romney or even to openly support Republicanism at Elliquiy, where members seem to swing pretty far Left, and strong endorsements of Leftist principles are common.

Let's make a special effort here to withhold judgment and criticism and give Romney supporters a fair hearing.  Tearing them down can happen someplace else.

Thanks so much for posting, if you choose to.

Finally, if you're wondering, I'm planning to vote for Obama at this point, but I am open to being persuaded otherwise.  Then again, like many others, it's difficult for me to understand why anyone would support Romney for President; but unlike some others, I certainly don't consider Republicanism or Romney support to be a character flaw or something.  As far as I'm concerned, we need diversity of political perspective in America for it to remain truly free, and we need diversity of opinion here at Elliquiy for it to remain interesting -- who the hell wants to surround themselves exclusively with people who agree with them?  Not me, at least.

If not a single person posts here, I hereby vow that I will personally research Romney long enough to honestly present what I consider at least one good reason to vote for him.  He's got to have good qualities, and I certainly have great sympathy for many Republican perspectives, even if I personally endorse more Democrat or Independent views.  Also, if not a single person posts here, I'll be kinda disappointed, but that's neither here nor there, I guess.  :)

P.S.  Okay, let us also say that you can post here if you are such a brave and dispassionate, objective soul that you are (as I hope I could be) willing to say something, anything, positive about Romney despite the fact that you oppose his run for President.  We'll call that a vote for moral ambiguity, something none of us would do well to rule out in every single part of our lives.
« Last Edit: April 11, 2012, 09:16:25 PM by rick957 »

Offline MasterMischief

Re: Mitt Romney For President
« Reply #1 on: April 11, 2012, 09:25:06 PM »
I like Mitt more than Rick.  ^-^

Offline HairyHeretic

  • Lei varai barbu - The true bearded one
  • Knight
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Dec 2006
  • Location: Ireland
  • Gender: Male
  • And the Scorpion said "Little frog .. I can swim."
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 1
Re: Mitt Romney For President
« Reply #2 on: April 11, 2012, 09:38:00 PM »
I'm curious, why open a thread that only allows a single point of view? If you're going to discuss any candidate, and their qualifications for president, don't you need to consider both their good and bad points in order to make a fair assessment of the quality?

Offline Shjade

Re: Mitt Romney For President
« Reply #3 on: April 11, 2012, 09:59:51 PM »
Edit: post redacted as it no longer applies after the subforum switch.
« Last Edit: April 11, 2012, 11:56:09 PM by Shjade »

Online Callie Del Noire

Re: Mitt Romney For President
« Reply #4 on: April 11, 2012, 10:13:34 PM »
I'm curious, why open a thread that only allows a single point of view? If you're going to discuss any candidate, and their qualifications for president, don't you need to consider both their good and bad points in order to make a fair assessment of the quality?

I think it's an attempt to keep it from becoming a pure out hatefest. Romney is not the sort who would be liked by some of this board.

I'm curious to see how he:

-Reverses himself now that the nomination is all but assured.. BUT right now he's only got 611 or so delegates.. its' NOT set.  yet.
-Who he picks as VP.
-What will come out of the next six months of media scrutiny. He's reversed himself a LOT of time, though he's not put his foot in it like Santorum.
-How he revises himself to meet the platform the party will build if he doesn't get the delegate counts. I can see now that Santorum has dropped out.. Newt and Paul maybe getting a bigger bite as the 'he's got it made' outlook the media puts out kicks in.

Offline sexhaver

Re: Mitt Romney For President
« Reply #5 on: April 11, 2012, 10:14:07 PM »
I should point out that there seems to be an assumption here that in order to talk about a politician you have to identify yourself by party or broad ideology, and let that sway your opinion one way or another, to be ignored by those who identify with the opposite party or ideology. Can the facts of governance not be discussed without first taking someone's side?

That said, I'm not an American citizen, thus I won't be voting for anyone, and I'm fairly ignorant about the details of each candidate, so that's all I'll say on this topic. All I've heard about Romney is that his campaign platform is flexible - he's willing to let popular demand alter his principles to an extent. Some see this as a good thing (he's a moderate?), others as a bad thing (he'll sell out?). I don't even know if it's true, it's just what I heard.

Offline rick957Topic starter

Re: Mitt Romney For President
« Reply #6 on: April 11, 2012, 10:19:27 PM »
I'm curious, why open a thread that only allows a single point of view? If you're going to discuss any candidate, and their qualifications for president, don't you need to consider both their good and bad points in order to make a fair assessment of the quality?

Of course, and that's a fair question.  The creation of this thread rests upon the assumption that the majority of Elliquians are at least as anti-Romney as I am, and I'm already planning to vote against him, so I don't need to hear more reasons to do that.  If anyone wants to start a thread for that, though, you're welcome to do so, and I might even contribute to that thread myself, frankly.

My hope for this thread is to create a space where Romney supporters could advocate on his behalf without being gangraped or disrespected or made to feel unwelcome in any way.  How else can we give their views a fair hearing? 

Am I wrong about most Elliquians either being Obama supporters (like me) or Independents or non-voters?

If I've done something wrong with the conditions I've placed upon the thread, I assume some staff person would either take down the thread or tell me to change it, right?  Sorry if I've broken a rule here without knowing.

Quote
Can the facts of governance not be discussed without first taking someone's side?

Okay, sure, yes.  That's totally fine, if anyone wants to say things that might support Romney in the minds of other people.
« Last Edit: April 11, 2012, 10:25:23 PM by rick957 »

Online Callie Del Noire

Re: Mitt Romney For President
« Reply #7 on: April 11, 2012, 10:49:43 PM »
Let's see.. what is there about Romney that folks know or not.

-He's the son of a Governor of Massachusetts as well as one himself.
-He's Mormon. Did 30 months in France as Mormon Missionary
-Instituted one of the first state based medical care programs as Governor
-He brings in most of his income from equity interest and is believed to be the richest man to run for president. (Ranked around 12th among politicians currently holding or seeking office, Bloomberg is #1)
-Bain Capital is one of the companies he's run and worked with and they have a history of layoff/sell offs when they buy out businesses but do to their privacy policies there is no reliable way to say that Bain grew or eliminated jobs overall.

Offline AndyZ

Re: Mitt Romney For President
« Reply #8 on: April 12, 2012, 02:39:42 AM »
An interesting prospect.  Trying to get someone to change your mind by asking for only positive comments because it's going to be pretty much impossible to swim through the sea of negative comments in a forum which predominantly sways to the left at all times.  It warms my heart to see: a lot of people I know who are truly Left or Right don't want to actually debate.

So, the question of voting for Romney vs. Obama.  For now, I'll assume not voting third party.  I can get into that on another thread (and think I have), but I want to get this out before the sleepy meds kick in.  However, for me, Romney only came in third in desirability for the four Republican candidates, so I'll be a hard one to sell you.

Are you happy with Obama and his actions so far?  Personally, I was nervous even before his attacks on the Supreme Court and his words to Russia about how he'll be more "flexible" after the election, but I'm always nervous when officials try to make deals away from the eyes of the public.

Voting is the ultimate polling machine.  If you believe that Obama is already a shoe-in (as even he does), but you want him to fix up his act, then having people vote against him to make it sweat it out in November might give enough of a wake-up call to have an epiphany.

Do you like bipartisanship?  Obama talks about it a lot, and his budget plan got a unanimous House vote, but they unanimously voted against it.  Back in 2008, when the major media folks were calling Obama a centrist, it was such a great thing because he'll reach across the aisle and all such.  We've now seen Obama's actual stance firsthand.

I don't really expect we'll find out Romney's actual stances on matters until he's guaranteed the Republican candidacy, though.  Until then, he's going to act as though he's much farther Right than he actually is.  That may sound like a negative comment, but if you want someone who's not going to act, how many politicians can you vote for?

Offline Tiberius

Re: Mitt Romney For President
« Reply #9 on: April 12, 2012, 07:47:48 AM »
No-one likes extremists, extremists are ever rarely popular with the public you can't be too hardcore Left or Right you have to be close to center or in the middle of left/right and center

Offline rick957Topic starter

Re: Mitt Romney For President
« Reply #10 on: April 15, 2012, 11:48:08 PM »
Well, this thread idea hasn't exactly caught fire, has it?  Oh well, that in itself says something interesting, I think, but I'm not sure what, just yet.  :)

Quote
Let's see.. what is there about Romney that folks know or not.

-He's the son of a Governor of Massachusetts as well as one himself.
-He's Mormon. Did 30 months in France as Mormon Missionary
-Instituted one of the first state based medical care programs as Governor
-He brings in most of his income from equity interest and is believed to be the richest man to run for president. (Ranked around 12th among politicians currently holding or seeking office, Bloomberg is #1)
-Bain Capital is one of the companies he's run and worked with and they have a history of layoff/sell offs when they buy out businesses but do to their privacy policies there is no reliable way to say that Bain grew or eliminated jobs overall.

Thanks for the review, Callie, it's quite helpful to be reminded of these facts.  I think I've encountered most of these facts somewhere over the last few months, but I couldn't have summarized them so neatly and rapidly -- I envy your ability for such things.

Quote
An interesting prospect.  Trying to get someone to change your mind by asking for only positive comments because it's going to be pretty much impossible to swim through the sea of negative comments in a forum which predominantly sways to the left at all times.  It warms my heart to see: a lot of people I know who are truly Left or Right don't want to actually debate.

I'm glad someone else likes the idea of such a forum existing.  So far you're the only person to post here and voice viewpoints that might diverge from what I imagine to be the predominant views of most Elliquiy people, so I'm grateful for that.

Quote
So, the question of voting for Romney vs. Obama.  For now, I'll assume not voting third party.  I can get into that on another thread (and think I have), but I want to get this out before the sleepy meds kick in.  However, for me, Romney only came in third in desirability for the four Republican candidates, so I'll be a hard one to sell you.

Are you happy with Obama and his actions so far? 

Considering the overall quietness of this thread so far, I wouldn't blame you for wanting to keep your personal views to yourself about who you plan to vote for (if you've decided yet, that is), but I noticed that you fell short of endorsing any particular candidate yet in your initial post here.

I consider myself ill-informed about Obama's term in office, so I don't feel qualified to endorse him or advocate on his behalf, but I am nevertheless planning to vote for him at this point, unless my opinion changes between now and November.  I keep up with politics and news headlines in a cursory way without studying them enough to have firm views.  On the other hand, I imagine that I'm at least as well-informed as the average American voter, and maybe a little better, considering how much misinformation gets happily consumed and regurgitated throughout the campaign season.

I'll tell you one thing that I like about Obama, and anyone out there who can shoot down this view with authoritative dissent is welcome to do so -- I'm open to having my ill-informed views swayed here.  Actually, it seems that you already see this issue differently from me, AndyZ, as you said here --

Quote
Do you like bipartisanship?  Obama talks about it a lot, and his budget plan got a unanimous House vote, but they unanimously voted against it.  Back in 2008, when the major media folks were calling Obama a centrist, it was such a great thing because he'll reach across the aisle and all such.  We've now seen Obama's actual stance firsthand.

I take this to mean that you consider Obama's bipartisan rhetoric empty based on his behavior in office thus far.  I came to the opposite conclusion, that he made some honest bipartisan efforts that were rebuffed by the opposite party.  I've heard both viewpoints from talking heads in the media.  The reason I've come to believe that Obama probably made some genuine efforts to reach out to the other side is because he paid a well-documented political price for the general impression that he did so.  He's been branded as ineffective or spineless by members of both parties.  That criticism must have some basis in fact, I would think, and if so, it doesn't make sense to me that he took a hard partisan line and then got completely misunderstood by everyone on both sides, who took him as being overly conciliatory and not hardnosed enough.  It's always a pain in the ass to figure out who's telling the truth about political developments when one side says black and other says white with equal vehemence and self-certitude, but assuming that politicians generally act in their own self-interest, I think it's safe to also assume that they're most likely to get criticized for personal weaknesses rather than strengths.  If Obama is a closet hardliner who sometimes masquerades as a centrist, why is he so often charged as being the exact opposite, as being too much of a pushover for his political opponents?

I'm sure that whole debate can be much better addressed by others here, and hopefully given specific examples to support the various sides, but as I indicated before, I'm far too much of a dilettante to discuss politics with great clarity and detail.

Quote
Personally, I was nervous even before his attacks on the Supreme Court and his words to Russia about how he'll be more "flexible" after the election, but I'm always nervous when officials try to make deals away from the eyes of the public.

Here are two good examples.  I might have heard of the developments you are referencing here, but they don't ring a bell, so any additional info would be appreciated.  I heard that the possibility of the Court striking down his healthcare reforms has recently put him in the uncharacteristic position of criticizing so-called "judicial activism," traditionally a rallying cry of his staunch political opponents.  Is that what you're referring to here?  Did you see his statements as sincere or hypocritical, and where do you come down on the healthcare bill and the Court's response to it?  All I have to say about it, based on my limited knowledge, is that I don't understand how the executive and legislative branches didn't anticipate or prepare better for such a huge threat to the legislation coming from the judicial branch; it makes all of the branches appear incompetent, as if the stupid hydra is fighting with itself while the public gapes and stands repulsed, no matter which side of the debate we come down on.  Business as usual in Washington, you say?  Blech ...

Quote
Voting is the ultimate polling machine.  If you believe that Obama is already a shoe-in (as even he does), but you want him to fix up his act, then having people vote against him to make it sweat it out in November might give enough of a wake-up call to have an epiphany.

Is this an approach you consider prudent -- meaning that you support Obama but want to make sure he sweats a little, earns his victory?  The American public often swings back and forth politically and endorses checks and balances between the various branches and parties, especially from one election to the next, but I don't know that I see the swinging as healthy for the country or helpful in its governance (I don't have a clear view one way or the other).

As to Obama being a shoe-in shoo-in? sure thing, I haven't heard that view coming from anyone in the media in a long, long time; rather, people seem to predict that the price of gas and unemployment rate could very well prove Obama's undoing.  Or is that media-hypester bullshit, just a way of artificially stoking interest in a one-sided election?  If you think so, please help to convince me.

Quote
I don't really expect we'll find out Romney's actual stances on matters until he's guaranteed the Republican candidacy, though.  Until then, he's going to act as though he's much farther Right than he actually is.  That may sound like a negative comment, but if you want someone who's not going to act, how many politicians can you vote for?

Ach, such cynicism!  Such disillusionment!  What's the world coming to?  :)  I wonder if Romney's supporters see him this way and forgive such political expediency as a matter of course, an inevitability, as it sounds like you do.  How distasteful!  Not that I would look down on anyone for seeing things as that bleak if they really are ...

Tiberius -- thanks for the comment -- remarks of any and all kinds are welcome here.

Republican partisans at Elliquiy?  The snipe hunt continues ...  :)
« Last Edit: April 15, 2012, 11:54:44 PM by rick957 »

Offline rick957Topic starter

Re: Mitt Romney For President
« Reply #11 on: April 16, 2012, 12:00:18 AM »
Say, I just noticed that this thread is in the Off Topic section now.  Was that my mistake?  I meant to put it under Politics Religion and Other Controversies; in fact I thought I did so.  Was it moved, or did I just fuck up in the first place?  If it was moved, would it be possible to find out why it was moved?  Any response would be appreciated.

Online Callie Del Noire

Re: Mitt Romney For President
« Reply #12 on: April 16, 2012, 12:03:18 AM »
Uh.. aaaacttually I've described myself as the rare GOP Moderate.. I'm not blinded with the social conservatism when we need financial conservatism..and part of that is admitting that we need to do something about taxes besides lowering them. Reform and increasing some of them.

And the reason you're not getting a lot is you DID limit the scope of what could be said.

FYI.. the mods moved the thread since it wasn't a debate thread.

Offline rick957Topic starter

Re: Mitt Romney For President
« Reply #13 on: April 16, 2012, 12:18:58 AM »
Quote
Uh.. aaaacttually I've described myself as the rare GOP Moderate.. I'm not blinded with the social conservatism when we need financial conservatism..and part of that is admitting that we need to do something about taxes besides lowering them. Reform and increasing some of them.

That's cool.  I was happy that you posted here regardless of your political views, since your posts were relevant to the proposed topic.

And the reason you're not getting a lot is you DID limit the scope of what could be said.

Sure.  I had hoped that some Romney supporters would take the opportunity to explain their views. 

Now that the thread has been moved to such an odd location, I find it even less likely that anyone would respond in the way I had hoped.

Quote
FYI.. the mods moved the thread since it wasn't a debate thread.

Without saying anything about it?  Is that how these things are usually done?  Were you privy to the decisionmaking process, Callie?  Is it inappropriate for me to ask for an explanation of any kind?  I had actually hoped that a range of viewpoints would be expressed here, since I assume that different people have different reasons for supporting Romney.  I imagined the end result could have been at least as informative and varied in content and views as most other threads in the P&R section.


Online Callie Del Noire

Re: Mitt Romney For President
« Reply #14 on: April 16, 2012, 12:22:27 AM »
http://elliquiy.com/forums/index.php?topic=137100.0

Trieste DID put a note up when she moved it.

Offline rick957Topic starter

Re: Mitt Romney For President
« Reply #15 on: April 16, 2012, 12:53:47 AM »
I see.  Thank you for the info and link.

Offline AndyZ

Re: Mitt Romney For President
« Reply #16 on: April 16, 2012, 02:33:08 AM »
Considering the overall quietness of this thread so far, I wouldn't blame you for wanting to keep your personal views to yourself about who you plan to vote for (if you've decided yet, that is), but I noticed that you fell short of endorsing any particular candidate yet in your initial post here.

Have you ever heard of the video game Primal Rage?  It's a side-scrolling fighting game where giant monsters duel against each other while relatively tiny humans worship the monsters.  That's pretty much how I see both parties, and have no interest in throwing my blind devotion to either one.

I tend to be closer to Libertarian than anything else, but I don't believe in everything that Libertarians believe either.  I would like to see lower tax rates, but I want the tax loopholes closed and extremely simplified in return.  I don't believe that the government should be involved in marriage at all, and if you need it for legal things like hospital visits and such, you should just be able to select people who have those rights via a living will or something like that.

I have plans for trying to get people to endorse candidates which aren't either candidate, but I want to save the idea until at least May to give it six months for the idea to fire people up and possibly catch on.  I want to try to get the wording right before I try for it.

Quote
I consider myself ill-informed about Obama's term in office, so I don't feel qualified to endorse him or advocate on his behalf, but I am nevertheless planning to vote for him at this point, unless my opinion changes between now and November.  I keep up with politics and news headlines in a cursory way without studying them enough to have firm views.  On the other hand, I imagine that I'm at least as well-informed as the average American voter, and maybe a little better, considering how much misinformation gets happily consumed and regurgitated throughout the campaign season.

With all due respect, I don't believe that people who aren't informed should vote.  I hope you look into what's actually been going on under Obama's term, both Obama himself and his cabinet, and not just listen to what the Democrats or Republicans have to say about him.

Quote
I'll tell you one thing that I like about Obama, and anyone out there who can shoot down this view with authoritative dissent is welcome to do so -- I'm open to having my ill-informed views swayed here.  Actually, it seems that you already see this issue differently from me, AndyZ, as you said here --

I take this to mean that you consider Obama's bipartisan rhetoric empty based on his behavior in office thus far.  I came to the opposite conclusion, that he made some honest bipartisan efforts that were rebuffed by the opposite party.  I've heard both viewpoints from talking heads in the media.  The reason I've come to believe that Obama probably made some genuine efforts to reach out to the other side is because he paid a well-documented political price for the general impression that he did so.  He's been branded as ineffective or spineless by members of both parties.  That criticism must have some basis in fact, I would think, and if so, it doesn't make sense to me that he took a hard partisan line and then got completely misunderstood by everyone on both sides, who took him as being overly conciliatory and not hardnosed enough.  It's always a pain in the ass to figure out who's telling the truth about political developments when one side says black and other says white with equal vehemence and self-certitude, but assuming that politicians generally act in their own self-interest, I think it's safe to also assume that they're most likely to get criticized for personal weaknesses rather than strengths.  If Obama is a closet hardliner who sometimes masquerades as a centrist, why is he so often charged as being the exact opposite, as being too much of a pushover for his political opponents?

When does he make the attempt to actually be centrist?  You hear him constantly whining about the last administration, how the Republicans block things, bold-faced lies, and so on, but actually trying to cross the aisle?

Perhaps you're talking about the Keystone pipeline, where there was no actual Federal authority needed to build the pipe, it still doesn't connect to Canada, yet some people were giving him credit for something which didn't actually happen.

Clinton did a lot to cross the aisle during '95 and '96, which caused his popularity to increase and helped him get a second term.  As Tiberius mentioned, people actually like centrists.  I'm sure we'd have a lot more if not for gerrymandering.

Quote
I'm sure that whole debate can be much better addressed by others here, and hopefully given specific examples to support the various sides, but as I indicated before, I'm far too much of a dilettante to discuss politics with great clarity and detail.

Here are two good examples.  I might have heard of the developments you are referencing here, but they don't ring a bell, so any additional info would be appreciated.  I heard that the possibility of the Court striking down his healthcare reforms has recently put him in the uncharacteristic position of criticizing so-called "judicial activism," traditionally a rallying cry of his staunch political opponents.  Is that what you're referring to here?  Did you see his statements as sincere or hypocritical, and where do you come down on the healthcare bill and the Court's response to it?  All I have to say about it, based on my limited knowledge, is that I don't understand how the executive and legislative branches didn't anticipate or prepare better for such a huge threat to the legislation coming from the judicial branch; it makes all of the branches appear incompetent, as if the stupid hydra is fighting with itself while the public gapes and stands repulsed, no matter which side of the debate we come down on.  Business as usual in Washington, you say?  Blech ...

Having Obama talk about how unelected officials becomes laughable when you see the number of people that Obama put into place during Congress' recess, without letting Congress take a vote on them.

Personally, I hope the individual mandate is struck down, because the idea that the government can fine me for not buying something they say I should have is something that frightens me greatly.

Won't even start about Obama's boasting of being a constitutional law professor...
Quote
Is this an approach you consider prudent -- meaning that you support Obama but want to make sure he sweats a little, earns his victory?  The American public often swings back and forth politically and endorses checks and balances between the various branches and parties, especially from one election to the next, but I don't know that I see the swinging as healthy for the country or helpful in its governance (I don't have a clear view one way or the other).

As to Obama being a shoe-in shoo-in? sure thing, I haven't heard that view coming from anyone in the media in a long, long time; rather, people seem to predict that the price of gas and unemployment rate could very well prove Obama's undoing.  Or is that media-hypester bullshit, just a way of artificially stoking interest in a one-sided election?  If you think so, please help to convince me.

It was just one of the few reasons I could think of to vote for Romney if you don't actually believe that lower taxes are beneficial for society.  However, I don't even know if Romney is going for lower taxes.

If you like, I can explain things like the Laffer curve, the paradox of the king lowering taxes and all such, but if I can't prove that Romney wants lower taxes, it's academic.

Quote
Ach, such cynicism!  Such disillusionment!  What's the world coming to?  :)  I wonder if Romney's supporters see him this way and forgive such political expediency as a matter of course, an inevitability, as it sounds like you do.  How distasteful!  Not that I would look down on anyone for seeing things as that bleak if they really are ...

I'm personally voting against Obama because I've been out of work for a year and a half.  I believe the business experts who talk about how all the regulations, the thousands of pages of new laws which nobody can give concise information on, and similar effects have cut off the knees of an economy which is supposed to have been recovering for years now.

Either Obama is completely inept, he's deliberately doing things poorly in order to do things which his various advisors have been caught on camera talking about wanting to do (like the Secretary of Energy's Stephen Chu's talking about wanting to make gas prices in the USA as high a price as in Europe, on camera in his own words, which certainly seems to be happening), or somehow Bush destroyed things so catastrophically that Obama claimed to be able to fix them just fine and hasn't been able to do so, despite being the genius that so many claim him to be.  I don't really believe the last of the three, but neither am I certain which of the other two is correct.

If you want to see both sides, you're going to have to turn on Fox News as well as one of the more liberal sources, taking everything with a grain of salt and comparing matters in the same way that you listen to how two kids describe matters when they fight.  Watching Rashomon (or the animated movie Hoodwinked) can help if you're not used to having to compare two different sides, but mostly just remember that there's two sides to any story, and neither is fully true.

...Yeah, I'm really jaded.  Sorry.

Offline Trieste

  • Faerie Queen; Her Imperial Lubemajesty; Willing Victim
  • Dame
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Apr 2005
  • Location: In the middle of Happily Ever After with a dark Prince Charming.
  • Gender: Female
  • I am many things - dull is not one of them.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 4
Re: Mitt Romney For President
« Reply #17 on: April 16, 2012, 02:45:33 AM »
Locked at the OP's request.