User Tag List

First 123412 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 135

  1. #11
    no clinkz 'til brooklyn Nocapszy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    i agree.

    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoBiscuit View Post
    I think it gives the left an easy target, but beyond that I don't know how this will play out.
    i'm not so sure. they've already tried to burn paul ryan in effigy and it didn't work. since his budget proposal, he hasn't done anything noteworthy [i.e. mediaworthy], so i think the president and his campaign are out of the "magic bullets" he keeps talking about.

    Conservatives hate Obama enough that they would have come out to vote against him anyway.

    They may not love Romney, but the choice between him and Obama would be an easy one for conservatives come November.

    Except possibly handing us Wisconsin (Paul Ryans state) I don't think this VP pick will be much of a net gain for Romney.
    so then i guess the other question is, who would give him a net gain?

    Now that all being said, I can understand why Romney chose Ryan given the pressure Romney must be getting from conservative donors.

    I don't think Ryan will play well to the middle ideologically.
    i remain unconvinced that the middle vote is what's necessary.

    it's probably safe to say that the plan is to focus on the economy, and ryan's speech was resounding with confidence that they know what the weak points are. presumably that means they know where to attack. i didn't sense as much strength regarding solutions.
    we fukin won boys

  2. #12
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,161

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2...nning-mate?lit

    Somewhat unexpected, but this should certainly shake up the campaign, motivate the base, and accentuate the differences with Obama/Biden.
    Absolutely shook things up.

    I thought he was going to go with a boring nobody like Pawlenty or Portman.

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    Romney must have been wondering how he could make himself seem even more like he hated the lower and middle class.

    I'm not sure if negative values can really exist in one's desire to vote for a candidate, but this certainly makes me complete absence of desire to vote for Romney somehow more absent. The Ryan budget plan was one of the bigger travesties I can remember from the Republicans in the past couple years.

    In general I'm not quite sure what the point is to this politically. Ryan is kind of an unknown to the general voting base. He's a big, fat target for populist attacks which appear to still be effective (and in this case they ought to be), and he's not really charismatic or interesting enough for it to compensate. Romney might be excessively worried about how right-wing he looks.
    Typical liberal tripe (as would be expected).

    I wonder if you could actually produce a cogent analysis of the Ryan Plan.

    I have yet to meet a single liberal who could, despite all their whining about it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cimarron View Post
    I think I know exactly what message he's trying to send by choosing Paul Ryan. "How can I show where I stand to those voters who have been paying little or no attention to the whole election process so far?" Choose a name that's rather well-known and symbolic for a major issue.

    I have been paying zero attention to this election, and I know who Paul Ryan is, in a vague, symbolic way. So I get Mitt Romney's "point." Very fast and effective method of conveying a platform message.

    Now, obviously, there are different ways, positive or negative, to interpret that message, but the fact is that it's pretty simple and (meant to seem) straightforward.
    And the ISTJ hits the nail on the head (as would be expected).

    Quote Originally Posted by Seymour View Post
    I think Paul Ryan beefs up the Romney ticket's "true conservative" credentials... but it's hard to see that as a winning strategy at this point. It may increase the motivation of some Republicans to vote, but otherwise it seems like it more narrows than broadens Romney's appeal.
    Independents have no reason to be scared by Ryan, and the base loves him.

    The truth is, he's the only national politician who's made a stand on the most crucial issue facing our country.

    His plan is not perfect, as I've written here before, but it would fix the problem, and is a starting point for negotiation.

    The Dems, by contrast, have offered no solution, and their "just increase taxes" ideology would destroy this country/economy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Seymour View Post
    And there's plenty to mine for political ammunition, just on Ryan's wiki page. It can easily be spun into:
    [LIST]
    If you want to believe liberal hack spin, then your vote is a waste already anyway.

    An objective analysis shows all of this spin to be utter bullshit.

    Quote Originally Posted by Seymour View Post
    [*]Ryan wanted to "kill medicare" (turn it into a capped voucher system that wouldn't increase with cost increases)
    He wanted to reform Medicare by taking away the blank check it currently is, and trying to control its costs.

    People over the age of 55 would keep the exact same Medicare they already have (or are set to get).

    People under 55 would get an $8,000 (CPI-adjusted) voucher to pay for their retirement health plan.

    Health care providers/insurers would then devise plans to fit the amount of that voucher.

    This would make Medicare sustainable (it currently isn't) by controlling its costs.

    Individuals must live on sustainable budgets; so must governments.

    Everything else is an unsustainable fantasy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Seymour View Post
    [*]Ryan wanted to introduce a consumption tax (regressive!)
    Look at Europe (aka, the Land That Liberals Want To Be).

    If you want to have a lavish welfare state, this is just about the only way to do it.

    Of course that's not Ryan's reasoning for the consumption tax, and it's been reported that he supports dropping it from the plan.

    Quote Originally Posted by Seymour View Post
    [*]The Ryan budget was so cruel that even the Catholic church spoke out against it ("profoundly misreading Church teaching.")
    The Catholic Church are a bunch of commies.

    Quote Originally Posted by Seymour View Post
    [*]Ryan was a Randroid (Ryan: "The reason I got involved in public service, by and large, if I had to credit one thinker, one person, it would be Ayn Rand." "[Rand's works] are required reading for everyone on my staff")
    As much as I hate Ayn Rand, she's better than the idiots who have influenced Obama.

    Quote Originally Posted by Seymour View Post
    [*]Voted for the partial Glass-Steagall repeal act in 1999
    Oh, you mean the bill signed into law by Bill Clinton.

    Quote Originally Posted by Seymour View Post
    [*]Voted for the Tea Party inspiring Bail Out in 2008
    As any rational person who knows what they're doing would have done.

    Quote Originally Posted by Seymour View Post
    Of course, every politician has statements and positions that can be spun. Still, definitely feels like a move to shore up his base, rather than broaden his appeal.
    I can tell you, I've pitched Ryan to plenty of people my age who definitely lean liberal, and they all end up liking him.

    Just cuz the liberals try to demagogue a guy for proposing the tough-but-necessary solution to our country's biggest problem, doesn't make those attacks accurate or true.

    Quote Originally Posted by Beefeater View Post
    And that's what this all about. It doesn't matter what Ryan believed or voted for in the past all that matters is the message about Ryan that the base is buying. For some time now the conservative base has been buying that Ryan is a smart and strong fiscal conservative who is serious about fixing the economy by reducing the debt.
    True.

    Quote Originally Posted by Beefeater View Post
    Most important to the base is that the left hates Ryan because of his position on the budget.
    I don't think that's the most important.

    Most important is that he's the only person who's actually proposed a viable solution.

    That solution was really just a starting point for negotiation, but the Democrats have still not proposed any viable alternative.

    The tock is clicking as Medicare spending continues to explode, and we continue running annual deficits of nearly 10% of GDP.

    Eventually those kinds of deficits destroy your economy, via excessively high inflation and/or taxation and/or interest rates.

    Quote Originally Posted by Beefeater View Post
    Voting for TARP? auto bailouts? No child left behind? Debt ceiling increases?
    That doesn't matter.
    Most of those just show that he's rational.

    The biggest no-no of all, though, was that he voted for the Medicare Prescription Drug Coverage bill in 2003.

  3. #13
    Vaguely Precise Seymour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/so
    Posts
    1,565

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    If you want to believe liberal hack spin then your vote is a waste already anyway.
    You do know that wasn't intended as a fair analysis of Ryan (hence clearly labeled "spin"), right? That was just the result of a quick glance through his wikipedia page. Some things on the list I'm fine with (voting for the bailout was just sanity, for example, and I'm not opposed to consumption taxes as long as tax structures remain fairly progressive).

    As to whether his budget was serious... I agree that it was tough and made deep cuts, but in ways that would farther exacerbate our already high income inequality (lowering rate of top tax bracket combined with shift toward consumption taxes). I agree that we, as a country, need to find a way to control health care costs. That means making tough decisions. However, any plan that starts from an assumption that taxes are too high (especially for "job creators"), defense spending is too low and benefits of current seniors have to be preserved (basic fairness... plus seniors vote!) is likely to be regressive. Because given that combination of constraints, where else can you cut that actually amounts to much?

    Otherwise, I think Ryan comes across a likable, intelligent and articulate as a person (ignoring his politics), which is part of what he brings to the table as a VP pick. The lack of foreign policy experience seems like a concern, since Romney isn't strong there, either.

  4. #14
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nocapszy View Post
    that thread is out of date. the title says "to be" as in future tense.
    mine pertains to the moment of, and all moments following romney's announcement.

    but i didn't notice that.
    thanks for the generous contribution.
    Yeah it went way out of date in the two hours between his thread and yours.

    Anyway, i agree with those who said it clarified romney's values. I'm just not sure it did much but solidify votes he already probably had. It's a good thing for him he has some amazing financial contributions undergirding him.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  5. #15
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Seymour View Post
    You do know that wasn't intended as a fair analysis of Ryan (hence clearly labeled "spin"), right? That was just the result of a quick glance through his wikipedia page. Some things on the list I'm fine with (voting for the bailout was just sanity, for example, and I'm not opposed to consumption taxes as long as tax structures remain fairly progressive).

    As to whether his budget was serious... I agree that it was tough and made deep cuts, but in ways that would farther exacerbate our already high income inequality (lowering rate of top tax bracket combined with shift toward consumption taxes). I agree that we, as a country, need to find a way to control health care costs. That means making tough decisions. However, any plan that starts from an assumption that taxes are too high (especially for "job creators"), defense spending is too low and benefits of current seniors have to be preserved (basic fairness... plus seniors vote!) is likely to be regressive. Because given that combination of constraints, where else can you cut that actually amounts to much?
    Don't forget his incredibly tight limit on discretionary spending. His plan all but declares that we should just forget about drivable roads and public education. Then there was his original (though eventually removed) plan to privatize social security. And regarding dealing with the budget deficit, making a huge cut to taxes is not a particularly promising move.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  6. #16
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,161

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Seymour View Post
    You do know that wasn't intended as a fair analysis of Ryan (hence clearly labeled "spin"), right?
    Yeah, I understood that wasn't necessarily your take.

    I was just beating down the idiocy of the spin.

    Quote Originally Posted by Seymour View Post
    Some things on the list I'm fine with (voting for the bailout was just sanity, for example, and I'm not opposed to consumption taxes as long as tax structures remain fairly progressive).
    Agreed.

    Quote Originally Posted by Seymour View Post
    As to whether his budget was serious... I agree that it was tough and made deep cuts, but in ways that would farther exacerbate our already high income inequality (lowering rate of top tax bracket combined with shift toward consumption taxes). I agree that we, as a country, need to find a way to control health care costs. That means making tough decisions. However, any plan that starts from an assumption that taxes are too high (especially for "job creators"), defense spending is too low and benefits of current seniors have to be preserved (basic fairness... plus seniors vote!) is likely to be regressive. Because given that combination of constraints, where else can you cut that actually amounts to much?
    I don't believe taxes are too high for the wealthiest, and that's one area where I disagree with the Ryan Plan.

    However, at the same time, increasing taxes on "the rich" will not solve our problem.

    Our problem is exploding Medicare costs.

    The Ryan Plan is a starting point for negotiation, presenting the Conservative position.

    Time for the Democrats to come to the table with their plan, and then to meet somewhere in the middle.

    Quote Originally Posted by Seymour View Post
    Otherwise, I think Ryan comes across a likable, intelligent and articulate as a person (ignoring his politics), which is part of what he brings to the table as a VP pick.
    Look at this ridiculous hitjob our wonderful liberal media is already trying to do on him: http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...tsheet_morning

    Honestly, I hate our fucking media; they are the biggest scumbags of all.

    Quote Originally Posted by Seymour View Post
    The lack of foreign policy experience seems like a concern, since Romney isn't strong there, either.
    IIRC, Obama wasn't exactly experienced in the foreign policy area, and he was the running for President.

  7. #17
    Freaking Ratchet Rail Tracer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,041

    Default

    I'll just post this and.... step a little back. Full list on the link.

    http://www.ontheissues.org/House/Paul_Ryan.htm

    Rated 13% by the ACLU, indicating an anti-civil rights voting record. (Dec 2002)
    Rated 0% by the HRC, indicating an anti-gay-rights stance. (Dec 2006)
    Rated 36% by NAACP, indicating a mixed record on affirmative-action. (Dec 2006)

    Rated 93% by the US COC, indicating a pro-business voting record. (Dec 2003)
    Repeal ObamaCare reporting requirements for small business. (Jan 2011)
    Rated 14% by UFCW, indicating a pro-management voting record. (May 2012)

    Rated 30% by CURE, indicating anti-rehabilitation crime votes. (Dec 2000)

    Rated -10 by NORML, indicating a "hard-on-drugs" stance. (Dec 2006)


    Voted YES on allowing school prayer during the War on Terror. (Nov 2001)

    Voted YES on requiring states to test students. (May 2001)
    Rated 8% by the NEA, indicating anti-public education votes. (Dec 2003)

    Rated 0% by the CAF, indicating opposition to energy independence. (Dec 2006)

    Bar greenhouse gases from Clean Air Act rules. (Jan 2009)
    Drill the Outer Continental Shelf; & license new nuke plants. (Mar 2011)

    Rated 91% by the Christian Coalition: a pro-Family-Value voting record. (Dec 2003)

    End economic protectionism: let dairy compacts expire . (Aug 2001)
    Rated 67% by CATO, indicating a pro-free trade voting record. (Dec 2002)

    Ban gun registration & trigger lock law in Washington DC. (Mar 2007)
    Allow reloading spent military small arms ammunition. (Apr 2009)

    Rated 11% by APHA, indicating a anti-public health voting record. (Dec 2003)
    Repeal the Job-Killing Health Care Law. (Jan 2011)

    Rated 22% by SANE, indicating a pro-military voting record. (Dec 2003)

    Rated 0% by FAIR, indicating a voting record loosening immigration. (Dec 2003)
    Comprehensive immigration reform without amnesty. (May 2005)
    Rated 83% by USBC, indicating a sealed-border stance. (Dec 2006)

    Rated 7% by the AFL-CIO, indicating an anti-union voting record. (Dec 2003)
    Allow an Air Traffic Controller's Union. (Jan 2006)
    Rated 58% by CEI, indicating a mixed voting record on Big Labor. (May 2012)

    Rated 0% by the AU, indicating opposition to church-state separation. (Dec 2006)


    Rated 10% by the ARA, indicating an anti-senior voting record. (Dec 2003)


    Rated 72% by NTU, indicating "Satisfactory" on tax votes. (Dec 2003)
    Rated 0% by the CTJ, indicating opposition to progressive taxation. (Dec 2006)

  8. #18

    Default

    I'm a centrist, and the choice of Paul Ryan is a big negative for me. Romney always struck me as an amiable but clueless plutocrat who honestly didn't understand the plight of most Americans instead of maliciously setting out to play reverse Robin Hood. The choice of Ryan eliminates any benefit of the doubt based on that characterization. His conservative bona fides play to the base, as several have pointed out, but I think that's a strategic mistake because I don't think Romney was in danger of losing the base. He needs to court independents, and Ryan is probably a bit radical for them - especially if they make the link to Scott Walker. The main benefit I see to Romney is that Ryan brings a needed dose of personality to the ticket.

    I sort of suspected he might pick Chris Christie. He's a rising conservative who is currently in a very sympathetic David/Goliath states' rights battle over sports gambling that enjoys support across the political spectrum. I wonder if the concerns over his weight killed any chance he had.
    Everybody have fun tonight. Everybody Wang Chung tonight.

    Johari
    /Nohari

  9. #19
    Senior Member Survive & Stay Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    9 so/sx
    Posts
    21,686

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2...nning-mate?lit

    Somewhat unexpected, but this should certainly shake up the campaign, motivate the base, and accentuate the differences with Obama/Biden.
    Really? Unexpected I mean? I dont see a great deal of difference between capitalist 1 and capitalist 2 here.

  10. #20
    Vaguely Precise Seymour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/so
    Posts
    1,565

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    Really? Unexpected I mean? I dont see a great deal of difference between capitalist 1 and capitalist 2 here.
    Given the way Romney's position have changed over time, Romney suffered from being ill-defined. Selected a very conservative representative for VP (apparently the most extreme VP pick from congress in the last 100 years) appeals to his base, but forfeits much chance of tacking to the center.

    So, Ryan as VP does help define what a Romney ticket represents. Whether that helps or hurts remains to be seen.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 294
    Last Post: 10-07-2017, 08:07 PM
  2. is it possible to be a peaceful muslim?
    By Il Morto Qui Parla in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 58
    Last Post: 04-23-2010, 09:11 PM
  3. Would you choose to be born?
    By proteanmix in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 10-09-2007, 05:34 AM
  4. Is it Illogical to be Dominantly Je?
    By Blackwater in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 09-06-2007, 09:21 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO