Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Wednesday, Sept. 26, 2012 | 2 a.m.
Another view?
View more of the Las Vegas Sun's opinion section:
• Editorials - the Sun's viewpoint.
• Columnists - local and syndicated writers.
• Letters to the editor - readers' views.
Have your own opinion? Write a letter to the editor.
It may come as a shock to Robert Blanner, (“We’re not all victims, Romney,” Sept. 23) but I consider myself one of the 47 percent he alludes to except that I happen to be a Republican. I agree with everything he says in his letter about entitlements but see things differently in regards to his views on Mitt Romney.
The interesting thing about all of this is how many other 47 percenters see things as I do. If there are many of us, then the 47 percent is overblown.
The point that is being made in the macro aggregate of our countries budget is
53 percent of the workers are provide for themselves AND paying for the operation of the federal government.
Under Obama fewer and fewer people must support more and more people.
This is not a debate about needy people getting support
Another 4 years under Obama and we may have only 40% of the people pay for the operation of the federal government
Where does this stop
Again SS and Medicare are not part of this because they are covered by payroll Taxes for your retirement
In today's column, David Brooks summarizes his opinion thus:
"Some people blame bad campaign managers for Romney's underperforming campaign, but the problem is deeper. Conservatism has lost the balance between economic and traditional conservatism. The Republican Party has abandoned half of its intellectual ammunition. It appeals to people as potential business owners but not as parents, neighborus and citizens."
This is one big reason many people cannot accept Romney's message. They cannot connect with him. We are simply parents, neighbors, and citizens. All we want is to live a decent life and the freedom to pursue what makes us happy. Money does not guarantee happiness.
Business ownership is not the only way toward self-actualization. That is where Romney fails.
I'm quite sure Anthony is not the only Republican in the 47%. There are probably a lot of seniors on Social Security, disabled veterans, students and many others who are Republicans and/or not backers of President Obama. But, Romney groups all of these into a single monolithic stereotype of needy victims that have only the singular commonality of not owing any income tax.
It's pretty convincing proof that Romney doesn't know anything about us, but we've certainly learned a lot more about him.
I agree with Nancy that the R message, as delivered by Romney and many other leading R's is lacking. What must also be examined though, is the D's message.
The D's message is that Capitalism and our economic, governmental and social model has run amok and must be 'fundamentally' changed. That word 'fundamental' has been and still is often used by President Obama.
Let's look at the definition of 'fundamental' ... 'serving as, or being an essential part of, a foundation or basis; basic; underlying: fundamental principles; the fundamental structure'
So, it should be obvious what 'fundamental change' means. It means changing the basis, the core blocks of our economic, governmental and social systems.
To me, this is a bridge much too far. Our system has served us well for over 250 years and made us the envy of the world. Our system needs some corrections, but it DOES NOT need to be fundamentally changed.
R's tend to want to let Capitalism run unfettered and limit government's role. D's tend to want a large transfer of private capital into government so it can distribute it more fairly. Both those philosophies are incorrect and dangerous and we need to start standing up and rejecting both of them.
Michael
Letter writer is correct. The statement by Governor Romney was spun way out of proportion. He said it very clumsily in part because it was a private fund raiser. What he meant was 47 percent of Americans, primarily those not paying any Federal income taxes, are entrenched in President Obama's base. He's not interested in getting their votes. Governor Romney is focusing on the 6-8 percent of independents and undecideds, based on polls and past elections, in order to win the election.
CarmineD
Letter writer is correct. The statement by Governor Romney was spun way out of proportion. He said it very clumsily in part because it was a private fund raiser. What he meant was 47 percent of Americans, primarily those not paying any Federal income taxes, are entrenched in President Obama's base. He's not interested in getting their votes. Governor Romney is focusing on the 6-8 percent of independents and undecideds, based on polls and past elections, in order to win the election.
CarmineD
There are many people dissatisfied with the current administration. Theoretically Romney should win by a landslide. However he is failing to connect to the core population because of his arrogance. He needs to come down a few steps down his pedestal and show his understanding of the common masses - the poor and the downtrodden. He needs to retool his communication box and speak the language ALL people will understand not just the rich, the conservatives, the bigots among us, the ignoramus, the intelligent, and the not so intelligent.
The hallmark of a great leader is his ability to communicate. If he does not do it soon, he will fail and millions of PAC money will be better off spent on more worthwhile projects.
Again, Nancy makes good points. It should also be pointed out that Romney is in a tough place. For all intents and purposes, the President and his party are arguing that our position isn't really that bad and if we just tax the wealthy and do a few other undefined things, everything will be just fine.
That simply cannot be true and it isn't true and most Americans know this. If Romney tells the ugly truth, which is really the ONLY way to successfully counter the fairy tale the President is telling, he risks telling Americans some very unpleasant facts that would undoubtedly be very unpopular.
Romney has been unwilling to tell those truths and instead has chosen to tell a 'different' fairy tale than the President tells.
The President is a far better fairy tale teller than Romney is, so Romney loses in that battle.
Unfortunately, we all lose if we believe either one of the fairy tales being told by Obama or Romney.
Michael
The real story here isn't the "47 percent" thing Romney said. The real story here is media bias and how anything and everything Romney says is taken out of context or twisted in a way to try and make him look bad. All the while Obama can make claims that the deaths of 4 people at one of our embassies is just a "bump in the road" without any scrutiny or criticism from the media.
"However he is failing to connect to the core population because of his arrogance."
__________
Romney's "arrogance", you have to be kidding. Obama is the most arrogant president this country has probably seen. This is a person who thinks is mere presence will make everything better.
Casler tries and tries and tries(but fails..)to convince all of us that he's a fair and balanced (open minded) guy who lays out the basic facts & then leads us down the correct road to the correct solution...
Sorry, but I don't see it that way. Casler will vote for Romney come November 6th. I will vote for Obama which will cancel out Casler's vote...
In other words, Casler is a big time Republican. Keep that in mind when dealing with him...
The hand writing is on the wall. Obama will win re-election. The latest polls show Obama leading in at least 10 of the 12 "battle ground states."
If that is true & Obama carries 10 of the 12 "battle ground states," the election will be a total blow out!
I'm sure most people know that a Republican candidate has NEVER won the White House with out winning Ohio.....
As of today, Obama is up by 10 pts. in Ohio...
The Republican governor of Ohio just yesterday said that the economy in his state is improving and jobs are coming back to the Buckeye State.
Romney, following the governor on the podium, then went into a rant telling the crowd that the job situation in Ohio is a disaster and it's all Obama's fault....
You figure it out....Ha! Ha! Ha!
In a nut shell, Romney's campaign is a disaster. He has a bad case of "foot & mouth disease" and the more he talks, the more Obama's lead increases...
Mitt is not one of us! He and his wife are so far removed from what the middle class in this country is all about that many Republicans (who are are part of that middle class..) are turning their back on Mitt and walking away...
Dear letter writer, I am one of the 53% and I have been for more than 40 years. I am voting for Obama and I am not alone. Romney has been one bad statement after another since the start of the republican primary and he is getting worse with every passing day. Has Mitt tried to walk back his comment on rolling down the windows on planes or is he doubling down on that one too?
RHG58 is doing what most right-wingers do when they have their back to the wall......
They resort to the old "liberal media" argument.
Even Romney has gone down that road of late. Of course, it hasn't helped his cause.
What RHG58 refuses to recognize is that his boy, Mitt, is running a very poorly organized and poorly run campaign.
Also, Mitt says so many contradictory things, depending upon the time of the day, that most voters have no idea what he truly stands for...
There's less than 6 weeks left in the campaign. Can Mitt pull it out? Does water run up hill and does the Sun come up in the West and go down in the East?
Flip-flops and gaffes aside, Romney is just a horrible candidate. The long campaign has exposed the cold, ackward personality traits that made him a successful vulture capitalist where billions in profits were derived from shutting down companies and laying off workers.
Thankfully, most voters can see through the facade so Romney will never be given a chance to sit behind the desk in the Oval Office and make the kind of critical decisions that President Obama was elected for.
The attacking lynch mobs should consider that GOP includes many millions who are NOT 1%ers. So hey, reconsider your line of attack. I'm not GOP but I understand some of what they're after. With all the social welfare and wasted K-12/no results and wasted government programs, there's nothing left to retire on--taxes take too much of our incomes so we can't invest well in a home, save enough in IRA's, stay in one job long enough to vest a pension. So seniors and retirees are swept into the fixed-income set before they figure out that the spending hype means THERE'S NOTHING LEFT FOR THEM.
This election is NOT ABOUT THE CANDIDATE, it's about a life style. Do we want to have a life style or do we want to be indentured servants to fund government?
It's time for republicans to face reality and see that their horrible candidate, Willard Romney, is toast. The former vulture capitalist may end up losing by a wider margin than McCain did in 2008. So instead of waiting until it's too late, throw Willard under the bus now and focus on not letting his losing campaign drag down other GOP candidates.
Or just blame the media. It's all their fault.
@ Nancy Augustin...
Amen, sister!
It's not ALL about the money.
The nattering nabobs of negativity that now comprise the majority of Republicans and TeaNutians have tunnel vision.
The 'right' seems to think M.O.N.E.Y. is EVERYTHING...
and/or that everything can be addressed in monetary terms...
They are the ABACUS Party.
Add/subtract. Multiply/divide. Take/give.
The 'R' party has NO INTEREST in Cause & Effect...'it's too complicated! All that THINKING! Makes my head hurt! Just let me keep ALL MY MONEY! That's all I care about, and all I THINK about! I'm a GREAT COUNTER'!
'Constructing & deconstructing BIG numbers; NOW your speaking my language'!
That's how they think...linear...with NO understanding of cause & effect.
We need more lateral thinking... our problems are many and complicated, and the old rules of engagement are not necessarily germane to 2012 & beyond.
The fact that in many cases, saving a buck now will cost you 5 later... means NOTHING to these people. It just doesn't register with them.
'How about cutting it from 5 to 3.5 or 3...cutting it to 1 or none causes a new set of problems; EXPENSIVE problems.'
'HOGWASH! That's MY MONEY! I want it! ALL OF IT! I need it to...um, 'create jobs'! Surely you get that...
Mittens Howell Rmoney & lil' Eddie Munster Ryan...
They want to do the Bush dance all over again; only this time they want to 'SUPER-SIZE' it...
As if to say, 'BIGGER tax cuts! MORE WAR! Less regulation! Hail the Corporation! God BLESS the CEO! Onward, Christian Soldier! DRILL, baby, DRILLLL!'
'It can all be solved by simple mathematics.'
If it wasn't so sad it would be hilarity, SUPER-SIZED!
We are in DIRE need of consensus building...
all across the USA & the whole of the world, fashioned by good old common sense, integrity & ingenuity.
The whole "47%" narrative has been blown way out of proportion and has become nothing more than a hammer for the Dems to hit Mitt with. How about we talks about the "100%" instead? To quote Newt: "Let me tell you about the 100 percent. Obama has failed the 100 percent who have to buy gasoline. Obama has failed the 100 percent who will be paying interest on the Obama national debt for the rest of their lives. Obama has failed 100 percent of those who want to get a job and move on with their lives. Obama has failed everyone in the Middle East who had hoped the Arab Spring would lead to freedom by allowing it to turn into an Islamist winter."
"Romney has been one bad statement after another since the start of the republican primary and he is getting worse with every passing day." As opposed to Obama's one bad policy after another? Wonderful campaigner, terrible leader.
"Stench" (Romney's new nickname given to him by Paul Ryan according to Politico) doesn't give one "whiff" about 47% of the American people. His ONLY focus is on business owners. He could care less about the average working man. Well, working people vote, and in this election, they will vote Obama in, in a LANDSLIDE!
Gmag39,
You write long letters to the editor (like I do) and in them you demonize the Conservatives, R's and Tea Partiers.
Odd's are that President Obama is going to be re-elected. Let's assume for a moment that either D's retake the House and keep the Senate or that a compromise can be forged. You're all about what's wrong with R's and their plans. What, exactly should President Obama do to reduce and then eliminate the budget deficits, start to reduce our enormous debt, kept SS and Medicare as they are but solvent into the future, create millions more jobs and get us going in the right direction?
I am perfectly willing to admit that a plan such as Romney's that includes more tax cuts and unspecified spending cuts sounds like a fairy tale. Please enlighten me as to why the President is the correct choice..... without just saying the R's are wrong on everything. What will President Obama try to do that isn't also a fairy tale... just a different fairy tale than the one Romney tells?
Do you REALLY have total faith that President Obama has a good plan that will work? I'll tell you that if Romney wins, I'd have MAJOR reservations as to whether he has a real plan that could succeed. I have those same reservations about President Obama. Don't you?
Michael
The 47% would appear to be a bit high to be sustainable.
Unfortunately, the president's campaign slogan 'Forward' seems to measure progress in higher foodstamp enrollment among other things. Look to this number going up in the future for he has stated that Spain is his economic model.
I am a conservative Libertarian, not in the 47%. And proud of it.
Yes we are a lifeboat and those who can't row to shore must be cast off to the sharks, only the strong should survive ...Paul von Ryan
Nothing new coming from the right! No surprise there!
The train wreck called the "Romney Presidential Campaign" continues to run from point # A to point # B with out a clue on what to do once it reaches its destination...
Oh well, less than 6 weeks to go & the "Romney wreck" will be part of presidentail history....a mere foot note at the bottom of a political science textbook....
Excuse me Michael but to what plan of Romney do you refer? The problems (leaving aside Mr. Romney's personality issues) are: (1) he has no plan and (2) he will not divulge any specifics of what he might do.
Let's see. Now just how do we decide if we are in the 47%. Are we talking about the 47% who pay no federal income taxes.Or those who are receiving Medicare and Social Security. Or those who are on welfare--jobless benefits,food stamps,Medicaid?
Which group do you think Romney was talking about--really? It seemed that he was referring to those who are paying no income taxes based on his recorded comments. But if he really thought it out before opening his mouth, he might have made it more clear that he was really referring to those on Welfare. At last count I believe that adds up to about 100 million folks. Correct me if I am wrong on this,but that would be about 33% of the population, which might equate to roughly 50% of voters. Therefore while Romney may have had his percentage right at 47%, he was referring to the wrong grouping--he really has very little chance of capturing the welfare contingent. Obviously there is some overlap between the groups but based on pure focus Romney really meant the welfare recipients as being the ones that he should not be focusing on --these people are in the bag for Obama.To say that Romney has kicked these folks to the curb as the Democrats have maintained is pure false reasoning--these folks would be beneficiaries of Romney's investment/job spuring policies. They would get to work, earn money and enjoy a better life.Being a beneficiary of Romney's policies is quite different than being the focal point of his vote recruitment effort.
In today's column, David Brooks summarizes his opinion thus:
"Some people blame bad campaign managers for Romney's underperforming campaign, but the problem is deeper. Conservatism has lost the balance between economic and traditional conservatism. The Republican Party has abandoned half of its intellectual ammunition. It appeals to people as potential business owners but not as parents, neighborus and citizens."
David Brooks strains to figure it all out. The simple reason why the concervative message is not getting through is due to the messenger, Mitt Romney---Obama, who is a stumble bum in performance, is simply a better orator--he communicates a slick and silky message that millions of Americans like to hear. Romney would be a much better executive in the Executive Branch,but he cannot attract the interest that Obama can. It's that simple. Brooks should take a vacation and rethink his piece in todays Sun. It's a shame that those who rely on Obama's promises must endure more disappointment as he chronically misses his targets.
Leric,
The claim that Romney has no plan is about as correct as the claim that Obama has no plan. If we really want to see each plan, all we have to do is go to their websites and be willing to read (I have read both plans).
The reality is that Romney wants to cut taxes, is willing to admit that government spending must also be cut but is unwilling to say how much or where. On the other hand Obama wants more government stimulus spending and higher taxes on the wealthy and is also willing to admit that government spending will have to be cut but is equally vague about how much and where.
If any fair minded person looks at our tax revenue ($ 2.4 Trillion) and spending ($ 3.7 Trillion), they know that even with 6 % growth and higher taxes on the wealthy, spending needs to be cut by at least 35 % to even approach a balanced budget.
Both these guys are proposing fairy tales that don't contain the cuts we are going to have to make. We ech have to support somebody, but none of us should believe either guy has a viable plan.
Michael
@ Casler...
"Do you REALLY have total faith that President Obama has a good plan that will work? I'll tell you that if Romney wins, I'd have MAJOR reservations as to whether he has a real plan that could succeed. I have those same reservations about President Obama. Don't you?"
Of course I do.
I don't think that President Obama has done everything right, nor does he have a 'magic plan' to pare down the debt or fix all our other problems, like Medicare, Social Security & the job market.
What he DOES have is a good start, a good heart & and he's plenty smart...
Until & unless the Repub's quit blocking every single attempt by the Obama admin to make changes, we'll never KNOW how good his 'plans' are, will we?
They've behaved shamelessly and to the detriment of our country; they should pay dearly for that in November.
A note on your post to me, Michael...
This ain't a debate.
I read an article, I comment.
I'm not here to 'win' anything; just to voice my opinion. It's the 'comments' section, after all...not the 'debate' section.
Have a nice day, y'all!
Bob,
As I've said before, Romney is a poor messenger and Obama is a good messenger. Obama knows not to deliver the bad news that government spending is going to have to be cut by at least 1/3 for us reach a balanced budget, so he just doesn't mention it and makes promises he won't be able to keep, just like in 2008.
It's unfortunate but true that if Romney really told the true about what we must do, instead of providing the same type of feel good crap that Obama provides, he'd take a great chance of being completely blown out of this election. The problem is if he doesn't take that chance, people are going to believe Obama, just like in 2008 and he is going to lose this election.
Michael
Gmag39,
For me, it's the numbers and little else. $ 2.4 trillion in revenue, $ 3.7 trillion in spending leaving a yearly deficit of $ 1.3 trillion.
Growth at even 6 % can't close that gap enough, more tax breaks can't do it, more government stimulus and higher taxes on the rich can't do it. Numbers don't lie and numbers say that we will nedd to cut government spending by more than 1/3 to even approach a balanced budget.
If either Romney or Obama would admit that and then make specific proposals to at least start to cut spending, I'd have respect for them.
The fact that in the face of all that, so many people do have faith in Romney or Obama scares me to death.
Michael
Harry Reid made some gaff comments about a light skinned man and it went away eventually, as will the 47% comment.
One thing that has not been mentioned enough is the probably electoral vote count of the up coming election...
As most of you know (and every one should know, but don't) its the electoral vote that selects the president..
It doesn't matter what the popular vote is...
Matter of fact, in 2000 George junior lost the popular vote by 500,000+ votes but ended up (thanks Supreme Court..) as the president...
In 2008 Obama had 68% of the electoral vote which by most standards is quite a mandate...
The popular vote, however, was much closer.....
The present electoral college set-up greatly favors Obama. Obama strength is in the larger cities, such as Chicago, LA, New York, Cleveland and Miami.
A state like Illinois will go the way Chicago goes...The same can be said about many of the larger cities in the larger states...
With the exception of Texas, Obama is clearly in the "hunt" in the larger states who have the most electoral votes.....
Another interesting fact:
It's possible to carry a mere 12 states, lose the other 38 states, & win the White House.
Also don't forget Washington, DC. It has gone Democrat year after year and will go the same way this year....
Of course, Its mere 3 electoral votes doesn't qualify it as a major player.
Thank you Michael, that neither candidate has a real plan is quite clear. However, from the point of view of Nevada, which depends on increased demand and a broadly felt sense of wealth to stimulate the totally discretionary spending which leads to gaming and serves as the major basis for employment here, Mr. Romney's proposed tax cuts would have no discernable change on business here -- and the corresponding (but as yet unspecified "loophole" closings) would seem to reduce "middle-class" deductions, which would reduce business and employment here.
Our 2-party system has given us this "choice" and nearly complete governmental paralysis. But the real problem with the 2-party system is that it frames public discussion so that it only occurs between the 2 sides the parties stake out, with the result that real problems are ignored and real solutions aren't considered.
Michael Casler....
Yes, Obama will probably not live up to all of the promises that he has made but what's new in presidential politics?
Did Ronald Reagan live up to the many promises that he made in both 1980 & 1984?
Nope.....he didn't come close! Not even with the big, big promises such as decreasing the size of the federal governmet, producing balanced budgets, and seeing that the government lived with in its means......
Its the same thing with party platforms. Once the convention is over, party platforms are quickly tossed in the trash bin..
That has happened time after time with both parties!
"Romney is a poor messenger and Obama is a good messenger." - wtplv
Michael, that is true only so long as Obama has a teleprompter to work with. He has also been caught with some less than tactful remarks when speaking off the cuff or in a supposedly private setting.
I think Romney's 47% comment is on a par with Obama's "you didn't build that" gaffe. And let's not forget Obama telling the Russians he'll have more flexibility after he is re-elected.
Boftx,
I realize that Obama is gaff prone and not very good 'off the cuff' and that gives Romney an opening in the debates. However, Romney tends to be scripted and stiff and that won't play well in the debates.
Michael
Romeny seemed like a decent candidate when he was on stage with the GOP field of wannabes but being the tallest midget in the circus doesn't make him fit for the White House.
After November the GOP loser will have plenty of time to work on his La Jolla beach mansion and get those car elevators installed.
El_Lobo,
You are correct of course. In my opinion however, with a debt of over $ 16 trillion and deficits each year exceeding $ 1 trillion, we are not too far away from a financial catastrophe. The numbers say that no matter how much Romney or Obama can grow the economy, to reach a balanced budget, government spending needs to be cut by at least 30 %. Do you hear either candidate saying that? I don't and for that reason I suspect we are in deep do do.
Michael
Obama will dominate the debates...
Romney, the plastic man, will show his true self in the debates.
Yes, more times than not, Romney comes off as stiff, scripted, and ill at ease.
Romney has had an unending inability to come across as some one that people can believe in and trust. The polls show that very thing....
Obama, on the other hand, even with an occasion gaff, is consistently liked by people and seen as someone who is honest, down to earth, and caring.....
There's no phoniness with Obama........not true with Romney....
<<A state like Illinois will go the way Chicago goes...>>
Not necessarily true. Yes, Chicago is pretty much Democratic, but Illinois is not. It has it's share of republicans in the collar counties and other parts of the State, ie southern Illinois for instance. Here's a bit of weird info: when it's time for voting for a governor, even Chicago voters favor the Republican candidate. Blagoyovich was a fluke. Even as a lifelong democrat, I have always voted for a republican governor.
@@boftx and Casler:
I commend both of you for the intelligent and civil comments you are both posting. It's refreshing to see that not everyone is full of hate and anger and name-calling, and that yes, people can respect each other regardless of their political affiliations.
Michael
Instead of expecting either candidate to explain their plan( no real chance), maybe what we are going to have to settle for in making our decisions as voters are
!. Which one is more successful in selling himself to the voter.(via debates, for example)
2. Which one we think will be the most effective Executive to run the Executive branch.( which we think will achieve the best results).
3. Who we trust the most to be our leader.
Bob
Number one above is still up in air. Number 2 and 3 are Romney for me.
El_Lobo,
It's math. Where is the 30 % cut in government spending that math says MUST happen? Obama shows know phoniness? REALLY....
Michael
Bob,
I don't expect either guy to reveal any cuts he'd make, although I think they should. Obama is clearly winning number 1.. to this point. Obama is leading on number 2 as well, according to the polls and number 3 as well.
This reminds me of the wizard of OZ. Obama is the all powerful wizard... and until and unless somebody (Romney) pulls the curtains, the illusion remains. I think the only way to pull that curtain open is by saying what Romney would do, in detail and saying at least that big spending cuts will be necessary and President Obama won't enact any of them and I will.
Michael
wtplv Michael 4:39: Obama will not cut spending. He'll increase it. He asked for a ONE YEAR EXTENSION in tax cuts. That year will be up in January 2013. Expect a tax hike, a LARGE TAX HIKE. National media isn't covering it but it seems Mr. O. is working on international treaties to send our tax money to the third world as redistribution for every culture less "affluent" than us.
Det__Munch,
Illinois will again go Democrat come November. Illinois went Democrat in 2008....Of course, I'm talking about the presidential race!
Actually Illinois has voted for a Democrat candidate for president in every election since 1992. The last time Illinois voted Republican in a presidential election was 1988......
Presently, Illinois is considered a "safe blue state."
Yes, down state Illinois is Republican territory & has been for a long, long time but in national elections Chicago goes Democrat & along with a small percentage of the down state vote, Illinois ends up in the Democrat column...
Yes, Illinois has elected a number of Republican governors but that not a sure fire thing....
The present governor is a Democrat (although he acts like a Republican...) and was elected after becoming governor with the resignation of Rod Blagojevich. .
Blago has not been the only governor to end up in jail for greedy & corrupt ways....
The governor before Blago also went to jail...He was a Republican. His name is George Ryan. Since the 1970's four of the eight governor's elected to serve the state of Illinois have gone to jail...
Who cares? It's game over for Romney. The deal will be sealed on Oct. 3rd. Obama will be presidential, and Romney will bet him 10k that he will win the election. Pay him now Mittens.
Michael...
The hand writing is on the wall. Romney and his election staff have done a terrible job of running a candidate for president...
Many long time Republicans are up-set with the campaign that Romney has run. He hasn't conveyed his message very well to the voters and he has changed his mind and his view on several things...
He has acted and performed pretty much the way John McCain did in 2008.....
We all know where that got McCain. don't we?
The latest polls don't look good for Romney. His one big chance to maybe turn his campaign around rests with the up coming presidential debates....
Can he do that? Who knows at this point in time...
Roberta...
I must ask. What are you smoking? Your statement says the following leads me to believe that you're doing something that is very different...very unusual!
You said:
"National media isn't covering it but it seems Mr. O. is working on international treaties to send our tax money to the third world as redistribution for every culture less "affluent" than us."
WOW! WOW! WOW!
Anthony......
YES, there are many republicans in that 47% of
Americans that romney threw under the bus.
Some of those 47% republicans are in my own
family.
They're nice people but thay still haven't
figured out why they are still voting against
their own best interest.
What's funny is that they always call our
Democratic side of the family for financial
advise.
They love our side of the family.
What's not to love?
But I believe that romney's dumb statement is
another HUGE GAFF that added to his sinking ship.
Just like not showing more tax statements.
And saying that he will kill Obamacare.
What a DISASTER!
The worst campaign I have ever seen in my life!
FOUR MORE YEARS FOR PRESIDENT OBAMA!!!
El_Lobo.....
Great comments again.
YES, the hand writing is on the wall and in the
polls.
And after Joe Scarborough saw a clip of romney
yelling "romney/ryan, romney/ryan", at a rally,
Joe put his face in his hands and said,
"SWEET JESUS"!!!
YES, the hits keep on coming from goofy romney.
romney is toast!
boftx......
Not even close.
Romney's statement was the kiss of death to his
campaign.
And even worse, there will be even more dumb and
goofy statements before romney loses and packs
his bags.
Have you ever seen the look on ryan's face as
he stands behind romney?
Like a deer in the head-lights.
WOW!!!
And you're still using that dumb fox-republican
telepromter comment?
PRESIDENT OBAMA is a Constitutional Law Professor
who taught Constitutional LAW classes.
Do you think he needed a telepromter in his
classes?
"PRESIDENT OBAMA is a Constitutional Law Professor
who taught Constitutional LAW classes."
As a group, at least as US presidents go, teachers do not make good presidents.
CarmineD
"The deal will be sealed on Oct. 3rd. Obama will be presidential,"
Just the opposite. Romney will easily win 2 of the 3 presidential debates including the first and most important. Romney will come off looking presidential and Obama like a big wind bag. Fact check will shoot holes in most of what Obama says diminishing his stature.
CarmineD
"Illinois will again go Democrat come November. Illinois went Democrat in 2008....Of course, I'm talking about the presidential race!
Actually Illinois has voted for a Democrat candidate for president in every election since 1992. The last time Illinois voted Republican in a presidential election was 1988......
Presently, Illinois is considered a "safe blue state.""
TRUE BUT this is not 2008. Illinois has 19 percent Evangelical Christians and 32 percent Catholics. And 2 percent Jews. That's 54 percent of the population. Many of whom vote.
CarmineD
Carmine.....Carmine.....Carmine....
What are we goig to do with you? It's alright to be loyal to your party but you have reached a point of "blind alliegence."
Romney is toast. Look for the presidential debates to change NOTHING!
I realize that you have convinced yourself that Romney is going to win and the polls out there that show Obama winning aren't true, but that's just about what I would expect from you....
Illinois will again (6th straight presidentail election...) go for Obama. That's his home state & all the polls show Illinois safely in the Democrat column...
You're statement about teachers not making good presidents is pure nonsense! Both Wilson & LBJ were teachers before running for political office. Historians rank both men near the top in presidential poll after presidential poll...
Oop's, I keep forgetting...you don't believe in polls, particularly if those polls show your guy getting his butt kicked! Ha! Ha! Ha!
Carmine.....something isn't true simply because you say it is....
You should have left that approach back in the 3rd grade!
Wether Obama is re-elected or not, he won't have to worry about the economy come Jan 2013. Good luck with the tax hikes.
Woodrow Wilson (28) was a terrible president. A dinosaur. He was anti-civil rights and women suffrage. His wife ran the country as the de facto president for his second term leading to the passage of the 25th Amendment.
WRT Lyndon B. Johnson (36), a democrat: He finished out Kennedy's term after Kennedy was assassinated. He chose not to run for a full term, many opined, because he knew he would lose. Recall: "I will not seek and if nominated will not serve...." And in fact the election went to Nixon in 1968, a Republican.
WRT Illinois, don't count your chickens before they hatch. That's why we have the elections.
Time will tell on the debates. Next week is D day. D for your guy is going "down." All history of debates tell us incumbent presidents, or their VP's, never fare well against the opposing party's nominee. Never.
CarmineD
FYI:
Republican candidate Wendell Willkie challenged President Franklin D. Roosevelt to a debate in 1940, but Roosevelt refused.
FDR, the golden tongue orator refused debates with off all persons: Willkie. FDR may have been a coward for saying no, BUT he understood political reality.
CarmineD
It is almost comically to hear some one "whistling as he walks thru the grave yard.
WOW, Carmine is as out of touch with reality as
romney.
Romney can NEVER RECOVER from all of the crazy
and out of touch statements he has made.
And everyday he makes more of them.
The BIGGEST FLIP-FLOPPER of all time.
Early voting is already starting in Iowa and
DEMOCRATS are flooding the polls.
And Obama is ahead in Iowa.
Carmine....
If you're going to talk history, please get your facts straight. Is that asking too much?
You said:
"....Lyndon B. Johnson (36), a democrat: He finished out Kennedy's term after Kennedy was assassinated. He chose not to run for a full term, many opined, because he knew he would lose."
Yes, LBJ finished out Kennedy's term but he then decided to run for re-election in 1964. He won by a HUGE LAND SLIDE. His Republican opponent was Barry Goldwater of Arizona...
In 1964, LBJ kicked Barry Goldwater's butt to the tune of 486 electoral votes to Goldwater's 52 electoral votes.
LBJ also carried 44 of the 50 states (along with the District of Columbia) and had 61.1% of the popular vote...
http://www.270towin.com/1964_Election/
Right-on El_Lobo....
Carmine is like all other desperate republicans
who just throw stuff out there and hopes nobody
notices.
These sorry republicans have never been this
desperate in their greedy lives.
Carmine said:
"Republican candidate Wendell Willkie challenged President Franklin D. Roosevelt to a debate in 1940, but Roosevelt refused.
FDR, the golden tongue orator refused debates with off all persons: Willkie. FDR may have been a coward for saying no, BUT he understood political reality."
Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha!
My little buddy continues to spin history & make-up what he doesn't know.
The hate that festers in Carmine's tiny little mine is unbelievable. He hates all things Democrat & refuses to give credit where credit is due...
Actually, FDR didn't accept Willkie's debate challenge because he didn't need to. FDR was clearly in charge of the race for the White House & to debate Willkie would have been counter productive...
The voters went to the polls in November of 1940 & voted in huge numbers for FDR. The results clearly shows that FDR was the choice of the American people.
In 1940:
FDR had 444 electoral votes & Willikie had a mere 82 electoral votes.
FDR carried 38 of the 50 states....
The election of FDR returned him to the White House for a 3rd term, something that had never happened before.....
Yep, Carmine continues to spin the facts & make-up the rest as he goes alone!
You're right on one account. I should have said LBJ chose not to run for a second term. On the rest you're burning daylight.
In today's history, successful presidents are those who win a second term and the person to whom they pass the baton, win election. Think Ronald Reagan.
CarmineD
"Carmine is like all other desperate republicans
who just throw stuff out there and hopes nobody
notices."
Mr. Teamster: That is an accurate definition of a liberal.
CarmineD
Carmine....
Get over yourself....You AGAIN got your butt kicked when it came to stating historical facts & using them to prove a point.....
LBJ ran for a 2nd term in 1964 & won by one of the greatest land-slides in presidential history....
He chose not to run in 1968. The fact that the American public was sharpely divided over the Vietnam War was a big factor in LBJ decision not to run.
If Robert Kennedy had not announced his candidacy in 1968 and the war had been going better, LBJ might have stayed in the race.
Could he have won? Would he have defeated "tricky Dick" Nixon?
We will never know, will we?
Historians give LBJ high marks for his presidency...particularly his passage of the Civil Right Bill (1964) and his passage of the Voting Rights Act (1965).
Throw in the Medicare bill; the "Great Society Program; environmental protection; federal aid to education; his "War on Poverty" and it becomes quite evident......his presidency was an outstanding one...
Carmine....something isn't right simply because you say it is.......Ha! Ha! Ha!
You should do what a smart guy would do....quit before you get even further behind in your attempt to match me with the use of historical facts.