Mitt Romney Debates Himself

Submitted by: ledzeppeloyd 4 years ago in

Damn, which of these guys am I supposed to vote for?
There are 45 comments:
Male 17,512
patchgrabber: He has said how the cuts would be done, through congress, through the ways and means committee. He`s set the goal, like a leader does, and he`s leaving it to the congress to meet that goal.

The minutia of how and what is cut is not the role of the president, that`s the role of congress. The president is supposed to lead, Obama hasn`t lead, that`s why we`ve been so screwed over the last 4 years.
0
Reply
Male 5,811
@CJ: You are so full of sh*t. What, exactly, were the contradictions Obama`s made that outnumber Romney`s? And the fact that you aren`t even defending him, merely using some logical fallacy to distract the argument, speaks volumes. Keep on supporting a flip-flopping mystery man who hasn`t told you *how* he`s going to do any of the outrageous things he says he`s going to. Anything for the elephant, huh CJ?
0
Reply
Male 17,512
FoolsPrussia: It is possible for someone to be `pro-life` and not want the total elimination of abortion, in all cases.

Also there are no `abortion bills`, pro or con, in the house or senate right now, which explains his earlier statement.
0
Reply
Male 3,445

0
Reply
Male 2,357
@HolyGod

[quote]Obama took office in a recession he didn`t cause. OF COURSE growth has been slow. I`m just showing there has been growth.[/quote]
In the case of these stats, Obama actually "benefits" from coming in during a recession year. In essence, it allows us to create an inflated showing of growth.

Wouldn`t it stand to reason that, if Obama is pulling us out of a recession (as in, we`ve already hit the lowest point), we SHOULD see "explosive" growth? We certainly have seen this type of growth in a "private" market - stocks. I doubt you`ll deny that both DOW and NASDAQ have recovered well.

Why then, if a "private" market can explosively recover from a recession, do the other stats fail to explode in a similar manner?

Consider this, in Bushes first term, these improved: GDP per capita, NASDAQ, DOW, Unemployment, Change in Jobs, Ave. Earnings, Employed People, and New Home Builds.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
That`s still fewer contradictions than Obama has made in the last 4 years.
0
Reply
Male 14,334
He did somehow get Mass with a surplus budget his last two years. Then we elected the democrat known as Dolittle Patrick and we`re back in debt.....

0
Reply
Male 4,396
"Nope but the inability to tell the truth probably lies in our flock of Kennedy lemmings."

"I a did not kill that woman, Mrs Kopechne"
0
Reply
Male 8,132
HumanAction

"Therefore, if this stat is going to be used as evidence that Obama is making good economic choices, then logic dictates that the same person MUST agree that Bush made better economic choices."

1. Obama took office in a recession he didn`t cause. OF COURSE growth has been slow. I`m just showing there has been growth.

2. Of all the stats I posted, that one is probably the least useful. Wages go up under every president. Wages go up fairly constantly if only based on inflation.
0
Reply
Male 8,132
cobrakiller

"I was never a big fan of fairy tales."

You know what? Maybe that is why the religious folks are behind mitt. Christians have the ability to accept absurd lies on faith alone.
0
Reply
Male 14,334
[quote]So he governed Massachusetts from Detroit?[/quote]

Nope but the inability to tell the truth probably lies in our flock of Kennedy lemmings.
0
Reply
Male 4,396
"He`s from Detroit."

So he governed Massachusetts from Detroit?
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]I`m not sure it`s fair to say Bush did better in his first term[/quote]

I don`t think so either, but going with those calculations alone that is a conclusion you could draw. I don`t think it would be a very honest one though. Bush was a horrible President, he wasted most of his political capital on two gloriously unjustified wars when he should`ve directed it towards FM and FM and the housing bubble they were creating.
0
Reply
Male 4,396
Paul Ryan`s convention speech was littered with lies. He had the fact checkers working overtime. Wonder if he will flip-flop too in tomorrows debate to try and throw Biden off. Should be a fun one to watch. The VP debates get a little more heated.
0
Reply
Male 14,334
[quote]What is it with the Massachusetts boys and their inability to tell the truth?[/quote]

He`s from Detroit.
0
Reply
Male 3,445
`This means Bush had a growth of 21% in his first term followed by 7% in his second. So logically Bush did better than Obama in his first term. But then he wasted political capital on the wars rather than halting the housing bubble, then there was the bailouts.`

I`m not sure it`s fair to say Bush did better in his first term. He was working with a functional economy when he came into office, which Obama wasn`t. Not trying to blame Bush or anything, just stating the facts.

I think the media coverage of the debate has really made Obama`s performance out to be worse than it was. Sure, he didn`t perform well. But that was mainly due to his poor opening and miserable closing statements. He did alright in between, though he missed some golden opportunities to call out Romney for position reversals and distortions. Unfortunately, I think the media can often have a stronger effect on the public than the actual candidates` words.`
0
Reply
Male 4,396
So which Mitt Romney is the liar? They both can`t be telling the truth. He`s a bigger flip-flopper than Kerry. What is it with the Massachusetts boys and their inability to tell the truth?
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]I am trying to show that these types of statistics are silly as they are not accurate portrayals of the economic state.[/quote]

Ah, okay then. Of course and I actaully gave a similar response to those stats.
0
Reply
Male 2,357
For instance, here is one that I`ve seen:

AVERAGE HOURLY EARNINGS
Worst point 2009: $22.03
Today: $23.58
Source: tinyurl.com/9tu5d8r

However, using the same data, if the current month were November, 2008, I could do this:

AVERAGE HOURLY EARNINGS
Worst point 2006: $20.06
Today: $21.93
Source: tinyurl.com/9tu5d8r

You`ll see that Obama`s increase is roughly 7.04%. However, the Bush increase is 9.3%. Therefore, if this stat is going to be used as evidence that Obama is making good economic choices, then logic dictates that the same person MUST agree that Bush made better economic choices.
0
Reply
Male 2,357
@Cajun247: I think you misunderstood me...

First off, I wasn`t suggesting that the Bush administration was "good" for the economy. Also, I tried to carefully word my sentence to show that I was comparing a 25.8% increase over two terms (12.9%/term) to an estimated 11.5% increase over one term. Again, the reasoning was not to convince anyone that Bush was greater than Obama economically.

I have recently noticed someone posting a great many stats that pick an arbitrary point in time (usually "today") and making a comparison to a "worst point". This is being done as an attempt to show that the current administration is positively affecting the economy.

I am trying to show that these types of statistics are silly as they are not accurate portrayals of the economic state.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
@HumanAction

Usually I agree with you but I`m afraid I`m gonna nitpick here. Bush achieved that growth over two terms. So for each term that goes to around 12.2% (square root of 1.258). A better example is if we look term by term. In 2005 NomGDP/Capita was $42.5K.

This means Bush had a growth of 21% in his first term followed by 7% in his second. So logically Bush did better than Obama in his first term. But then he wasted political capital on the wars rather than halting the housing bubble, then there was the bailouts.
0
Reply
Male 7,611
The biggest positive in the favor of Obama [at least in my view] is realism. Obama keeps speaking about "we" rough of a ride ahead of us, but we can get there. He then tells us how he plans to get there. Romney/Ryan [because lets face it, on this account they are interchangeable] keep giving this fairy tale about how "they" are going to fix everything without telling us how.

I was never a big fan of fairy tales.
0
Reply
Male 2,357
The problem with the Obama plan is that it is a gamble with the US economy (and, by extension, the world economy). Obama`s plan ASSUMES that it will be successful and that the costs (massive debt increases) will DEFINITELY be offset by the gains (modest economic improvement).

The problem I see is that we have had a truely massive increase in debt over the past several years yet only very modest economic improvements. Honestly, stats showing such gains or losses are meaningless over the course of several years since those are bounds within normal market fluctuation.

Consider this: George Bush raised the GDP per capita from 36k to 45.3k during his 8 years; this is a 25.8% increase over two terms. Obama over his single term has raised it from 45.3k to a generous estimate of 50.5k (2012 est); this is an 11.5% increase. By this logic, Bush was better for the economy than Obama.
0
Reply
Male 7,378
Republicans rally behind the worst candidate in the history of candidates and the call democrats stupid.
0
Reply
Female 1,515
Romney`s BS is so blatant its as if he has no idea wtf he is doing. Oh wait, he doesn`t. Ya`ll need leaders educated in science, economics, simple math.
0
Reply
Male 5,811
From usual I-A-B right wingers: *[quote]cricket[/quote]*
0
Reply
Male 10,855
On top of which looking at Nominal GDP per capita, unemployment, govt debt, AND deficit it`s not better than when Obama took office.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]We`ve been making progress. Things are getting better. We are headed in the right direction. Let`s stay the course[/quote]

That statement will ring hollow when govt debt obliterates all of those gains.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]Raise Defense spending 2.1 trillion over 10 years.[/quote]

I agree, wasteful and actually makes us more vulnerable.

[quote]Cut PBS and Obamacare.[/quote]

Former should be low priority. The latter on the other should be replaced with a law that penalizes states for enforcing interstate insurance bans and converts MediCare into gauranteed contribution plan.

[quote]Cut all taxes 20%[/quote]

Go to a 15% rate on all income minus deductions. My idea is rather than having a libraries worth (I really mean that) of tax code, simply put if you can justify an expense as the cost of producing a good or service then it can reduce your taxable income. This way wages and salaries get deducted from corporate earnings and thus AREN`T double taxed.
0
Reply
Male 8,132
Cajun247

"no real path forward."

Here is what I have heard from Obama: "We`ve been making progress. Things are getting better. We are headed in the right direction. Let`s stay the course"

Here is what I have heard from Romney: "I`m going to fix everything. I am. I can`t tell you how. But I am."

I`ll go with option A. That seems like substance to me.
0
Reply
Male 5,811
@HG: It`s ok, Ryan said he ran the numbers and it`s good. I mean, what sane individual would blindly give support to someone who has not revealed any specifics of his plans to reduce the debt? You should be content with PBS, because Romney has said that he won`t cut some of the biggest entitlements and deductions on the books. But at least you have an across the board 20% tax cut to look forward to with absolutely no negative consequences whatsoever.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]I mean should the presidential debate turn into a round of liar liar pants on fire?[/quote]

Might as well, the debate has been entirely devoid of substance. Hell the idea that someone "wins" the debate undermines the intrinsic purpose of debate. That is to unravel the truth. Sure they might of presented some facts, but no real path forward.
0
Reply
Male 8,132
All I have heard from Romney

Raise Defense spending 2.1 trillion over 10 years.
Cut PBS and Obamacare.
Cut all taxes 20%

Then some how MAGICALLY balance the budget and lower the debt.

Raise spending and lower revenue. I`m pretty sure that is always how Republicans think you lowered the debt. Probably why Reagan tripled the debt.

Such a joke. Yet every 4 years suckers rally to the Republican cry of "fiscal responsibility". Look at Reagan, Bush, and Bush 2. Now look at Romney. The fiscal conservative is dead.

In the last 3 decades Republicans had 20 years in power. THEY RAISED THE DEBT EVERY YEAR. Please stop being suckers.
0
Reply
Male 8,132
Cajun247

"Obama could`ve at least pointed that out."

I seem to recall Obama saying something about Romney changing what he had said and Romney said "No I didn`t". What was he supposed to say "Yes you did"?

I mean should the presidential debate turn into a round of liar liar pants on fire?
0
Reply
Male 10,855
Yeah not a Romney supporter either, he really is a weak-kneed flip-flopper.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
@tatrip

Q = Romney will cut taxes on the top 1%
E = Romeny will cut taxes on the bottom 99%

"I will not reduce the taxes paid by high income americans" therefore not Q

"We`re going to cut taxes on everyone, including the top 1%" therefore Q && E

(not Q) && Q therefore W

W = Romney does NOT have logically coherent a tax plan.

Of course the assumption being Romney is going to do what he says.

Oh wait...
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]Hard to prepare for that.[/quote]

Obama could`ve at least pointed that out.
0
Reply
Male 3,445
This video could have been ten minutes long. Not mentioned are Romney`s "evolving" stance on abortion and climate change.
0
Reply
Male 8,132
tatripp

"I will not reduce the taxes paid by high income americans"

"We`re going to cut taxes on everyone, including the top 1%"

"I reject the idea that I don`t believe in more teachers"

"He says we need more teachers, did he not get the message? It`s time for us to cut back on government"

"preexisting conditions are covered in my plan"

"we can`t play the game that way, you have to get insurance when you`re well"

HOW are two of those not contradictions?
0
Reply
Male 8,132
WHICH IS WHY OBAMA WAS SO CONFUSED.

He showed up to debate Mitt on Mitt`s stances and then Mitt had different stances. Hard to prepare for that.
0
Reply
Male 1,196
two of those weren`t even contradiction.
0
Reply
Male 2,711
@Bredlom
Politics in America has most definitely been getting worse... much, much worse.
0
Reply
Male 41
Im not sure if politics is getting worse or Im just noticing how drated it is now
0
Reply
Male 5,811
I think that video could have been much longer. I swear when they say they`re "rebooting" Romney`s campaign they do a full format and reinstall. I suppose it would be hard to argue against someone who doesn`t even seem to have viewed his own webpage.
0
Reply
Male 2,384
Link: Mitt Romney Debates Himself [Rate Link] - Damn, which of these guys am I supposed to vote for?
0
Reply