• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

For real though: What is Romney's Path to Victory?

Sticks and stones. The guy with the 47% approval rating is going to win on his appeal. You guys are firing on all cylinders this evening. Keep fighting the good fight though. I will conceed to pirate that getting rid of Bernanke is a solid idea.
 
HoosierDeac said:
jhmd- can you articulate what Romney's policy is to create jobs and reduce unemployment? I'm asking seriously, I just don't think I've heard what the actual plan is.
Click to expand...

I agree that Romney could be much better with his message. He has been skittish on specifics, and that's a failure. What he should be saying is that a Romney administration will begin with removing the economic sword of Damacles that is Obamacare and the President's garbled and noncomittal message on tax policy to install certainty and predictability: two things missing since Obama was sworn in on Obama's campaign promises and then immediately crammed through Stimu-fail, Obamacare AND (and?) extended the Bush tax cuts. Well, which is it?

If I'm Romney, I offer another option besides rudderless fail. Explain what every job creator in the country has known for a long time: until you remove the chilling effect of Obamacare and the President's failures to lead on economic issues, you're going to get more "jobless" than "recovery". People aren't dumb. They know that what's been tried isn't working. Tell them that you'll remove the barriers by simplifying the tax code with flattening out the rates and cutting spending across the board.

If I'm Romney, I would look straight in the eyes of the American labor force and tell them that the first economic bill I would send to Congress would flatten the rates between capital gains, dividends and wage income. There is no reason their effort should be taxed at a higher rate than gains on ownership.

P.S. What is Obama's plan?

P.S.S. Better yet, what is his record? Still 8%? Worse than when he took office? FOUR. YEARS. LATER., shouldn't that matter?
 
Last edited:
PirateDeacon said:
I think the best chance Romney has is if he plays up the failures of Ben Bernanke and the Federal Reserve. Obama will win this election because of his wider appeal. It's unfortunate that the Republicans didn't give their star candidate a shot (Ron Paul).
Click to expand...

That is a sure way to have Obama win a landslide mandate.
 
jhmd2000 said:
I agree that Romney could be much better with his message. He has been skittish on specifics, and that's a failure. What he should be saying is that a Romney administration will begin with removing the economic sword of Damacles that is Obamacare and the President's garbled and noncomittal message on tax policy to install certainty and predictability: two things missing since Obama was sworn in on Obama's campaign promises and then immediately crammed through Stimu-fail, Obamacare AND (and?) extended the Bush tax cuts. Well, which is it?

If I'm Romney, I offer another option besides rudderless fail. Explain what every job creator in the country has known for a long time: until you remove the chilling effect of Obamacare and the President's failures to lead on economic issues, you're going to get more "jobless" than "recovery". People aren't dumb. They know that what's been tried isn't working. Tell them that you'll remove the barriers by simplifying the tax code with flattening out the rates and cutting spending across the board.

If I'm Romney, I would look straight in the eyes of the American labor force and tell them that the first economic bill I would send to Congress would flatten the rates between capital gains, dividends and wage income. There is no reason their effort should be taxed at a higher rate than gains on ownership.
P.S. What is Obama's plan?

P.S.S. Better yet, what is his record? Still 8%? Worse than when he took office? FOUR. YEARS. LATER., shouldn't that matter?
Click to expand...

How does lowering tax rates help with the debt then?
 
PirateDeacon said:
Explain Lucy
Click to expand...

Lucy?

Otherwise sure. Ron Paul is a fringe candidate due to his wacky ideas. Those appeal to a small portion of the population, and that small portion is pretty adamant about the correctness of their position, but it is a fringe level of support that isn't shared by most of the country.

That's why Ron Paul has never gotten close to the nomination. He just isn't that popular and his message doesn't resonate with enough people.
 
A4PwTiTCUAA7Ip7.jpg
 
jhmd2000 said:
I agree that Romney could be much better with his message. He has been skittish on specifics, and that's a failure. What he should be saying is that a Romney administration will begin with removing the economic sword of Damacles that is Obamacare and the President's garbled and noncomittal message on tax policy to install certainty and predictability: two things missing since Obama was sworn in on Obama's campaign promises and then immediately crammed through Stimu-fail, Obamacare AND (and?) extended the Bush tax cuts. Well, which is it?

If I'm Romney, I offer another option besides rudderless fail. Explain what every job creator in the country has known for a long time: until you remove the chilling effect of Obamacare and the President's failures to lead on economic issues, you're going to get more "jobless" than "recovery". People aren't dumb. They know that what's been tried isn't working. Tell them that you'll remove the barriers by simplifying the tax code with flattening out the rates and cutting spending across the board.

If I'm Romney, I would look straight in the eyes of the American labor force and tell them that the first economic bill I would send to Congress would flatten the rates between capital gains, dividends and wage income. There is no reason their effort should be taxed at a higher rate than gains on ownership.

P.S. What is Obama's plan?

P.S.S. Better yet, what is his record? Still 8%? Worse than when he took office? FOUR. YEARS. LATER., shouldn't that matter?
Click to expand...

You might want to check your numbers.
 
ChrisL68 said:
Lucy?

Otherwise sure. Ron Paul is a fringe candidate due to his wacky ideas. Those appeal to a small portion of the population, and that small portion is pretty adamant about the correctness of their position, but it is a fringe level of support that isn't shared by most of the country.

That's why Ron Paul has never gotten close to the nomination. He just isn't that popular and his message doesn't resonate with enough people.
Click to expand...

That is simply not true, there were multiple polls that indicated he competed very well with Obama in national polls.
 
PirateDeacon said:
That is simply not true, there were multiple polls that indicated he competed very well with Obama in national polls.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Gingrich and Paul had some polls where they were relatively close before anybody had to seriously consider voting for either of them. Either one would have gotten absolutely crushed in a general election.
 
The reason the compare unemployment now to January 2009 isn't getting much play is because unemployment was increasing at a rate of 0.4% per month in January 2009.
 
ChrisL68 said:
Yeah, Gingrich and Paul had some polls where they were relatively close before anybody had to seriously consider voting for either of them. Either one would have gotten absolutely crushed in a general election.
Click to expand...

Those two don't even belong in the same sentence. What might seem radical to some is actually just an unfortunate reality.
 
PirateDeacon said:
Those two don't even belong in the same sentence. What might seem radical to some is actually just an unfortunate reality.
Click to expand...

Yes, Gingrich has actually been in a position of government leadership before.
 
ChrisL68 said:
The reason the compare unemployment now to January 2009 isn't getting much play is because unemployment was increasing at a rate of 0.4% per month in January 2009.
Click to expand...

Is it still January 2009, or have four years passed?
 
ChrisL68 said:
Yes, Gingrich has actually been in a position of government leadership before.
Click to expand...

"Government leadership": when you work with the other party to balance the budget, reduce spending and create economic growth.

cf. Holding public office, cf. the Obama presidency.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top