Mitt, Winning Friends & Influencing Allies

Off Topic Politics and World Issues
21

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:<<< Don’t get me wrong, I think he would probably be better than Obama. While I believe Obama was handed a poison chalice by the economic events that preceded his election, he has looked very out of his depth at times. Other times not. What I found personally (with my very limited knowledge in the area) to be his undoing was that abortion of a health care bill.

As for Mitt, i understand what you’re saying and I don’t disagree that he has substantially more experience than Obama (prior to his current four years, since there’s no experience like doing an actual job) had. Hell, maybe even more than he currently has. But there is an air of elitist detachment to him that I just battle to see past and find even mildly engaging. I don’t think he’s a bad guy, and as far as being a Mormon go, while I think it’s as much a ‘religion’ in the old school term as scientology, I personally know tons of Mormons through my family and have found them all to be to be solid and empathetic human beings. I have no issue with that side.
As for the Olympic gaffe, it’s not that he wasn’t more qualified than most to comment, even if the Winter Oly in Salt Lake is a far cry from Summer Games in London. I was more really surprised by the out of the blue low pressure nature of the gaffe is all. Hence my comment in the OP.

If I have to think back to the last election, with the benefit of hindsight I think McCain would have made a better president than Obama and currently than both the current picks. Just my opinion.

As for Rommney’s business acumen, from what I understand, he started with the silver spoon (not his fault) and continued from there, in a quite a narrow field of endeavor. I’m not sure how that relates to what he will do in the WH as far as being business friendly goes. But that’s a tough one to gauge if you don’t live in the US.

My .02c

Edit: I still fail to see how they are the best you guys can muster over there, on both sides. All partisan dickwagging aside. Also just an opinion. Maybe I’m wrong…[/quote]
Not bad dude. Overall, not bad at all. As an aside and for the record I have said many times here that committed Mormons are patriotic to the core and historically are first in line to fight when this country has needed defending. Serious Mormons, of which Romney is not one, are politically right down the Reagan line. I think it would be a tossup for would be more nauseating to watch. Romney or McCain. [/quote]

Hell, even non US born Mormons, which are the only kind I know in Africa, are US patriots hehehe. They have ALL ‘pilgrimaged’ to Salt Lake City and are all pro US in every way possible!
And I know a good 40 or so very, very well. I think they all qualify for what you describe a ‘serious’ Mormons, though you would have to explain what you mean a bit more for me to say with certainty.

22

Neuromancer:

Great insights! (and your Profile Pic just cracks me up!)

Ultimately the President’s undoing will be the Economy. Anything else will just be dirt thrown on the coffin (including the Health Care Bill).

I agree with you about being handed a “poison chalice”; but I disagree that McCain, Palin or Reagan himself could have overcome the economic maelstrom that has affected not only the U.S. but the World. I think that the President and his advisors DID head off what could have been even worse economic circumstances if they had not made some of the moves they made; but you can’t “prove a negative”. In other words, would the “Let 'em BURN!” approach that many have advocated would have put us in a better place economically. I doubt it.

And you will never have anyone throwing you a party because things are “Less bad…”.

As part of my own “Political Maturation”, my hope is that the GOP gains the White House and a Supermajority in the House and Senate. Then I’ll be able to accurately assess whether “another way” truly IS better; or whether it’s all just a bunch of political smoke and mirrors.

We’ll see.

Mufasa

23

[quote]Mufasa wrote:<<< I think that the President and his advisors DID head off what could have been even worse economic circumstances if they had not made some of the moves they made; but you can’t “prove a negative”. In other words, would the “Let 'em BURN!” approach that many have advocated would have put us in a better place economically. I doubt it. >>>[/quote] I’ll just go ahead and refrain from responding to this =] [quote]Mufasa wrote:<<< As part of my own “Political Maturation”, my hope is that the GOP gains the White House and a Supermajority in the House and Senate. Then I’ll be able to accurately assess whether “another way” truly IS better; >>>[/quote]A super majority in either body of the legislative branch is about as likely as John Conyers accurately quoting the constitution. Also the GOP, despite what my friend ZEB is bound to say is is different only in degree and not in foundational ideology in practice. They had the Executive AND legislative branches to themselves for what, 6 years and blew the opportunity to actually show you anything. They were definitely NOT anything like this flagrantly Marxist horde occupying our halls of government now, but it was as I say, A matter of degree and not fundamental difference.

24

The Founding Fathers.

To me, Neuro, the most amazing (and often overlooked) thing to me about them…was to have the ability, means and influence to seize absolute Power and Control …and not do it.

The other (and related to the first) is their focus on a greater good beyond themselves.

In today’s Politics none of them would stand a chance.

Mufasa

25

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Neuromancer:

Great insights! (and your Profile Pic just cracks me up!)

Ultimately the President’s undoing will be the Economy. Anything else will just be dirt thrown on the coffin (including the Health Care Bill).

I agree with you about being handed a “poison chalice”; but I disagree that McCain, Palin or Reagan himself could have overcome the economic maelstrom that has affected not only the U.S. but the World. I think that the President and his advisors DID head off what could have been even worse economic circumstances if they had not made some of the moves they made; but you can’t “prove a negative”. In other words, would the “Let 'em BURN!” approach that many have advocated would have put us in a better place economically. I doubt it.

And you will never have anyone throwing you a party because things are “Less bad…”.

As part of my own “Political Maturation”, my hope is that the GOP gains the White House and a Supermajority in the House and Senate. Then I’ll be able to accurately assess whether “another way” truly IS better; or whether it’s all just a bunch of political smoke and mirrors.

We’ll see.

Mufasa

[/quote]

I agree that economically, the die was cast prior to the election and no one could have done much different or much better in the four years that followed. It was just too big, too systemic a rupture in the system. As for MacCain, the choice of Palin was a howler. She had no business being one aneurysm away from the Oval Office hot seat, was a relief he didn’t win on that score alone. But i do think he’s a hell of a decent man, and appeared to have a handle to how the political world worked. I could be wrong, regardless, it’s water under the bridge.

Obama and his crew at this point just look and sound bereft of ideas. Fatigued. At least by what I read and see.

Do you see it differently?

26

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
The Founding Fathers.

To me, Neuro, the most amazing (and often overlooked) thing to me about them…was to have the ability, means and influence to seize absolute Power and Control …and not do it.

The other (and related to the first) is their focus on a greater good beyond themselves.

In today’s Politics none of them would stand a chance.

Mufasa[/quote]

It was a perfect storm of the people involved, the time in history and the geography and other factors.
I agree with you, not only would they not stand a chance politically today, but today’s society just doesn’t kick out that caliber of individuals in the upper echelons that could have a grasp on the levers of power.

Perhaps revolutions ARE the only way for the status quo to change adequately enough to see the kind of progress most of us might believe is necessary.

But in the western world we’re all far too comfortable. Even the poor.

Edit: Comfortable and comfortably numbed by tv, movies , iphones, playstations and all the other conveniences of modern life

27

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
The Founding Fathers.

To me, Neuro, the most amazing (and often overlooked) thing to me about them…was to have the ability, means and influence to seize absolute Power and Control …and not do it.

[/quote]

George Washington could easily have done that. Something along those lines was attempted by the first Democratic VP Aaron Burr after he killed Alexander Hamilton. He plotted against and was arrested for treason by Jefferson in a bid to establish his own fiefdom. An inauspicious start for the party of slavery, segregation, organised crime and statism.

28

No…I’m with you, Neuro.

I think ANYONE in office now would be out of ideas because some things will 1) take some time to come back (e.g. housing) 2) are part of an overall paradigm shift (e.g. our switch from manufacturing (in general) to “information, technology and data” leading to an inadequately trained work force and jobs that will NEVER return 3) a European Economy in complete disarray and 4) a Middle East that is as unstable as it’s been in years.

The net result is that despite ones best efforts; these are all things that just have to unfold the way that they will unfold.

Yes…I think that there may be things that can lessen the impact; but again, it’s all about things being “Less Bad…” instead of good or great.

Mufasa

29

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

As for Rommney’s business acumen, from what I understand, he started with the silver spoon (not his fault) and continued from there, in a quite a narrow field of endeavor. I’m not sure how that relates to what he will do in the WH as far as being business friendly goes. But that’s a tough one to gauge if you don’t live in the US[/quote]

You are mistaken my friend. Romney inhereted a modest amount of money from his father’s estate along with his siblings. He then immediately donated every penny to his alma mater! Not many people know this so don’t feel bad.

I agree no one but the wealthy could have done it. Also no one like the wealthy were so motivated.

30

"…Perhaps revolutions ARE the only way for the status quo to change adequately enough to see the kind of progress most of us might believe is necessary…

“…But in the western world we’re all far too comfortable. Even the poor…”

You hit it on the head, Neuro.

TRUE revolutions don’t happen when people are relatively comfortable.

Mufasa

31

[quote]pat wrote:
His biggest problem is that he is about as lovable as a shoe box. Romney is not in control of this situation. This is obama’s to lose. If obama loses I am going to laugh hard, because Romney is just not threat. It would be tantamount to obama getting fired. Obama talks pretty and people fall for that shit. Romney may be able to keep up with substance, but he doesn’t have a pretty mouth and that’s going to kill him in the end.

I give obama a 60% chance at re-election. He has fucked up a lot, but people in this country has short memories. All he has to do is promise everybody a smart phone and they will vote for him… However, the conservative base may just be invigorated enough to unseat him if his based is not stirred up, so there’s a chance.

You’re right about one thing, Mitt has very little margin for error. Shit like the above he cannot afford.[/quote]

Hey, Pat…

There has been a lot of disagreement on “Whose Election it is to lose” on the Forum…but I’m still in the Camp that “It’s Romney’s to lose…” (keeping in mind an important point that TBolt made about an incumbent President having many advantages…)

With all that Romney has been “given” (a LOUSY economy, both in the U.S. and WorldWide); a “wounded” President whom has “lost his narrative”; and a fired-up Conservative Base that absolutely DESPISES the President to their very core…

If he DOESN’T win, he never will…and should run for President of the IOC or something…(can you “run” for President of the IOC? But you get my point…)

Mufasa

32

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I think the term conservative has been bastardized. It is not a social term , it is a fiscal term and Obama may be more fiscally conservative than Romney [/quote]

Thanks Dr. PoliSci.

33

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

I had also heard about his donating the inheritance to the alma mater, props to him. But we also all know that making cash and raising capital is fairly easy if you are part of a moneyed circle. Just like us mere mortals will raise capital from people that know us quite easily if we have a decent reputation, just the numbers differ. Also not his fault.
[/quote]

So you are saying he had a better opportunity to create wealth because of various connections and I agree with you. But having an opportunity DOES NOT also give you the ability. There are plenty of people who actually did inherit wealth, unlike Romney, that actually blew it. Also let’s remember that Romney helped create wealth for a lot of people, not just himself, through Bain Capital. And I’ll take anyone who went out in the private sector and made himself 300 million dollars over a community organizer any day.

Obama actually hates what is needed to turn this contry around and that is B U S I N E S S growth. And we know that Romney not only has embraced it but understands it as well.

34

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

I had also heard about his donating the inheritance to the alma mater, props to him. But we also all know that making cash and raising capital is fairly easy if you are part of a moneyed circle. Just like us mere mortals will raise capital from people that know us quite easily if we have a decent reputation, just the numbers differ. Also not his fault.
[/quote]

So you are saying he had a better opportunity to create wealth because of various connections and I agree with you. But having an opportunity DOES NOT also give you the ability. There are plenty of people who actually did inherit wealth, unlike Romney, that actually blew it. Also let’s remember that Romney helped create wealth for a lot of people, not just himself, through Bain Capital. And I’ll take anyone who went out in the private sector and made himself 300 million dollars over a community organizer any day.

Obama actually hates what is needed to turn this contry around and that is B U S I N E S S growth. And we know that Romney not only has embraced it but understands it as well. [/quote]

I think I’ve pretty much agreed with almost all you have said here before on this thread. I don’t know if he can turn it the country around, but I do think a new approach is required (if he turns out to have a ‘new approach’ will only be evident if he’s elected and over time), because team obama is out of ideas and out of energy at this point,IMO. Even if I don’t agree with the Obama ‘hating’ anything that is good for the country. I don’t buy that, sound like partisan character assassination…

35

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Neuromancer:

Great insights! (and your Profile Pic just cracks me up!)

Ultimately the President’s undoing will be the Economy. Anything else will just be dirt thrown on the coffin (including the Health Care Bill).

I agree with you about being handed a “poison chalice”; but I disagree that McCain, Palin or Reagan himself could have overcome the economic maelstrom that has affected not only the U.S. but the World. I think that the President and his advisors DID head off what could have been even worse economic circumstances if they had not made some of the moves they made; but you can’t “prove a negative”. In other words, would the “Let 'em BURN!” approach that many have advocated would have put us in a better place economically. I doubt it.

And you will never have anyone throwing you a party because things are “Less bad…”.

As part of my own “Political Maturation”, my hope is that the GOP gains the White House and a Supermajority in the House and Senate. Then I’ll be able to accurately assess whether “another way” truly IS better; or whether it’s all just a bunch of political smoke and mirrors.

We’ll see.

Mufasa

[/quote]

Are you forgetting the type of economy that Ronald Reagan inherited? Interest rates were 18%, inflation was sky rocketing and there were gas lines. On top of all that the country was in a mental funk.

Fast forward four years and not only did Ronald Reagan pull us out of an economic mess, but the country was inspired once again! A really good President CAN make a difference.

Obama had four years to spur business growth by actually helping small business (as they hire 65% of all new employees in the workforce). He has both the House and Senate democratic and what did he do? He passes a health care bill instead of putting the country back to work! Which also happens to be the biggest tax hike in US history.

OBAMA IS CLUELESS!

36

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Mufasa wrote:<<< I think that the President and his advisors DID head off what could have been even worse economic circumstances if they had not made some of the moves they made; but you can’t “prove a negative”. In other words, would the “Let 'em BURN!” approach that many have advocated would have put us in a better place economically. I doubt it. >>>[/quote] I’ll just go ahead and refrain from responding to this =] [quote]Mufasa wrote:<<< As part of my own “Political Maturation”, my hope is that the GOP gains the White House and a Supermajority in the House and Senate. Then I’ll be able to accurately assess whether “another way” truly IS better; >>>[/quote]A super majority in either body of the legislative branch is about as likely as John Conyers accurately quoting the constitution. Also the GOP, despite what my friend ZEB is bound to say is is different only in degree and not in foundational ideology in practice. They had the Executive AND legislative branches to themselves for what, 6 years and blew the opportunity to actually show you anything. They were definitely NOT anything like this flagrantly Marxist horde occupying our halls of government now, but it was as I say, A matter of degree and not fundamental difference.
[/quote]

By lowering taxes 5% for all Americans George W. Bush created almost 4 million new jobs!

THAT is what republican leadership created.

Oh I know the press went on to vilify Bush and his name is now a dirty word because of that. But, economically he was far better than Obama.

And don’t even compare the left wing democratic party to the republican party you only show your political ignorance.

There are glaring difference on social, economic and foreign policy do you really need me to rattle them off? Over a long period of time do you honestly think that we’d be in this mess if the republicans controlled both the House, Senate and the White House?

Come on Trib…you gotta be smarter than that.

37

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

As for Rommney’s business acumen, from what I understand, he started with the silver spoon (not his fault) and continued from there, in a quite a narrow field of endeavor. I’m not sure how that relates to what he will do in the WH as far as being business friendly goes. But that’s a tough one to gauge if you don’t live in the US[/quote]

You are mistaken my friend. Romney inhereted a modest amount of money from his father’s estate along with his siblings. He then immediately donated every penny to his alma mater! Not many people know this so don’t feel bad.

I agree no one but the wealthy could have done it. Also no one like the wealthy were so motivated.
[/quote]

Watch how motivated they are if Obama wins and gets his way and taxes them into oblivion.

You want to see another depression?

Obama 2012!

38

[quote]Mufasa wrote:

TRUE revolutions don’t happen when people are relatively comfortable.

Mufasa
[/quote]

And when half the country pays no taxes, and one in five American families receive some sort of federal government assistance, and there are 43 million people on food stamps, and they keep extending unemployment…I’d say they’re pretty comfortable.

Obama’s dream of America is almost here one more term and he’ll have it.

39

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

I had also heard about his donating the inheritance to the alma mater, props to him. But we also all know that making cash and raising capital is fairly easy if you are part of a moneyed circle. Just like us mere mortals will raise capital from people that know us quite easily if we have a decent reputation, just the numbers differ. Also not his fault.
[/quote]

So you are saying he had a better opportunity to create wealth because of various connections and I agree with you. But having an opportunity DOES NOT also give you the ability. There are plenty of people who actually did inherit wealth, unlike Romney, that actually blew it. Also let’s remember that Romney helped create wealth for a lot of people, not just himself, through Bain Capital. And I’ll take anyone who went out in the private sector and made himself 300 million dollars over a community organizer any day.

Obama actually hates what is needed to turn this contry around and that is B U S I N E S S growth. And we know that Romney not only has embraced it but understands it as well. [/quote]

I think I’ve pretty much agreed with almost all you have said here before on this thread. I don’t know if he can turn it the country around, but I do think a new approach is required (if he turns out to have a ‘new approach’ will only be evident if he’s elected and over time), because team obama is out of ideas and out of energy at this point,IMO. Even if I don’t agree with the Obama ‘hating’ anything that is good for the country. I don’t buy that, sound like partisan character assassination…
[/quote]

I don’t hate Obama, I hate his policies. I actually pity Obama as he is a clueless ideologue who is bound by his core beliefs to constantly do the wrong thing!

40

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

I had also heard about his donating the inheritance to the alma mater, props to him. But we also all know that making cash and raising capital is fairly easy if you are part of a moneyed circle. Just like us mere mortals will raise capital from people that know us quite easily if we have a decent reputation, just the numbers differ. Also not his fault.
[/quote]

So you are saying he had a better opportunity to create wealth because of various connections and I agree with you. But having an opportunity DOES NOT also give you the ability. There are plenty of people who actually did inherit wealth, unlike Romney, that actually blew it. Also let’s remember that Romney helped create wealth for a lot of people, not just himself, through Bain Capital. And I’ll take anyone who went out in the private sector and made himself 300 million dollars over a community organizer any day.

Obama actually hates what is needed to turn this contry around and that is B U S I N E S S growth. And we know that Romney not only has embraced it but understands it as well. [/quote]

I think I’ve pretty much agreed with almost all you have said here before on this thread. I don’t know if he can turn it the country around, but I do think a new approach is required (if he turns out to have a ‘new approach’ will only be evident if he’s elected and over time), because team obama is out of ideas and out of energy at this point,IMO. Even if I don’t agree with the Obama ‘hating’ anything that is good for the country. I don’t buy that, sound like partisan character assassination…
[/quote]

I don’t hate Obama, I hate his policies. I actually pity Obama as he is a clueless ideologue who is bound by his core beliefs to constantly do the wrong thing![/quote]

I was referring to you saying he hates America. Do you really believe that?

EDIT: Disregard this post ZEB, I was mistaken in what you said, another poster set me right.

My apologies.