• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Paul Ryan, Help Or Hurt Romney

Will Ryan as VP help or hurt Romney win election?


  • Total voters
    120

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
112,903
Reaction score
60,358
Location
Sarasota Fla
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Well, it is being reported that Romney will announce Ryan tomorrow morning. While it is entirely possible that they are screwing with the media, it seems kinda unlikely and that Ryan will be the VP pick. Do you think the pick will help Romney, hurt him, have no real effect?
 
If DONE RIGHT (which I would suspect at this point they know they have to do), then I think it helps Romney.


But there is a big margin of error there, and no plan survives contact with the enemy. We will see how good Obama is at overcoming a Romney campaign run on an actual platform v "I'm not the guy with the 8% unemployment". There is alot of room there to run on Mediscare and the general notion that any big change done by Republicans is designed to help the rich at the expense of others.

I would say...... somewhere between 55/45 and 65/35 to help Romney v hurt him.
 
Last edited:
If he does it, he's just playing right into Obama's hands. Making it all about taxes and trickle down. Obama wins if that is what the election is about and that is all Ryan is about.
 
I doubt it will have very much effect. VP's usually have very little positive effect except for a small boost in their home state, which I doubt will be enough for Romney to win Wisconsin anyway. At the same time, even though I view him as less safe of a pick than Rob Portman for instance, I don't think its likely he'll hurt the campaign either.
 
If DONE RIGHT (which I would suspect at this point they know they have to do), then I think it helps Romney.


But there is a big margin of error there, and no plan survives contact with the enemy. We will see how good Obama is at overcoming a Romney campaign run on an actual platform v "I'm not the guy with the 8% unemployment". There is alot of room there to run on Mediscare and the general notion that any big change done by Republicans is designed to help the rich at the expense of others.

I would say...... somewhere between 55/45 and 65/35 to help Romney v hurt him.

Sorry, but its a bit ridiculous to say that Romney can run a campaign on "actual performance" as he has zero experience at POTUS. Granted he has a resume, but he has to convince people that success in the minor leagues translates to superior major league performance sufficient to transplant a guy with actual major league experience.

Now its ok to believe its so, but when it comes to qualifications to be POTUS, Romney has ZERO actual experience and Obama has 3.5 years of actual experience.
 
My granddaddy once took home an old birdbath a widow woman from church gave to him. We met over at his house to help lift it off the truck and put it in the yard wherever he wanted it. We got it positioned just right and my grandmama and great aunt declared it good and worthy, a thing of beauty for all to see. They never really liked it.

Later as we were sitting in the house talking and having coffee, my youngest brother, who was 6 or 7 at the time, peed on the birdbath. We saw him from the family room window. He peed all over it. LOL!

Nobody ever liked that birdbath but my granddaddy. My brother peeing on it didn't change a damn thing.
 
Last edited:
Sorry, but its a bit ridiculous to say that Romney can run a campaign on "actual performance" as he has zero experience at POTUS. Granted he has a resume, but he has to convince people that success in the minor leagues translates to superior major league performance sufficient to transplant a guy with actual major league experience.

Now its ok to believe its so, but when it comes to qualifications to be POTUS, Romney has ZERO actual experience and Obama has 3.5 years of actual experience.

Hey, that's not fair. Romney did manage to enact Obamacare in MA. So at least he's got that... Heh.
 
It would hurt him and the entire push for fiscal responsibility. Ryan is one of the smartest members of the House, holds a seat in the House that is needed to keep the left out, and is a little too young for a VP. He should pick Christie. He needs some balls in his campaign and it wouldn't hurt the Tea Party's hold on the House.
 
Sorry, but its a bit ridiculous to say that Romney can run a campaign on "actual performance" as he has zero experience at POTUS. Granted he has a resume, but he has to convince people that success in the minor leagues translates to superior major league performance sufficient to transplant a guy with actual major league experience.

Now its ok to believe its so, but when it comes to qualifications to be POTUS, Romney has ZERO actual experience and Obama has 3.5 years of actual experience.

I'm no Romney fan but I believe 4 years as a governor is a MUCH more applicable experience than 3 1/2 years as a Senator. No one can run against an incumbant POTUS and say "I have more Presidential experience than this guy" so that's a fallacy anyway. Romney has a wealth more of managerial experience than then Senator Obama did. So lets not argue about experience on this one. I think thats an argument that makes no sense. IMO, being Governor of a state is THE best preparation for the office of the President. Its basically the same job, just on a smaller scale. With all that being said, I still think Romney sucks, so whatever lol.
 
It would hurt him and the entire push for fiscal responsibility. Ryan is one of the smartest members of the House, holds a seat in the House that is needed to keep the left out, and is a little too young for a VP. He should pick Christie. He needs some balls in his campaign and it wouldn't hurt the Tea Party's hold on the House.

Further, I would LOVE to see a VP debate between Biden and Christie. Come on, tell me that would not be awesome. Two blow hards going at it. Christie would be calling Biden an idiot, Biden would tell him he's a really big fu***** guy, it'd be great!!!
 
I'm no Romney fan but I believe 4 years as a governor is a MUCH more applicable experience than 3 1/2 years as a Senator. No one can run against an incumbant POTUS and say "I have more Presidential experience than this guy" so that's a fallacy anyway. Romney has a wealth more of managerial experience than then Senator Obama did. So lets not argue about experience on this one. I think thats an argument that makes no sense. IMO, being Governor of a state is THE best preparation for the office of the President. Its basically the same job, just on a smaller scale. With all that being said, I still think Romney sucks, so whatever lol.

The problem here is that Romney has to run away from his record as governor or annoy the republican base.
 
Well, it is being reported that Romney will announce Ryan tomorrow morning. While it is entirely possible that they are screwing with the media, it seems kinda unlikely and that Ryan will be the VP pick. Do you think the pick will help Romney, hurt him, have no real effect?

Right now there is a lack of enthusiasm for Romney among both conservatives (though not to the same extent as McCain) and independents. Going on the theory independents won't be excited enough to turn out for either candidate, it helps Romney to draw in more conservatives. However, there is a chance Ryan will actually provoke independents to vote Democratic due to the perceived eccentricies and failures of the Tea Party.
 
Last edited:
The problem here is that Romney has to run away from his record as governor or annoy the republican base.
His problem, unlike President Obama, is that he doesn't embrace who he really is. President Obama lays it out there. He's a quasi-socialist, makes it known more and more everyday, and makes no bones about it. Romney should say, yes, I compromised with some Dems, but they were all I had. And that was a very different circumstance than this is. This President wants to say I would ruin the middle class, well, it can't get much worse than what it is. He says I would ruin it, he already has. So, that's "forward" for you. You can go "forward" and continue to ruin the middle class.
 
The problem here is that Romney has to run away from his record as governor or annoy the republican base.

Seriously though, wouldn't you love to see Christie and Biden debate? That would be like a WWE match.
 
Mr. Romney, I have a new nickname for you.

Bill Buckner.

 
If he does it, he's just playing right into Obama's hands. Making it all about taxes and trickle down. Obama wins if that is what the election is about and that is all Ryan is about.

This is the message that picking Ryan sends. More taking from the poor to give to the rich. Basically the question Romney is asking America right now is "How would you like another recession?" More jobs will go overseas. More homes will be foreclosed on. More "shared sacrifice" that will fall on the middle and lower classes. And more profits for the business elite.
 
I am curious to know if this news is accurate myself.

They keep saying that Portman's ties to the Bush Admin and economic policies will hurt Romney, and I could see that being the case. I think Portman seems similar to Romney in how he talks and gives speeches... not very energetic or exciting.

I can also see how Ryan would hurt Romney, so I think Pawlenty would be a safer choice... but for some reason, he isn't getting much support from the establishment.
 
Last edited:
Sorry, but its a bit ridiculous to say that Romney can run a campaign on "actual performance" as he has zero experience at POTUS

........

I'm going to assume you were just reading too fast; and missed that.

cpwill said:
We will see how good Obama is at overcoming a Romney campaign run on an actual platform

Now its ok to believe its so, but when it comes to qualifications to be POTUS, Romney has ZERO actual experience and Obama has 3.5 years of actual experience.

Romney has significantly more executive experience than Obama did when he ran to be President - and after 3.5 years of OJT, Obama hasn't demonstrated a particularly steep learning curve.
 
The problem here is that Romney has to run away from his record as governor or annoy the republican base.

But he is doing both...
 
In general I tend to think that the VP pick has less of an effect than people pretend. Even Sarah Palin probably got equal amounts of people to vote for and against McCain (though there was at least one poll showing that she helped more than she hurt him).

But if I *had* to pick I'd say this helps Romney, simply because undecideds are looking for an alternative to Obama and at least Ryan offers *something*. He's articulate enough to make a good case against the inevitable smears, too. Even if some independents are somewhat uneasy about the ideas behind it, I'm willing to bet they're more uneasy about repeating the last 4 years.

Plus it'll help conservatives get behind the "Massachusetts Moderate".
 
Well, it is being reported that Romney will announce Ryan tomorrow morning. While it is entirely possible that they are screwing with the media, it seems kinda unlikely and that Ryan will be the VP pick. Do you think the pick will help Romney, hurt him, have no real effect?

Romney is such a lousy candidate that it will not matter who he picks as his VP. When Romney loses 2012 the die hard party-tards will probably try to blame Paul Ryan just like many die hard party-tards tried to blame Sarah Palin for McRino losing 08 instead of accepting the fact that they chose a ****ty candidate.
 
Last edited:
Boy that second option is a bit misspelled. :p
 
If he does it, he's just playing right into Obama's hands. Making it all about taxes and trickle down. Obama wins if that is what the election is about and that is all Ryan is about.

If Romney picked someone that was a social conservative you'd say the same thing.
 
Romney is such a lousy candidate that it will not matter who he picks as his VP. When Romney loses 2012 the die hard party-tards will probably try to blame Paul Ryan just like many die hard party-tards tried to blame Sarah Palin for McRino losing 08 instead of accepting the fact that they chose a ****ty candidate.

Such a great argument full of facts and insight... :doh

The good thing about Ryan is that he is a budget guy. The Republican ticket has a solid plan for our 8.3% unemployment rate. Thats more than you can say for Obama and voters see that.
 
Back
Top Bottom