• 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
TurtleDude said:
in 2008? the general election

Ron Paul has some good ideas He is a bit nutty personally and his foreign policy is a bit too naive for my taste but he's far far far better than Obama

so tell me what would Mr Paul's position on taxes be
Click to expand...

I don't agree with him entirely either, and I have sort of lost a lot of my favor in him since 2008. Overall, I still think he is has strong principles and is predictive and therefore better than Romney. His foreign policy was great. He was against the neocons and Bush Admins foreign policy, and because of that policy, Bush is one of the least popular presidents in recent history.

I don't understand why you'd hate his foreign policy. Why should we invade countries and then put on some type of international welfare and financial support? You don't support welfare for your own citizens, but corporate and Iraqi welfare are acceptable, right?
 
TurtleDude said:
That is a silly comment. I am older than Luntz and most likely had my views before he did. So your claims are idiotic. maybe I influenced him. I was calling the estate tax a death tax about the time my grandfather died in 1969

but you seem to think that those who oppose welfare socialism and the death tax are some small little group

that is laughable
Click to expand...

Your age is irrelevant. The fact is a simple one: every post you have ever made here using the neologism DEATH TAX was made well after Luntz & Faris issued their marching orders to the sycophants of corporate America. Every single one of them.

They would be proud of you and maybe even reward you with a biscuit.
 
SheWolf said:
I don't agree with him entirely either, and I have sort of lost a lot of my favor in him since 2008. Overall, I still think he is has strong principles and is predictive and therefore better than Romney. His foreign policy was great. He was against the neocons and Bush Admins foreign policy, and because of that policy, Bush is one of the least popular presidents in recent history.

I don't understand why you'd hate his foreign policy. Why should we invade countries and then put on some type of international welfare and financial support? You don't support welfare for your own citizens, but corporate and Iraqi welfare are acceptable, right?
Click to expand...

that is a rather simplistic view of the foreign policy. I don't believe in the almost complete isolationist position he advocated. I oppose lots of the handouts we give other nations and I cannot see why we have so many soldiers in Germany

however I see a value in supporting some countries and I see a value of having a military presence in an area that has immense strategic value
 
haymarket said:
Your age is irrelevant. The fact is a simple one: every post you have ever made here using the neologism DEATH TAX was made well after Luntz & Faris issued their marching orders to the sycophants of corporate America. Every single one of them.

They would be proud of you and maybe even reward you with a biscuit.
Click to expand...

that is idiotic


Just because I joined this BOARD after those two used the term does not mean I adopted the term from them

and btw how could I have used the term here before they did since this board started less than 10 years ago?

I was using that term before you ever heard of them
 
Last edited:
TurtleDude said:
that is idiotic


Just because I joined this BOARD after those two used the term does not mean I adopted the term from them

I was using that term before you ever heard of them
Click to expand...

Another example of you making claims using your own personal history or life as the only support for it. So typical. And so intellectually dishonest in debate.
 
MarineTpartier said:
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.
Click to expand...

You know you really should contact the Romney campagn with those ideas, from the polls lately they could use the help. There's nothing I would like more than Romney?Ryan showing their true colors.
Obama's win will become a landslide.
 
TurtleDude said:
read what you wrote again-it doesn't make sense

and so what part of Paul's tax policy did you like?
Click to expand...

Again, individuals can get refunds from the IRS in excess of the taxes they paid. Somebody can even get thousands of dollars in a refund and pay zero taxes to the IRS.

Paul's tax policy never seemed a central issue to his message to me, at least not in 2008. He wants to return to the gold standard and he doesn't like the Federal Reserve. His arguments about the Fed can be interesting at times or seem thought provoking, but those were never big issues to me. I wanted him to win the primary, and I would have liked to see him win a few states this time.

As for his economic principles, while he is principled, I honestly don't believe if elected his policies would entirely go through the congress and house as he'd like. I always felt that way.

Paulonomics: Ron Paul
 
Oh btw there is no citation to the claim that the term "death tax" is a neologism as claimed by wiki. For all i know a far lefty put that phrase in there. Since anyone can edit that definition it is most likely an opinion by someone who worships the death tax. Nonetheless the term "death tax" does not even meet the definition of a neologism because even the IRS was using that term to refer to some estate taxes.

according to that same article, Faris started advocating that conservatives refer to the estate tax as a death tax in the era when Newt was speaker-long before this board started but 15 years before the Yale Political Union debated

RESOLVED: the Death Tax should be repealed. This took place shortly after Reagan was sworn into office making the date approximately February 1981. more than a decade before Faris was relevant

I was one of the lead speakers on the affirmative
 
AreteCourage said:
This pick will hurt Romney for one reason:

The independent voter.

Paul Ryan is way too far right to sway most independents.
Click to expand...

Paul Ryan has won seven elections in a Democrat district. The last time the people of Paul Ryan's district voted for a Republican for President was 1984.

Woops?

His stance on medicare, and social security make him a darling for the far right
Click to expand...

Well his courage and willingness to grab the third rail certainly earn him alot of fans; but call me curious - given that premium support for Medicare was first proposed under the Clinton Administration, are you arguing that Bill Clinton was a darling of the far right, or should have been?
 
TurtleDude said:
that is a rather simplistic view of the foreign policy. I don't believe in the almost complete isolationist position he advocated. I oppose lots of the handouts we give other nations and I cannot see why we have so many soldiers in Germany

however I see a value in supporting some countries and I see a value of having a military presence in an area that has immense strategic value
Click to expand...

What is so scary about not intervening in the rest of the world and flexing military strength and presence constantly? You would think strengthening your own country at home, would be a better in terms of self sufficiency and showing the world strength. America killed Saddam and ended the Taliban under Bush, gave Iraq trillions of dollars and nearly financially collapsed. To want to continue on that path is ridiculous.
 
iguanaman said:
You know you really should contact the Romney campagn with those ideas, from the polls lately they could use the help. There's nothing I would like more than Romney?Ryan showing their true colors.
Obama's win will become a landslide.
Click to expand...
You make the assumption that everyone is pleased with President Obama. The dude is entering Dubya level job approval bro. I honestly believe that if Romney would distance himself MORE from President Obama, he would be better. The starker the contrast, the better IMO. I'm not saying that because its what I want. I'm saying it because the polls show that. Everytime President Obama runs some attack ad making Romney look as sleazy as he is, Romney loses more votes. Everytime President Obama runs an ad that shows Romney supported similar policies that he did (Romneycare comes to mind), he loses more votes.
 
SheWolf said:
What is so scary about not intervening in the rest of the world and flexing military strength and presence constantly?
Click to expand...

umm.... collapse of the globally integrated economy accompanied with the deaths of potentially millions of innocents?
 
cpwill said:
Paul Ryan has won seven elections in a Democrat district. The last time the people of Paul Ryan's district voted for a Republican for President was 1984.

Woops?



Well his courage and willingness to grab the third rail certainly earn him alot of fans; but call me curious - given that premium support for Medicare was first proposed under the Clinton Administration, are you arguing that Bill Clinton was a darling of the far right, or should have been?
Click to expand...

A simple wiki search reveals that Paul Ryan's district was carried by George W. Bush in 2004 and voted for Obama in 2008...there's not much evidence to support the idea that this district in particular is any more "Democrat" than it is "Republican," at least at first glance. But if you're privy to other information that supports your case that this is a "Democratic" district then please enlighten us.

Wisconsin's 1st congressional district - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Well now that is interesting because it is in direct contradiction to what I have thus far heard. I'll do some rooting around :)
 
cpwill said:
umm.... collapse of the globally integrated economy accompanied with the deaths of potentially millions of innocents?
Click to expand...

So if the US military runs the global economy and prevents death... lol
 
StillBallin75 said:
A simple wiki search reveals that Paul Ryan's district was carried by George W. Bush in 2004 and voted for Obama in 2008...there's not much evidence to support the idea that this district in particular is any more "Democrat" than it is "Republican," at least at first glance. But if you're privy to other information that supports your case that this is a "Democratic" district then please enlighten us.

Wisconsin's 1st congressional district - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

I said before that I don't think they'll win Mass or Wisconsin, and I highly doubt they'll win Florida because of all the seniors.
 
iguanaman said:
You know you really should contact the Romney campagn with those ideas, from the polls lately they could use the help. There's nothing I would like more than Romney?Ryan showing their true colors.
Obama's win will become a landslide.
Click to expand...

I am sure pollsters are eager to the run the numbers on how Romney's polling after the VP announcement, so we'll get the actual results soon. Probably within a week, and the results will be heavily discussed, as usual.
 
SheWolf said:
I am sure pollsters are eager to the run the numbers on how Romney's polling after the VP announcement, so we'll get the actual results soon. Probably within a week, and the results will be heavily discussed, as usual.
Click to expand...

I'm betting that we learn soon that polls are liberal conspiracies.... Again.
 
teamosil said:
I'm betting that we learn soon that polls are liberal conspiracies.... Again.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't doubt if Romney doesn't get a bounce.... maybe, maybe he'll get a bounce after the RNC or maybe he'll never get bounce. Could you image Romney running this campaign with no bounce? I don't see him preforming well against Obama in the debates either.
 
SheWolf said:
I wouldn't doubt if Romney doesn't get a bounce.... maybe, maybe he'll get a bounce after the RNC or maybe he'll never get bounce. Could you image Romney running this campaign with no bounce? I don't see him preforming well against Obama in the debates either.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the debates are going to be a disaster for Romney... He barely made it through the primary debates, and those were against people who basically agree with his whole platform.

I get the strong sense that Romney just basically feels that he deserves to be president. He went out and made lots of money like he was told he was supposed to and he always pulls the skin off his fried chicken... And so it's pretty much owed to him. And he just finds it so frustrating that people are making him jump through all these hoops.... Obama will make him melt into an angry, gaffe-a-rific, pool in the debates.

He won't get a bounce in the polls. He might get a bounce in enthusiasm from his base, but I suspect he'll actually take a small drop in the polls in the immediate term. The real impact though is that he can no longer steer things off talk about taxes and trickle down. That is now permanently front and center. And that is the worst possible topic to have front and center for Romney.
 
Last edited:
Too soon the tell. IMHO an up front boost then no difference.
 
Ryan allows Romney to drive an ideological argument, the same argument that Obama seems to want to make, but with less clarity about the labels.

And in a battle between obviously liberal vs obviously conservative, the conservative should win.
 
SheWolf said:
So if the US military runs the global economy and prevents death... lol
Click to expand...

Close. The US Military is the linchpin for the global economy, and prevents much death.
 
cpwill said:
Well now that is interesting because it is in direct contradiction to what I have thus far heard. I'll do some rooting around :)
Click to expand...

Alrighty, so.

Over the coming days, you’re likely to hear all about how “purple” Paul Ryan’s home congressional district is. In past presidential races, Wisconsin’s blue-collar first congressional district was a solidly Democrat district until 1994; it was won twice by Bill Clinton. Yet in 2008, while Obama was pulling 66 percent of the vote in the City of Kenosha, 67 percent in Janesville, and 70 percent in Racine, Ryan received a solid 52 percent, 59 percent, and 45 percent in those same cities, respectively...

Wisconsin redistricted in 2012 in a way that gave Ryan a slightly more solid GOP base with which to work. According to a memo recently distributed by pollster Gene Ulm, Ryan currently leads his Democratic challenger, former small-business owner Rob Zerban, by a 61 percent to 33 percent margin. This number almost matches the 61-32 favorable/unfavorable rating Ryan’s constituents give him....

Mitt Romney currently leads Ryan’s home district by a 53 percent to 41 percent margin over Barack Obama...
Click to expand...

The first district has recently shifted to become more solidly GOP, but at least in 1992 and 1996 it voted Democrat at the Presidential level, and Democrats held the House seat from there until 1994.

Obama carried Ryan's district in 2008 - though Ryan won handily as well with 64%, meaning that a significant portion of Obama voters split their ticket for him.

It looks like the district did vote for Bush in 2004, but danged if I see who they voted for in 2000.

:shrug: either way, the point remains that Ryan isn't exactly from a solid-red district, and he's used to winning over large numbers of independents and moderate democrats.
 
cpwill said:
Alrighty, so.



The first district has recently shifted to become more solidly GOP, but at least in 1992 and 1996 it voted Democrat at the Presidential level, and Democrats held the House seat from there until 1994.

Obama carried Ryan's district in 2008 - though Ryan won handily as well with 64%, meaning that a significant portion of Obama voters split their ticket for him.

It looks like the district did vote for Bush in 2004, but danged if I see who they voted for in 2000.

:shrug: either way, the point remains that Ryan isn't exactly from a solid-red district, and he's used to winning over large numbers of independents and moderate democrats.
Click to expand...

That was all before his budget to enhance the top 2% at the expense of everyone else....you keep blowing past that ryans plan was rejected by most of america...TWICE...the CBO ripped it apart every economist said it was a candy store for the rich that put all the cost for their tax cut on the middleclass....you cant just ignore the truth and just talk about what you want it to be will
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom