Some simple observations about the Ryan pick.

[cgCali]

1. They rolled him out like Friday night trash. In the "political world", this is NOT something you do if you want to take charge of the news cycle for any amount of time. And on this particular weekend, especially when the Olympics are winding down and people are leaving on vacation, it's the equivalent of "hiding".

2. This, IMO, was a "hail Mary". Not as reckless as Palin, but a hail Mary none the less. Romney was getting beat down four ways from Sunday. There's NO WAY that the Romney team can possibly think this helps them with Democrats, Indy's or the few undecideds that remain, or is going keep him from getting the crap beat outta him anyway. What it really tells us is that (probably from internal polling) Romney was in more trouble in the base than has been let on.

3. With the Ryan pick, we keep hearing the word "ideas". That word is obviously very prominent in the Republican talking points. "Ryan is an 'ideas man'". Ok, whatever. But it's clear that Romney needed some sort of "idea", besides "Because of the economy, pick me!". So now, he's got a real idea on his team...even if it's a bad one.

4. And because of #2, it seems with this pick, that Romney's not really trying to win over anybody that's going to put him over the top anymore. Just trying to appease the far right (again), and NOT get creamed in a landslide. I think that's the only thing Romney is seeking to gain outta this, at this point.


The Obama campaign was already going to hang the Ryan budget around Mitt Romney's neck. All Romney did was provide them with the "real dude", in hopes that he would be able to explain it in a way that's more palatable to the American electorate the 3rd time around. Nice move.

 

[worldlymrb]

The Obama campaign was already going to hang the Ryan budget around Mitt Romney's neck. All Romney did was provide them with the "real dude", in hopes that he would be able to explain it in a way that's more palatable to the American electorate the 3rd time around. Nice move.

Kinda like how congress hung Obama's budget around his neck by defeating it 414-0?

 

[Jen]

1. The timing was perfect. Olympics winding down; there is time to settle it in before the Convention. Couldn't have been better timing.

2. Any choice would have been "something" to the Democrats. If not a Hail Mary then something else. Nobody cares what those who won't be voting for Romney/Ryan want to call it, so "Hail Mary" works.

3. Ryan has worked hard in the House to get a good budget started. He himself said that it's a "starting place", but the (lazy?) Democratic Senate not only didn't want to work with anything their own President put out there but didn't want to work with anything coming from the Republican House so they sat on it. But Ryan has plenty of ideas. Harry Reid just didn't want to deal with it.

4. Romney doesn't need to "win over" Democrats who are sold on Obama's losing tactics and lack of leadership abilities. Their vote was already set in stone. Romney and Ryan are strong on ideas and on direction. They speak for themselves. It was a choice of strength and didn't need to pander to anyone.

Obviously we see it in two different ways. Nothing wrong with that. Carry on.

Jen

 

[Bo-4]

The timing was awful.. Saturday morning? Sure way to not get anyone's attention. Monday or Tuesday would have been WAY better.

Yeah, we've all seen Ryan's "ideas" and 70% of the country didn't like them.

And he was clearly pandering to the hard right. Good luck reeling in votes from indies, mods, seniors and those near retirement.

Bad choice all the way around Jen. Ya should have gone with T-Paw or Portman. Chances are, the Munster boy won't even deliver Wisconsin.

1. The timing was perfect. Olympics winding down; there is time to settle it in before the Convention. Couldn't have been better timing.

2. Any choice would have been "something" to the Democrats. If not a Hail Mary then something else. Nobody cares what those who won't be voting for Romney/Ryan want to call it, so "Hail Mary" works.

3. Ryan has worked hard in the House to get a good budget started. He himself said that it's a "starting place", but the (lazy?) Democratic Senate not only didn't want to work with anything their own President put out there but didn't want to work with anything coming from the Republican House so they sat on it. But Ryan has plenty of ideas. Harry Reid just didn't want to deal with it.

4. Romney doesn't need to "win over" Democrats who are sold on Obama's losing tactics and lack of leadership abilities. Their vote was already set in stone. Romney and Ryan are strong on ideas and on direction. They speak for themselves. It was a choice of strength and didn't need to pander to anyone.

Obviously we see it in two different ways. Nothing wrong with that. Carry on.

Jen

 

[bdtex]

Ryan doesn't help Willard gain any ground with women or Hispanics and doesn't help in any state except Wisconsin,and not much there. Ryan also puts a face to that record low approval rating of Congress. Obama/Biden need to tether that albatross to Willard along with all the others that are dragging him down.

 

[worldlymrb]

4. Romney doesn't need to "win over" Democrats who are sold on Obama's losing tactics and lack of leadership abilities. Their vote was already set in stone. Romney and Ryan are strong on ideas and on direction. They speak for themselves. It was a choice of strength and didn't need to pander to anyone.

Obviously we see it in two different ways. Nothing wrong with that. Carry on.

Jen

LOL, yeah..right!

 

[KnotaFrayed]

1. They rolled him out like Friday night trash. In the "political world", this is NOT something you do if you want to take charge of the news cycle for any amount of time. And on this particular weekend, especially when the Olympics are winding down and people are leaving on vacation, it's the equivalent of "hiding".

2. This, IMO, was a "hail Mary". Not as reckless as Palin, but a hail Mary none the less. Romney was getting beat down four ways from Sunday. There's NO WAY that the Romney team can possibly think this helps them with Democrats, Indy's or the few undecideds that remain, or is going keep him from getting the crap beat outta him anyway. What it really tells us is that (probably from internal polling) Romney was in more trouble in the base than has been let on.

3. With the Ryan pick, we keep hearing the word "ideas". That word is obviously very prominent in the Republican talking points. "Ryan is an 'ideas man'". Ok, whatever. But it's clear that Romney needed some sort of "idea", besides "Because of the economy, pick me!". So now, he's got a real idea on his team...even if it's a bad one.

4. And because of #2, it seems with this pick, that Romney's not really trying to win over anybody that's going to put him over the top anymore. Just trying to appease the far right (again), and NOT get creamed in a landslide. I think that's the only thing Romney is seeking to gain outta this, at this point.


The Obama campaign was already going to hang the Ryan budget around Mitt Romney's neck. All Romney did was provide them with the "real dude", in hopes that he would be able to explain it in a way that's more palatable to the American electorate the 3rd time around. Nice move.

These are the "honest" "tough choice" "fiscally responsible" R&R at work.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/app...oods-how-ryan-was-kept-secret-from-the-press/

That description was used to describe Ryan immediately after the story about his sneaking around.

Palin was also the presumptive republican nominee's "game changer" grand stage entry just 4 short years ago. Like job and economic growth tax cuts, we've seen the delivery on this staging.

No doubt Democrats have done their share of staging too, but then Democrats are not trying to convince Americans, the nation was in fabulous shape when Obama took office, that he ran it into ruin. They'll simply be reminding people of the nameplate on the Oval office when the Wall Street Journal headline read "Worst crisis since '30's, no end in sight".

Anything before 1938 was more than 70 years before 2008, yet some seem to think that they can convince enough Americans that while they, "republicans", had the White House when that "worst crisis since he 30's" arrived, they know how to recover fully in less than 4 years from a crisis of that magnitude, not only that, but that they know how to keep another one from happening. All America has to do is to go back to the same policies that were in place when the "worst crisis since the '30's" happened and magically, it won't happen again and America will prosper and live happily ever after. Or at least the wealthiest Americans who refuse to help their nation and their fellow Americans in need will.

 

[Charcat]

Those were "simple" observations all right.

By the way, Bo, would you put out that cigarette?? It's so smoky over here I don't want to go outside....

 

[NightSwimmer]

I don't know if either Pawlenty or Portman would have been a significantly better choice for Romney, but there could have been no better choice than Paul Ryan for the Democrats -- for both the presidential election and the down-ticket campaigns.

And the news cycle... That's PR-101. They meant to bury it to the general public while trumpeting the announcement to the base via right-wing media outlets. It's too obvious.

 

[KnotaFrayed]

1. The timing was perfect. Olympics winding down; there is time to settle it in before the Convention. Couldn't have been better timing.

2. Any choice would have been "something" to the Democrats. If not a Hail Mary then something else. Nobody cares what those who won't be voting for Romney/Ryan want to call it, so "Hail Mary" works.

3. Ryan has worked hard in the House to get a good budget started. He himself said that it's a "starting place", but the (lazy?) Democratic Senate not only didn't want to work with anything their own President put out there but didn't want to work with anything coming from the Republican House so they sat on it. But Ryan has plenty of ideas. Harry Reid just didn't want to deal with it.

4. Romney doesn't need to "win over" Democrats who are sold on Obama's losing tactics and lack of leadership abilities. Their vote was already set in stone. Romney and Ryan are strong on ideas and on direction. They speak for themselves. It was a choice of strength and didn't need to pander to anyone.

Obviously we see it in two different ways. Nothing wrong with that. Carry on.

Jen

With regard to budgets, because of the debt ceiling agreement, certain budgetary actions will already take place. As far as anyone working across the aisle or not, that works both ways and was in part the reason for the debt ceiling deal provisions.

If Mitt Romney can use the excuse that showing more of his tax returns will only provide fodder for Democrats, then I suppose Democrats could make similar claims about presenting a budget for a vote (to say a budget has not been presented does not tell the whole truth, an unfortunate political tactic used quite often.)
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/aug/05/buddy-roemer/obama-submitted-budgets/

Does it make any of their tactics, t*t or tat or tat for t*t right or better than their opposition? I don't think so, but will voters elect someone that reveals something about them they don't want to hear? If Ryan is truly serious about reducing the debt, then why not combine added revenue with cuts?

When it comes to "Obama's failing tactics" we hear the buzz words, but see no facts relative to the events that occured before Obama took office which seem to be lost on outer space to those who keep talking about Obama's failing tactics or his ruining the nation, as if the nation hadn't endured the worst crisis in more than 70 years prior to Mr. Obama being elected, in part, if not in LARGE part because the worst crisis in 70 years had occurred with a "republican" in the White House, tax cuts in place and those in Congress who are always talking about the "tax and spend" Democrats, even as they (the "republicans") had and were supporting a "spend and cut revenue that could pay for the spending" set of policies.

You put a lot of faith in failing memory and/or the ignorance of enough Americans to believe the tall tale that Obama inherited something that was in good shape that he then took and ruined.

 

[Bo-4]

LOL, yeah..right!

Sometimes we agree huh Worldly.. uncanny! ;-)

 

[LeRoy_Was_Here]

I don't know if either Pawlenty or Portman would have been a significantly better choice for Romney, but there could have been no better choice than Paul Ryan for the Democrats -- for both the presidential election and the down-ticket campaigns.

LeRoy: Well, I wouldn't go THAT far. Rmoney Hood could've chosen Ted Nugent. Or Donald Trump. Or Michele Bachmann. Or Sarah Palin. Or Rick Perry. Or.....I think you get the idea....

 

[NightSwimmer]

LeRoy: Well, I wouldn't go THAT far. Rmoney Hood could've chosen Ted Nugent. Or Donald Trump. Or Michele Bachmann. Or Sarah Palin. Or Rick Perry. Or.....I think you get the idea....

Heh!

Guess you do have a point there!

 

[Bo-4]

Those were "simple" observations all right.

By the way, Bo, would you put out that cigarette?? It's so smoky over here I don't want to go outside....

Spoil Sport.. okay DAMN!!

Crap dude, only about two weeks until our epic battle in Michigan and Pete STILL hasn't made a QB decision? =:~\

 

[Charcat]

Crap dude, only about two weeks until our epic battle in Michigan and Pete STILL hasn't made a QB decision? =:~\

Still hoping for Patti (sp). Did you catch any of the preseason NFL? Wanted to watch Kellen, but I guess there wasn't much to watch. How about Doug Martin, though??!! He's gonna go places.

 

[cgCali]

Kinda like how congress hung Obama's budget around his neck by defeating it 414-0?

Did you even read/understand your own link? Probably not. Cons NEVER do. And never expect anyone else to, either.

The vote came as the House worked its way through its own fiscal year 2013 budget proposal, written by Budget Committee Chairman Paul D. Ryan. Republicans wrote an amendment that contained Mr. Obama's budget and offered it on the floor, daring Democrats to back the plan, which calls for major tax increases and yet still adds trillions of dollars to the deficit over the next decade.

Repubs purposely slipped a "poison pill" into it, that Dems would NEVER go for, to get their desired result. "It was UNANIMOUS!" LOL!!!

That was a pretty sloppy, easily picked apart try (also on your part), to "hang" something around President Obama's neck.

Better think twice before linking that again. Makes Ryan look worse than he already does.

 

[cgCali]

1. The timing was perfect. Olympics winding down; there is time to settle it in before the Convention. Couldn't have been better timing.

2. Any choice would have been "something" to the Democrats. If not a Hail Mary then something else. Nobody cares what those who won't be voting for Romney/Ryan want to call it, so "Hail Mary" works.

3. Ryan has worked hard in the House to get a good budget started. He himself said that it's a "starting place", but the (lazy?) Democratic Senate not only didn't want to work with anything their own President put out there but didn't want to work with anything coming from the Republican House so they sat on it. But Ryan has plenty of ideas. Harry Reid just didn't want to deal with it.

4. Romney doesn't need to "win over" Democrats who are sold on Obama's losing tactics and lack of leadership abilities. Their vote was already set in stone. Romney and Ryan are strong on ideas and on direction. They speak for themselves. It was a choice of strength and didn't need to pander to anyone.

Obviously we see it in two different ways. Nothing wrong with that. Carry on.

Jen

Yeah, right Jen. The "timing couldn't have been better" for most of the public....NOT. TO. NOTICE.

 

[cgCali]

The timing was awful.. Saturday morning? Sure way to not get anyone's attention. Monday or Tuesday would have been WAY better.

Yeah, we've all seen Ryan's "ideas" and 70% of the country didn't like them.

And he was clearly pandering to the hard right. Good luck reeling in votes from indies, mods, seniors and those near retirement.

Bad choice all the way around Jen. Ya should have gone with T-Paw or Portman. Chances are, the Munster boy won't even deliver Wisconsin.

You're right about that, Bo. Jen can spin it all she wants. Fact is, the "timing" of this was a tell-tale sign about the turmoil, and "internals", going on within the Romney camp.

They grabbed a lightning rod, and are going to try to make the best of it. Based on how inept this campaign has been so far, it will be very interesting to see.

 

[cgCali]

Ryan doesn't help Willard gain any ground with women or Hispanics and doesn't help in any state except Wisconsin,and not much there. Ryan also puts a face to that record low approval rating of Congress. Obama/Biden need to tether that albatross to Willard along with all the others that are dragging him down.

Absolutely, bd. What this pick does is solidify the votes he's NOT going to get.

And I don't even think it puts WI in "real play".

A good line I heard today: Ryan better "'define' himself before Obama does". LOL

 

[Zoar]

A Romney Ryan presidency:
1. Poor will be humanely left to starve, (it's better for all this way...)
2: Rich are smarter than everyone else, they get to order you to the back of the line and they get to say "It's my turn", even when it isn't.
3. Car elevators will be the new Black.
4. Gated communities shall be protected. OUTSIDE THE GATED COMMUNITIES THE POOR GET TO FIGHT OVER LIMITED RESOURCES and may the strongest survive.
5. Only wealthy people can vote starting in 2013.
6. The newest Supreme Court nominee tips the scales and Ratify That THE USA IS A CHRISTIAN NATION, and all Americans who refuse to acknowledge this get a YELLOW STAR TATOO on their foreheads7
7. INTERNMENT CAMPS get set up so the workers can more efficiently do manual labor for the rich: of course these camps are justly called "Freedom Camps".
8. Ann Coulter is made Secretary Of State