1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Romney VP Pick -- Paul Ryan

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Moderator1, Aug 11, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Page 2 of 28
  1. doctorquant

    doctorquant Well-Known Member

    LOL
     
    doctorquant, Aug 11, 2012
    #13
  2. Michael_ Gee

    Michael_ Gee Well-Known Member

    I've made this point before, Moddy, but the pol sci research indicates that VP choices -- with one exception -- have had next to no influence on elections. They are maybe worth one or two points in the VP candidate's home state.
    The one exception was Palin. Crunching the exit polls indicates she may have cost McCain a couple of points. But he was gonna lose anyway.
    Some Democratic consultants ran a focus group back in the spring in which they tried to tie Romney to Ryan's budget. When Ryan's budget was described to the group, it simply refused to believe any pol would propose such a thing. That's the risk for Romney right there. What's the gain?
     
    Michael_ Gee, Aug 11, 2012
    #14
  3. The Big Ragu

    The Big Ragu Moderator Staff Member

    One other thing about what I posted and why Paul Ryan is the same-as-usual for me. ... he has his special interests, just like everyone who can buy the support to get to public office.

    I don't see how you call yourself a fiscal hawk and then twist yourself into a pretzel making the case that you are going to cut this, that and the other thing. ... but the pentagon / defense industry? Nooooooo. That's a non-starter.

    Talking about killing off Medicare, Social Security (don't know if he has) are great. But defense spending is such a large part of those $4 trillion plans we are putting out every year. If he -- or anyone was serious -- about reigning in our government and dropping our debt load, one of the first places they'd have to look at is what we spend on defense and be willing to have a philosophical conversation about why the amount we are spending is so damned important.

    It's another reason I can't take the Paul Ryans of the world seriously. He'll paint the "other side" as beholden to special interest spending and himself as fiscally responsible. But he's no different. He just has different horses picked for the race.
     
    The Big Ragu, Aug 11, 2012
    #15
  4. Moderator1

    Moderator1 Moderator Staff Member

    I'm getting the same thing. My interest would be piqued if a Democrat friend said, "Wow - GREAT PICK!! GAME ON!" or a Republican friend said, "Lord, what are we thinking?" Dems are going HA! and Repubs are going RAH!, which is about what you'd expect I guess.

    I do have one friend who thinks this is your 2016 President. Of course, Dems thought that about John Edwards in 2004!.

    If I had $1,000 to bet on this election, I have no idea where I'd put it. Depending on how this thread works, we may do another poll soon.
     
    Moderator1, Aug 11, 2012
    #16
  5. 93Devil

    93Devil Well-Known Member

    I really thought McDonnell from Virginia would have been a smart choice. Plays the GOP lines and has not done a bad job in Virginia. Other than that female vote thing, but if you are a woman voting GOP you might not care at all about that health stuff anyway.

    Ryan is just such an "all-in" type of choice that Romney might lose some of his moderate supporters because of the craziness of Ryan. Plus, as it was stated by TSP, who is Ryan moving over to the GOP that wasn't already there?

    And if these two do win, how the hell is Romney going to hold off the Ryan base? Is Romney really this hard core?
     
    93Devil, Aug 11, 2012
    #17
  6. Azrael

    Azrael Well-Known Member


    Roadmap!
     
    Azrael, Aug 11, 2012
    #18
  7. 93Devil

    93Devil Well-Known Member

    Ryan is so out there that he might actually motivate more Dems to get out and vote just to be sure he never sets foot in the White House. That said, he might get more GOPers to get out, but I think that base was coming out anyway.
     
    93Devil, Aug 11, 2012
    #19
  8. Michael_ Gee

    Michael_ Gee Well-Known Member

    To get all Machiavellian about it, taking a potential party rival out of his power base in the House and putting him into the vice-presidency is a very good way to neutralize said potential rival. But I don't think Romney is thinking that far ahead. He really seems to have no plan for this election except watching the economy suck and bitching about it plus keeping the Republican base happy. No matter how enthusiastic said base may get, they still only have the same number of votes.
     
    Michael_ Gee, Aug 11, 2012
    #20
  9. 93Devil

    93Devil Well-Known Member

    This pick also will bring the Koch Brothers out of the shadows and into the light of day if they were not already visible to most voters.
     
    93Devil, Aug 11, 2012
    #21
  10. The Big Ragu

    The Big Ragu Moderator Staff Member

    We have between now and November to see what happens to the world economic picture. There is too much potential meldown, similar to what led into the 2008 election, to handicap it well.

    My guesses.

    1) If we maintain a sort of status quo, Obama is fighting high unemployment, poor consumer confidence, some discontent with him not being the rock star people got swept off their feet by in 2008, etc. Romney is fighting being way less charismatic than Obama, being a rich guy, and painted into a corner as "out of touch," a la Bush I. That will make for a close election.

    2) If some major negative economic event happens -- and there are more bad things lined up than possible good things (I can't think of a good scenario right now) -- it can and will sandbag Obama. From Obama's perspective, he has to just be hoping that the Eurozone, the European banking system -- which is in deeper trouble than most people in the U.S. understand -- and the various central banks can keep manipulating things to put off what is going to be an inevitable mess. If they can buy him time through November, we will get the status quo scenario, which is a relative toss up election.

    This is largely why Tim Geithner was traveling around Europe last month, meeting individually with finance ministers trying to get them on board with a U.S.-centric get-with-our-program agenda. His program amounted to doing the short-sighted things that will buy time, but make the mess even worse -- with still no further plan for dealing with the inevitable.

    You know that things are pretty bad, and that Obama is very motivated, when the U.S. Treasury Secretary travels to a posh resort town on the German coast, to interrupt a vacation by the German Finance Minister for an urgent meeting to try to get him on board. That told me a lot.
     
    The Big Ragu, Aug 11, 2012
    #22
  11. 93Devil

    93Devil Well-Known Member

    Most voters are not digging into world economics. They are concerned about the environment, their taxes, healthcare and social security.

    Obama in a rout.
     
    93Devil, Aug 11, 2012
    #23
  12. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    Though I don't support his positions, and blanch at his breathless attempts to inject a strain of pseudo-intellectualism* into budgets and such, I've always generally liked Ryan. I might be completely naive, but I think he comes off really well on television. He's extremely outgoing and articulate - way more than Pawlenty, from what I've seen. Obviously he's going to be painted as the "Kill Medicare" guy, but, hell, at least the guy was willing to step out and acknowledge that cutting government may also mean cutting popular programs. Even if it was just for a moment, until the inevitable blowback.

    I know this is like announcing that the sky is blue, but clearly Romney needed a running mate with impeccable conservative credentials, in order to neutralize the skepticism about his. I'm no political fan of either guy, but at last this time around, I don't have to spend the entire autumn alternating between abject dread that an utter nimcompoop is a heartbeat away from the presidency, and blind rage at her mocking and general mean-spiritedness.**

    The GOP is running two generally competent individuals who I happen to disagree with. I'm willing to bet that Paul Ryan can handle a question about which newspapers he reads.

    * I don't mean that to be a thread-ending swipe. I think that there are very interesting academic arguments in favor of conservativism. But what Ryan and Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin and some others do, in my estimation, is name drop a few thinkers. I find it cynical.

    ** I acknowledge fully that Romney can be just as mean-spirited as she can. He's just more Machiavellian about it, through ads and Super PACs and the Koch Brothers, where as I had a visceral reaction every time Palin mimicked and mocked from the stump.
     
    Dick Whitman, Aug 11, 2012
    #24
Page 2 of 28
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page