|
|
Post by Ardbeg... innit on Sept 24, 2012 6:28:56 GMT -6
I have spent the last few weeks avoiding the discussions here in a deliberate attempt to see if anyone would have anything good to say about Romney.
I have read the recent threads, and have counted exactly 0 positive comments on why Romney should be President.
Yes, I get it, I understand that "he is not Obama". Unfortunately that argument doesnt work, the Dems tried that before, in 2004.
Romney is simply a Republican version of John (he's not Bush) Kerry. Couldnt find many positives to run on with him either, and its no surprise that like Kerry, Romney holds his party's record for flip-flopping on their records.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tex on Sept 24, 2012 6:59:51 GMT -6
I was waiting on you to say something nice about him. What a disappointment that has been.
Romney understands economic growth. He left Massachusetts a better place. He has a track record for turning around failed enterprises, and God knows, we need that after BO's failed tenure.
|
|
|
|
Post by ♥ COVID-19♥ on Sept 24, 2012 7:57:08 GMT -6
By the time he left office in MA, his approval ratings were dismal -- he knew this, which is why he didn't run for re-election because he realized he would've lost. RE: turning around failed enterprises: If he can run on The Olympics, why was it so bad that Obama had a background as a community organizer? Or was that just a double-standard?
|
|
|
|
Post by Tex on Sept 24, 2012 8:22:54 GMT -6
The bottom line here is the same as our neighborhood. This one will vote for Obama, this one for Romney. If someone ch-ch-changes their vote from last time, it will be because their experience led them to do so, not because any sales pitch I might put on. Here in the hood, I will tell my neighbors who I'm voting for if they ask, but I intend to be on speaking terms with them after the election, no matter who wins.
The only neighbors here who have changed their support from last time are two gay guys down the street who supported Obama last time and this time say they like neither and will not vote. Joe is the only one I can think of on the board who has changed his
mind.
I think it is fair to say that Obama is a far different candidate this election than last.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ardbeg... innit on Sept 24, 2012 8:37:23 GMT -6
I was waiting on you to say something nice about him. What a disappointment that has been. Romney understands economic growth. He left Massachusetts a better place. He has a track record for turning around failed enterprises, and God knows, we need that after BO's failed tenure. I did... I said he was the Republican version of John Kerry. Are your expectations for me so much higher that you would be looking for nice words about Romney while giving none of your own to Obama? |
|
|
|
Post by Tex on Sept 24, 2012 8:51:43 GMT -6
Obama is the Democratic version of the Houston Astros.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ardbeg... innit on Sept 24, 2012 9:04:35 GMT -6
That tale will be told on November 6. If Romney gets 300+ electoral votes, I will gladly concede your point.
But what specifically is Romney campaigning on that trips your trigger? THAT is what I mean about "positive statements". You say that he "understands economic growth", but that is ENTIRELY within the confines of microeconomics (relative to the size of the total US economy). He has been successful in a world where you win by taking away from others. The entire concept that he "grew the economy" while in the business environment is ridiculous, he grew he business by making others smaller or wiping them out completely.
|
|
|
|
Post by New Mama on Sept 24, 2012 9:11:48 GMT -6
Massachusetts job growth grew during his tenure. factcheck.org/2012/06/obama-twists-romneys-economic-record/The Olympics is not his singular business achievement, only one of many. Creating and growing Bain Capital is noteworthy. After all he was a co-founder and grew the company impressively until he left in 1999. He grew the company from about 12 employees to 115 with over $4billion under management including companies like Toys R Us, Staples, Dunkin Donut, Sports Authority, Burger King, Sealy, The Weather Channel and Domino's Pizza. A reported 80% success during his tenure. Did he have some stinkers? Sure, but he knows how to grow a business and has created jobs. He is for free enterprise not some sort of redistribution agenda. He knows that being green and alternative energy ispreferredd but he is also a realist and will work with industry to answer our energy needs HERE and NOW, not somepipe-dreamm down the road 10 or 15 years. That industry will come in it's own time. We can't wish it here. In the meantime our reliance on oil overseas is a National threat. Considering my options, he the best choice for me. |
|
|
|
Post by New Mama on Sept 24, 2012 9:13:17 GMT -6
That tale will be told on November 6. If Romney gets 300+ electoral votes, I will gladly concede your point. But what specifically is Romney campaigning on that trips your trigger? THAT is what I mean about "positive statements". You say that he "understands economic growth", but that is ENTIRELY within the confines of microeconomics (relative to the size of the total US economy). He has been successful in a world where you win by taking away from others. The entire concept that he "grew the economy" while in the business environment is ridiculous, he grew he business by making others smaller or wiping them out completely. He also took many new and or failing companies and made them succeed. |
|
|
|
Post by Tex on Sept 24, 2012 9:23:35 GMT -6
That tale will be told on November 6. If Romney gets 300+ electoral votes, I will gladly concede your point. But what specifically is Romney campaigning on that trips your trigger? THAT is what I mean about "positive statements". You say that he "understands economic growth", but that is ENTIRELY within the confines of microeconomics (relative to the size of the total US economy). He has been successful in a world where you win by taking away from others. The entire concept that he "grew the economy" while in the business environment is ridiculous, he grew he business by making others smaller or wiping them out completely. "...successful in a world where you win by taking away from others.." This is wrong on so many levels. The "zero sum" static view of the economy is not reality. Obama believes it and look at the results. I'm not all pumped up - you are correct. I believe it will take a decade of competent leadership to get us even to where we were when hope and ch-ch-change came to town. |
|
|
|
Post by ♥ COVID-19♥ on Sept 24, 2012 9:24:53 GMT -6
Romney was also master of The Leveraged Buyout. The Leveraged Buyout is a legalized version of what the mob calls a bust-out. Basically, when you own a business and wind up owing a lot of money to the mob, they take over your business and essentially bust it out in order to get repaid; this causes you to go out of business, but at least they get paid back.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ardbeg... innit on Sept 24, 2012 11:13:38 GMT -6
That tale will be told on November 6. If Romney gets 300+ electoral votes, I will gladly concede your point. But what specifically is Romney campaigning on that trips your trigger? THAT is what I mean about "positive statements". You say that he "understands economic growth", but that is ENTIRELY within the confines of microeconomics (relative to the size of the total US economy). He has been successful in a world where you win by taking away from others. The entire concept that he "grew the economy" while in the business environment is ridiculous, he grew he business by making others smaller or wiping them out completely. "...successful in a world where you win by taking away from others.." This is wrong on so many levels. The "zero sum" static view of the economy is not reality. Obama believes it and look at the results. I'm not all pumped up - you are correct. I believe it will take a decade of competent leadership to get us even to where we were when hope and ch-ch-change came to town. Tex, in microeconomics, it is almost 100% a zero sum game. The fact is that it is probably 99.9% zero sum and 0.1% "real growth". Company A and Company B are competing in the same marketplace to make widgets. Company A sells more widgets than Company B, Company A hires more people, most likely from Company B because they are losing in the widget marketplace. If there is an overall growth in the net number of jobs it is due to external forces not related at all to what Company A and Company B are doing, or could possibly hope to do. In fact if Company A is winning the widget market, it is probably due to efficiencies that allows them to use FEWER workers, not more. NO, in the microeconomics of Bain Capital, if Romney actually created any REAL jobs, they were very few. |
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Jake on Sept 24, 2012 12:16:17 GMT -6
Gordon, I'm glad you are not running the business world. The most successful businessmen invent new markets, they don't cannibalize old markets. Steve Jobs was a master of creating new products that nobody ever thought of before. You might try to argue that the iPhone took business away from earlier, non-smart phones. But it vastly expanded a market that barely existed beforehand.
As for Romney, I've stated many times that the only thing I like about him is that he is "not Obama." Sadly, that is all I've got this time round.
|
|
|
|
Post by ♥ COVID-19♥ on Sept 24, 2012 12:21:52 GMT -6
But then, when you factor in the number of layoffs incurred at both Nokia & Motorola the past few years, the job market in that space did shrink.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Jake on Sept 24, 2012 12:25:55 GMT -6
But then, when you factor in the number of layoffs incurred at both Nokia & Motorola the past few years, the job market in that space did shrink. Cite? I'll bet there are far more jobs in the wireless communications field today than there were ten years ago, or even five. |
|
|
|
Post by Tex on Sept 24, 2012 12:27:33 GMT -6
"...successful in a world where you win by taking away from others.." This is wrong on so many levels. The "zero sum" static view of the economy is not reality. Obama believes it and look at the results. I'm not all pumped up - you are correct. I believe it will take a decade of competent leadership to get us even to where we were when hope and ch-ch-change came to town. Tex, in microeconomics, it is almost 100% a zero sum game. The fact is that it is probably 99.9% zero sum and 0.1% "real growth". Company A and Company B are competing in the same marketplace to make widgets. Company A sells more widgets than Company B, Company A hires more people, most likely from Company B because they are losing in the widget marketplace. If there is an overall growth in the net number of jobs it is due to external forces not related at all to what Company A and Company B are doing, or could possibly hope to do. In fact if Company A is winning the widget market, it is probably due to efficiencies that allows them to use FEWER workers, not more. NO, in the microeconomics of Bain Capital, if Romney actually created any REAL jobs, they were very few. By this logic, Western Electric should be kicking Apple's ass. I'm sure no one could make rotary phones with as few employees as Western Electric. Wealth is dynamic, not static. It is not some pie of a given size that should be cut up into ever smaller pieces. The sum total of wealth ch-ch-changes every second of the day. Cook a meal, turn aluminum into an airliner, teach a piano lesson - and wealth increases. Get rid of a dysfunctional economic combination and turn it into a viable one, and wealth increases. That was Romney's business. |
|
|
|
Post by Merlot Joe on Sept 24, 2012 13:30:20 GMT -6
Joe is the only one I can think of on the board who has changed his mind. You are 100% correct Tex, I have changed my mind, but I am not sure if I will vote for Romney either. My feeling are the same as Jake's he's no Obama. I listen to his speech at the RNC and it wasn't impressive. I am going to vote and I will either put in a write in candidate or Romney. The main reason I am voting is to vote against some issues on the ballot locally. |
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Jake on Sept 24, 2012 13:34:50 GMT -6
I will say that I do like Paul Ryan. I would enthusiastically vote for him.
|
|
|
|
Post by ♥ COVID-19♥ on Sept 24, 2012 14:00:44 GMT -6
William Kristol wrote that GOP voters would have a more enthusiastic response if the ticket was Ryan-Rubio. He might be right.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ardbeg... innit on Sept 24, 2012 14:57:28 GMT -6
Gordon, I'm glad you are not running the business world. The most successful businessmen invent new markets, they don't cannibalize old markets. Steve Jobs was a master of creating new products that nobody ever thought of before. You might try to argue that the iPhone took business away from earlier, non-smart phones. But it vastly expanded a market that barely existed beforehand.As for Romney, I've stated many times that the only thing I like about him is that he is "not Obama." Sadly, that is all I've got this time round. Yes, and all of the expansion in the manufacturing and the related jobs went to China. In reality that is cherry picking a positive example. For every true innovator like Jobs, there are thousands of businesses that exist solely in a zero sum economy. Walmart moved into out town about 15 years ago, and put about 20 Mom and Pop places out of business... zero sum. Beyond that, I stand by my analysis of Romney and "job creation". His experience is entirely in the microeconomics world and therefore has little to do with the world that he would be stepping into if elected. Source |
|
|
|
Post by Exildo Wonsetler Briggs III on Sept 24, 2012 20:32:17 GMT -6
Only in America can the lazy, looney left claim that being successful is bad. Folks come here from all over, indeed the left wants the gub'ment to give illegals a free get our of jail card so they can find work - but not do TOO well!! Get rich, and suddenly you're bad.
Stupid. REAL stupid!
|
|
