patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,189,804 comments by 13,850 users - clambo, Onvacation online now
What if Romney turns out to be moderate?
invite response
2012 Oct 6, 9:58am 23,636 views 90 comments
« First « Previous Comments 70 - 90 of 90 Search these comments
For one thing, Romney won't be a pawn for union thugs.
If we had never had unions, we would be working round-the-clock, lack much if any safety regulations, and many of the other things that are now taken fro granted. Now think about that statement for just a minute.
and you think other politicians are not?
Of course you don't. Your just playing games here..
Let me back up the train for just a second. The intent of this post was to more or less ask those who are vehemently against "Liberals" whether or not they would be more or less attracted to Romney if he turns out not to be exactly as far-right-leaning as many have indicated. Again- not naming names, but there have been a number of people here and elsewhere who from what they say pretty much sound like that they're strictly for a candidate who is extremely far to the right and some of these same people have pledged their support for Romney. So if in fact he isn't that sort of President, then what did those who were counting on him to be right leaning get out of it other than to say " Ha ha Liberals!"?
zzyzzx
2012 Oct 10, 2:50am
If we had never had unions, we would be working round-the-clock, lack much if any safety regulations, and many of the other things that are now taken fro granted. Now think about that statement for just a minute.
Does this mean that you agree that unions have outlived their usefulness?
All I see today is job fleeing the country due to excessive union demands. That lower employment opportunities for everyone here, and increases our trade deficit.
How so?
For one thing, Romney won't be a pawn for union thugs.
But he will be a pawn for Sam Waltonesque thugs and Koch bros. What an improvement!
Does this mean that you agree that unions have outlived their usefulness?
All I see today is job fleeing the country due to excessive union demands. That lower employment opportunities for everyone here, and increases our trade deficit.
No, I don't agree at all. I also don't believe that jobs are "fleeing" the country because of unions. If that were the case, then Japanese, German, Korean, and British companies making everything from cars, equipment and even whole commercial airliners- many of which are in turn shipped out to other countries wouldn't choose to setup factories all over the US.
Does this mean that you agree that unions have outlived their usefulness?
All I see today is job fleeing the country due to excessive union demands. That lower employment opportunities for everyone here, and increases our trade deficit.
No, I don't agree at all. I also don't believe that jobs are "fleeing" the country because of unions. If that were the case, then Japanese, German, Korean, and British companies making everything from cars, equipment and even whole commercial airliners- many of which are in turn shipped out to other countries wouldn't choose to setup factories all over the US.
Exactly correct. However, we have fundamenalists here is U.S who are convinced that unions are evil. In hip hop community, these sort of individuals are described as "haters." Most people who bash unions don't have union representation themselves and are secretly jealous of perks such as paid vacation and the benefits that union members enjoy. However rather than demand that their employers pay them and provide them with likewise benefits, they find it a lot easier to blame "unions." Classic jealosy, envy and "class warfare."
freak80
2012 Oct 10, 3:33am
However, we have fundamenalists here is U.S who are convinced that unions are evil
What?
freak80
2012 Oct 10, 3:34am
My buddy from the labs whose daughter works for Judicial Watch was over for dinner last night and said Romney will be handed a list of acceptable judges for appointment to the Supreme Court.
Who will be handing a list of acceptable judges to Romney? Judicial Watch? What make you think Romney will just "do what he's told?"
Vicente
2012 Oct 10, 3:50am
the rich aren't paying their "FAIR SHARE" (yes we are).
No, clearly they are not. I have no idea if you are rich are not, but we are at historic LOWS of taxation and yet wealth inequality gaps have never been larger. If we try "trickle down" for another 30 years, will it maybe start to show small signs of working? Sorry Charlie, already know the answer to that one!
Romney will be a tool of the 1%, and there is nothing "moderate" about that group. They want more for themselves, and less for the rest of us, it's that simple.
bdrasin
2012 Oct 10, 3:51am
My buddy from the labs whose daughter works for Judicial Watch was over for dinner last night and said Romney will be handed a list of acceptable judges for appointment to the Supreme Court.
Who will be handing a list of acceptable judges to Romney? Judicial Watch? What make you think Romney will just "do what he's told?"
Good question! No one knows. Romney talked like a "severely conservative" governor during his primaries. Was that just an act to get the nomination? Romney talked like a Massachusetts moderate in the debate (and probably will for the rest of the campaign, he's already raised all the money he'll need). Is this just an act to get to 51% and win the election?
What will he do when he actually wins? (At this point I'd say the race is Romney's to lose) No one knows! In Massachusetts the Dems controlled 85% of the legislature so he had no choice but to work with them. Given his flip-flops so far, imagine how "flexible" he could be once in office. Do conservatives worry about this? Or do they not really care as long as their nominee wins? Given the evidence so far, I'd say they just want to win.
However, we have fundamenalists here is U.S who are convinced that unions are evil
What?
What I mean is that it is part of the conservative dogma in the United States to be against unions. Most of them are set in this belief and they cannot be reasoned with about it, which makes them fundamentalists.
What I mean is that it is part of the conservative dogma in the United States to be against unions. Most of them are set in this belief and they cannot be reasoned with about it, which makes them fundamentalists.
What's important to understand is that it wasn't like everyday constituents suddenly up and decided that unions were bad. That idea was planted by politicians.
zzyzzx
2012 Oct 10, 4:44am
No, I don't agree at all. I also don't believe that jobs are "fleeing" the country because of unions. If that were the case, then Japanese, German, Korean, and British companies making everything from cars, equipment and even whole commercial airliners- many of which are in turn shipped out to other countries wouldn't choose to setup factories all over the US.
And exactly how many of these foreign based firms making stuff in the US unionized. It's something pretty close to nothing.
freak80
2012 Oct 10, 4:59am
Given his flip-flops so far, imagine how "flexible" he could be once in office. Do conservatives worry about this? Or do they not really care as long as their nominee wins? Given the evidence so far, I'd say they just want to win.
Well put. They're mainly just voting *against* Obama rather than *for* McCain...oops...I meant *for* Romney.
And exactly how many of these foreign based firms making stuff in the US unionized. It's something pretty close to nothing.
Quite a bit of it is in fact unionized. So much for that theory...
rootvg
2012 Oct 10, 5:01am
No, I don't agree at all. I also don't believe that jobs are "fleeing" the country because of unions. If that were the case, then Japanese, German, Korean, and British companies making everything from cars, equipment and even whole commercial airliners- many of which are in turn shipped out to other countries wouldn't choose to setup factories all over the US.
And exactly how many of these foreign based firms making stuff in the US unionized. It's something pretty close to nothing.
They're not fleeing the country but they are fleeing the Rust Belt, those who haven't left there already.
We have manufacturing and we're gonna keep it, but it's not gonna be union and it's not gonna be up north and the companies may not even be US owned. All the BMW and Mercedes SUVs are made in the American south because Germans don't understand the concept of an SUV. I don't even think you can buy one over there.
We have manufacturing and we're gonna keep it, but it's not gonna be union and it's not gonna be up north and the companies may not even be US owned. All the BMW and Mercedes SUVs are made in the American south because Germans don't understand the concept of an SUV. I don't even think you can buy one over there.
Its less to do about whether unions are there or not and more to do with the lower cost of running operations there.
freak80
2012 Oct 10, 5:15am
What I mean is that it is part of the conservative dogma in the United States to be against unions. Most of them are set in this belief and they cannot be reasoned with about it, which makes them fundamentalists.
I understand what you are saying.
Why I asked:
I hear the term "fundamentalist" thrown around willy-nilly in our culture and I can't seem to find a consistent definition. Sure, there's the "dictionary" definition which refers to "conservative" Presbyterians who broke away from "modernist" Presbyterians. Then it became a pejorative term for "anyone who is more religious than I am." Now it seems to refer to "anyone with firmly-held beliefs", whether secular or religious.
I've even heard the term "free-market fundamentalism" thrown about in some circles.
The term has become a double-edged sword, then. Most of us have firmly-held beliefs, whether we are "liberals" or "conservatives." That's what ideologies are: firmly-held beliefs.
zzyzzx
2012 Oct 10, 5:42am
Quite a bit of it is in fact unionized. So much for that theory...
Are any of the foreign owned auto plants in the US unionized???
Are any of the foreign owned auto plants in the US unionized???
Some are. Some aren't. But even if the point by saying that was to try and "prove" that any and all unionized labor is the root cause of failure, how do you explain the fact that the Midwest such as states like OH, IN, and other heavy manufacturing-centric areas that are still highly unionized are now doing better than most of the rest of the country? How do you explain the fact that the US automotive industry- again- still mostly located in the Midwest- is now doing better than it has in decades?
The whole " Unions are bad" propaganda is just that- Propaganda- and nothing more.
how do you explain the fact that the Midwest such as states like OH, IN, and other heavy manufacturing-centric areas that are still highly unionized are now doing better than most of the rest of the country? How do you explain the fact that the US automotive industry- again- still mostly located in the Midwest- is now doing better than it has in decades?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_Chapter_11_reorganization
On 31 May 2009 news broke that the U.S. would initially likely become the largest shareholder of the reorganized GM following a bankruptcy filing and re-emergence from bankruptcy. The U.S. government would invest up to $50 billion and own 60% of the new GM and the Canadian government would own 12.5%.
All the BMW and Mercedes SUVs are made in the American south because Germans don't understand the concept of an SUV. I don't even think you can buy one over there.
Yes.. they do understand SUVs. And Europe does import Escalade and other US made SUVs. Big 60-70s Cads are very big.
« First « Previous Comments 70 - 90 of 90 Search these comments
I'm not the only one to notice that Romney most definitely made a dramatic "change" in his rhetoric on stage last week during the debates. Many political commentators made the same observation- that Romney seemed to have suddenly and without warning moved to the middle. You'd almost think that some of the things he was proposing were basically almost the same as what Obama already had mentioned but Romney had basically "branded" it has his own.
So... that brings up the next question. I'm not going to point fingers or name names. But there have definitely been some comments made by some of the Republican-friendly folks on this forum which has you think that anyone other than a super-rignt-wing, ultra-conservative simply will not do. Thus I would definitely be curious about what some of these people would think if Romney were to actually win and turn out to be a moderate, not as far to the right leaning President? What if he actually turned out to be somewhat liberal ( for a Republican)? What if many of the same things Obama wanted to do or accomplished were simply taken up by Romney and "re-branded" or perhaps dumbed down a little, but essentially along the same lines?
Putting "Liberals against Conservatives" and vice-versa aside for a second, what would the reactions be from those who were perhaps hoping for a super conservative President and instead got a moderate one instead?
Perhaps for once we could keep this civil? Perhaps it might reveal a thing or two from some on both sides...
#politics