patrick.net

leo707 says

seemed to have some integrity and states what he actually believes.

But doesn't do what he says. It sounds good if you're a Paulista, but looks hypocritical if you think he's a politician.

Still, what a different set of debates that would be! And a spectacular electoral wipeout.

CL says

Still, what a different set of debates that would be! And a spectacular electoral wipeout.

Amusing, but it probably would not have been a wipeout. Around 30% on each side will vote for their party no matter what. For a variety of reasons, Eastwood's empty chair might have got 40%. Romney might do worse than that, Paul might have done better.

Tell us how you really feel, Senator Webb:

http://www.politico.com/blogs/charlie-mahtesian/2012/09/webb-drops-the-hammer-on-romney-136858.html

leo707 says

seemed to have some integrity and states what he actually believes.

No, he lies with the best of them.

http://patrick.net/?p=1216317

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/post/paul-ryans-dishonest-speech/2012/08/30/16bb62d8-f24f-11e1-adc6-87dfa8eff430_blog.html

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/08/30/1125901/-The-biggest-of-all-Paul-Ryan-s-big-nbsp-lies

I think that perhaps one of the biggest reasons Romney isn't doing as well as he could ( not that this upsets me) is that his message has generally been generic and lacking in any detail.

His plan seemed to have been to simply let the bad economy do the work for him, which meant all he'd have to do is kick back and occasionally blame Obama for the economy and his "Failed policies". The thing is that even if a bad economy is typically worse for an incumbent, most people want to hear detailed plans and direction from the challenger. The only thing Romney has said is nothing new. Basically towing the same generic line Republicans have been towing forever: Cut taxes and cut spending. Big deal. That's been repeated so much that it has lost its meaning. People likely just ignore it.

Lastly, Romney has failed to make much of an inroad appealing to anyone beyond the same base that would have voted for anyone so long as they were a Republican. That trick might have worked back when the demographics of the country were different. But the fact is that the population has changed and will continue to do so. So as long as people like Romney fail to connect with a wider voting populace, the tactics employed by the GOP will continue to become increasingly ineffective.

Is it funny in this country?

If you made money and paid tax, you never paid enough.

If you don't pay tax, no body should mention it even it is a fact.

47% did not pay federal income tax is a fact. But once you mention it, you are a bad guy.

BobMSN says

47% did not pay federal income tax is a fact. But once you mention it, you are a bad guy.

This isn't why people made a big stink about the comment. The reason was the sentiment that the comment indicated.

This is why they have resorted to cheating (well that and because there are too many scumbags in their ranks).

Fox news, and the tea bagger movement have backfired. Independents can see the clown show that the republican party has become, and independents, or relative independents decide the election.

People don't like Romney or trust him.

In spite all the negative propaganda, and in spite of his not pleasing the left, Obama is consistent. He shows a caution in what he says and does and pragmatism that people respect. IT reminds me of the way many "liberals" probably viewed Reagan, in a way.

I was a young liberal in the 80s and didn't like Reagan. Everything from his union busting to his lowering taxes while beefing up the military (exploding the deficit)..... I could go on. So I really didn't like his policies. But I could see his charm and his likeability, and as a figure head I knew his presidency had some merit.

I think for many moderate republicans (serious conservatives and libertarians) it's like this with Obama. In a way they respect him, and they like him. True that many also hate him, in large part because of the constant complaining from the right wing media machine.

But in the end it's about likebility, and Romney loses that contest badly.

BobMSN says

47% did not pay federal income tax is a fact. But once you mention it, you are a bad guy.

Like Edvard said--mentioning it doesn't make you a bad guy. Implying that the 47% are leeches that are lazy and prefer to live off the rest of the country does.

tatupu70 says

Like Edvard said--mentioning it doesn't make you a bad guy. Implying that the 47% are leeches that are lazy and prefer to live off the rest of the country does.

I have a problem with this attitude because its so generalized- that anyone who accepts any form of social assistance is lazy. Its meant of course to train those who believe in such a statement to automatically be against any and all social programs- even if they happen to be a benefit to them directly. Its the same sort of general statements made that such-and-such thing is socialist, doesn't matter if it actually is socialist, but since that term is well-known to make people jump from rational discussion to gut reaction, it avoids any topic at hand from being even passively examined as a matter for debate and simply a means to stoke the fears of "Socialism"...

marcus says

No, he lies with the best of them.

Oh yes Paul Ryan is a huge liar, but I was talking about...

leo707 says

Ron Paul's...seemed to have some integrity and states what he actually believes.

Oops. To early, and before my morning coffee. Still,...very illiterate of me.