• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Romney/Ryan: the "Hope and Change" of 2012

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,560
1
0
It should come as a shock to no one that Obama's first term has been, no matter how you look at it, a huge disappointment. Whether you voted for him in 2008 or not, you should be either disappointed by the things he hasn't done or disappointed by what he has done.

Enter Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan as the two-party-system alternative to Obama/Biden this election cycle.

Now the praise, adoration, and hope is placed in them as the saviors of the country... just as it was placed in Obama/Biden 4 years ago.

Does anyone else but me have an extraordinarily strong sense of deja vu?

Far too many of you here on P&N and across the country will vote for Romney/Ryan expecting hope and change and will, mark my words, be extremely disappointed.

Some say "well, even a little better than Obama is good enough". No! It is not! Not only are we not going to get "a little better than Obama", we're not going to get any better than Obama.

Campaigning is not governing. Romney has been campaigning the last 4 years, Obama has been governing. Campaign promises inevitably run into the indestructible wall of the federal government... where they die or get mutated into all of the monsters we've had thrust upon us throughout the decades.

There is simply no reason, whatsoever, to believe that Romney/Ryan will be any better than Obama/Biden. Partisan blinders aren't gonna cut it. Republican "hope and change" isn't any less of a joke than Democratic "hope and change".

Vote 3rd-party. Vote write-in. Or, if nothing else, don't vote in the presidential race at all.
 
Last edited:

Double Trouble

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,273
103
106
Sorry, but I completely disagree. I don't see any of the "hope and change" phenomenon we saw in 2008, with the rock star candidate who had dumb people crying at his speeches and heralding a new "post racial" era, heralding the man who would change everything.

Romney doesn't have anyone enthralled with this dreamy hope bullshit. I'd say it's the opposite, he's not charismatic enough, he's too sober and dry.

I don't have some wishy washy notion of Romney being the savior or anything like that. Washington DC has grown big and powerful enough that it will swallow up anyone who tries to change it, Romney included. If nothing else, I'm voting for Romney because I'd like to see most of obamacare rolled back, and I'd like to avoid another two or three liberal justices getting added to the supreme court.
 

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,234
699
126
There is no hope and change from either side. We're all fucked unless you're the investor class and can jump ship to another country when the shit finally hits the fan.
 

Double Trouble

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,273
103
106
There is no hope and change from either side.
True. We have met the enemy and he is us. The voters are to blame, we keep electing lousy politicians and then complain when they are lousy. Now we've dug ourselves into a financial hole that I don't think we'll be able to dig ourselves out of no matter who gets elected.
 

Anarchist420

Diamond Member
Feb 13, 2010
8,645
0
76
www.facebook.com
we're not going to get any better than Obama.
We're going to get something worse than what a 2nd Obama term would be. I mean, Geithner and Clinton would both be out of their admin. Obama would return Occupy Wall Street to its origins. He's open to change, Romney is just plastic and metal.

Also, Romney is black because Obama is a white man. I'd always go with the white man even if they refuse to admit that they're white man. Bibi is the black african negroid, he's not Jewish and Ahmedinajahd is the one who is the true blue Jew so he can give up power and is not really corruptible like Bibi is. I also know who to listen to so I'm more like warren G Harding-style "corruption" although thanks to Dr. Paul and others, i know to stay out of public office and the military for all time to come.
 

PJABBER

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
4,822
0
0
OP Translation:

My guy sucks, he has done a terrible job, but he is the best of the best so your guy cannot possibly do any better and will very likely do worse.

Nonsense.

Your guy has done much worse than most anyone else would have done simply because he does not believe in free markets and capitalism. He believes in government central planning and controls, he believes in equal outcomes and not equal opportunity, he sees no merit in individual entrepreneurs.

Romney/Ryan need to roll back the mountain of debt the clown Obama and the Bush wars racked up, that is true. They will have to systematically remove the redistributionists and the economy destroyers that the Obama administration have systematically insinuated into the federal bureaucracy. It will not be easy and it will take more time than anyone thinks.

But it can be done and it will only be done when Obama and his minions are taken out of power to do more damage.
 
Last edited:

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,560
1
0
OP Translation:

My guy sucks, he has done a terrible job, but he is the best of the best so your guy cannot possibly do any better and will very likely do worse.

Nonsense.

Your guy has done much worse than most anyone else would have done simply because he does not believe in free markets and capitalism. He believes in government central planning and controls, he believes in equal outcomes and not equal opportunity, he sees no merit in individual entrepreneurs.

Romney/Ryan need to roll back the mountain of debt the clown Obama and the Bush wars racked up, that is true. They will have to systematically remove the redistributionists and the economy destroyers that the Obama administration have systematically insinuated into the federal bureaucracy. It will not be easy and it will take more time than anyone thinks.

But it can be done and it will only be done when Obama and his minions are taken out of power to do more damage.
Obama was not, is not, and has never been "my guy". Keep trying.

It "will be done"? Says who? What is the basis of your faith in Romney/Ryan actually doing what they say on the campaign trail that they will do?

Given the track record of all the pie-in-the-sky campaign promises from candidates of both parties over the decades I see no reason to believe Romney/Ryan will actually do what they say they'll do.
 
Last edited:

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,650
199
101
Saying Romney is no better than obummer is like saying having a cold is no better than having ebola. Yes, they're both diseases, but obummer is infinitely worse than the alternative. Hope for regime change in 2012!
 

Charles Kozierok

Elite Member
May 14, 2012
6,762
0
0
Sorry, but I completely disagree. I don't see any of the "hope and change" phenomenon we saw in 2008, with the rock star candidate who had dumb people crying at his speeches and heralding a new "post racial" era, heralding the man who would change everything.

Romney doesn't have anyone enthralled with this dreamy hope bullshit. I'd say it's the opposite, he's not charismatic enough, he's too sober and dry.
I agree with you here.

If there's any repeat of 2008, it's not Romney/Ryan being the "hope and change of 2012". It's not about Romney and Ryan at all. It's about getting rid of Obama. That's their "hope and change", and you can see it all over this forum, and even this thread. I think that is what zsdersw is talking about.

In 2008 the left was irrationally enthralled with the idea that electing Obama would solve all of the world's problems.

In 2012 the right is irrationally enthralled with the idea that voting out Obama will solve all of the world's problems.
 

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,560
1
0
Saying Romney is no better than obummer is like saying having a cold is no better than having ebola. Yes, they're both diseases, but obummer is infinitely worse than the alternative. Hope for regime change in 2012!
What reason do you have to believe that Romney isn't also ebola in your analogy?
 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,650
199
101
What reason do you have to believe that Romney isn't also ebola in your analogy?
Well, for one thing, he's going to do away with most of obummercare, and that's a huge step forward. If nothing else, that would be a great accomplishment. He won't be pushing to jack up my taxes and agitate against people who accomplish something, and businesses will have more confidence that they won't face a hostile environment and will invest in our economy.

All in all, even if Romney does very little, it's better than the things obummer has done and will continue to do.
 

Charles Kozierok

Elite Member
May 14, 2012
6,762
0
0
Well, for one thing, he's going to do away with most of obummercare, and that's a huge step forward.
No, he's not.

He won't be pushing to jack up my taxes and agitate against people who accomplish something, and businesses will have more confidence that they won't face a hostile environment and will invest in our economy.
Possible, but this comment ignores the huge stock value gains and record corporate profits already taking place under Obama.
 

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,560
1
0
Well, for one thing, he's going to do away with most of obummercare, and that's a huge step forward. If nothing else, that would be a great accomplishment. He won't be pushing to jack up my taxes and agitate against people who accomplish something, and businesses will have more confidence that they won't face a hostile environment and will invest in our economy.

All in all, even if Romney does very little, it's better than the things obummer has done and will continue to do.
Nothing but campaign promises. What has been the track record on too-good-to-be-true campaign promises over the years? Have we gotten the really good legislation (or removal of bad legislation) that we've been promised over the years and decades?
 
Dec 30, 2004
12,554
2
76
I wish Romney would campagin on Hope & Change, which would remind people of the last time and how nothing happened.
 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,650
199
101
No, he's not.
Yes, he is. I'm not naive enough to blindly believe what politicians say, but I think Romney would be able to put a stop to much of the bill on day one. It's as simple as granting permanent waivers to everyone.

Possible, but this comment ignores the huge stock value gains and record corporate profits already taking place under Obama.
The record profits and stock gains are nice, but they are hoarding trillions because of the uncertainty. If Romney gets elected, the economy will perk up because they'll pump money into the economy when someone who understands business is in the white house.
 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,650
199
101
Nothing but campaign promises. What has been the track record on too-good-to-be-true campaign promises over the years? Have we gotten the really good legislation (or removal of bad legislation) that we've been promised over the years and decades?
Granting waivers to obummercare would not be difficult, and that's something Romney can deliver.
 

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,560
1
0
Granting waivers to obummercare would not be difficult, and that's something Romney can deliver.
Again, politicians have been saying they will do this and do that for decades... only to do nothing or do something we don't want them to do.

There remains no reason to believe that "can" becomes "will" if Romney wins.
 

Charles Kozierok

Elite Member
May 14, 2012
6,762
0
0
Yes, he is. I'm not naive enough to blindly believe what politicians say, but I think Romney would be able to put a stop to much of the bill on day one. It's as simple as granting permanent waivers to everyone.
He has no interest in undoing Obamacare. It's modeled after his own health care law, and it's a great boon for the healthcare industry. You've been conned.
 

jackstar7

Lifer
Jun 26, 2009
11,679
1,941
126
It should come as a shock to no one that Obama's first term has been, no matter how you look at it, a huge disappointment. Whether you voted for him in 2008 or not, you should be either disappointed by the things he hasn't done or disappointed by what he has done.

Enter Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan as the two-party-system alternative to Obama/Biden this election cycle.

Now the praise, adoration, and hope is placed in them as the saviors of the country... just as it was placed in Obama/Biden 4 years ago.

Does anyone else but me have an extraordinarily strong sense of deja vu?

Far too many of you here on P&N and across the country will vote for Romney/Ryan expecting hope and change and will, mark my words, be extremely disappointed.

Some say "well, even a little better than Obama is good enough". No! It is not! Not only are we not going to get "a little better than Obama", we're not going to get any better than Obama.

Campaigning is not governing. Romney has been campaigning the last 4 years, Obama has been governing. Campaign promises inevitably run into the indestructible wall of the federal government... where they die or get mutated into all of the monsters we've had thrust upon us throughout the decades.

There is simply no reason, whatsoever, to believe that Romney/Ryan will be any better than Obama/Biden. Partisan blinders aren't gonna cut it. Republican "hope and change" isn't any less of a joke than Democratic "hope and change".

Vote 3rd-party. Vote write-in. Or, if nothing else, don't vote in the presidential race at all.
Ah, Mercutio. I always enjoy your stuff.
 

PJABBER

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
4,822
0
0
Obama was not, is not, and has never been "my guy". Keep trying.
My apologies, I know you have been taking "pox on both their houses" stances and my comment was more the generic "you" than the specific "you." I am still thinking in French, the "tu" vs the "vous."

It "will be done"? Says who? What is the basis of your faith in Romney/Ryan actually doing what they say on the campaign trail that they will do?

Given the track record of all the pie-in-the-sky campaign promises from candidates of both parties over the decades I see no reason to believe Romney/Ryan will actually do what they say they'll do.
While you are entirely right in saying that both major parties have been profligate spenders, the times, they are a changing. The last hurrah has been the Obama payoffs of the last four years and they may yet buy him the election.

However, the money has run out. If the spigot is not turned off and all of the unnecessary spending pared back, we are in deep doo-doo.

That is why I was ecstatic that Romney picked my personal favorite candidate Ryan, a singularly informed light shining down the tunnel.

You may have no faith, but I do believe that a Romney/Ryan team at the helm will start that long and difficult turn toward fiscal sanity.

You want proof of intent? Well, Romney laid out a good plan, but I have to go with what Ryan has actually been advocating for and getting passed in the House for a number of years - only to be stymied by the Democrat Senate.
 
Last edited:

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,560
1
0
While you are entirely right in saying that both major parties have been profligate spenders, the times, they are a changing. The last hurrah has been the Obama payoffs of the last four years and they may yet buy him the election.

However, the money has run out. If the spigot is not turned off and all of the unnecessary spending pared back, we are in deep doo-doo.

That is why I was ecstatic that Romney picked my personal favorite candidate Ryan, a singularly informed light shining down the tunnel.

You may have no faith, but I do believe that a Romney/Ryan team at the helm will start that long and difficult turn toward fiscal sanity.

You want proof of intent? Well, Romney laid out a good plan, but I have to go with what Ryan has actually been advocating for and getting passed in the House for a number of years - only to be stymied by the Democrat Senate.
Ryan advocated for and passed those things in the House because he knew they wouldn't become law. Neither party is bold when there's a good chance of it passing all the way through. He's talked a good talk, but there's a long line of those... who ended up doing nothing good.
 

PJABBER

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
4,822
0
0
The same Senate projected to still be Dem controlled, mind you.
That will be a real issue. But the President has the bully pulpit and while Obama has only paid lip service to debt control while running up annual trillion dollar deficits while saying he needs to spend even more to do his payoffs, my guess is that the Senate Dems will be under tremendous pressure, after 1,300 days without passing a budget, to pass one.

One step at a time. One step at a time.
 

PJABBER

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
4,822
0
0
Ryan advocated for and passed those things in the House because he knew they wouldn't become law. Neither party is bold when there's a good chance of it passing all the way through. He's talked a good talk, but there's a long line of those... who ended up doing nothing good.
Now you are begging the question (petitio principii.) :cool:
 

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,560
1
0
Now you are begging the question (petitio principii.) :cool:
Not at all. There's a long history of proposals made by both parties that they knew had no chance of becoming law and were only done to score political points with the constituency-du-jour.

The things that actually have a chance of becoming law are always much more diluted and camel-ized*.


* built by committee, altered and changed to be almost always exactly what we don't need
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY