GOP Insiders: The Paul Ryan pick is a complete disaster

I know Obama commissioned Simpson-Bowles and has ignored their suggestions since they made their report. I know he promised to cut the deficit in half by 2011 (and it's 2012 now). No end of ginormous deficits, as far as the eye can see.

So yeah, I assume the guy who wrote a bill to cut $4T in spending and deal with the entitlement program issues (not gut them, fix them) and who got his bill voted on is the only one in the race trying to address the issue. In fact, I'm quite sure Romney picked him so there'd be a clear cut decision: Continue living far beyond our means or spend within reason to what the govt. takes in.

 

The vote was 382-28. There are 382 republicans in the House? News to me! (and that there's not is news to you?)

On the other hand:

http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-mon...lains-why-obama-never-embraced-bowles-simpson


Geithner explains why Obama never embraced Bowles-Simpson


Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner on Thursday explained why President Obama never fully embraced the 2010 report of his fiscal commission, headed by former Sen. Alan Simpson (R-Wyo.) and Erskine Bowles.

Geithner, under heavy fire from the Senate Budget Committee, said the Obama administration “did not feel” it could embrace it because the cuts to defense were too deep and the reforms to Social Security relied too much on benefit cuts.

Fiscal conservatives, including many Democrats, have for the last year lamented that Obama did not seize the Bowles-Simpson report and try to build bipartisan consensus around it. The administration instead pursued secretive talks with GOP leaders that hit the rocks last July when the GOP could not back an approach that included higher taxes.

 

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub...aul_ryan_favorably_43_say_he_was_right_choice

Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan’s favorables are up after the first blush of national media exposure following Mitt Romney’s selection of him as his vice presidential running mate. But as is generally the case with running mates, Ryan gives only a slight boost to Romney.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 50% of Likely U.S. Voters now have a favorable opinion of Ryan, while 32% view him unfavorably. This includes 29% with a Very Favorable view of Romney’s vice presidential pick and 13% with a Very Unfavorable one. Only 13% are now unfamiliar with Ryan, and five percent (5%) are not sure about him. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Just prior to being picked as Romney’s running mate, only 39% viewed Ryan favorably, while 25% held an unfavorable opinion of him.

Forty-three percent (43%) of voters think Romney made the right choice when he chose Ryan to be his running mate. Twenty-two percent (22%) disagree and think it was a bad choice. A sizable 35% aren’t sure.

But 36% now say they are more likely to vote for Romney with Ryan as his running mate. Twenty-nine percent (29%) say they are less likely to vote for the Republican, while just as many (30%) say the vice presidential selection has no impact on their vote.

 

I don't think it's relevant at all. What I'm seeing is Republicans are even more energized than Democrats because of the pick, and were beforehand. The 36%/29%/30% numbers might actually favor Romney because the 36% vs. 29% is a significant swing from party registration figures.

If history repeats itself, independents may well bolt Obama at the end, like they did Carter.

Plus, I do feel the debates and conventions will have a much bigger impact than in recent elections. With the ads being all negative, the debates are going to be Romney's chance to raise the economy as an issue, right to Obama's face and in front of a huge TV audience. I do think that Cheney helped Bush win in 2000 with his debate performance, and the VP debate this time will feature a bright young guy vs. a really old gaffe machine.

In the debates, the personal attacks are easily deflected ("there you go again" and Gore's sighing and crowding Bush), while the "are you better off now than 4 years ago" question hits home.

I think it's really easy to make the case we've seen almost 4 years of failed policies and easy to defend the retort that Romney's plan is going back to Bush policies. Romney isn't Bush, his economic plans are not Bush's, and we haven't seen what he can do as president. It's all scare tactics and trivial to point out they are.


Obama would be bucking the odds on many fronts.

The unemployment rate is higher than for any president reelected in recent times.

Few Democrats actually win reelection - since 1900, only Clinton, FDR, and Woodrow Wilson were reelected and two of those (Wilson & Clinton) won both times with less than 50% of the popular vote. Oddly, since some people claim people vote against their own interests, all republican presidents since 1950 have been reelected, except for GHW Bush (Ike, Nixon, Reagan, W).

Obama's signature achievement is an unpopular health care plan. Not only did the people revolt against this kind of agenda by electing republicans to control the house and a huge swing in the senate, too, but they similarly punished Clinton in 1994 for an equally unpopular (but failed) program.

Obama is not polling above 50% in the national polls. This is not good news for any incumbent.

Democrats just aren't as enthusiastic this time around about voting, at all, as republicans. The opinion polls don't matter if your side stays home.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/25/voter-enthusiasm-2012_n_1703127.html

 

Yes.... keep telling yourself that. Don't bother to notice that Rasmussen has a pretty big Republican lean.

Most of all, don't even mention the other poll that was released that shows Ryan with lower favorables than any VP candidate except Palin and Quayle.

Like Quayle and Bentsen! "Congressman, I knew Jack Kemp. I served with Jack Kemp. You're no Jack Kemp."

The opinion polls don't matter period. But if you are going to cite them, you shouldn't cherry pick.

You are kidding yourself in a major way, Denny. Dennyial is not just a word I made up just now.

barfo

 

The opinion polls are the current scorecards of the race. It's the best we can do, but reading them isn't as simple as X% vs. Y%, and you know it. Speak of denial some more.

There are several polls that were done with some people polled before the VP choice. Let's see what they are in a week.

Ryan is young and not from one of the large states. He just isn't well known. He is known by people inside the beltway and their opinions are that he's a good guy. We'll see whether Obama can spend enough to drag down his favorable polling numbers, but we also won't see him flub a debate or a gotcha type interview. In no way, shape, or form, does he have a reputation as one who makes gaffes.

We'll see.

I'm closer to Ron Paul's views. I'd slash the military along with a lot of the rest of govt. expenses.

But Paul's plan is a lot better than no budgets, higher spending expectations, and a constant demand by govt. to tax more.