Would the country be better off today if Romney had won?

[Skylar]

Yes or no, and why.

Probably not. Romney lacks obama's experience. So its unlikely he could have done a better job. Worse, his most optimistic projections were below Obama's actual performance.

"I can tell you that over a period of four years, by virtue of the policies that we'd put in place, we'd get the unemployment rate down to 6%, and perhaps a little lower," the presumptive GOP nominee said in a TIME interview published Wednesday.

The number marked the first time Romney had talked about a specific rate during this election cycle, although he listed 5.9% as the number he would strive for in his 59-point economic plan released in September.

Romney promises to bring unemployment down to 6 CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

Obama managed that feat in 18 months. Romney indicated it would take 4 years.

Also, Romney's 'fuck em' they can go to the emergency room' strategy to healthcare reform would have almost certainly meant larger numbers of folks who were uninsured compared to now.

Romney didn't use our agreements with Iraq and Afghanistan as his benchmark of withdrawl from either country. Romney's position with Afghanistan was almost antagonistic, telling them what they 'have to understand'. Essentially describing how a 'President Romney' would dictate terms to the Afghan president.

So chances are we'd still be fighting those wars under Romney.

Our deficit would likely be larger under Romney as he called for all sorts of tax cuts that he didn't pay for.

And all the things that Romney promised.....a strengthening dollar and a rising stock market, Obama actually delivered.

So by the very metrics that Romney defined, we're doing better under Obama.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Obama invented this epic partisan divide, you guys are so right!!

Never saw that absurd claim till you posted. Must be a rough life fighting against the strawman all the time.

Thats odd cuz the 1st guy that quoted my post here that you quoted said that Obama DID invent it.

Might wanna correct his error, ole man.

If so I stand corrected. Having said that I have IDIOTS on ignore. What's it like intentionally playing with the low hanging fruit?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

one thing for sure....FOX News rating would be in the toilet if Romney won.....

How oh How would they keep your undivided interest, without a Obama?

Not really.......because the Demagoguery Party would be out in full force still blaming Republicans for a lack of funding.

yea, you are probably right Mud, FOX would find something to rile their customers....

Smart business people know how to turn a profit. Rush, Fox News etc... their liberal counterparts? Air America, MSNBC etc... not so much.

yep, the were not as good at lying and making mountains out of molehills and they didn't have their audience pegged, down-pat as FOX.

No, they're just fucking stupid and don't understand their own customers

 

[G.T.]

Obama invented this epic partisan divide, you guys are so right!!

Never saw that absurd claim till you posted. Must be a rough life fighting against the strawman all the time.

Thats odd cuz the 1st guy that quoted my post here that you quoted said that Obama DID invent it.

Might wanna correct his error, ole man.

If so I stand corrected. Having said that I have IDIOTS on ignore. What's it like intentionally playing with the low hanging fruit?

If i didnt play......youd be on ignore too pops.

 

[pismoe]

This thread is dedicated to those on the right who stayed home or voted third party in 2008. Obama's second term is your fault. Voting the lesser of two evils --------------- is the RIGHT thing to do, every time.

not going to happen Redfish , a boosh , Christy , Rubio and others on the rino ticket will get me voting dem Hilary or similar , warren or better yet Bernie sanders . All 3 that I mention will PUNISH the moderate repub / rino voters and supporters pretty well and I'll be cheering all the time !! He11 , its been moderate repubs and their supporters that have brought the USA political system to where it is !!

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Obama invented this epic partisan divide, you guys are so right!!

Never saw that absurd claim till you posted. Must be a rough life fighting against the strawman all the time.

Thats odd cuz the 1st guy that quoted my post here that you quoted said that Obama DID invent it.

Might wanna correct his error, ole man.

If so I stand corrected. Having said that I have IDIOTS on ignore. What's it like intentionally playing with the low hanging fruit?

If i didnt play......youd be on ignore too pops.

Lol

Clever rat!

 

[G.T.]

Obama invented this epic partisan divide, you guys are so right!!

Never saw that absurd claim till you posted. Must be a rough life fighting against the strawman all the time.

Thats odd cuz the 1st guy that quoted my post here that you quoted said that Obama DID invent it.

Might wanna correct his error, ole man.

If so I stand corrected. Having said that I have IDIOTS on ignore. What's it like intentionally playing with the low hanging fruit?

If i didnt play......youd be on ignore too pops.

Lol

Clever rat!

Hah

I got love for ya man

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

This thread is dedicated to those on the right who stayed home or voted third party in 2008. Obama's second term is your fault. Voting the lesser of two evils --------------- is the RIGHT thing to do, every time.

My Wife and I were talking the other night about what to do if, God forbid, we have a Clinton vs Bush matchup in 2016.

This is quite a conundrum for me. I DESPISE that broad and I DESPISE the thought of another Bush in office. Additionally, the thought of yet another member of a "Royal Family" being elected turns my stomach.

This will probably come as a surprise to many here, but we are NOT England.....if THIS is the best this country has to offer, it just might be time to give up voting.

Vote third party.

that will help elect hillary clinton. FACT.

Maybe...but what's the difference between Jeb and Hillary? They'll both sell you out.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

This thread is dedicated to those on the right who stayed home or voted third party in 2008. Obama's second term is your fault. Voting the lesser of two evils --------------- is the RIGHT thing to do, every time.

My Wife and I were talking the other night about what to do if, God forbid, we have a Clinton vs Bush matchup in 2016.

This is quite a conundrum for me. I DESPISE that broad and I DESPISE the thought of another Bush in office. Additionally, the thought of yet another member of a "Royal Family" being elected turns my stomach.

This will probably come as a surprise to many here, but we are NOT England.....if THIS is the best this country has to offer, it just might be time to give up voting.

Vote third party.

that will help elect hillary clinton. FACT.

This thread is dedicated to those on the right who stayed home or voted third party in 2008. Obama's second term is your fault. Voting the lesser of two evils --------------- is the RIGHT thing to do, every time.

My Wife and I were talking the other night about what to do if, God forbid, we have a Clinton vs Bush matchup in 2016.

This is quite a conundrum for me. I DESPISE that broad and I DESPISE the thought of another Bush in office. Additionally, the thought of yet another member of a "Royal Family" being elected turns my stomach.

This will probably come as a surprise to many here, but we are NOT England.....if THIS is the best this country has to offer, it just might be time to give up voting.

Vote third party.

that will help elect hillary clinton. FACT.

If it comes down to that, I will hold my nose and vote for that asshole Bush. But make no mistake - this country is getting NOTHING for their vote.

I have a minimum standard. If the GOP can't offer me someone who I know in advance wont be a failure / sellout, then I'm not giving them the vote. For all I know, HIllary will f things up less, tbh.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

I wouldn't know. I voted for Romney and I would do it again. I never thought of Romney as the "lesser" of anything. I just don't see how a Romney presidency would have looked any better than the idiot we are saddled with now. He could have gotten little to nothing passed in Congress.

Damned shame, but there you go.

I can see this p.o.v. But sometimes it's understated how much power the president has to set the national narrative.

I'll give you that in a heartbeat. I remember Ronny Reagan's speeches to America quite well. That man ALWAYS made me proud to be an American. Obama? Screw that faculty lounge communist.

I could'a been just as proud without my taxes being raised 11 times, running our debt sky high, his corruption and lying and turning us into a debtor nation. And running the nation according to advice of an astrologist.

I'm plenty proud these days ... I've regained the money I lost under the Bush regime but of course, I would have been a lot better off if he hadn't taken it in the first place.

What you're saying you're proud of is his speech writers.

Idiot.

You're the idiot; claiming that Reagan raised taxes 11 times when you know damn well he dramatically reduced the cumulative. I'm getting so sick and tired of that lie from liberals; it's possibly the most disengenuous lie they use.

 

[Redfish]

This thread is dedicated to those on the right who stayed home or voted third party in 2008. Obama's second term is your fault. Voting the lesser of two evils --------------- is the RIGHT thing to do, every time.

not going to happen Redfish , a boosh , Christy , Rubio and others on the rino ticket will get me voting dem Hilary or similar , warren or better yet Bernie sanders . All 3 that I mention will PUNISH the moderate repub / rino voters and supporters pretty well and I'll be cheering all the time !! He11 , its been moderate repubs and their supporters that have brought the USA political system to where it is !!

If you think any of those 3 would be good for the USA then you are a complete idiot.

exactly how would those clowns "punish" moderates?

 

[Redfish]

This thread is dedicated to those on the right who stayed home or voted third party in 2008. Obama's second term is your fault. Voting the lesser of two evils --------------- is the RIGHT thing to do, every time.

My Wife and I were talking the other night about what to do if, God forbid, we have a Clinton vs Bush matchup in 2016.

This is quite a conundrum for me. I DESPISE that broad and I DESPISE the thought of another Bush in office. Additionally, the thought of yet another member of a "Royal Family" being elected turns my stomach.

This will probably come as a surprise to many here, but we are NOT England.....if THIS is the best this country has to offer, it just might be time to give up voting.

Vote third party.

that will help elect hillary clinton. FACT.

Maybe...but what's the difference between Jeb and Hillary? They'll both sell you out.

hopefully it won't come to that. if it does, the country loses. But, having said that, a head of cabbage would be a better president than HRC. So, I will vote against HRC no matter who the GOP runs.

stopping her is the most important thing any american can do in 2016.

 

[Redfish]

Yes or no, and why.

Probably not. Romney lacks obama's experience. So its unlikely he could have done a better job. Worse, his most optimistic projections were below Obama's actual performance.

"I can tell you that over a period of four years, by virtue of the policies that we'd put in place, we'd get the unemployment rate down to 6%, and perhaps a little lower," the presumptive GOP nominee said in a TIME interview published Wednesday.

The number marked the first time Romney had talked about a specific rate during this election cycle, although he listed 5.9% as the number he would strive for in his 59-point economic plan released in September.

Romney promises to bring unemployment down to 6 CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

Obama managed that feat in 18 months. Romney indicated it would take 4 years.

Also, Romney's 'fuck em' they can go to the emergency room' strategy to healthcare reform would have almost certainly meant larger numbers of folks who were uninsured compared to now.

Romney didn't use our agreements with Iraq and Afghanistan as his benchmark of withdrawl from either country. Romney's position with Afghanistan was almost antagonistic, telling them what they 'have to understand'. Essentially describing how a 'President Romney' would dictate terms to the Afghan president.

So chances are we'd still be fighting those wars under Romney.

Our deficit would likely be larger under Romney as he called for all sorts of tax cuts that he didn't pay for.

And all the things that Romney promised.....a strengthening dollar and a rising stock market, Obama actually delivered.

So by the very metrics that Romney defined, we're doing better under Obama.

nice recitation of the dem/lib talking points, but not a one of them is true. But thats right, truth is not a requirement for liberals.

 

[bodecea]

This thread is dedicated to those on the right who stayed home or voted third party in 2008. Obama's second term is your fault. Voting the lesser of two evils --------------- is the RIGHT thing to do, every time.

So...those would be the people we thank. Good to know.

 

[hipeter924]

Yes, in the sense it would have forced a debate in the Democratic party, though I doubt it would have brought many new voices to the surface.

No, because Romney was still a Bush lite, and wouldn't have had any more success than Obama did, if his fail tour of Europe was any indication.

 

[Redfish]

The big differences:

Romney is an honest man
Romney has a record of success
Romney knows how to run a business
Romney does not hate the USA
Romney is not a racist
Romney's wife is not trying to get even for slavery
Romney does not hate Israel
Romney does not side with radical muslims

So, the answer to the OP is Yes, the country would be better off today if Romney had won

 

[Skylar]

Yes or no, and why.

Probably not. Romney lacks obama's experience. So its unlikely he could have done a better job. Worse, his most optimistic projections were below Obama's actual performance.

"I can tell you that over a period of four years, by virtue of the policies that we'd put in place, we'd get the unemployment rate down to 6%, and perhaps a little lower," the presumptive GOP nominee said in a TIME interview published Wednesday.

The number marked the first time Romney had talked about a specific rate during this election cycle, although he listed 5.9% as the number he would strive for in his 59-point economic plan released in September.

Romney promises to bring unemployment down to 6 CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

Obama managed that feat in 18 months. Romney indicated it would take 4 years.

Also, Romney's 'fuck em' they can go to the emergency room' strategy to healthcare reform would have almost certainly meant larger numbers of folks who were uninsured compared to now.

Romney didn't use our agreements with Iraq and Afghanistan as his benchmark of withdrawl from either country. Romney's position with Afghanistan was almost antagonistic, telling them what they 'have to understand'. Essentially describing how a 'President Romney' would dictate terms to the Afghan president.

So chances are we'd still be fighting those wars under Romney.

Our deficit would likely be larger under Romney as he called for all sorts of tax cuts that he didn't pay for.

And all the things that Romney promised.....a strengthening dollar and a rising stock market, Obama actually delivered.

So by the very metrics that Romney defined, we're doing better under Obama.

nice recitation of the dem/lib talking points, but not a one of them is true. But thats right, truth is not a requirement for liberals.

A blanket dismissal isn't an argument. Its an excuse for one.

Which ones are wrong specifically? And demonstrate how, with evidence.

 

[pismoe]

hey REDFISH , seems to me the punishment of the Moderate 'rinos' would be by taking their money by more redistribution , more programs , college loan forgiveness , reparations ,'Hilarycomputers' similar to obamaphones and internet service in every home , plus higher taxes , more importation of foreigners like radical muslims and maybe a guaranteed yearly income plan , free food and housing to go with 'obamacare' . And that's just a start as I'm sure that all dems have the plan !! Only thing worse than a dem progressive is a moderate rino and moderate rino is what many repubs like 'heb boosh' are . And , I won't support any moderate Rino REDFISH !!

 

[Kosh]

Yes or no, and why.

Probably not. Romney lacks obama's experience. So its unlikely he could have done a better job. Worse, his most optimistic projections were below Obama's actual performance.

"I can tell you that over a period of four years, by virtue of the policies that we'd put in place, we'd get the unemployment rate down to 6%, and perhaps a little lower," the presumptive GOP nominee said in a TIME interview published Wednesday.

The number marked the first time Romney had talked about a specific rate during this election cycle, although he listed 5.9% as the number he would strive for in his 59-point economic plan released in September.

Romney promises to bring unemployment down to 6 CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

Obama managed that feat in 18 months. Romney indicated it would take 4 years.

Also, Romney's 'fuck em' they can go to the emergency room' strategy to healthcare reform would have almost certainly meant larger numbers of folks who were uninsured compared to now.

Romney didn't use our agreements with Iraq and Afghanistan as his benchmark of withdrawl from either country. Romney's position with Afghanistan was almost antagonistic, telling them what they 'have to understand'. Essentially describing how a 'President Romney' would dictate terms to the Afghan president.

So chances are we'd still be fighting those wars under Romney.

Our deficit would likely be larger under Romney as he called for all sorts of tax cuts that he didn't pay for.

And all the things that Romney promised.....a strengthening dollar and a rising stock market, Obama actually delivered.

So by the very metrics that Romney defined, we're doing better under Obama.

nice recitation of the dem/lib talking points, but not a one of them is true. But thats right, truth is not a requirement for liberals.

A blanket dismissal isn't an argument. Its an excuse for one.

Which ones are wrong specifically? And demonstrate how, with evidence.

The old far left posts religious bunk and then expects others to prove them wrong!

 

[boilermaker55]

The left refusing congress to do its job? Who filibustered the hell out of congress?
Live with your lie all you want.

impossible to say. It's like asking if World War I would have been won earlier if the US had jumped right in. Who knows?

I would like to think that we would be much better off - but we had the left refusing to allow the Congress to do its' job (Thanks Harry Reid), so, it's doubtful that Romney could have accomplished much, if anything.