Why We Needed Romney

Discussion in 'Politics' started by pspr, Nov 12, 2012.

  1. pspr


    We're Screwed Under Obama's Status Quo. (In pictures so even the liberals here can understand)

    Percent of GDP
    <img src="http://www.heritage.org/federalbudget/charts/2012/saving-american-dream-680.jpg" width="600" height="400">

    Percentage Change In Inflation Adjusted Dollars
    <img src="http://www.heritage.org/federalbudget/charts/2012/growth-federal-spending-680.jpg" width="600" height="400">

    Inflation Adjusted Dollars
    <img src="http://www.heritage.org/federalbudget/charts/2012/welfare-spending-680.jpg" width="600" height="400">

    Under Obama's Budget
    <img src="http://www.heritage.org/federalbudget/charts/2012/budget-and-defense-680.jpg" width="600" height="400">

  2. We needed Romney for precisely the reason people voted against him. He's a "flip flopper". What that means in the real world is that he's a deal maker. People don't understand how business get's done, so they don't understand the concept of deal making.
    We needed a guy that can play on both sides of the fence. A guy that can get the repubs behind closed doors and say, I know what they're asking for is crazy, but...A guy that can get dems behind closed doors and say, I know what they're asking for is crazy, but... We needed a guy not so in love with his own ideas that he can't change his mind.
    Romney was that guy. Obama isn't. It's as simple as that, and that's why we're gridlocked and will continue to be gridlocked.
  3. So that's how it's done, just lie. That is simple. Gee thanks Cptn.
  4. pspr


    Romney knows business finance. He may have been our last hope to find a solution to our financial demise.
  5. Lucrum


    It's certainly working for Obama. But then considering his average supporter, it's not really that surprising.
  6. 377OHMS


    I agree. Most regular folks don't realize that deal making means compromising. It is also supposed to be one of the traits of a good congressman or senator. Both sides get something they want and the overall result is supposed to be good for the country.

    Romney emphasized a few times in the debates that he had reached a compromise on various issues when he was Governor of Mass but that didn't seem to impress the right or the left.

    We're so divided the last 10 years or so that we've lost sight of that idea.
  7. Sorry I disagree, compromising with the enemies of freedom both personal and economic is a losing strategy.

    It's like ceding an argument to a woman , not because she is correct but just because you'll do anything to get the bitch to shut her yap.

    It may feel good at the moment but sooner or later you'll be aghast at the ramifications of the stupidity you just agreed to out of short term "convenience" for lack of a better word.
  8. 377OHMS


    My good friend is extremely uncompromising with the ladies and every little thing has to go his way in his relationships. He keeps getting divorced. Sometimes I try to convince him to give in on a few small things but hold his ground on the big things but he says that if he doesn't get his way on everything then there is no end to it. He is going into marriage number 4 this spring.

    I'm getting married some time this next year and I've been trying to be flexible and not insist that I have my way on everything. Sometimes I dig my heels in if it is really important to me but many times I'll let my girl have her way in an effort to keep her happy. I've found that if she is happy my life is easier and more pleasant. Most of the time its just about what restaurant we're going to eat in or what temperature to set the thermostat to, stuff like that that isn't going to kill me if it isn't exactly what I want. I don't feel like I'm pussy-whipped. Its just that some give and take makes for a better partnership. When I do really insist on something my gf is likely to let me have my way probably because I'm flexible about stuff she really wants.

    Does that make any sense? I pick my battles and don't get too wound up over small stuff.

    In politics I think that if there is absolutely no compromise it is likely that nothing would get done. If there was a bill in the House, for example, that had something in it that the Democrats find important and something in it that Republicans think is important and the bill doesn't violate the core values of either party and furthermore it is perceived to be positive legislation for the country then why is that a problem?

    Same with business. Two businesses are considering a deal but one of them insists on a tight delivery schedule. The other company says it can meet the tight delivery schedule but it needs to be paid a premium to be able to do it. If those two companies stand to profit from the deal and both can meet the demands of the other then isn't that a good deal that involves a compromise?

    I believe that kind of thinking is what makes the world work. Its not about compromising your core requirements or core values but rather to find common benefit in something and then making small concessions in order to make it happen. I think that is what CaptainObvious is saying and I agree with him.
  9. I see your practical point with women but politically just remember compromise is what got us where we find ourselves now.

    There's plenty of room to compromise politically on the useless stuff but major issues is slow suicide.

    PS: It's best not to be sleeping with the enemy, that way you don't have to give a crap if the democrats go home miffed.

    1) That's decidedly not what the republican establishment has been doing for the last 30 yrs or so.
    It's been like choice a between the fascists and the communists.
    A shit sandwich is a shit sandwich no matter which type of bun you use.