Politics

[Rhode Irish]

Wow that was ugly for Obama. He looked tired and kept looking down the whole time. Remember debates are not about facts, they are about who can win the argument. Romney flipped every argument against Obama. Romney called Obama's plan "trickle down", he attacked Obamacre, Medicare, Education, taxes, every time Romney stuck his chin out and dared Obama to swing, he just smiled and looked down.

yes, I agree with Rhode that he can use the "specifics" Romney threw out in ads, but he should have pounced then. The entire country is watching and Obama sleepwalked. Politically, this is the best moment of the Romney campaign.

I can't really disagree with this. It was certainly a good night for Romney because he exceeded (the artificially low) expectations and it was a strong debate performance. I expect there to be some movement in the polls toward Romney, but how long that bump lasts will depend a lot on how the substance of the debate is treated in the coming days.

The aesthetics of the attacks you're talking about can help the perception in the immediate aftermath of the debate that you "won" it, but as those arguments are dissected the substance of the points made in those attacks will matter more.

I'm going to bed. I feel fine about the state of the race right now. It didn't end tonight and it could have, so I'm sure the Romney people are happy about that. They have a lot more work to do from this point than the President does though.

 

[jason_h537]

I can't really disagree with this. It was certainly a good night for Romney because he exceeded (the artificially low) expectations and it was a strong debate performance. I expect there to be some movement in the polls toward Romney, but how long that bump lasts will depend a lot on how the substance of the debate is treated in the coming days.

The aesthetics of the attacks you're talking about can help the perception in the immediate aftermath of the debate that you "won" it, but as those arguments are dissected the substance of the points made in those attacks will matter more.

I'm going to bed. I feel fine about the state of the race right now. It didn't end tonight and it could have, so I'm sure the Romney people are happy about that. They have a lot more work to do from this point than the President does though.

You can say he had low expectations but Romney came off strong. Even with high expectations, if they came out with the same performances, it wouldn't change who won. Now go turn on CNN, go read The New York Times, what they will be talking about is how strong Romney looked. You won't hear about liberal media bias in the next couple of days. People who haven't decided yet haven't been paying attention. They will watch this and tune out again. This is the impression that was left and I expect a couple points in Romney's direction.

 

[BobD]

I always have to start my political statements with IMO.

I don't subscribe to "undecided" voters in friggin October....do you live under a rock or are you just going to ask a friend for advise on the way to the voting booth?

The debate won't change the election.

The press will talk this up because ratings for election coverage are shrinking rapidly.

 

[jason_h537]

I don't subscribe to "undecided" voters in friggin October....do you live under a rock or are you just going to ask a friend for advise on the way to the voting booth?

The debate won't change the election.

Yup, there are people who still don't know who they are voting for. They do not watch the news, they just are. It is a small percentage but these people do exist.

I agree the debate will likely not change anything, but this should be a wake up call to the Obama campaign to wake up. This will also raise the enthusiasm of the Romney camp. They have been struggling raising money recently and this could help.

 

[phgreek]

meh, I see Romney winning this...but I really wouldn't get excited unless he does this in the next...Obama did like every front runner/incumbant...played not to lose...and was overcome by someone focussed on this moment...

The guy is a liberal from Chicago...just watch the Machine churn now...

 

[yankeehater]

Now Romney knows how Clint felt talking to that empty chair because he debated against an empty podium.

It looked to me like Romney was running the corporation and Obama was the meek employee being scolded for not doing his job well.

 

[autry_denson]

is it me or did romney's rhetoric shift WAY left last night? good decision on his part, b/c he got himself back in the race. looked like a blowout 24 hours ago, but 24 hours from now I think it's going to look a lot closer.

don't understand why Obama didn't call out the fact that Romney's economic 'plans' consist primarily of magic. really disappointing performance by Obama overall.

 

[GoIrish41]

is it me or did romney's rhetoric shift WAY left last night? good decision on his part, b/c he got himself back in the race. looked like a blowout 24 hours ago, but 24 hours from now I think it's going to look a lot closer.

don't understand why Obama didn't call out the fact that Romney's economic 'plans' consist primarily of magic. really disappointing performance by Obama overall.

Obama let Romney off the hook far too many times.

- Didn't hammer him enough on lack of details in any plans
- Never mentioned the 47% comments
- Didn't call him on the inconsisencies of his dramatic shift to the left during the debate
- Didn't mention tax returns
- Let him get off way to easy on the Obamacare shift

He handed Romney a win in this debate IMO. Perhaps he was trying to take the high road and stay on a postive message, but he had Romney on the ropes going into the debate and just needed a couple of good punches to score a knockout and that did not happen.

That said, I believe Romney had a deep, deep hole to dig out of coming in. He has a long way to go before he sees any real daylight.

 

[Irish Houstonian]

This is the first debate I've seen where CNN actually declares a "winner".

Romney = Alabama. Boring, consistent, and wins by controlling tempo.

Obama = West Virginia. Inspirational on offense, sucks on defense.

 

[BobD]

This is the first debate I've seen where CNN actually declares a "winner".

Romney = Alabama. Boring, consistent, and wins by controlling tempo.

Obama = West Virginia. Inspirational on offense, sucks on defense.

CNN is playing it up big. Their ratings were low for election coverage with many thinking its already a done deal. Now with college football and the NFL season in full swing we also have the MLB playoffs starting up......they need a race.

 

[Ultimate Penn St. Hater]

Obama let Romney off the hook far too many times.

- Didn't hammer him enough on lack of details in any plans
- Never mentioned the 47% comments
- Didn't call him on the inconsisencies of his dramatic shift to the left during the debate
- Didn't mention tax returns
- Let him get off way to easy on the Obamacare shift

He handed Romney a win in this debate IMO. Perhaps he was trying to take the high road and stay on a postive message, but he had Romney on the ropes going into the debate and just needed a couple of good punches to score a knockout and that did not happen.

That said, I believe Romney had a deep, deep hole to dig out of coming in. He has a long way to go before he sees any real daylight.

I agree. Good post.

 

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

This kind of makes debates seem extremely overrated.

Who won’t be watching the debate? Persuadable voters

 

[GoIrish41]

Go Irish,

You sound like a bitter, angry individual intent on sticking it to "the man" and that's what liberalism will do for American "workers." By the way, if you have a job, you're a worker, no matter which tax bracket you're in.

Above all else, I care about people. When I chose a president, I look for some keystones to his character. How does he talk about the weakest, least represented, least fortunate among us. Does he stand up for the rights of gays and lesbians, or does he refuse to acknowledge their right to marry who they love? Does he defend a woman's right to choose, or does he believe he should make that decision for them? Does he treat latinos with dignity and respect, or does he advocate "show me your papers" or talk about self deportation? Does he look down on those who are in unfortunate financial circumstances or does he call them victims feeding off the government teet? The person who stands up for those people is the person who demonstrates character. He is the guy I want leading this country. I'm not trying to stick it to the man, I'm trying to keep the man from sticking it to the weakest amongst us. I appreciate that you have shrunk to namecalling in the absense of providing an articulate argument about what you stand for, but as far as I can see you are all about making every decision based on money. That is your business, but to suggest I'm a bitter, angry person because I think bigger than that is a bit insulting and unintelligent.
* We all want clean air and water. Describing Republicans as ones who want children to suffer under anything worse is sad on your part.
You said you want to get rid of the EPA. Who do you think is responsible for ensuring air and water stay clean? You might not overtly say you don't want children to suffer, but the consequenses of what you are saying are just that.
* Unions bankrupt local and state treasuries. Fact.

Without unions, the people who teach our children, keep our homes from burning to the ground and protect us from criminals wouldn't be making a living wage. The point about unions is that if people were treated fairly in the first place, unions wouldn't have come into existence.
* No good or service that the government controls makes costs go down. It's a logistics and financial $hitshow that won't make "access", "quality" or "cost" any better.

Dude, 30 million people now have insurance that didn't have insurance before Obamacare. The efficiency of private industry didn't step up to the plate for these people -- in fact it abandoned them. Sometimes government has to step up to the plate. It's why we should all want a president to worry about 100% of the citizens and not thumb their nose at 47% of them.

* Every poll has these two neck and neck and you claim Romney will NEVER be president? Haha...give me a break. All I can gaurantee is it will be close.

I suggest you take a closer look at the polls. Look at the state-by-state polls and give me your honest assessment of Romney's chances of winning Ohio, PA, Michigan, Florida, Iowa, Virginia, Colorado ... He has to carry a lot of these states to have a chance. He's losing in every one of these states in every poll -- even the Fox News poll. As a ND fan, we all have a lot of experience in blind optimism. I'm glad you are putting it to good use outside the context of college football.

 

[GoIrish41]

GoIrish -

1) Go hug a tree, but stay away from my ticket oak.

2) there is a reason unions are dominant in the public sector and facing extinction in the private sector. It is based in economics and economics have to be tortured to near death before the public sector faces reality.

3) Obamacare does not change ACCESS to healthcare, no one was denied before and all of the same people will declare medical bankruptcies going forward as they are today. If anything, it takes funds from Medicare to fund more Medicaid (take from old to give to younger but poor).

I argue people have even less incentive to take any care of themselves since they have been given the (false) impression that government will take care of their healthcare. So preventative care moves in the wrong direction (rather doctors will provide more "preventative care" because more people will make poor health choices).

4) you remind me of why I stepped away from this thread for a few weeks. Hateful partisan bickering is tiresome whether it is Rachel Maddow or Sean Hannity.

1. Ah, RDU, what a fantastic humorist.
2. So, this is based in economics ANDeconomics? Interesting. That is something I haven't considered from an economic standpoiint OR an economic standpoint.
3. I'll give you this one. They have always had access to the most inefficient and expensive healthcare available -- they could go to the emergency room. And, no doubt people will start eating lard and bacon for every meal now that they don't have the worry about healthcare. Score one for RDU!
4. I didn't even realize you were gone!

 

[RDU Irish]

South Park Underpants Gnomes Profit Plan - YouTube

Found this secret internal footage of Obama and his economic advisors.

 

[ND NYC]

simply put, Romney kicked Obama *** last night.

Obama was ill prepared, disinterested and came off like he didnt want to be there.

 

[RDU Irish]

1) Medicare - Romney reversed the perpetual scare tactics of the Dems over seniors. Romney was clear that nothing changes for those at or near retirement.

2) Taxes - Green subsidies would pay 50 years of oil & gas subsidies. Oil subsidies are on the table "pay for" dropping the corporate rate. Difficult concept - reducing deductions + lower rates = revenue neutral especially when he acknowledges he cannot force feed legislation and needs to work with both sides. Promises revenue neutrality in cleaning up tax code with rich continuing to pay a higher proportion of taxes. Another difficult concept but valid.

3) Education - Mass = #1 so STFO that I don't know or care about education. 90B to green tech would pay for 2 million teachers to counter Obama's attempts to claim priorities.

4) Jobs - Romney hammered this without being redundant. Worked it into tons of answers from different angles. Made it clear his #1 priority is jobs. Great counter to Obama saying only 3% of businesses filing under individual tax code pay at 35% rate, "Yeah, but they employ half of those workers and 25% of the overall private labor force."

5) Partisanship - I think this is a huge issue for the casual voter and independent voter. Romney made a concise and effective case for his track record and was convincing in promising to meet with Dem leaders day one to get to work. Obama's response was absolutely wrong. He retorts with partisan defensiveness. "you say repeal of Obamacare is day one, well democrats will have something to say about that!" No claim to even try to work with Republicans from Obama, no olive branch to the opposition to get to work if re-elected ESPECIALLY when he is guaranteed to face a Republican house.

Winning is nice, but I thought Romney did a good job saying and doing it in a way that was compelling to those in the middle. He definitely won votes last night, not only from fence riders but energizing his base. They may be upset about running to the middle on a few things, but he made up for it with passion, presentation and presence. Besides, did anyone really think Mitt is a hard right winger anyway?

 

[RDU Irish]

Henninger: 2012's Sure Losers—Young People - WSJ.com

An article reinforcing my belief that Obama's youth vote will not turn out.

Larry J. Sabato's Crystal Ball » VOTER TURNOUT: HEADING DOWNWARD IN 2012?

2008 saw 61.6% voter turnout. Obama taking 53% to McCain 45.6%. 1.5% went to fringe candidates. Reversion to twenty year average would put voter turnout closer to 55%. Split the difference and I would say 58% for this cycle might still be generous but represents about 1 in 17 who voted last time staying home, not as imposing when you consider there were ten eligible voters staying home in the last election for every 17 that showed at the polls in the best turnout election we have seen since the voter age was changed to 18 in 1972.

Of those 3.6% not voting, I think a vast majority would have voted Obama in 2008, maybe 80/20 which would swing the percentages to 51.3/47.2. If turnout falls futher to 55%, you have a dead heat of 49.7/48.9 with Romney only needing to turn 1 out of 100 voters to his cause, all else equal.

Now add the third party element, last election drew 1.4% to odd balls. That could easily expand to 2%, again drawing mostly from disenchanted Obama voters. I have a hard time seeing how someone open to third party changes from McCain to third party, they would more likely stay third party both rounds.

 

[GoIrish41]

1) Medicare - Romney reversed the perpetual scare tactics of the Dems over seniors. Romney was clear that nothing changes for those at or near retirement.


2) Taxes - Green subsidies would pay 50 years of oil & gas subsidies. Oil subsidies are on the table "pay for" dropping the corporate rate. Difficult concept - reducing deductions + lower rates = revenue neutral especially when he acknowledges he cannot force feed legislation and needs to work with both sides. Promises revenue neutrality in cleaning up tax code with rich continuing to pay a higher proportion of taxes. Another difficult concept but valid.

Fact Check: Fact Check: Romney’s green math
3) Education - Mass = #1 so STFO that I don't know or care about education. 90B to green tech would pay for 2 million teachers to counter Obama's attempts to claim priorities.

4) Jobs - Romney hammered this without being redundant. Worked it into tons of answers from different angles. Made it clear his #1 priority is jobs. Great counter to Obama saying only 3% of businesses filing under individual tax code pay at 35% rate, "Yeah, but they employ half of those workers and 25% of the overall private labor force."

5) Partisanship - I think this is a huge issue for the casual voter and independent voter. Romney made a concise and effective case for his track record and was convincing in promising to meet with Dem leaders day one to get to work. Obama's response was absolutely wrong. He retorts with partisan defensiveness. "you say repeal of Obamacare is day one, well democrats will have something to say about that!" No claim to even try to work with Republicans from Obama, no olive branch to the opposition to get to work if re-elected ESPECIALLY when he is guaranteed to face a Republican house.

Winning is nice, but I thought Romney did a good job saying and doing it in a way that was compelling to those in the middle. He definitely won votes last night, not only from fence riders but energizing his base. They may be upset about running to the middle on a few things, but he made up for it with passion, presentation and presence. Besides, did anyone really think Mitt is a hard right winger anyway?

Problem is, nobody really knows what Romney is except a guy who desperately wants to be president.

I actually agree with some of you analysis about why Romney did well in the debate last night. That said, last night there were no fact checkers on the stage with the two candidates. Much of what he said will come out in the wash and be gone over in exhaustive detail by pundant until the next debate. I also think you are underestimating the degree to which Romney's base will be forefiving about his dramatic shift left last night and in the days leading up to the debate.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

Problem is, nobody really knows what Romney is except a guy who desperately wants to be president.

I actually agree with some of you analysis about why Romney did well in the debate last night. That said, last night there were no fact checkers on the stage with the two candidates. Much of what he said will come out in the wash and be gone over in exhaustive detail by pundant until the next debate. I also think you are underestimating the degree to which Romney's base will be forefiving about his dramatic shift left last night and in the days leading up to the debate.

We know the president performed poorly and out was outdone when Chris Matthews has a meltodown on msnbc.

We hardly knew a thing about Obama in 2008 and the country elected him. We didn't know what exactly "hope and change" meant, but we do now. We didn't know as much about his past, his influences, and his beliefs as we do now. We knew about his radical (and outright racist) pastor of 20 years, but the media tried to keep that hush hush. We still don't know what his college transcipts look like, but we have Bush's and Kerry's.

Romney is who he is, no Reagan but certainly a free market, private sector guy who believes in people, not government programs as solutions.

*** One thing that both guys got wrong last night is education. Nothing in the Constitution is mentioned about education because it should be left up to the states to handle. The idea that the president/ congress can hire teachers is flat out wrong. Only school districts/ counties can hire. And yes, I was and still am against "no child left behind" and "race to the top."

 

[GoIrish41]

We know the president performed poorly and out was outdone when Chris Matthews has a meltodown on msnbc.

We hardly knew a thing about Obama in 2008 and the country elected him. We didn't know what exactly "hope and change" meant, but we do now. We didn't know as much about his past, his influences, and his beliefs as we do now. We knew about his radical (and outright racist) pastor of 20 years, but the media tried to keep that hush hush. We still don't know what his college transcipts look like, but we have Bush's and Kerry's.

Romney is who he is, no Reagan but certainly a free market, private sector guy who believes in people, not government programs as solutions.
*** One thing that both guys got wrong last night is education. Nothing in the Constitution is mentioned about education because it should be left up to the states to handle. The idea that the president/ congress can hire teachers is flat out wrong. Only school districts/ counties can hire. And yes, I was and still am against "no child left behind" and "race to the top."

did you not own a television set 4 years ago? You couldn't flip the channel without seeing Rev. Wright. ... I won't even get into the irony that is evident with regard to Romney's tax returns.

Not trying to be a smarta**, but I really don't know what you mean by this. Can you explain? I understand the dig on Obama, but I'm not sure I get the point about Romney. He did say that half of the country was made up of "victums" who believe they are entitled to healthcare and food. What do you mean he believes in people? I have to be missing something.

States, counties and school districts count on federal dollars to fund education and hire teachers. Like it or not, the federal government plays a key role in the education of our youth. If you can make a logical argument on how the states, counties and school districts can raise the money to foot the bill for education, I'm all ears. However, doing education on the cheap at the expense of our young people is a nonstarter. Education is the key to this country's future.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

Yes, I did own a TV set. Media tried covered it up and then defended obama. Said we couldn't hold him accoubtable for what his pastor said. Said it means nothing and tells us nothing. It told us a lot.

When I said he believes in people, he believes that individuals are free and capable to choose their own desntiy, their own healthcare, make their own decisions as opposed to big gov programs that plan people's lives and "takes care" of everyone.

States count very little on federal money for funding of education. Most counties/ districts get their revenue from local property taxes. Don't paint me as that guy who "hates teachers" and wants to raise children who can't read and do taxes.

I'm citing the Constitution. Not one word in there about education. States have freedom to handle it as they will, like they do with gay marriage. States/ counties can take a number of different steps: re-evaluate teachers' pensions and salaries (wisconsin), encourage more competition (charter and private schools), raise property taxes, or districts can eliminate programs temporarily (art, music, etc.). None of this is easy and none of it is fun. But until the private sector gets booming again, poeple earn more money, and pay more in taxes, this is the state of public education.

Underlying point: We as a country cannot rely on the federal government for every problem we face, especially in education.

If Romney or Obama ever come out and say, "I'll invest ***x dollars to hire yyyyy teachers"...I will vomit in my mouth. Federal government does not hire teachers.

 

[WaveDomer]

Problem is, nobody really knows what Romney is except a guy who desperately wants to be president.

This is bull. Romney has been around for years and years. I said this earlier in the thread and will say it again: Romney is the most all around successful person to ever run for POTUS. Ever. Look at his accomplishments in: education, career, family, church, and charity. It is unequaled. When he was at Bain he worked wonders because he is the ultimate pragmatist. They would look at a failing company, get all the info possible, grind the numbers, talk ideas extensively, then put the plan into action. You might not like his politics, but there is no denying the guy is an amazing human being. If you sat next to him on an airplane, didn't know who he was, and then asked him about his life, you wouldn't be able to believe it. I don't give 2 s&$%s about having a beer with the president or having someone who is clued into all the hip garbage on television. I want competence. I want that in my doctor, in my teachers, in my lawyer, and in my politicians. They released his tax records, and also a summary of 20 years worth of taxes. Why don't you go look at what they say. Go look at what he gives to charity. This BS about "he's secretive" or he's "elitist" blah blah blah. BS. He does amazing things for people with his giving, not only money but of his time. Go look it up.

 

[RDU Irish]

I thought Romney missed an opening on education - Student Loans. Obama bragged about taking out the middleman and saving $60B. Pointing out a 6.8% interest rate charged to students, that cannot escape this debt in bankruptcy, while the Treasury pays 3.5% on 30 year Treasuries. And rates are triple that of only six years ago despite interest rates going down. Romney mumbled something about raising grants too, seemed clueless.

$50K Student loan under Obama @ 6.5%- $375/month for twenty years ($90,000 total paid)
$50K Student loan under Bush @ 2%- $253/month for twenty years ($60,700 total paid)

My wife pays 6.55% after a quarter point reduction for auto pay for 2010 program completion. I think I pay 1.5% or less after auto pay and some other deduction for a 2006 program completion. This does not factor in the compounding effect of unsubsidized loans tacking on interest during school versus subsidized not adding interest until six months after graduation. 6.8% over four or five years for the average undergrad is painful

 

[Bluto]

I'm thinking in a few houres there's going to be a ton of Romney the "flip
flopper" and Romney the "liar" commercials.

Anyhow, I have a number of conservative friends who like all the wacky conservative pages. The comments on those pages regarding the debate seem like a mix of sound bites from Red Dawn, Rambo III and if it had overdubs Birth of a Nation.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

Another thing that won't change unless young people entering college and parents wake up and smell the BS....

stop taking up fake majors that offer no skills or have no demand in the marketplace. go to school to learn something useful so you get a return on your investment.

that is one area (50% of college grads this year are unemployed or working part time) that isn't obama's fault. and wouldn't be romney's fault, either.

 

[WaveDomer]

Another thing that won't change unless young people entering college and parents wake up and smell the BS....

stop taking up fake majors that offer no skills or have no demand in the marketplace. go to school to learn something useful so you get a return on your investment.

that is one area (50% of college grads this year are unemployed or working part time) that isn't obama's fault. and wouldn't be romney's fault, either.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/IRVdiHu1VCc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Mike Rowe wrote to President Obama 4 years ago regarding job training etc. Never heard back. He wrote to Romney and heard back and has appeared with Romney in Ohio.

 

[RallySonsOfND]

Another thing that won't change unless young people entering college and parents wake up and smell the BS....

stop taking up fake majors that offer no skills or have no demand in the marketplace. go to school to learn something useful so you get a return on your investment.

that is one area (50% of college grads this year are unemployed or working part time) that isn't obama's fault. and wouldn't be romney's fault, either.

Exactly. Coming from a very business oriented family (both my grandfather and father starting their own businesses) everything is about ROI. My sister and I both picked our colleges based on that thought, our majors based on that. She got hired during the worst of the economic downfall and made BANK. I'll be looking at the same next fall.

 

[GoIrish41]

This is bull. Romney has been around for years and years. I said this earlier in the thread and will say it again: Romney is the most all around successful person to ever run for POTUS. Ever. Look at his accomplishments in: education, career, family, church, and charity. It is unequaled. When he was at Bain he worked wonders because he is the ultimate pragmatist. They would look at a failing company, get all the info possible, grind the numbers, talk ideas extensively, then put the plan into action. You might not like his politics, but there is no denying the guy is an amazing human being. If you sat next to him on an airplane, didn't know who he was, and then asked him about his life, you wouldn't be able to believe it. I don't give 2 s&$%s about having a beer with the president or having someone who is clued into all the hip garbage on television. I want competence. I want that in my doctor, in my teachers, in my lawyer, and in my politicians. They released his tax records, and also a summary of 20 years worth of taxes. Why don't you go look at what they say. Go look at what he gives to charity. This BS about "he's secretive" or he's "elitist" blah blah blah. BS. He does amazing things for people with his giving, not only money but of his time. Go look it up.

Sure, he's been around for years. As a moderate governor, as a hard-right conservative running for the Republican nomination, and last night as a guy who was sprinting to the left. Which guy is he really? That's what my comment was referring to.

I do emphatically deny that he is an amazing human being. Great businessman, man of the church, even charitable -- but you are barking up the wrong tree if you think I'll ever believe that a man who ruined people over and over to enrich himself is a good human being. I believe that he is pure scum. All that money he gave to mormon charity he took from hardworking American citizens who he put out of work because people in China would do the work for less. As far as his summary of taxes goes, you can believe whatever you wish. There is a reason he isn't showing them. I can write anything in summary of my taxes that I want to if there is no way for anyone to check. Hell, I gave $6 million to charity last year. See what I mean?

 

[RallySonsOfND]

Sure, he's been around for years. As a moderate governor, as a hard-right conservative running for the Republican nomination, and last night as a guy who was sprinting to the left. Which guy is he really? That's what my comment was referring to.

I do emphatically deny that he is an amazing human being. Great businessman, man of the church, even charitable -- but you are barking up the wrong tree if you think I'll ever believe that a man who ruined people over and over to enrich himself is a good human being. I believe that he is pure scum. All that money he gave to mormon charity he took from hardworking American citizens who he put out of work because people in China would do the work for less. As far as his summary of taxes goes, you can believe whatever you wish. There is a reason he isn't showing them. I can write anything in summary of my taxes that I want to if there is no way for anyone to check. Hell, I gave $6 million to charity last year. See what I mean?

Oh please. Why am I suppose to care what Romney does with his money? Free Trade is the most efficient way to produce a good. It is all about comparative advantage, and efficiency.

If the people in China can produce a good for less than America can, THEY SHOULD BE THE ONES PRODUCING IT. Are you also upset that machinery is putting more Americans out of work? How about different technological improvements? Guess what, those machines now employ people who build them and perform maintenance.

What is more American, a Camaro that is built in Canada, or the BMW that is built in South Carolina?