PDA

View Full Version : Paul Ryan to be VP candidate.



Tetragrammaton
08-11-2012, 12:33 AM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/11/paul-ryan-mitt-romney_n_1684794.html


NORFOLK, Va. - Mitt Romney will announce Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) as his running mate on Saturday, according to two sources with knowledge of the decision.


Romney is making a huge mistake.

Tetragrammaton
08-11-2012, 12:42 AM
This is getting dumped in a weekend and during the closing ceremony for the Olympics. Romney wants the activist base to get riled up but wants to limit press coverage.

Spesh
08-11-2012, 12:52 AM
Wow. Surprising. And yes, i agree thats a mistake. Thought it was going to be Rob Portman. They seemed eager to work together and certainly couldnt have hurt his efforts in Ohio.

Anyone excited about this selection(those who were on the fence about voting for Romney i mean)?

Tetragrammaton
08-11-2012, 12:56 AM
Anyone who likes Paul Ryan is either voting for Romney already or on the fence because he isn't right-wing enough. It won't be appealing to true independents.

Chris Christie would have been a great choice. His gluttony will always hurt him nationally, but he is generally well liked nationally.

Tetragrammaton
08-11-2012, 12:59 AM
Paul Ryan comes from a somewhat Republican district. He won over sixty percent of the vote even in the Democratic wave elections of 2006 and 2008. Since he has never run for anything statewide in Wisconsin, that indicates he might not deliver too much of a push for Romney to win the state.

Spesh
08-11-2012, 01:27 AM
Anyone who likes Paul Ryan is either voting for Romney already or on the fence because he isn't right-wing enough. It won't be appealing to true independents.

Chris Christie would have been a great choice. His gluttony will always hurt him nationally, but he is generally well liked nationally.

That assumes Christie would have accepted. He turned down a chance to run for the big office and was originally cold to the prospect of running for VP, although he had seemingly warmed up to the idea more recently. He will have his chances in the future.

Ryan is a solid enough choice i suppose. But if he was looking to reassure his base, and appeal to some up for grab votes, Rubio would have been ideal in many ways. Rubios allies are quite zealous in his qualifications for the job and he is popular in a swing state. Ryan seems like much of what Romney has been doing this campaign: safe but uninspiring. Feels like another missed chance. Then again, after the Palin debacle, maybe steady is the way to go.

Dogbone34
08-11-2012, 01:42 AM
bad choice. the romney campaign is a mess.

CedarPhin
08-11-2012, 03:24 AM
Terrible move.

Spesh
08-11-2012, 10:30 AM
Perhaps channeling the fervent wishes of conservatives (https://twitter.com/RameshPonnuru/status/234267468556820480), Mitt Romney on Saturday introduced running mate Paul Ryan as "the next president of the United States." UPDATE: This may actually be a very, very good omen for the Republican ticket.


http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/romney-ryan-next-president-united-states-134334441.html

:lol:

trojanma
08-11-2012, 10:44 AM
Ryan is a polarizing figure, but he is smart and ambitious. He will certainly fire up the base.
He is certainly no Palin.

Christie may have been one of those guys that worked on paper and not in reality.

This will probably be a low turnout election so a fired up base may be all you need.

Valandui
08-11-2012, 05:33 PM
I still think that they wanted Rubio and he told them to go **** off. I get the impression that Rubio only supports Romney because he's the nominee and doesn't particularly care for him.

TheWalrus
08-11-2012, 06:44 PM
I still think that they wanted Rubio and he told them to go **** off. I get the impression that Rubio only supports Romney because he's the nominee and doesn't particularly care for him.

My view as well. Rubio obviously has designs on the top job. He doesn't want to align himself with a moderate loser and create burdensome video of him defending policies and positions he doesn't believe in for when it's his time.

Ryan is a riskier VP choice for Romney. He creates a bigger target for the Obama campaign to hit but it's not like they weren't making traction massacring Romney for not releasing his tax returns and for his career at Bain up to now. Not that it particularly matters anyway. Romney is a bad candidate and at the wrong time and despite Obama's weakness has never really had a shot at winning. This won't change that one way or another.

Nate Silver's math over on the 538 blog had suggested that Portman had the greatest chance of helping Romney win the election in terms of a home state "bump," but it seems the campaign decided -- for once -- to stop playing it so safe. Wisconsin isn't really in play, so the choice of Ryan is obviously more of a shot of adrenaline aimed at the base. But... with the economy down, I honestly doubt people in Ohio or Florida or Virginia are going to be particular enthusiastic about hearing about the huge discretionary cuts in the Ryan Plan. Deficits don't matter nearly so much as jobs, and it's pretty hard to argue that taking money out of the economy by reducing spending or lowering tax rates on the wealthiest by 10% will really help get things going.

SnakeoilSeller
08-11-2012, 07:07 PM
I think it is a great pick. Liberals, the media, and Obama's band of kool aid drinkers were going to bash it anyway. He appeals to conservative democrats, independents, establishment republicans and the tea party. He is young, catholic and intelligent (so the haters cannot use the meme he / she is an idiot). He has experience with dealing with the biased media. It puts Wisconsin in play.

TheWalrus
08-11-2012, 07:20 PM
I think it is a great pick. Liberals, the media, and Obama's band of kool aid drinkers were going to bash it anyway. He appeals to conservative democrats, independents, establishment republicans and the tea party. He is young, catholic and intelligent (so the haters cannot use the meme he / she is an idiot). He has experience with dealing with the biased media. It puts Wisconsin in play.

Hardly. Paul Ryan only has a 38% approval rating in Wisconsin, while 33% disapprove.

Why would Ryan appeal to independents and conservative democrats when his budget plan doesn't poll very well with them?

The guy is well spoken and obviously smart and deals well with the media. But he's hardly a candidate designed to appeal to the middle.

Spesh
08-11-2012, 07:32 PM
I think it is a great pick. Liberals, the media, and Obama's band of kool aid drinkers were going to bash it anyway. He appeals to conservative democrats, independents, establishment republicans and the tea party. He is young, catholic and intelligent (so the haters cannot use the meme he / she is an idiot). He has experience with dealing with the biased media. It puts Wisconsin in play.

I dont think anyone here had any doubt whatsoever that you would think its a great pick. And by that i mean any person that was nominated at all.

Romney had a chance to pick someone people could excite his base and appeal to independents. Instead they got someone who will appeal to conservatives. Not the worst thing in the world, but hardly the best. Anyone who truly considers themselves conservative isnt voting for Obama anyways. Its a solid pick, but had he been able to get Rubio Republicans would be tripping over themselves to welcome Romney into the White House.

edit: And yes, wanted to add that it puts Wisconsin in play. Not bad. But thats not going to make or break the election. Landing representatives from Florida or Ohio would have been more critical in this race. But, it certainly doesnt hurt Romney to try and land Wisconsin.

Tetragrammaton
08-11-2012, 10:02 PM
A lot of people have speculated that the Super PAC donors made Romney do this. It seems very possible, and it sets up Ryan's 2016 run well.

Gonzo
08-11-2012, 10:24 PM
I think it is a great pick. Liberals, the media, and Obama's band of kool aid drinkers were going to bash it anyway. He appeals to conservative democrats, independents, establishment republicans and the tea party. He is young, catholic and intelligent (so the haters cannot use the meme he / she is an idiot). He has experience with dealing with the biased media. It puts Wisconsin in play.

"insert name here" is a great pick! - (anything but Obama, regardless of the fact that there will be no change whatsoever)

Valandui
08-12-2012, 02:41 AM
I think it is a great pick. Liberals, the media, and Obama's band of kool aid drinkers were going to bash it anyway. He appeals to conservative democrats, independents, establishment republicans and the tea party. He is young, catholic and intelligent (so the haters cannot use the meme he / she is an idiot). He has experience with dealing with the biased media. It puts Wisconsin in play.

Wisconsin and Minnesota aren't the Democratic strongholds you might believe. They're very similar to the Dakotas electorally with a much larger population. They tend to send Democrats to Congress, but family values play very strongly there and are likely to lean to the Republican side in a Presidential election.

TheWalrus
08-12-2012, 04:02 AM
Wisconsin and Minnesota aren't the Democratic strongholds you might believe. They're very similar to the Dakotas electorally with a much larger population. They tend to send Democrats to Congress, but family values play very strongly there and are likely to lean to the Republican side in a Presidential election.

The last time Minnesota went Republican in a presidential election was 1972. Wisconsin last went Republican in 1984 (where every state went Republican... except, you guessed it, Minnesota). Conversely, the last time a Democrat won North or South Dakota was 1964. There's some similarities in the rural populations, I'm sure. Just as the people in rural Pennsylvania tend to vote, as in James Carville's famous example, like people from Alabama.

But states are won or lost in a kind of order. If Obama is in danger of losing a Minnesota, he's going to get crushed anyway. Which makes it sort of irrelevant.

SnakeoilSeller
08-12-2012, 08:23 AM
Hardly. Paul Ryan only has a 38% approval rating in Wisconsin, while 33% disapprove.

Why would Ryan appeal to independents and conservative democrats when his budget plan doesn't poll very well with them?

The guy is well spoken and obviously smart and deals well with the media. But he's hardly a candidate designed to appeal to the middle.

I would love to see that approval rating, please cite it for me, thank you. It should be easy to find.

And even so, Congress has a 12% approval rating and his is 38% - I find that successful. Obama's ratings are 43% approve, 51% disapprove, so using your logic, Obama should lose.

I do know that Ryan is in a democratic district, he has won it 7 times. And Obama won his district in 2008 by 4 points, while Ryan got 65% of the vote - so it would appear that lots of democrats and independents voted for him. But those are just facts.

Valandui
08-12-2012, 08:42 AM
The last time Minnesota went Republican in a presidential election was 1972. Wisconsin last went Republican in 1984 (where every state went Republican... except, you guessed it, Minnesota). Conversely, the last time a Democrat won North or South Dakota was 1964. There's some similarities in the rural populations, I'm sure. Just as the people in rural Pennsylvania tend to vote, as in James Carville's famous example, like people from Alabama.

But states are won or lost in a kind of order. If Obama is in danger of losing a Minnesota, he's going to get crushed anyway. Which makes it sort of irrelevant.
I may have been thinking of it in reverse order, where it's fairly common for Republican senators and congressmen but democrats always win the Presidential elections there. I was half asleep when I posted that.

SnakeoilSeller
08-12-2012, 08:43 AM
Also, according to Hot Air article, Rasmussen found back in July that Ryan polled better than Rice, Pawlenty and Portman with independents. Also from Gallup (and cited in the Hot Air article) Seniors were in favor of the Ryan plan. In fact if you look at the Gallup data, the only age group that did not prefer Ryan's plan to Obama's, were those brilliant 18-29 year olds. (That poll was taken back in 2011, and many of those 18-29's have since moved back in with their tax paying parents because they could not find jobs)

http://www.gallup.com/poll/147287/Americans-Divided-Ryan-Obama-Deficit-Plans.aspx?version=print

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/08/11/rasmussen-ryan-favorability-3925/

Tetragrammaton
08-12-2012, 09:31 AM
I would love to see that approval rating, please cite it for me, thank you. It should be easy to find.

And even so, Congress has a 12% approval rating and his is 38% - I find that successful. Obama's ratings are 43% approve, 51% disapprove, so using your logic, Obama should lose.

I do know that Ryan is in a democratic district, he has won it 7 times. And Obama won his district in 2008 by 4 points, while Ryan got 65% of the vote - so it would appear that lots of democrats and independents voted for him. But those are just facts.

Ryan is not in a Democratic district. It has a Cook Index of R+1.

I am not sure what comparing his approval rating to Congress' is supposed to mean - everyone knows people like their Congressman but not Congress.

SnakeoilSeller
08-12-2012, 10:36 AM
Ryan is not in a Democratic district. It has a Cook Index of R+1.

I am not sure what comparing his approval rating to Congress' is supposed to mean - everyone knows people like their Congressman but not Congress.

But, according to that post he had a favorability rating in Wisconsin, not just his district. Nobody would know who my Congressman is 100 miles from here, cannot be said of Ryan.

Spesh
08-12-2012, 12:28 PM
Not true. I did not want Portman. I was not excited about Pawlenty, Thought Christie would be a bad choice. I was intrigued by Rice, but did not know all of her other views and did not know how it would play out.

Just because liberals are sheeple and have a follow the herd mentality, does not mean that all people do.

Ah, so as a conservative your considered a special exception when you follow the herd, no?

So basically everyone except for Ryan was a bad choice(to be fair, you didnt list Rubio who i imagine you support) and would have gladly spoken up about how bad a choice they were had they been selected over Ryan. Sure, thats easily believable. Because youve come across as totally impartial concerning the two parties, its believable that you would criticize a Republican.

Anyways, anyone else find this amusing:


Mitt Romney (http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/08/romney-and-paul-ryan-tight-lipped-on-vp-process/) requested "several" years of tax returns from his potential running mates, a senior adviser to the candidate said Saturday, suggesting that those considered for the ticket may have been required to reveal more financial documents that the candidate himself.In a briefing with reporters in Virginia Saturday, senior adviser Beth Myers, who was charged with headed the vice president selection process, declined to specify exactly how many years of tax returns were required, saying only that "several" were requested.
Several, by definition, implies more than two years.


http://news.yahoo.com/romney-campaign-requested-several-years-tax-returns-vp-124514448--abc-news-politics.html

CashInFist
08-12-2012, 02:13 PM
I don't see how any Republican could not like the Paul Ryan choice for VP. It brings the most important political topic to the forefront, "The Economy". I can't wait for the Ryan/Biden debates. Get your popcorn out. LOL

CedarPhin
08-12-2012, 03:46 PM
The GOP's punted the last 2 elections and are playing for 2016 it appears.

Tetragrammaton
08-12-2012, 03:59 PM
The GOP's punted the last 2 elections and are playing for 2016 it appears.

More or less. They see a great opening; not having to face a juggernaut like Obama, and Biden unlikely to run due to his age. Bush will be a more distant memory.

X-Pacolypse
08-12-2012, 06:57 PM
Doesn't matter. Romney sucks, Ryan sucks, Obama sucks, Biden sucks, it's all more of the same.

LouPhinFan
08-13-2012, 09:45 AM
More or less. They see a great opening; not having to face a juggernaut like Obama, and Biden unlikely to run due to his age. Bush will be a more distant memory.

I wouldn't exactly classify Obama as a "juggernaut". LOL

The Ryan pick was meh to me. His budget plan had some good ideas in it, but as per the usual with Washington is lacks specifics on how it would be put into place. The debates will be interesting. Obama's silky smooth mesmerizing speech patterns full of empty promises will probably destroy Romney's vanilla mouth sputters while Ryan's pointed mundane campaign catchphrases will destroy Biden's gin soaked brainless spasams. It will make great comedy fuel. Jon Stewart will have a field day.

Valandui
08-13-2012, 06:26 PM
I wouldn't exactly classify Obama as a "juggernaut". LOL

The Ryan pick was meh to me. His budget plan had some good ideas in it, but as per the usual with Washington is lacks specifics on how it would be put into place. The debates will be interesting. Obama's silky smooth mesmerizing speech patterns full of empty promises will probably destroy Romney's vanilla mouth sputters while Ryan's pointed mundane campaign catchphrases will destroy Biden's gin soaked brainless spasams. It will make great comedy fuel. Jon Stewart will have a field day.

Obama is a juggernaut, but not in the political sense necessarily. He was built into a celebrity before he ran the first time and his appeal is based entirely on that. Dude was in the Senate for all of about five minutes before he ran for President and never had any actual positions on anything during that time. After that, McCain pulled the equivalent of what the Bears did to the Tebow-led Broncos last year and stopped running as the ultra-experienced war hero and started just reacting to the Obama campaign. This time, the American people are given the alternative of voting for an identical candidate who comes off as an ultra-rich robot who no one can relate to.