Quote from AAAintheBeltway:
I find this pick very disappointing. They are undoubtedly estactic at the White House.
This race had a simple trajectory. To win, romney needed only to turn it into a referendum on Obama. For Obama to win, he needed first to deligitimize Romney and then make the race about competing economic policies.
Obama is well on the way to succeeding with tearing down Romney. He doens;t have to change everyone's opinion, only a statistically significant chunk of independents.
Now Romney has basically handed him the other half on a silver platter. All we will hear about now is the "Romney/Ryan plan to destroy Medicare" or the "Romney/Ryan plan to destory Social Security" or the "Romney/Ryan plan to raise taxes on the middle class."
Reps have put themselves in this bizarre position. For the decades of my life (with the recent flop now that Obama is killing the enemy) they have been the hawks, the foreign adventurers, the "securers" of America's resources "accidentally" located abroad, yet at the same time they insist on very low taxes. They think this can work because this one time, when they cut taxes, revenues rose, but ignoring the fact that it was their military spending which inflated GDP. The result of those two contradictory goals? Deficits and debt have exploded, turning the country into a debtor nation. Now, a big recession comes along (the product of people gambling to secure some kind of decent retirement) and scares the shit out of people, so suddenly it's "government is too big!", completely ignoring the data which indicates we are a middling spending but low taxing country. The fear begets the Tea Party, a mass of pitiable boomers whose members (45%) will not have so much as ten grand to their name in their senior years, and who of course cannot afford tax increases, to where they should have been all along, so all they can see is spending cuts. Finally, here comes the plutocrats' accountant, Ryan, who "educates" us that the lack of currency circulating among the general population is a result of too much spending (13% of the country's budget, whoa!) on the young, the poor, the old, the sick.Quote from AK Forty Seven:
+1
Ryan is so bad Michelle Bachmenn would have been a better choice
Quote from Ricter:
Reps have put themselves in this bizarre position. For the decades of my life (with the recent flop now that Obama is killing the enemy) they have been the hawks, the foreign adventurers, the "securers" of America's resources "accidentally" located abroad, yet at the same time they insist on very low taxes. They think this can work because this one time, when they cut taxes, revenues rose, but ignoring the fact that it was their military spending which inflated GDP. The result of those two contradictory goals? Deficits and debt have exploded, turning the country into a debtor nation. Now, a big recession comes along (the product of people gambling to secure some kind of decent retirement) and scares the shit out of people, so suddenly it's "government is too big!", completely ignoring the data which indicates we are a middling spending but low taxing country. The fear begets the Tea Party, a mass of pitiable boomers whose members (45%) will not have so much as ten grand to their name in their senior years, and who of course cannot afford tax increases, to where they should have been all along, so all they can see is spending cuts. Finally, here comes the plutocrats' accountant, Ryan, who "educates" us that the lack of currency circulating among the general population is a result of too much spending (13% of the country's budget, whoa!) on the young, the poor, the old, the sick.
/rant
