Tom Rinaldo's Journal
Member since: Mon Oct 20, 2003, 06:39 PM
Number of posts: 15,259
Number of posts: 15,259
That notorious quote from President George W. Bush continues to echo in today's Republican Party. The same macho posture, the same "our troops can handle anything the enemy throws at us, so let them try" invitation to even greater carnage. It was easy for George W. Bush to say, he sat 7,000 miles away from the action surrounded by the Secret Service
The last time I looked Mitt Romney wasn't stationed in the Middle East either. Nor does he have children stationed there. Nor does he work for an airline that flies there, or even an Oil Company that works there. For all of his devotion to the Mormon Church, Mitt Romney doesn't toil for Christ as a missionary in Africa, and he isn't an aid worker there either, feeding and caring for families at risk of dying from malnutrition.
No, Mitt Romney is safe here inside America, running for President of the United States. He isn't in physical danger when passions surge over religious issues in Africa or the Mideast. He can afford to act tough and try to score political points against the President while American lives are at risk. Because his isn't. It's only those who find themselves in harms way who have anything to worry about. The troops Romney so conspicuously failed to mention during his acceptance speech, for example, and our diplomatic personnel who risk their lives daily serving American interests in the four corners of the world. Yes Republicans love the military. It’s just the soldiers they can't bring themselves to support.
Does Mitt Romney condone hate speech against other religions? Does he favor sticking it to people of a faith that is not his own? That might explain his defiant rejection of any attempt to calm the waters as mere "sympathy for terrorists". Perhaps that is it. It's more likely though that Romney is just a politician trolling for votes during an election campaign, indifferent to the fate of innocent lives that his crass bravado puts at greater risk.
Posted by Tom Rinaldo | Wed Sep 12, 2012, 10:24 AM (3 replies)
Politicians spit it out like an epithet; “only more of the same!” As if that’s always the worst option possible, give us anything but more of the same. Democrats and Republicans instinctively belittle the day when nothing new is offered beyond the oft ridiculed more of the same. Except when times are good of course. When times are good the temptation sets in to change absolutely nothing, not even your jersey if you’re a baseball pitcher on a winning streak. Keep a good thing going and don’t tinker with success. Politics flickers like a bad fluorescent light bulb; change, freeze, change, freeze. What gets lost in the strobe lights is usually common sense.
We know better in our own lives, at least most of us do. Our personal decisions are less mechanical. Just because drinking that first vodka and tonic brought about generally desirable results is no reason to assume that drinking a second, third, or fourth one will do the same. Most of us resist that blind assumption. Common sense and experience kick in instead. Likewise with life’s adversities. You start running a high fever so you see the Doctor. She says you have a bad infection and prescribes antibiotics as a treatment. You go home and take a full dose but still feel absolutely awful. Same thing happens in the morning: Little or no improvement. What do you do that evening? You go for more of the same.
It is the nature of calamities that destruction comes in s relative blink of an eye, while recovery can seem to drag on for eternity. An assassin nearly took Gabby Giffords life. The world she knew was obliterated in an instant. It required drastic action to save her, but there was no rapid way to restore her health. Gabby is an inspiration and an American hero. Everyday she faces more of the same; more stressful physical therapy, more frustrating mental exercises. Over and over the prescription essentially remains the same, because slow as it may be, that is the best route to her recovery.
We have all been schooled well about the weather. We know the difference between a category one, two, or three storm. Hurricane Cindy struck Louisiana during the same year that Hurricane Katrina did. Recovery from the former was rapid, not so the latter. Americans understand that not all hurricanes are the same. Neither are recessions. Over the past hundred years the United States has experienced numerous recessions, but only one was a category 5, and that was The Great Depression. Recovery from that one dragged on for nearly a decade, and many believe it would have taken even longer had it not been for World War II.
The Recession that President Obama inherited the first day he stepped into the oval office might not have clocked in then as a category 5, but it certainly rated a high category 4, the deadliest economic storm our nation has faced since the 1930’s. When Hurricane Cindy first struck Louisiana in July 2005 it was initially categorized as a Tropical Storm, but was later upgraded to a Category 1 hurricane in the post-storm analysis. Something similar happened with The Great Recession.
While President Obama fought to prevent an economic slide into a second Great Depression, he assured America that we could turn adversity around; that our worst fears would be averted, and that strength would be restored to America’s economy. As FDR once famously stated, “We have nothing to fear but fear itself”, and Barack Obama worked hard to resstore consumer confidence in the American economy by proclaiming his own confidence in America’s future. He staked his political reputation on an economic recovery, and we are in one today.
Our recovery is slower than the President initially forcast, but it turns out that the recession itself was far worse than how experts were characterizing it when Obama actually made his recovery projections. That fact was revealed in revised figures documenting the actual GDP loss during the recession that were retroactively released by the U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Economic Analysis:
“The overall pattern of quarterly changes during the downturn was similar in both the revised and previously published estimates, though the revised estimates show larger decreases for 2008:Q4 (-8.9 percent compared with -6.8 percent) and for 2009:Q1 (-6.7 percent compared with -4.9 percent).”
Americans love Super Glue and Duct Tape, but there isn’t always a quick fix for every problem. Some solutions play out over time, and require perseverance to achieve. Sometimes it takes more of the same. Sometimes it even takes four more years. One thing though is certain. No disaster victim is ever well served by sending them back to a disaster zone. Wrong policies caused our economy to crash in 2008. Restoring those who advocated them to power in Washington would be a change from “more of the same”. It would be more of what caused the disaster in the first place.
Posted by Tom Rinaldo | Sat Sep 8, 2012, 02:14 PM (2 replies)
Emotionally, that's what just came up for me, with the emphasis on Part 3 "The Return of the King", and no I'm not making a specific reference to Bill Clinton here. I'm not tempted to assign direct character comparisons to actual real Democrats- with one possible exception.
There is something about Chris Mathews that is reminding me of the Dwarf; Gimli son of Glóin. It's the way Mathews has seemed transformed during both parties national conventions; from a grumpy one step removed commentator whose glory days were in the past, into a happy warrior with renewed purpose youth and vigor. It's become politics with conviction for a cause that he believes in again for Mathews, not just a game of Hardball.
But it is the feeling present at the Democratic National Convention that is evoking the Lord of The Rings trilogy for me - not similarities with a specific cast of characters. There is just something epic in the air, the struggle is joined, the outcome is momentous. The days of sleep walking are over; the days of shirking from conflict are passed. An ancient coalition, ragged from years of distrust and neglect, is reassembling for battle. The Elves are reengaged, Gondor is rising again. You can feel it in the crowd at the Democratic Convention. We can feel it in ourselves. Finally we confront the Right head on, in a fight for America's future.
There is a bigger than life feeling to what we are witnessing now. But that is what life feels like when, animated by core principles, we take on a battle with life or death implications for millions.
Posted by Tom Rinaldo | Thu Sep 6, 2012, 02:30 AM (12 replies)
It's hard to come up with a populist political statement that even approaches the punch that this teaser for a empty calories video found on Yahoo carries. Purses that cost more than a house; when millions of Americans have recently lost their homes to foreclosures, and millions more have been living on the streets for years. We all know there are Super Rich people in the world. Usually we are numbed to what that means, but it's hard to avoid the implications here. The video itself is drivel but it does name drop a little if that type of thing interests you. Here is the full "text" for the story:
Most Expensive Handbags: Did you know that one purse can cost as much as a house?
Fri, Aug 31, 2012 - Who Knew? 2:02 | 376,933 views
Hobbies can be pricey, especially if you are into collecting expensive, luxury handbags. The most costly purses are covered in diamonds and are in fact a rarity. Check out some of the most exorbitant handbags and the celebrities who own them.
America is a nation that is said to celebrate wealth - even while children starve. Speaking for myself only, I wouldn't so much mind the super wealthy spending houses for a purse if we housed the homeless first and fed the hungry children who live among us.
I know, I know, the market doesn't work that way, and government is "heavy handed". There is some truth in both those claims. But there is also something wrong about a nation that smiles while the super rich stylishly carry the equivalent of a house or two off their shoulder to a party while children starve. There just is, and most Americans in their gut know it.
Our economy, our society itself, is constructed around the premise that wealth is an incentive to productivity. OK, fine. But how much incentive do the Super Rich need to contribute to our nation's productivity? I think at the point where they start purchasing $100,000 purses the potency of that incentive has already been spent.
No one within hiking distance of the mainstream in American politics advocates putting a cap on personal fortunes. I'm not advocating that either. But there is something deeply morally repugnant about the feverish efforts on the Right to LOWER the tax rates the Super Wealthy must pay in this country, one that gives them the liberty to burn through millions on impulse purchases while fellow citizens die from lack of affordable health care.
Posted by Tom Rinaldo | Tue Sep 4, 2012, 12:09 PM (13 replies)
I just stumbled upons something I wrote a while ago that seems relevent right now in this Party Convention season. It's the 2016 Tea Party Pledge to Privatize Citizenship. Originally posted on July 4th, 2011:
Today as we celebrate the American Revolution, let us look forward to future milestones of freedom, independence, and the ultimate triumph of free market forces. Once again Americans will lead the way, when the Tea Party of 2016 unveils its manifesto. The road will be long and hard and resistance will be furious, but true freedom, profound individual capitalism, will not be denied us. Here now, reconstructed from the future through the science of guided interest group polling, is the outline of our coming liberation as seen and described by the Tea
Posted by Tom Rinaldo | Sun Sep 2, 2012, 11:38 AM (5 replies)
No one exactly saw it coming, not then, not there anyway. And certainly not in the person of Clint Eastwood; who is widely viewed as a relatively down to earth and thoughtful man. .But it happened on prime time with the major networks watching – the Republican Party hit its crazy limit. Too many reckless charges made for far too long; Republicans finally maxed out on over the top, and the credit voters had given them is now overextended and in the process of being revoked.
The build up was slow, and steady. Rome wasn’t burnt down in a day, but the defining moment was precise and decisive; a uniform collective “WTF?” And though, in hindsight many could see it coming, the literal moment it happened was unsettling. That charge card had been used a hundred times before; often well beyond the normal limits. Why would it stop working now? That’s how it happens though. A clerk at a check out counter apologetically looks up one day and says, “I’m sorry sir but that account has been closed.”.
The Republican Party is branded now as just a wee bit unhinged. A large segment of the American people had been doggedly resisting reaching that conclusion for several years; But the Republican Party finally breached those lingering doubts, with a spotlight focused on center stage during the climax to their National Convention.
A point comes when thin ice cracks and it cracked that night. Mitt Romney thought he could skate past the danger, but he really should have known better. There were very recent sightings of Republican crazy, most notably in the persona of “legitimate rape” Akin, who believed “good girls” could shut it down. The public was primed for a Republican defining moment at the Convention, and it came. Unfortunately for Mitt Romney, it didn't come during his speech
Republicans have an old Party with a proud tradition. Getting pegged for being loony wasn’t easily accomplished. Republicans used to be thought of as the relatively sober team in politics, to the point of seeming staid at times. Wild eyes were seen as a Democratic trait. That hasn’t been true for a long time actually but conventional wisdom resists new data. It took a lot of new data on the Republican Party to set up that empty chair defining moment.
It took Pat Robertson blaming Katrina on gays, and Sarah Palin quitting as Governor with less than half of one term served. It took a 2010 Republican Senatorial Candidate warning about “Second Amendment Remedies” while another assured us she wasn’t a witch. It took Newt Gingrich calling Barack Obama a greater threat to America than al-Qaeda and Mitt Romney resurrecting the Cold War. It took Rush Limbaugh denouncing a young law student as a slut for defending the use of Birth Control, and Donald Trump sending private investigators to Hawaii to look for the President’s fake birth certificate.
It took all that and so much more but the hits never stopped coming in today’s Republican Party. As odd as Clint Eastwood’s performance was on Friday night, the oddest part was that somehow it did not seem all that out of place there once the initial shock wore off. The delegates in fact seemed to love it. It was just another crazy moment from a Party that rather predictably excels at them. But it was one crazy too many for a lot of Americans who tuned in to see whether they can trust Mitt Romney with the Presidency. The image of his Party is now an empty chair.
Posted by Tom Rinaldo | Sat Sep 1, 2012, 11:37 PM (15 replies)
Every major party presidential year convention advances the agenda of the party holding it - they don't spend tens of millions for nothing - the only question is; how helpful was the Republican Convention that just ended? The answer this time should be reassuring to Democrats.
The Republican convention had been hyped for weeks as the first of 4 big chances (the debates are the others), that Romney will have to seize the narrative message of the campaign, to fire up his base, and to captivate undecideds voters with his leadership and with his vision for America. Instead the Convention warmed up Romney's base, gaffes and missteps partially muddied the Republican campaign narrative (think Clint, peanut throwing attendees, and speakers who glorified themselves as examples), and undecided voters know no more details about Romney's plans to change America's direction (other than changing the occupant of the White House) than they did before the Republican Convention. In other words they still know very little about Mitt Romney's plans.
Without Romney offering a compelling vision - something more distinctive and a little more specific than essentially loving America and hating unemployment, there is no strong reason for undecided voters to vote for Mitt Romney. Republicans are hoping they will be motivated by a desire to kick out the incumbent. Perhaps they will be but Mitt Romney has been counting on that dynamic since the day he officially declared for President, and the Republican Convention has come and gone with the President barely scuffed up by the proceedings. A good case can be made the Republican rising star new VP pick, Paul Ryan, landed as many blows against himself as he did against Obama by repeatedly and flagrantly distorting the truth and getting caught doing so.
For a supposedly good businessman Mitt Romney got a rather poor return on his investment in the Republican National Convention. Now Barack Obama gets to look forward to his own 4 day infomercial broadcast from Charlotte next week. The bar has been set exceedingly low for the Democrats to do better.
Posted by Tom Rinaldo | Fri Aug 31, 2012, 10:12 AM (5 replies)
Just watched Stephanie Cutter being interviewed as a Obama campaign spokesperson this morning, and she is good, very good indeed. Can't fault her in anyway for how she handled herself in that interview. That said, she kept her emphasis focused on the Republican's gender liabilities; their extreme positions on birth control and no exceptions for rape and incest for abortions etc. Yes of course we have to hammer Republicans on that front - point granted.
But I believe that ultimately we will win or lose this election over Medicare and Social Security. The Republicans know that also. For reasons I went into in another DU OP Romney essentially had to pick Paul Ryan as his running mate. After doing so his campaign lost no time going on offense (always the best defense) regarding Medicare and Social Security. Ryan no doubt will do the same tonight. Every day that Democrats don't pound home our case regarding those two popular social programs we are giving the Republicans an opening to redefine themselves as the Party fighting to defend them.
Democrats are in danger of repeating the error made in 2004 regarding John Kerry's military service and heroism. We couldn't wrap our thoughts around Republicans turning that advantage around against Kerry. It just seemed too preposterous. Factually of course it was, but politically clearly it wasn't. It's as if our side never studied how the classic "Big Lie" functions. Democrats got caught flat footed then and we are in danger of having that happen to us again today.
Once a lie has legs it is difficult to run down and corner. Social Security and Medicare are the safety net for the Middle Class. They are the main event, and the battle over which political party emerges in the public mind as the one fighting to save them will occur in the center ring. Don't count on Republicans trying to run away from that debate. They will instigate it at every opportunity and by so doing attempt to define it on their terms. Forget the conventional wisdom that Democrats are viewed as the traditional defenders of those programs. Republicans will spend a billion dollars if necessary to turn that wisdom on its head.
Remember the Purple Heart band-aids Republicans used to mock John Kerry's heroism? Prepare for claims that Democrats are offering band aid solutions to preserving Social Security and Medicare while those programs hemorrhage red ink from potentially fatal budgetary wounds; one only Republicans are willing to address with the surgery needed to save them. Democrats need to focus our fire against the Republicans on this crucial front while we still hold the higher ground. Don't be lulled into a sense of false security by the republican prior track record. Tonight the Republicans begin in earnest to define themselves as the best friends Medicare and Social Security ever had.
Posted by Tom Rinaldo | Wed Aug 29, 2012, 10:59 AM (15 replies)
Just got back a little while ago from a March and Rally in Albany calling for a New York State wide ban on fracking for natural gas. Probably about two to three thousand people took part. That might not seem like a large number to some, but it is. Albany is not a very large city nor is it located near any larger ones. And remember, Monday is a workday. This wasn't a weekend rally with big name speakers and entertainers.
Almost everyone there, with very strong circumstantial evidence supporting it, believes Cuomo plans to go through with allowing fracking in the Southern Tier area of the State. Today was a warning to him of what lies ahead if he goes ahead and takes that path.
I can not in any way call myself a committed anti-fracking activist. I haven't put in the work to earn that distinction. I attended today though because I really care about this issue and I had the time and means to get there, so I went in support of those who organized it. I salute and applaud them for all the effort that went into the rousing call for action today event signifies.
While I haven't personally stepped up to become an anti-fracking activist (not yet anyway) I was an anti-nuclear power activist in the late 70's and early 80'. I was one of many grassroots organizers who brought a major energy industry to its knees for decades bu mobilizing ordinary people to do heroic things. I know a powerful grassroots movement when I see it and I saw one gathered in Albany today..
The anti-fracking coalition is broad, organized, fervent, and committed for the long haul. It is a true bottom up movement, with leaders emerging from farms and neighborhoods across the state. It is filled with the type of people that local people know well and greatly respect. They can not be marginalized or dissuaded by industry propaganda or scare tactics.
The event today culminated in the delivery of 3200 signatures on a pledge to resist fracking anywhere in New York State petition. Those aren't merely expressions of opposition to fracking, they are pledges to resist it by whatever non violent means necessary . The thousands of people who showed up today in Albany were the classic tip of the iceberg; because it was primarily a crowd of organizers who made the trip there today, come together from all across New York State and beyond. They represented far deeper ranks of hard core opponents to fracking who are busy organizing in their own communities but who could not all afford the time and money to journey to Albany on a word day.
This movement is growing and it is growing organically. It is also growing exponentially. The anti-fracking movement is deeply rooted at the community level where it can not simply be eradicated by energy corporation influence. I've been there before, I've seen how this grows, I know where this is heading and I can only hope Governor Cuomo has his eyes open and his ear to the ground, or he will be pained by what will soon hit him All Democratic elected State Senators in New York State (and they are one short of being in the majority) support a ban on fracking. Which side are you on Andrew? If you chose the wrong one you can forget about any Presidential ambitions.
Posted by Tom Rinaldo | Mon Aug 27, 2012, 06:38 PM (10 replies)
This is the Presidential Election that Republicans tried for three years to turn into a referendum on Barack Obama, It is rapidly becoming a referendum on the Republican Party instead. This is the Presidential Election that Republicans thought would be dominated by news about an anemic economic recovery and voter anxiety over stubborn unemployment numbers. Instead it has been dominated by news about Republican candidates and voter anxiety over the radical policy proposals they have embraced. Republicans worked so hard to set up this election on their chosen terms. What went wrong?
Instead of seeing a laser like focus on the economy, Americans watch the light show of a political party imploding. Pundits act surprised but they shouldn’t be. It’s been clear at least since the 2010 midterm elections that today’s Republican Party can’t be trusted with lasers. They don’t aim them where they say they will.
Remember “Jobs, jobs, jobs”, the Republican mid term mantra and proclaimed highest priority? Republicans never focused on job creation after their victory in 2010, and they never advanced an employment agenda either. The Republican laser instead focused on blaming Obama for a bad economy, even if that required blocking common sense initiatives Obama advanced to improve The Republican economic plan remained a retread of policies that gave us the Great Recession in the first place. Across the board tax cuts? That was tried before the Great Recession. Less government regulations? Republicans slashed those when they held the Presidency, and a less encumbered financial sector promptly crashed the world economy.
Simply put the Republican economic blue print is a hard one to sell, since only the wealthiest Americans actually benefit from it. So Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign sought to side step meaningful discussion about specific plans. After all, it doesn’t take a Keynesian to know that massive budget cuts don’t create jobs, yet slashing government spending is the only major new initiative Republicans have pushed since the demonstrably failed economic policies of George W. Bush’s administration.
Bottom line: Most Republican leaders never wanted a meaningful debate on either the economy or the budget (with the glaring exception of Paul Ryan who we will come to shortly). They only wanted a horrible economy to use against Obama. They might have gotten their wish had the euro zone collapsed this year as many were predicting, forcing the U.S. back into renewed recession. Paul Ryan wouldn’t be on the ticket today had that scenario materialized.
The Republican Congressional agenda revolved around obstruction in the Senate and distraction in the House, with all the hoopla several dozen attempts to repeal Obamacare plus myriad convoluted attacks on abortion could muster. While Republicans blamed Obama for a lack luster economy they deflected attention away from unsettling details of their own economic agenda. Balancing the budget is a relatively popular goal to advocate for, but far less so if it entails shredding the Middle Class safety net while preserving tax give-aways to Big Oil and rejecting the Buffet rule for millionaires.
Cue up the Republican Mirror Ball: Birthism? Check. Creeping Communism? Check. Sharia Law? Check. Obama’s Un-America Values? Check. Witch hunt for Voter Fraud ? Check. Anything other than a honest discussion about actual issues with real economic implications. Heading into summer Mitt Romney banked on a bad economy to effectively sink Obama. He campaigned on soothing sound bites with fill in the blank details, but mostly Romney blamed the President for everything that ails us. That was supposed to be enough to secure a Republican victory.
Paul Ryan though had his own personal agenda. His rise to prominence in the Republican Party was fueled by his reputation as a policy wonk, one who not only knew the numbers but was courageous enough to tabulate them in cold print on a national stage. For Paul Ryan substance, or at least the plausible appearance of it, is his political life blood.
The National Republican Party, the part not totally subsumed by the Tea Party at least, has a love hate relationship with Paul Ryan. They need Paul Ryan in order to appear credible in regards to budgetary policies. Without Ryan Republicans couldn’t wage scorched earth warfare for continuing huge tax cuts for the rich while portraying large budget deficits as leading to the inevitable downfall of America. Isn’t that a contradiction? Not to worry, Paul Ryan had a plan. Ryan crunched the numbers to support Republican bottom lines, and the Party preferred to just leave it at that. Don’t dwell on the pesky details.
Although the Paul Ryan budget has the added advantage of offering red meat to the Republican hard core base, it raises anxieties for voters outside that core when its provisions got looked at closely. In fact attacking the Ryan budget helped Democrats win seats in a string of special elections held after the 2010 mid term elections. The Democrats, it seems, needed Paul Ryan around as much as Republicans did; which is why most pundits never expected Mitt Romney to choose Paul Ryan as his running mate.
The Republican Mirror Ball helped keep voters from looking too closely at the Paul Ryan Budget, which Mitt Romney and Congressional Republicans have all formally approved. 2012 was supposed to be a referendum on Obama, not on Republican plans to privatize Medicare and Social Security. That scheme failed for two reasons. The first one is straight forward. The economic recovery under President Obama is still ongoing, albeit at a disappointing anemic rate. Had the U.S. economy begun retracting again, had a much feared double dip recession taken hold before the November elections, Republicans had good reason to believe Obama would be toast. All Romney had to do to win under that scenario was stay out of jail.
But Republicans weren’t counting on a literal U.S. fall back into recession to propel them back into the White House. A year ago they gladly would have forfeited that contingency if they somehow could have locked in an 8,3% unemployment rate for August of 2012. Republicans sowed the seeds of their own pending destruction by underestimating the American electorate.
Mitt Romney essentially thought all he had to do to defeat Barack Obama for President under prevailing circumstances was to present himself to voters as a successful businessman who “knew how the economy worked”. He stood as “Other” on a multiple choice question that had Barack Obama as the only alternate option. But it turns out the American people were resistant to the placebo effect. They actually wanted to understand more about the pill they were being asked to swallow. When they went looking for answers both Mitt Romney in specific, and Republicans in general, had precious few to offer.
Americans saw a presidential candidate tied to anti-gay and anti-immigrant positions in a Party beset by Birthers. And Americans weren’t ready to accept that one and a half years worth of tax returns was all they needed to see from a man who had amassed a fortune north of 250 million dollars while gaming the system to his personal advantage. They also didn’t go along with Romney’s logic that details about his economic plans were better left to be revealed and discussed after the November election.
Voters wondered where Mitt Romney stood on anything because he showed a disturbing ability to change his positions on everything whenever political winds shifted throughout his career. They saw a politician who either lacked in substance and convictions, or one who lacked enough faith in the voters to reveal either his core convictions or the real substance of his policy agenda.
Mitt Romney didn’t want to choose Paul Ryan as his Vice Presidential choice, Romney had to choose Paul Ryan. Ryan was the antidote to the downward spiral of the failed narrative that Mitt Romney’s campaign had become. Most voters accept that Paul Ryan, unlike Mitt Romney, actually has core convictions. Most voters believe that Paul Ryan, unlike Mitt Romney, actually welcomes public scrutiny of his policy proposals. Most voters think that Paul Ryan, unlike Mitt Romney, is willing to openly face controversy to advocate for measures he believes our nation needs. Mitt Romney needed to associate himself with someone like Paul Ryan to restore his credibility as a potential leader of the nation.
There are just two major problems with Mitt Romney’s VP pick strategy. The more the American people learn about Paul Ryan’s actual proposals and convictions, the less they like them. They actually strongly reject many of them but Mitt Romney owns them all now, since he personally picked Ryan from a plethora of VP options. Unless, of course, Mitt Romney forces Paul Ryan to disassociate himself from his own proposals and convictions, and become more like Romney himself. But that just brings us back to square one and negates the reason for choosing Ryan. Except today’s square one is even more toxic for Romney than the one from early July, since Democrats will make damn sure that voters know exactly what Paul Ryan stands for, and the sight of Mitt Romney running away from his chosen running mate does not build confidence in his leadership.
Posted by Tom Rinaldo | Sun Aug 26, 2012, 02:19 PM (17 replies)