bumrejects.myfreeforum.org Forum Index bumrejects.myfreeforum.org
Open discussion on just about any topic
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   Join! (free) Join! (free)
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Romney Ryan 2012 - The Ticket and The Campaign
Page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    bumrejects.myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> Republican Candidates Nov 2012
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
bieramar



Joined: 19 Nov 2010
Posts: 4441
Location: Taylor Ranch, NM

PostPosted: Sat Aug 11, 2012 2:00 pm    Post subject: Romney Ryan 2012 - The Ticket and The Campaign  Reply with quote

VP candidate Paul Ryan's initially perceived strengths and weaknesses - before the media and blog vetting begins:

STRENGTHS:

• Young; 42 years old.

• GOP leader in deficit and debt reduction, and budget matters, in the House (although the House has less favorable ratings than Romney), the traditional conservatives' and the Tea Party's main platform.
[Obama's deficits:
$1.4 trillion FY2009;
$1.3 trillion FY2010;
$1.5 trillion FY2011 (projected);
$1.1 trillion FY2012 (projected)].

• Battleground state, Wisconsin (where Obama currently is polling ahead Romney, and Obama won Ryan's District in 2008, 51%-47%).

• Charismatic rapport with Romney during media-covered joint appearances.

• Appeals to two of the GOP bases - fiscal conservatives, and Tea Partiers (and potentially Independent and Democratic fiscal conservatives).

WEAKNESSES:

• Proposed the budget plan in the House which is the most controversial issue in the struggle between (1) on the one hand avoiding another recession and maintaining the economy by continuing cash flow spending at current levels by Medicare/Social Security recipients, and (2) on the other hand reducing the deficit/debt by cutting payments to recipients in both programs.

• Forced last year's congressional standoff and the now impending "mandatory" defense cuts.

• Led the House efforts to partially privatize Social Security.

• Voted for the Bush tax cuts, the Iraq war, and the Medicare prescription drug subsidies - none of which were "paid for" by decreasing spending in other areas, i.e. increased the deficit/debt and federal borrowing from foreign individuals and central banks.

• Voted against the joint Conference's (Simpson-Bowles) recommendations to cut the deficit debt.

• Never elected/held statewide office.

• No foreign-policy experience.

• Minimal private-sector experience (short time as "marketing consultant" in family business).

• Professional politician (political analyst/speechwriter at Empower America, congressional aide, congressman).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
bieramar



Joined: 19 Nov 2010
Posts: 4441
Location: Taylor Ranch, NM

PostPosted: Sun Aug 12, 2012 1:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

My analysis of the Ryan pick as VP.
There are four separate groups in the GOP (as there are in the Democratic Party) - the members of which, to different degrees, are connected, committed and/or dedicated to the Party.

1. "Knee jerk" voters who vote Republican regardless of any other factors, issues or personalities of the candidates.

2. Local politicians whose business and social connections benefit from being identified as a Republican (but who don't necessarily vote along Party lines in secret ballots).

3. Republican national candidates and politicians who are, or wannabe, among or supported by the very wealthy and powerful who can channel funds to their campaigns across state and national borders.

4. The very rich and powerful (Republican, Democratic, independent and dual-partisan) whose wealth and power is directly related to the legislation passed in the U.S. Congress, and to the regulations, orders and directives which stem from the occupant in the White House.

Those in category 4 - with few exceptions - hedge their bets and have always won over the last half century, regardless of who is elected as president and in congress, and regardless of their public personae, posturing, and blustering (e.g. Trump, whose wealth and power won't be affected one iota if Obama is re-elected, or if Romney is elected).

Romney is a member of group 4.

The GOP as an unified party is in big trouble - if it wasn't for Obama, the common enemy, it would have disintegrated into several partisan sectors after those elected by the Tea Party in 2010 not only failed to implement conservative economic legislation, but also blocked compromises worked out in smoky back rooms. While simultaneously the religious conservative and birther partisan sectors run amok.

I think many of the group 4 folks have accepted the probability that Obama will be re-elected, and rather than expend their power and money in trying to elect Romney in November, lobbied (or demanded, pulled the strings, etc.) for Ryan as a Party unifier of the diverse bases, in order to strengthen and save the GOP and maintain the status quo of 2-Party control of selecting the Members of Congress and the occupant in the White House.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
bieramar



Joined: 19 Nov 2010
Posts: 4441
Location: Taylor Ranch, NM

PostPosted: Mon Aug 13, 2012 9:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

No bump!!!

This really surprised me - from RasmussenReports™ today, after noting that today's results is a 3-day rolling average:

"As a result, two-thirds of the interviews conducted for today's update were completed after it was announced that Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan will be Romney's vice presidential running mate. The announcement so far has had little impact on the numbers."

I do note that Ryan's approval/disapproval ratings is 39%/27% - which may explain why no bump, as the undecideds may still hold Ryan's House leadership actions (stalemates) against him.  
The key poll results will be those following the GOP Convention, which also usually is an upward bump.

EDIT/UPDATE:
The RealClearPolitics average of all major nationwide polls through August 14th continue to show Obama up +3 points.

BUT Gallup (registered voters, landline and cell phones) AND Rasmussen (self-identified likely voters, landline phones) both show a 1 to 2 point "bump" for Romney on the 13th and 14th, with Romney ahead of Obama, albeit within the margin of error.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
bieramar



Joined: 19 Nov 2010
Posts: 4441
Location: Taylor Ranch, NM

PostPosted: Thu Aug 16, 2012 1:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ryan corrected Hill reports during VP search

By Kevin McCoy, USA TODAY
August 16, 2012

While being vetted by Mitt Romney's campaign, GOP vice presidential hopeful Rep. Paul Ryan amended two years of his financial disclosure statements to add an income-producing trust worth between $1 million and $5 million that he had previously neglected to report.

The trust, an inheritance of Ryan's wife, former Washington lobbyist Janna Little Ryan, represents one of the couple's largest assets. Letters and amendments Ryan filed June 6 with the Clerk of the House show the trust produced income of between $15,001 and $50,000 in 2010, and between $100,001 and $1 million last year.

Financial disclosure rules require members of Congress to report assets and income in ranges, without specifying exact amounts. The reports are filed each year in May and are made public by the House.

Members of Congress often make mistakes in their financial disclosure filings, and congressional ethics panels have been historically forgiving of errors and omissions. Moreover, there is no evidence that Ryan tried to hide the family income or was pressured to make a late disclosure.

The trust was created in 2010 following the death of Janna Ryan's mother, Prudence Little, a prominent Oklahoma attorney. Janna Ryan's remaining interest in the trust is estimated between $1,000,001 and $5 million, according to the amended filings.

Ryan's amended reports were hand delivered to the House Clerk with letters characterizing the belated disclosures as an "inadvertent omission."

He also wrote that Heather Jones, a senior counsel for the House Ethics Committee, had examined the full trust document and agreed that no disclosure of its underlying assets was required.

Beth Myers, who headed Romney's vice presidential search team, told reporters last week the campaign began vetting a short list of potential running mates in early May. Preliminary results went to Romney in mid-June, and staffers then asked some of the contenders to clarify some issues. In a CBS 60 Minutes interview Sunday, Ryan said he gave several years of his tax returns to the Romney team during the process.

Ryan campaign spokesman Brendan Buck did not provide responses to USA TODAY's questions about the filings, including whether the omissions were revealed during the vetting process. "Did you read the letter? Seems to answer these questions," Buck wrote in an e-mail.

The filings, however, left unanswered how and why family income of such significant size initially went unreported.

Ethics specialists differed on the issue's significance.

Craig Holman, a government affairs lobbyist for Public Citizen, a consumer advocacy group, said "the amount and timing of this new disclosure suggests that Ryan had not sought to be fully transparent about his income and investments until he felt compelled to do so."

But Rob Walker, former chief counsel and staff director for both the Senate and House ethics committees, said the omission was not a serious matter. "It certainly doesn't appear on the face of anything that's been filed, including the forms and the letters, that this was anything other than inadvertent," Walker said, noting that many members of Congress file amendments to their annual financial disclosure filings.

Similarly, Cleta Mitchell, a lawyer at Foley & Lardner who advises campaigns, candidates and others on compliance issues involving financial disclosure and ethics, said the belated disclosure would not "rise to the level of either a legal or ethical problem. Just an oversight that has now been amended/corrected."

Last month, the House Ethics Committee concluded that Rep. Vernon Buchanan, R-Fla., failed to accurately report all of his positions, ownership interests and income from several entities from 2007 to 2010.

But the panel closed its investigation after concluding the omissions were not willful and "were not substantively different from the hundreds of thousands of errors corrected by amendment at the requirement of the committee every year."
---
http://www.usatoday.com/news/poli...inances-reports/57078160/1?csp=ip
===

Just slipped his mind?  

I wonder if that million dollar plus trust info would have been added if Ryan hadn't been vetted for veep?

I'm sure living on trust fund incomes sure give the Ryans and the Romneys of the world insights into Medicare and Social Security tax caps, FICA, etc.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
coebul



Joined: 18 Nov 2010
Posts: 3285
Location: Northwest USA

PostPosted: Thu Aug 16, 2012 2:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oh come on!  0bama got Rezko and all that entails.  Give it a rest.
_________________
"The American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they can bribe the people with their own money." -- Alexis de Tocqueville
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
bieramar



Joined: 19 Nov 2010
Posts: 4441
Location: Taylor Ranch, NM

PostPosted: Sun Aug 19, 2012 4:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

--- excerpts ---

The two polls conducted since the Ryan pick was revealed show an unchanged race.

The Rasmussen poll actually has Obama gaining on Romney since the Ryan pick.

Gallup, on the other hand, has Romney gaining two points since last Saturday.

Taken together, an average of the two polls show that Ryan has, thus far, not been a "gamechanger" in the race.

However, all polls are not created equally.

The methods of each pollster vary, and many pollsters will adjust their numbers after their survey is complete. Ideally, these adjustments make the poll more accurate, but that is not always the case.

Finally, many pollsters also have a track record for either accurately predicting elections, or favoring one side over the other.

Rasmussen Tracking
Poll of 1500 "likely voters" taken from 8/15/2012 to 8/17//2012
Obama 46%
Romney 44%


Analysis: Ten days ago Rasmussen had Obama with a one point lead. Rasmussen had Romney in the lead for much of the past week after Romney selected Ryan, but as seen above that trend has now reversed, giving Obama a two point lead.

Rasmussen uses a fairly large sample and by "tracking" their results over multiple days the pollster should be able to produce more accurate results.

However, Rasmussen's poll uses a "likely voter" sampling method, which excludes some registered voters.

Rasmussen does not include cell phone users, but attempts to compensate by using an "online survey tool to interview randomly selected participants from a demographically diverse panel."

In 2008 Rasmussen's final poll matched up well with the final result in the race, and its polls in the final month were fairly consistent.

However, in 2010 a study done by the American Research Group found Rasmussen to be the least accurate of the eleven pollsters they evaluated.

Rasmussen uses a sample that has "baseline targets" of 35.8% Republicans, 33.0% Democrats, and 31.2% "unaffiliated" voters, despite other surveys that show Democrats' actually outnumbering Republicans in the general population.

Gallup Tracking
Poll of 3050 registered voters taken from 8/10/2012 to 8/16/2012
Romney 47%
Obama 45%


Analysis: Last week Gallup showed the race tied, so according to their data the Ryan pick has given a two point swing.

Gallup has, by far, the largest sample size, with 3050 registered voters, which theoretically should make their poll more accurate.

Gallup includes data from six days, which theoretically will even out their results, but the large date range could also be including old/bad data.

Gallup's polls varied greatly in the 2008 race, at one point having McCain ahead by ten points before producing a final prediction with Obama up by eight points. Gallup has not released the internal breakdown of their sampling. Gallup was rated above average by Nate Silver in 2010.

--- End excerpts from analysis by Ryan Witt, Political Buzz Examiner.
Ryan Witt is a graduate of Washington University Law School in St. Louis and has extensive experience teaching government and politics.
-
http://www.examiner.com/article/a...ecent-obama-versus-romney-polls-8
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
coebul



Joined: 18 Nov 2010
Posts: 3285
Location: Northwest USA

PostPosted: Sun Aug 19, 2012 5:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Registered voters are not likely voters.
_________________
"The American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they can bribe the people with their own money." -- Alexis de Tocqueville
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
bieramar



Joined: 19 Nov 2010
Posts: 4441
Location: Taylor Ranch, NM

PostPosted: Sun Aug 19, 2012 5:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

coebul wrote:
Registered voters are not likely voters.


Correct - but "registered" voters are potential voters, and will turn out and vote, or not, depending on what grasps their fancy during October and the first week of November.

"Likely" voters in Rasmussen's reports are those (registered or not) who that at that snapshot moment when they were responding to a series of questions via their landline telephone answered "yes" when asked if they think they will vote in November.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
tsiya



Joined: 18 Nov 2010
Posts: 4017
Location: Cabbage Hammock

PostPosted: Mon Aug 27, 2012 11:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Obama Campaign Stop Protest

http://youtu.be/FVLOZuGM1BM
Very Happy
_________________
Bob

"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule."
H. L. Mencken
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
scrutney
Site Admin


Joined: 18 Nov 2010
Posts: 1535

PostPosted: Fri Aug 31, 2012 3:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

honestly, i didn't think he had it in him...but mitt delivered a damn fine speech.

he'll get the traditional 5 point bump.



_________________
one man's terrorist is another man's folk hero
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    bumrejects.myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> Republican Candidates Nov 2012 All times are GMT
Page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 1 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Card File  Gallery  Forum Archive
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum