What if Romney chooses Ryan as a running mate?

[longeyes]

This election is going to be about governability, and that is something far deeper than four men.  The future will not be business as usual.  There is no way Obama, should he win again, can govern short of abrogating the U.S. Constitution and the structure of our political system.  His ideas can't be implemented otherwise.  

I think Romney-Ryan is about the best We the People can do right now.  If we can't win with this ticket, America is no longer America.  This Election will make clear whether that's the case.  And things will take their own course thereafter.

[Perd Hapley]

Longeyes,

Don't discount the possibility that many voters just won't find Romney, his political record, or his Republican coterie sufficiently American to deserve their vote. This may alter how an Obama victory should be interpreted.

[Fitz]

Longeyes,

Don't discount the possibility that many voters just won't find Romney, his political record, or his Republican coterie sufficiently American to deserve their vote. This may alter how an Obama victory should be interpreted.

This

[TommyGunn]

Longeyes,

Don't discount the possibility that many voters just won't find Romney, his political record, or his Republican coterie sufficiently American to deserve their vote. This may alter how an Obama victory should be interpreted.

Are they secretly  ...French, or something? ? ?


Romney is WAY more "American" than Obama, raised in Indonesia, born in Hawaiikenya (where ever ...).

[roo_ster]

Are they secretly  ...French, or something? ? ?


Romney is WAY more "American" than Obama, raised in Indonesia, born in Hawaiikenya (where ever ...).

Obama was the first birther, what with the bio he gave his book agent.

[Jamisjockey]

This election is going to be about governability, and that is something far deeper than four men.  The future will not be business as usual.  There is no way Obama, should he win again, can govern short of abrogating the U.S. Constitution and the structure of our political system.  His ideas can't be implemented otherwise. 

I think Romney-Ryan is about the best We the People can do right now.  If we can't win with this ticket, America is no longer America.  This Election will make clear whether that's the case.  And things will take their own course thereafter.

America ceased to be decades ago. Now we debate over cremation, or an open casket.

[longeyes]

I'm not putting up Romney as the perfect solution but he falls within the "old normal," such as it is.  Obama is a whole different thing.

My own view is that is that Romney-Ryan would buy us time but will not solve the underlying cultural forces that are ripping America apart.  But they represent at least a nod to recognizable values, not a total rejection of traditional America.

[Perd Hapley]

Are they secretly  ...French, or something? ? ?.

Pretty much.

But I think you put the problem succinctly. After all the Tea Parties, and the town hall activism, and the Congressional revolution of 2010, we've only managed to get a nominee that's more American than a dyed-in-the-wool, America-hating European socialist. After the national uproar against Obamacare, they nominated the author of Romneycare, and that should be soundly rejected. It would mean another four years of Obama, but that is the GOP's fault, of course.

[SADShooter]

Pretty much.

But I think you put the problem succinctly. After all the Tea Parties, and the town hall activism, and the Congressional revolution of 2010, we've only managed to get a nominee that's more American than a dyed-in-the-wool, America-hating European socialist. After the national uproar against Obamacare, they nominated the author of Romneycare, and that should be soundly rejected. It would mean another four years of Obama, but that is the GOP's fault, of course.

Only one exceedingly small quibble with your analysis.

[AZRedhawk44]

Anyone who thinks Obamacare is going ANYWHERE under a Romney administration is delusional. 

[longeyes]

What's coming is coming, regardless of whether Romney wins or Obama wins.  Only the speed and acceleration will vary.  The lineaments of the future conflict were set decades ago, and they are about to play out.  Romney-Ryan will be the last showing of the traditional flag, but that flag is not the same flag, in terms of values, as half a century ago, much less two centuries ago.  I continue to say that culture and demographics set the future and have already pre-determined the shape of the struggle ahead, regardless of the people in political power.  I don't believe, personally, that we can fix what's wrong, we can only prepare for divorce and try to mitigate the pain that will come with that.

***

I note that the moderators of the "debates" have been set.  Schiefer and Lehrer, whom most of us thought died years ago, are back, along with two newer representatives of the progressive media establishment.  Here, in microcosm, is the real problem: this is a democratic Republic, but one in which the people in power are scared to death of real questions, uncensored, being asked by We the People.  So it goes.

[slingshot]

After the national uproar against Obamacare, they nominated the author of Romneycare, and that should be soundly rejected. It would mean another four years of Obama, but that is the GOP's fault, of course.

If the American public wants Obamacare or Romneycare, they will get it regardless of whether or not Obama or Romney is president.  I think the solution is something in between with baby steps toward some sort of plan which takes care of those that truly can't care for themselves.  The problem is that the work ethic has declined in America along with family values.  Cultural issues are central to the US decline.  You talk to an intelligent woman raising children on her own and she will say things need to be changed, BUT she has her hand out for whatever she can get from the govenment.  Why? Because she needs it.  So, I suspect I know for whom she will vote.

Somehow, Romney and Ryan have to convince the American people (including the ones receiving significant government benefits) that things really are heading toward financial armageddon.  Voters have to rise above their personal wants and choose a president that they feel will affect things for the long term rather than the short term.  

This is going to be an interesting campaign and election.  The result is not a sure thing for either major party.  But a strong third party showing of even 5-10% will ensure that Obama is re-elected.

[Perd Hapley]

Only one exceedingly small quibble with your analysis.

Sorry. Corrected.

[SADShooter]

I just wanted to stop visualizing the poor sheep.

[Monkeyleg]

In assessing how Ryan will affect the Romney campaign, just remember that he's been up for re-election every two years for the last fourteen years. He's had to explain all of his positions--including those outlined in his plan--to the voters in his district. I lived in his district, and it's not a safe Republican seat by any means. He's able to communicate with those voters, and I'm sure he'll do fine with voters nationwide.

Vice presidential candidates don't usually make or break a campaign (Sara Palin may have been one exception to that rule), but Ryan's plan itself can make or break the Romney plan. By selecting Ryan, Romney has signed on to the plan, and has to explain it well enough to counter the distorted ads the Obama campaign will throw at it.

This all makes the selection of Ryan a really bold move on Romney's part. It should make for an interesting 84 days.

[roo_ster]

I note that the moderators of the "debates" have been set.  Schiefer and Lehrer, whom most of us thought died years ago, are back, along with two newer representatives of the progressive media establishment.  Here, in microcosm, is the real problem: this is a democratic Republic, but one in which the people in power are scared to death of real questions, uncensored, being asked by We the People.  So it goes.

Yeah, no doubt.  How about a non-ossified moderator?  Like, maybe a sharp lefty blogger and righty blogger?

Were I the nominee, I would not agree to be "moderated" by any MSM figure.  Might as well let them kick me in the jimmy repeatedly.  I'd rather have a nakedly partisan guy from either side.

[Perd Hapley]

Or just two naked guys.

[HankB]

Yeah, no doubt.  How about a non-ossified moderator?  Like, maybe a sharp lefty blogger and righty blogger?

Were I the nominee, I would not agree to be "moderated" by any MSM figure.  Might as well let them kick me in the jimmy repeatedly.  I'd rather have a nakedly partisan guy from either side.

Wasn't there a GOP primary debate moderated by George Stephanopoulos, a genuine Clintonista? 

Seriously, if there's going to be any debates, the GOP really needs to see that at least one of the three will be moderated by someone as unbiased as anyone from the major networks or CNN. (Who would that be? Ann Coulter? Neal Boortz? Michael Savage? Dick Morris? Andrew Napolitano?)

[longeyes]

It is strange--and unconscionable--that the GOP would, at this juncture, agree to let the debates, with their power to greatly affect the electoral outcome, be orchestrated by the Usual Suspects.  I can't explain it, I can only guess at how it's come about.  The loss of representation, not just in these debates, but in our relationship with our elected officials in general, is one of the key issues in today's political environment.  We ought to have a people's forum to house Presidential debates, with uncensored and unedited questions, about the full spectrum of relevant topics.  Until that happens, until we make it happen, we will never have an honest chance to deal with our real problems.  I still have faith that the American people, left to themselves, might be able to resolve even the gnarliest of issues, given the chance.

[Jamisjockey]

It is strange--and unconscionable--that the GOP would, at this juncture, agree to let the debates, with their power to greatly affect the electoral outcome, be orchestrated by the Usual Suspects.  I can't explain it, I can only guess at how it's come about.  The loss of representation, not just in these debates, but in our relationship with our elected officials in general, is one of the key issues in today's political environment.  We ought to have a people's forum to house Presidential debates, with uncensored and unedited questions, about the full spectrum of relevant topics.  Until that happens, until we make it happen, we will never have an honest chance to deal with our real problems.  I still have faith that the American people, left to themselves, might be able to resolve even the gnarliest of issues, given the chance.

GOP is the Rodney King party.  "Can't we all just get along?"
Someone mentioned getting kicked in the jimmy.....I think that's the GOP motto.

[longeyes]

You're right, but a lot of Americans share that view, don't they, preferring the illusion of "unity" rather than the dreary and uncomfortable reality of arguably terminal "disunity?"  What percentage of people just want to believe "it will all work out?"  I talk to many who feel that way.

I think we can assume that the October non-surprise, aka "the debates," while heavy on the "jobs" meme, will fail to discuss either the impact of illegal immigration or the ascendancy of outsourcing, and, more to the point, who, in both parties, benefits from them.  China did not get to be our chief creditor and "benefactor" without a lot of help from people high up in our own administrations, nor did illegal immigration go from a trickle in the '80s to a potential election-changer in 2012 and beyond without much help from people in Congress, the White House, and the State Dept.

All of this, right now remains a black hole for most Americans.  Until we can grill our representatives about these and many other issues and demand truthful and honest answers, we are just bystanders at our own national funeral.

[MechAg94]

I'm not putting up Romney as the perfect solution but he falls within the "old normal," such as it is.  Obama is a whole different thing.

My own view is that is that Romney-Ryan would buy us time but will not solve the underlying cultural forces that are ripping America apart.  But they represent at least a nod to recognizable values, not a total rejection of traditional America.

I don't think any President would solve the underlying problems.  That requires significant change in Congress which is probably harder.  Even Ron Paul, if elected, couldn't have solved those problems.  What we can hope is that someone like Ryan can discuss the problems in real terms and in detail.

[birdman]

China did not get to be our chief creditor ...

Actually, the single largest holder of US treasuries is the federal reserve at nearly $2T.  The Chinese have been divesting their US holdings slowly and hold only about $1.2T.

[Blakenzy]

All smoke and mirrors. If you haven't realized by now that both the red and blue candidates have the same strategic agenda, then it's time to un-hat your ass and take a real hard look at reality. Try playing 'spot the seven differences' with the two parties, and see what that yields. There may be a slight nuance of which secondary policies are applied, but either candidate will "lead" us down the same road map, guaranteed.

What the US needs is for it's citizenry to grow a spine, and perhaps a brain atop of that spine. and say NO to the old guard, because swallowing the same hogwash over, and over is what got us here in the first place. Choosing the lesser of two evils can lead you no where good.

A Romney-Ryan ticket is nothing but bait to vote for more of the same. Remember that a Revolution does not necessarily have to come from the muzzle of an AR-15.

[longeyes]

Actually, the single largest holder of US treasuries is the federal reserve at nearly $2T.  The Chinese have been divesting their US holdings slowly and hold only about $1.2T.

The Fed is a foreign country too, now that I think about it...