Why is Romney allowing the President to define him.

Darla said:
It's a joke dummy. I guess you have been living under a rock along with Cawacko, but when a very negative ad hits, it is almost always run on news stations, morning shows, and then the video is all over the internet. The video of the actual ad being the, you know, "source"?

In fact, the knowledge that this will happen saves campaigns and PACs a great deal of money. THey run it once then all of the news shows, nightly news, cable 24 news, and the political morning talk shows on the major networks, run it over and over in order to "debate" it. It's a free ride for them.

That is why making the claim that they dont' run political ads in your neck of the woods is specious. Maybe they don't pay for them to be run, but someone is showing them. For people who watch and read anything other than basketball and internet porn, they are actually very hard to avoid. Some of us try to.
Click to expand...

I suppose I should be more specific as I have said the same thing before. I have yet to see a political ad for either presidential candidate on local programming. I have seen them on Chuck Todd and as commercials during some of the nightly cable news. I never look for the on the Internet. Darla is correct to point that out as I had never thought of it when I say, "they don't show presidential campaign commercials in my neck of the woods."
 
Romney can't spend any of the money he raised for the general election until after the party convention in August. Right now he is limited to money raised for the primary election. That's probably why he isn't doing much. The PACs and Super PACs and political charities are doing the ads for Romney at this point.
 
leaningright said:
I suppose I should be more specific as I have said the same thing before. I have yet to see a political ad for either presidential candidate on local programming. I have seen them on Chuck Todd and as commercials during some of the nightly cable news. I never look for the on the Internet. Darla is correct to point that out as I had never thought of it when I say, "they don't show presidential campaign commercials in my neck of the woods."
Click to expand...

I meant it was specious in the context of what Cawacko said. They don't show them here either. I have always found them hard to avoid though. Once the election heats up I do tend to watch at least the Sunday morning talk shows and sometimes, if the ads are controversial enough, showing them takes up much of their time.
 
blackascoal said:
Forget the polls .. forget the money count .. forget every question on the upcoming election but this one ..

WHO WILL BEST SERVE AMERICA'S CORPORATE RULERS BEST?

The indisputable answer to that question is Barack Obama without question.

Winner: Barack Obama

Stop pretending that the American people choose presidents .. or that your government isn't OWNED by the pluotocracy.

Take the red pill.
Click to expand...

While you're at it, everyone become Jehovah's Witnesses and bear witness to the truth and the light. Jehovah loves us all very much!!
 
Howey said:
All he has is the economy.

You can't run a campaign based on jobs and the economy when you've become a very, very, very rich man with money hidden all over the world at the expense of firing people.
Click to expand...

"Put it this way: Has there ever before been a major presidential candidate who had a multimillion-dollar Swiss bank account, plus tens of millions invested in the Cayman Islands, famed as a tax haven?

And then there’s his Individual Retirement Account. I.R.A.’s are supposed to be a tax-advantaged vehicle for middle-class savers, with annual contributions limited to a few thousand dollars a year. Yet somehow Mr. Romney ended up with an account worth between $20 million and $101 million.

There are legitimate ways that could have happened, just as there are potentially legitimate reasons for parking large sums of money in overseas tax havens. But we don’t know which if any of those legitimate reasons apply in Mr. Romney’s case — because he has refused to release any details about his finances. This refusal to come clean suggests that he and his advisers believe that voters would be less likely to support him if they knew the truth about his investments."

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/09/opinion/krugman-mitts-gray-areas.html?_r=1&ref=paulkrugman
 
This is likely how Romney ended up with a huge IRA account:

P1-BF499A_BAINI_G_20120328182136.jpg



Source: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204062704577223682180407266.html
 
christiefan915 said:
"Put it this way: Has there ever before been a major presidential candidate who had a multimillion-dollar Swiss bank account, plus tens of millions invested in the Cayman Islands, famed as a tax haven?

And then there’s his Individual Retirement Account. I.R.A.’s are supposed to be a tax-advantaged vehicle for middle-class savers, with annual contributions limited to a few thousand dollars a year. Yet somehow Mr. Romney ended up with an account worth between $20 million and $101 million.

There are legitimate ways that could have happened, just as there are potentially legitimate reasons for parking large sums of money in overseas tax havens. But we don’t know which if any of those legitimate reasons apply in Mr. Romney’s case — because he has refused to release any details about his finances. This refusal to come clean suggests that he and his advisers believe that voters would be less likely to support him if they knew the truth about his investments."

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/09/opinion/krugman-mitts-gray-areas.html?_r=1&ref=paulkrugman
Click to expand...

I posted Krugman's entire column this morning. They are petrified of it.
 
Also keep in mind - the McCain campaign from what i have read actually did see all of Romney's tax returns, the ones he won't release now.

And they went with Sarah Palin.

Think about it.

I think the right instinctively knows there's a mountain of shit there, and if they see the light of day they will render Romney unelectable. That's why they are so shrill about the topic.
 
It depends on which way they are being defined, whether it is effective, and if it can be used later against those doing the defining...

At this point the current RCP averages (after ACA ruling) are rolling in the Romney direction (still show Obama ahead in the average but Romney is closing the gap and showing as the winner on more polls than he did just after the ACA ruling).

If they "define" him and yet the momentum continues to remain in his favor once the "correction" comes it will have a still larger effect. Also, with regard to the "vulture capitalism" if they let them to go all in on that one it will be fun to watch as they draw out first Obama's record (giving money to Swiss Companies, failing Solar companies, etc.) on his "crony capitalism" with the Stimulus as well as driving the point that his National Co-Chair made his money by doing exactly what Romney did. By holding for the right timing they can have better effect.

Basically, by waiting to see how the "defining" affects the campaign first they can better create a more effective answer to it in the future.
 
cawacko said:
I have many issues with Romney. The biggest one is how he's running his campaign. Yes the economy is not in good shape and yes he should go after Obama for that but that is all he is doing. He needs to articulate his vision going forward as well. It must be a combination. He can't just say Obama is failing and expect that to lead him into the White House.
Click to expand...
exactly. well said, and the OP is dead nails on. I actually listen to all candidates,
Romney is not saying anything - Obama is shoving him into a corner on middle class tax cuts ( why just one year? -it's clearly a political move -good idea or not).
I'd have to conclude that Romney is completely out of touch, can't even campaign.
 
cawacko said:
Since they don't show political ads in my neck of the woods would you be so kind as to show me then when they do appear?
Click to expand...
Huge media buys in the swing states -i've been seeing them ( I live in Florida's I-4 corridor -the "swing part" of the the swing state).

On a National level i see them on Morning Joe. But most of the media buys are local.
 
Jarod said:
In the battleground states of Florida, Ohio and Virginia the Preisdnet has unleashed, over the past three weeks, a barage of negative ads that appear to be working.

I am not suprised by this, what I am suprised is that Romney has not responded with anything, not even posative ads.

This is either a tactical decision with the intent being to hit the ground running after the olympics into the convention... or it is simply incompentance in the campaign. If it was a tacticaly decision, its a BIG gamble, because Romney needs to define himself before anyone else does, he is very much unknown. I know the thought is that the campaign will not be about Romney but about the president, and that is somewhat true... However In my opinion, the first choice undecidededs will have to make is if they like the President or not. If they decide they dont like the President next they will have to decide if Romney is better or worse. Failure to define yourself might very likely hurt Romney in this area.
Click to expand...

mittens is avoiding making statements on policy like one would avoid the plague


he is afraid that if he takes a stand or defines a policy that it will be used against him

this makes it easier for others to define him

oh well

ps mittens has been defined as 'outsourcer in chief' and is trying to counter it by trying to hang the same label on obama...the old i am rubber and you are glue didge
 
All Romney has to do is rerun Obama's campaign promises, from 2008, just prior to making a comment about them.

The "Hope and Change" one alone shoiuld be funnier then all get out.
 
Don Quixote said:
mittens is avoiding making statements on policy like one would avoid the plague


he is afraid that if he takes a stand or defines a policy that it will be used against him

this makes it easier for others to define him

oh well

ps mittens has been defined as 'outsourcer in chief' and is trying to counter it by trying to hang the same label on obama...the old i am rubber and you are glue didge
Click to expand...

These definitions are only mildly having any effect. The polls give or take a swing of +5/-5 either way. It is way to early to be hanging the drapes just yet.

Although I too wish Romney would punch back a little harder, the most likely effect you are seeing from any of Obama's mud slinging, and deflection of his lies and failures is only affecting the core cheerleaders....You know the type, they can usually be spotted tagging cute little snickering nick names like "mittens"...;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top