Comments on: Romney somersaults on to the middle ground Thu, 21 Jul 2016 07:57:19 +0000 hourly 1 By: ofilha Wed, 10 Oct 2012 19:30:42 +0000 I do not blame the candidate for the hyperbolics and change in positions. I blame the masses that eat it up like it’s ice cream and refuse to believe what they see: a man who flips and flops like a used car salesman but they continue to believe that he will be what he said last,not what he said before and before that and before that. People are sheep.

By: QuietThinker Mon, 08 Oct 2012 13:57:07 +0000 Romney will say anything he thinks will get him elected, even if it completely contradicts what he says to a different audience. Even looking to his actions is a bit of a mess. He created Romneycare as governor, then says he will completely repeal it because the same plan was labeled Obamacare. Then he tries to tell audiences that he will keep the parts they like, but not the parts that will pay for it. Then he says he will cut the budget and taxes.

His tax returns offer a more consistent viewpoint, he takes full advantage of the hedge fund loophole to pay less than 15%, avoids taking some charitable deductions that would put his rate at 9% (which he can then take after the election with an amended return), shows Cayman Islands accounts whose only conceivable purpose is a tax dodge, then refuses to show earlier tax returns than must be even worse. Oh, then he badmouths the working poor as “takers” when their payroll tax rate (yes it is a tax on income) is higher than his income tax rate.

Now in the debates he tries to pretend that he cares about the rest of us.

By: Peertoperr Mon, 08 Oct 2012 10:59:33 +0000 In other words Romney adopted Obama’s policies. No wonder he won the debate.

This is OK and I would even vote for him if I knew he would be telling the truth out of conviction. But he is a serial “let say whatever to get elected” politician – changing approaches with the wind. So the only way to really know what happens if we elect him is to see which ring he will need to kiss.

And without a doubt it is the billionaires who are funding his campaign: those who want to maintain their Cayman tax shelters (so there will really be no closing of loopholes by the Congress on that one), A casino mogul with a deep love for Israel (i.e 100% chance of war with Iran) being accused of bribing foreign officials and Coal Moguls brothers who want to pollute freely (everywhere except in the Hampton of course), and the tea Party (the tails that wag the dogs) in the congress. Since he has no convictions those people will tell him what to believe in. This is where we need to see which policies he will adopt – Not in debates. It is the policies of the puppet masters that will prevail at the end of the day if you elect Romney.

By: spall78 Sat, 06 Oct 2012 13:31:31 +0000 It’s one thing for a politician to allow experience and wisdom to slowly adjust their world views, thereby changing their opinion of policy. I think as an electorate we need to allow this kind of flexibility over the course of a career; otherwise we don’t allow them any room for growth.

Romney claims this sort of shift for several of his most egregious flip flops (ie choice/life) and though it seems a little disingenuous and politically expedient, I think I can let it pass. However, if we allow this massive shift of core governing philosophies during a single election cycle then we are morons.

I honestly have no idea what this guy would attempt to do in office. Is he a “severe conservative” or a moderate bridge builder? I can’t even tell what platform he’s standing on. He’s running on tax cuts, but has started saying that the tax cuts are revenue neutral because of closed loopholes… that’s called tax reform, not cuts. Tax reform is certainly a worthwhile endeavor and I could vote for someone pushing it, but I can’t tell if he’s even serious about doing that.

I would love to be able to vote for a moderate, thoughtful fiscal conservative, but I am not convinced that is the candidate before me. Considering that this conservative-turned-moderate also comes with metric ton of social conservatism baggage, I think I’ll leave him up on the shelf and stick with the devil I know…

By: paulstewart Fri, 05 Oct 2012 02:06:56 +0000 Mitt has no credibility. He thinks he can just say whatever and be believed. He is really not honest.

I think Obama won the debate. Why? Well all Romney did was attack the President and say that everything he has said in the past is not what he said. In short, he’s not telling the truth again. On top of that he is aggressively attacking the President as being “failed” and not having done enough. This is simply not true. Voters will see right through this.

What was Obama supposed to do? Attack Mitt? What the President did was stay true to his own vision and views. Somehow, people think that a whirling dervish of falsehoods and double and triple speak is a winner? Naw. Obama is trying to have a discussion and Romney just wants to dump on him and hope nobody notices his own inconsistencies. He is also Etch a Sketching but in small steps, little by little, to claim that he is exactly like Obama on the issues that matter to Americans. Because Obama has it right.

Mitt can’t be trusted. And who really knows what he believe and what he will really do if he had the power of the Presidency? You know what, I am pretty sure I know what he would do and it would not be pretty. s/13017922-its-the-dishonesty-stupid s/12903382-michele-obama-and-bill-clinto n-lay-out-at-the-rnc-just-how-much-obama -believes-in-america-does-mitt-romney-be lieve-in-america-or-something-else

By: pax_vobiscum Fri, 05 Oct 2012 01:07:41 +0000 President Obama’s sole strategy appears to be wearing thin.

Continuing to blame George Bush for the shortcomings of his own administration may still play well to die-hard liberal Democrats, but isn’t likely to sway any moderate or undecided voters.

Far more likely, it will reinforce the notion that Obama’s own policies are indefensible, and that another four years of excuses, not progress, are headed our way.