WorldTraveller

People can have honest differences in philosophies, you can believe that we should have a smaller military, I also happen to be on that side, but to dismiss one's beliefs as "pandering" with no evidence to back up that claim, other than your perceptions, is pretty weak. If there is one thing that Paul Ryan isn't, he's not a panderer, and anyone who believes that is in the definitive minority with that view.

Could you please expand on "but the fundamental problem is the people below 55 that have paid into medicare for years, seem like they will LOSE what they have paid for." ?I would prefer facts for you to make your case, not your perceptions.Thank you

I'm beginning to pick up a new "mainstream" media narrative against Romney and Ryan. Which is how do your plans differ with one another? Romney says the principles are the same regarding Medicare, that they are very similar but that his budget is his own, not Ryan's. Of course, this isn't good enough for the "mainstream" media, they want him to get extremely specific, yet, they outright ignore that he states that his budget is the one he has presented and that the Medicare is virtually the same. So expect to see the "mainstream" media attempt to make this a major story.

If I were the Romney campaign, I'd hit them on these losses to the taxpayers, Delphi and the argument of favoring Union households/Democratic constituencies while trampling private sector workers.

While I agree with that article, it is an opinion piece from Politico and certainly doesn't line up with their left-leaning views. And make no mistake, they are a left-leaning media outfit

An interesting poll from WAPO. of course it's really too early to tell, but the immediate reaction is very encouraging for the Romney/Ryan campaign. - A new Washington Post/ABC poll shows a nearly entirely positive shift in Paul Ryan's favor after being selected as Mitt Romney's presidential running-mate. a. His positive ratings with all voters jumped 15% after being picked, while his negative ratings only jumped 1%. That's a +14% gain. b. His positive ratings with independents jumped 20%, while his negative rating only rose by 4%. That's a +16% gain. c. His positive rating with Democrats jumped 10%, but his negative ratings jumped 8%. That's a +2% gain. d. His positive rating with Republicans jumped 49%, while his negative rating jumped only 1%. That's a +48% gain. Now, here's the most important number. e. His positive rating with senior citizens jumped 18%, while his negative rating with seniors didn't jump, at all. In other words, the initial rush of reports that Ryan's Medicare plan might damage him with seniors hasn't yet borne fruit. - The biggest data point from my perspective is how he polled with seniors and independents. Not too shabby. Now it's incumbent upon them to define themselves as opposed to allow the party of demagoguery do it for them.

The only ones will be the daily trackers from Gallup and Rasmussen, but I will imagine pretty soon we will see some others. However, we will have to see what days they were conducted. I would say the best polls that we can really look at will be about 2 weeks after the Democratic convention, that will give a good snapshot of where we are.As of right now, the Battle ground polls are pretty close to being neck and neck, and most of those polls have been RV polls.

With one main distinction, BO's $700 B "cut" was to pay for Obamacare, Ryan's was made for the preservation of Medicare. Something that was totally lost on Rachel Maddow.Btw, did anyone catch Rich Lowry making a fool of Rachel on Sunday on MTP? Pretty hilarious.

The laffer curve has to do with the tax rate and the relationship it has with tax revenues. I don't see how any reasonable person can dispute it. Btw, the answer you provided didn't address the laffer curve, at least not rationally. If you are taxed at 100% you believe that there would be productivity? How?

I'm convinced, you're trolling

I don't get what you're sayin

Holy ****! Aren't left leaning folks embarrassed over Debbie wasserman Schultz? Yesterday she said she didn't know the party affiliation of the producers of obamas super PAC . Then today ( google wolf blitzer and Debbie). It's on rcp website. Wolf blitzer tried to have her admit that people over 55 wouldn't get affected. She did not want to admit it, he repeatedly (must have been five times he pressed her) tried to get her to admit it, she flat out lied. She lied yesterday and she lied today and she is the dnc head. It's outright embarrassment and she represents the democratic party. She's a bold faced liar and that's not hyperbole, that's fact, and she represents the democratic party. The democrats right now look like a bunch of small people right now. Small, liars, shallow, vitriolic and no substantive .

That's fine, that's your opinion. Point remains, his positions (which are popular with 50% of the country), won't change the needle one iota. Those who were voting on these issues, weren't going to vote for Romney anyway, and he is not any sort of right-wing social crusader, who speaks scary that is going to cause more chicks to vote against the ticket. If anything, he will attract chicks. I am almost positive that he will be a net positive regarding attracting women to the ticket.

I disagree, from my perspective, if you value the social over fiscal issues when deciding who should be president, you are a simpleton.

Something like that. Obama is in Iowa today, so what does he do? He promises them $170M for drought relief. That's how he rolls.

So here are two quotes from this weekend, one from Obama: "A new America in which prosperity is shared" and the other from Ryan: "We promise equal opportunity, not equal outcome" That's it folks, whose side are you on?

What I said was:"Those simpletons who vote on social positions weren't going to vote for Romney as it is"and then I also said:"Actually, I believe he will attract women to the campaign, he's young, smart and good looking, and believe it or not, there is a segment of the population of women voters where these things matter."There is no contradiction in there whatsoever. By saying "Believe it or not, there is a segment of the population of women voters where these things matter" I'm implying that this is also a shallow reason to vote for someone.I'm surprised you didn't catch that, it really wasn't that encrypted.

Yet another poll that shows the enthusiasm is clearly on the conservatives side, and this was before the Ryan pick. I guarantee you that he energizes the base even more so than this poll indicates. - More Republicans than Democrats are engaged in the presidential contest and voter turnout could decrease compared with the 2008 election, according to a Gallup poll on Monday. Seventy-four percent of Republicans said they’re thinking about the election “quite a lot,” compared to 61 percent of Democrats, the USA Today/Gallup survey found. “In most prior election campaigns, Republicans have typically paid a higher level of attention to the election than Democrats. However, the current 13-point Republican advantage is larger than Gallup has measured in recent presidential election years,” Gallup wrote. “That may be because Republicans had a competitive nomination contest this year, while on the Democratic side, President Obama was not challenged for the nomination. In the early part of 2008, when Democrats had a prolonged and competitive nomination contest between Obama and Hillary Clinton, Democrats led Republicans in thought given to the election.” Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0812/79665.html#ixzz23RP4ol54

I would agree with you, however this isn't a complicated line of attack. here goes: "Under ObamaCare" Seniors will be subject to a board of unelected bureaucrats who will ration health care for seniors" bla bla blaYou see that? In less than 10 seconds, I used the word "ObamaCare", "bureaucrats" and "ration"These words are negatively associated with seniors.This line of attack can work.

I don't see this as any factor whatsoever in the elections. Those simpletons who vote on social positions weren't going to vote for Romney as it is, and he isn't such a hard right social conservative to where he'll scare women to voting for Obama. Actually, I believe he will attract women to the campaign, he's young, smart and good looking, and believe it or not, there is a segment of the population of women voters where these things matter. This is a complete non issue, that only matters in publications such as the NY TIMES.

Anyone who is paying attention knows that both sides are going to demagogue each other, the D's will say that under Romney and Ryan, "Medicare will end as we know it", that you will get a voucher and after that voucher, you are on your bud. The R's will say, "Obama cut Medicare by over $700B" Those are simple attacks that will resonate with some voters. However, there is going to be a very powerful attack that actually has substance behind it, which is the following: Under Obamacare, there is a medical advisory board called IPAB (Independent Payment Advisory Board). This "advisory board" is going to be comprised by 15 unelected bureaucrats who will have the authority to make decisions on cuts to Medicare providers. In other words, its all about price control. Rationing Not only will they have this power, but Congress doesn't even have the power to overturn their rulings. According to the Medicare chief actuary , within the next 10 years, Medicare providers will be paid less than Medicaid providers. This can scare the hell out of seniors. A rationing board that determines payments to Medicare providers. I fully expect this to be a potent weapon to more than offset the onslaught we will see against Romney and Ryan's plan.

I agree to an extent. I fully expect GOP turnout to be considerably higher than the D's, relatively speaking. I believe that if Romney wins independents by + 5 or more in states like Ohio, Florida, Iowa and Virginia, he wins. Voter registrations are pretty close to equal in these states, so turnout is key. Also, I see a new electoral map for Victory for Romney. In all maps he needs to win Florida, PERIOD!However, Ohio is not necessary. Obviously if he loses Ohio, it becomes much more difficult. But he can Wisconsin (which is definitely possible and take states like Iowa AND Colorado and win. Latest polls in Colorado and Iowa have been showing with a slight lead, so this is certainly possible.

Here is a poll in the battleground states of LIKELY VOTERS not just registered ones. JA noted that Romney is losing the independent voters, I argued that no way no how does Obama win those voters come November. If you look at the findings here, among likely voters, Romney is up + 10 Things are definitely within very close striking range for Romney to win this election, and the idea that mainstream media "conventional wisdom" that Ryan will lose Florida for the campaign is a shallow observation. Will Romney win Florida? Who knows. Are their risks associated to picking Ryan for the senior vote? sure. Someone posted a GALLUP poll regarding Ryan's medicare plan, and you know what demographic supported his plan the most? Above 65 years old. And guess what? They supported Ryans plan more so than Obamas. Now is that a static number? Of course not, and over the next couple months there will be a fight to demagogue each others plan, so we'll see how those numbers turn out. Be wary of polls going forward, it's all in the way they word itYou know who supported it the second most? Ages 55- 64 It's perfectly logical. It is so easy to make the point. Here goes. IF YOU ARE ABOVE AGE 55, YOUR MEDICARE STAYS THE SAME It is so simple to make this point, its easy to understand, and you can place it on ads. Like I said earlier, Rubio ran hard on Ryan's plan, and he would say this over and over, and he won in a landslide with senior voters. Below is the poll, and sorry I can't "quote" it, but something happened to the format to where I don't have the option to do so. - The race for the White House remained in a dead heat just before Mitt Romney announced Paul Ryan as his running mate, a new POLITICO/George Washington University Battleground poll finds. The poll, conducted in the days leading up to the Ryan announcement on Saturday, finds that despite the unprecedented millions of dollars being poured into the contest and the non-stop attacks from each side, the top line numbers are essentially unchanged from a previous Battleground poll in early May. Obama takes 48 percent of likely voters in the new poll, compared with 47 percent for Romney – a statistical tie and well within the margin of error. In May, the numbers were flipped: Romney was at 48 percent and Obama was at 47 percent. The poll found 5 percent of voters are undecided. "The overall sort of broader scope of the ballot is that there's been little to no movement," said Republican pollster Ed Goeas of the Tarrance Group, who helped conduct the bipartisan poll. Both candidates also maintained their previous advantages among specific demographic groups. Romney leads among independent voters by 10 points, 47 percent to 37 percent, the same margin he had in May. And Obama continues his advantage among female voters by 15 points – also similar to his May margin. - Read more: http://www.politico....l#ixzz23R2ql7OF

I'm no social conservative, as a matter of fact I'm pro choice, but the planned parenthood argument is a reasonable argument. The argument is not to end PP but to withhold federal tax payer dollars. From social conservatives, they don't want their tax dollars going to organizations that help fund abortions. This something they fervently against, which is having no part in the terminating of an unborn child. I respect their values, specially in such a controversial issue.

Another point I want to make. I always thought that Ryan would bring the best out of mitt. In many ways I believe they are similar, they are leaders, analytical, numbers crunchers and results oriented sort of people. I believe mitt is inspired by Ryan, I honestly believe that. And as a result, he will run a more inspired campaign. He definitely has more pep in his step and he is speaking on another level that we are accustomed from seeing from him. I don't know how to paste and copy on the iPad but you should of checked out mitts response to a couple hecklers at the Wisconsin rally. It was unscripted and delivered perfectly, and while doing so, he jabbed sharply with a counter punch against obamas campaigns "gutter style " politics.