The Presidential debates.

Listen, intellectually I believe Mitt is full of BS but emotionally I want to believe that he has seen the light. The American people have to make a decision in 4 weeks and if the democrats can not figure out how to utilize visual media to get their fundamental ideals across as a contrast to what the republicans are proposing then they will lose. Obama won 4 years ago on style and Mitt has suddenly figured that out. Obama's facts were not accurate and neither was Mitt's. Reality is in the "eyes" of the beholder making style very important. In this debate Obama flat got beat on style. I was shocked to be honest. Style is important because our facts are so distorted. Style is important because it bridges or connects with people with each other. If someone can not speak with style and appropriate mannerism do you think anyone will listen to them or even believe them? I think the republicans have the economic ideals wrong but right now we need someone to get congress working again. If Obama can not do it we need to find someone else. To get my vote Obama would have to convince me (and he has time) that he is going to "change" his approach toward congress and bombard me with buzz words and graphs of real "facts". Some of those facts will show failures of his administration but I really believe that people will connect with the truth. The contrast of two very different explanations of what is wrong with the economy and what it will take to fix it is right before him and we are waiting to see and hear it.

I think I'll jump in here and start by saying LS, as usual, wants to trash Mitt because he is a Republican and evidently can't stand someone who is so successful. The statement was made that corportations and the wealthy are sitting on billions of dollars and not spending them. That is probably correct. If Mitt Romney is elected, I strongly believe you will see a ground swell of money being put back into the economy and employment will rise. I will at this point ask a question of all of those employers out there. Are you doing any hiring or are you waiting to see the results of the election? Corporations and individuals alike are sitting on their money because they have no idea what this administration is going to do next to hamper their operations. It is not just President Obama, it is the bureaucracy in D.C.that continues to make regulations that are useless in the hope of furthering their particular agenda. It is not just the Presidency that need change in Washington and I hope that will happen but also the complete tone exhibited by those inside the beltway. We need change now and you who really follow the economy and politics know all the reasons why.

Listen, intellectually I believe Mitt is full of BS but emotionally I want to believe that he has seen the light. The American people have to make a decision in 4 weeks and if the democrats can not figure out how to utilize visual media to get their fundamental ideals across as a contrast to what the republicans are proposing then they will lose. Obama won 4 years ago on style and Mitt has suddenly figured that out. Obama's facts were not accurate and neither was Mitt's. Reality is in the "eyes" of the beholder making style very important. In this debate Obama flat got beat on style. I was shocked to be honest. Style is important because our facts are so distorted. Style is important because it bridges or connects with people with each other. If someone can not speak with style and appropriate mannerism do you think anyone will listen to them or even believe them? I think the republicans have the economic ideals wrong but right now we need someone to get congress working again. If Obama can not do it we need to find someone else. To get my vote Obama would have to convince me (and he has time) that he is going to "change" his approach toward congress and bombard me with buzz words and graphs of real "facts". Some of those facts will show failures of his administration but I really believe that people will connect with the truth. The contrast of two very different explanations of what is wrong with the economy and what it will take to fix it is right before him and we are waiting to see and hear it.

I have noticed a couple of times that you have referred to "Obama's approach towards Congress". I really see it as congress's attitude towards Obama. They have played obstructionism to the hilt. They would not even let the Simpson-Boles recommendations be introduced into the House to be considered. They would not even consider the 3 to 1 compromise Obama offered in spending cuts to tax increases. They only passed the mildness half of Obama's Jobs Bill. The entire Republican establishment from day one, four years ago, has placed the importance of making Obama ineffective, way beyond the importance of doing what's right for this country.

I hope that no one is voting for Mitt because he has found a way to be financially successful at the middle classes expense. He is not a job creator but I do agree with Andy A in that if Mitt is elected corporations and the wealthy will spend some of those billions and not because of deregulation but because they support anyone who will help them pay less taxes. They have already corrupted regulation and therefore not as big a factor as one might think. I predict the economy will grow short term and will create another bubble and when that bubble pops we all better have some money stashed away like the wealthy because this will not be a pop but a collapse. There is nothing that I can see in Ryan's plan or Mitt's plan that will strengthen the middle class. I do not think the wealthy gives a rats you know what about the middle class. I am leaving the door open for either one of them to convince me that they have a plan to stabalize our economy with a strong middle class. Federal spending is a problem. Tax structure is a problem. Corporate wellfare is a problem. Abuse of our entitlement programs is a problem. Wall street is a problem. Monopolization is a problem. Corporate control of our economic system is a problem. Corporate control of our political system is a problem (lobbyist write most of our laws). If Obama is elected I see a congress that remains dysfunctional. If Mitt is elected I see cooperation in congress that will get things done but the things they get done will eventually collapse our economy. Lets hope I am wrong about Mitt and Ryan because I believe they will be elected.

Obviously my words have had impact and must ring true. I've always felt that if Mitt Romney truly convinced people that he would govern as a centrist, he could easily beat Obama. The problem is that it would have made it tougher on him during the nominating process. So he pulls out the etcha sketch during the debate, much to the surprise of many. If he would truly reject the tea party and people were convinced of his sincerity, that would help him win swing states. Choosing Paul Ryan as a running mate doesn't help him in this regard, but people may forget that at least for a while. Still think about it, does anyone want Ryan to be potentially set up as a future president? I think the answer is no for most people. Hopefully this can be alluded to in the Biden vs. Ryan debate. I don't think Romney's tack to the middle is sincere. Romney will try to be whatever he thinks he needs to be. In Massachussetts he governed as a moderate and perhaps even a liberal. As presdient I expect him to govern as a nation building neoconservative and we'll probably see someone like John Bolton in a cabinet position. I think we know what the next four years would be like, unless our memories are short.

mputnal3: It seems like you are saying that cooperation in Congress, even if they are passing extremely bad laws, is better than stagnation. I really do understand your frustration, but given the extreme views of much of the Republican Party, this would risk (a) increased defense spending (b) increased likelihood of meaningless wars in the middle east (c) increased taxes on the middle class (d) decreased financial regulation, leading to more likely recurring collapses in the economy (which mostly affect the middle class) and the list goes on. Right now, the stock market is the highest it has ever been in 5 years, even though the rest of the world is in rough economic times. Considering the fact that we have had a downturn in the economy since 2006 ( 6 years ago!) I feel, in general, we are very stabilized. No, it isn't full blast, but, then again, it shouldn't be. I'm certainly not crazy about stagnation in the Congress, but a neo-conservative alternative would help the rich get a whole lot richer, but it won't help anybody else.

I'm more concerned about the neocon stance on foreign policy. Romney is actually whining about the fact that we got out of Iraq. As for the economy, the economy is going to recover no matter what, probably in the next year IMO. Companies are going to have to spend the cash they are sitting on and start hiring regardless of who gets elected. It is they only way they can remain competitive and maintain market share. If Obama is elected, they will do so begrudgingly, but if they don't expand, their competitors will. What alternative would they have? Wait four years to expand in hopes of a GOP presidency??:clap:

I am beginning to think that Romney has substantial ties to the military/industrial complex and it wouldn't hurt his pocketbook to start a couple more wars. I'm not so sure the economy can rebound without the middle class having money to cause demand.

If Obama is elected there is a real risk of stagnation because I do not believe corporations will spend. If you are the top of the corporate world and are holding all this cash from the middle class I do not believe you will be interested in suddenly doing anything that would support the economy if Obama is elected. They actually hate this man because he has suggested such a thing as raising their taxes. If Obama gets reelected their mission in life is very simple-humiliate him with whatever control they have and they have a lot of financial control over this economy. I would not be surprised to see more viscious attacks on his character. Now why would we want to vote for any party that is willing to go that far? No good answer for that except that hopefully people would finally realize that supply side economics no longer works. When the bubble pops this next time I think the American people will be in no mood for excuses from neo-conservatives and the tea party. This country will take the non compromising attitudes of the tea party and say we tried it your way and you failed us for the last time! Right now people just want to see congress working again and lets face it there is a slight chance the republicans will have learned something from moving to the center however I really doubt it would change their view of the economy until after another collapse with their hands fully in it. I wish Obama had more of whatever it takes to shake the leaders on both sides of congress and say you are not leaving this room until we find a way to move this economy and balancing the budget by both revenue and cuts....but he does'nt. Sometimes you have to vote for the worse of two evils in order to open the eyes of those blinded by partisanship...IMO

You just said we should vote for the Republicans because they held the entire country hostage! You sound like a reasonable person until you start talking that. I'm not sure you understand that the Tea Party is the extremist wing of the Republican Party, and are pushing the party far more right than they have ever been. The no tax increase pledge has been signed by a vast majority of the entire Republican Party, and they will never compromise about anything. Obama gave them a chance to a 3 to 1 spending cuts to tax increase proposal and they turned it down. In the Republican primary debates, the question was raised to 10 to 1, and it was rejected by all the candidates. That is how extreme they are. I agree with LS that the economy should pick up after the election, regardless of the who is president, but the Big Corporations won't just gear up with more production unless the middle class has enough spendable money to create demand. Again, the stock market is doing fine, the rich investors are making money. Under the Ryan Plan, capital gains tax will be eliminated, leaving a gaping hole in revenues that will have to be filled by the working class. But your premise to vote for the worst choice just to break the stagnation is not a conceivably correct direction to take. If the Republican Party gains power this cycle, with the impact of super-pacs, the gerrymandering they have perfected in Texas spreading nationwide, and with voter suppression efforts increased, it is absolutely frightening what will happen to"democracy" in this country.

mputnal3:
So we should vote Republican due to the Stockholm syndrome? Give me a break. Furthermore, personally things have never been better. I have no complaints about the last four years. I understand YMMV, but the economy and employment picture is improving and will continue to do so over the next four years no matter what. No, I have no intention of bonding with my captors.

Everyone should vote for whoever they feel will be better for this country. I am only saying that if your candidate loses then do not blame it on the other side. Accept the outcome and lets all be Americans instead of democrats and republicans. What we need is for our congress to work again. We may agree or disagree about how to make this a better country but what is more important is that we are able to talk to each other about it. We can not let these elections divide us. We have to support whoever becomes our next President. If Romney wins because people believe that he is moving away from the tea party then that would be a good thing. If Romney wins because he lied about moving away from the tea party then that will eventually cripple the republican party because people are not as stupid as some think. Long term that is a win win situation. If Obama wins I no longer feel he can be an effective President and I wish that was not true because I like him as a person. Much of his ineffectiveness has been the result of the tea party's primary goal. The tea party is really bad for this country but they obviously connected to the voters. The sooner this bond with the voters can be broken the better but if Obama is re-elected that bond will continue. I believe that people are very smart and are demanding we shrink the deficit, strengthen the middle class and lower unemployment. Those things can only happen with a working congress. If Romney wins and fails to do these things it will be the end of the tea party and many of the republican ideals including supply side economics. So the only way I see that happening is if Romney wins. I can not see myself voting for Romney for many reasons but if I do it would be for this reasoning only. I do not believe that a Romney win will further the cause of the tea party but I could be wrong...

Again, your logic eludes me. You are saying that the only way to progress in this nation is to elect Romney and have him fail??? Don't you understand he is allied with the Tea Party? If he got elected, and there was just the least right wing shift in the Senate, this country might never recover from right wing extremism. The polarization, and obstructionism you speak of is overwhelmingly a product of the Republican Party in the House. Romney has made it very clear that his number one priority will be to insure that the tax burden on the rich is reduced. The elimination of capital gains tax will insure that. It won't do a thing to strengthen the middle class. I also do not understand your repeating the mantra that the American public is too intelligent to let bad things happen. You underestimate the power of the Republican Party propaganda machine. Something like 50% of the population still believes that Iraq had a hand in 9-11 and they possess WMDs. And about an equal number of believe Obama is a Muslim. I'm sorry to sound so severe, as you are trying to sound conciliatory, but I feel there are some seriously sinister forces at work to cement the stranglehold that the wealthy have on this country, and if Romney gets elected, the deal will be done.

Yes I believe that normal every day people just trying to make a living are not given enough credit. And the fact that you can not fully understand my logic means that this divide exists in part because of left wing elitism. I think Romney and the tea party has MISLED the American people but I hold out some hope that Romney is truly shifting away from the tea party. If you are right we have no hope for the next four years regardless of who is elected. I am only "choosing" not to believe the sky will fall if Romney is elected. I am choosing not to be bitter about this election if my candidate does not win. If Romney wins and you dig in on the left then you become part of this divide. I am just tired of the unbelievable intolerance of partisan politics. Maybe we need a third party that is not bound by absolute ideals and elitist behaviors but right now we have to find common ground. I agree with you about the tea party but you have to give main street more credit. Emotionally charged people will not listen so by focusing on postives we will eventually find something to agree on. My logic is my logic and I understand it is stretching reality but I believe it is better than being a part of this great divide in our country.