facebooktwitterRSS
- Advertisement -
  • Most Commentedmost commented up
  • Most Emailedmost emailed up
  • Popularmost popular up
- Advertisement -
 

« News Home

Obama, Romney head into final stretch of the election



Published: Sat, September 8, 2012 @ 12:00 a.m.

In the next eight weeks, President Barack Obama and his Republican challenger, Mitt Romney, will be battling for the relatively small number of voters who say they are undecided about the Nov. 6 election. Given that the presidential race is a dead heat, the candidates can be expected to go all out to win over a majority of those undecideds.

In so doing, Obama and Romney, a former governor of Massachusetts, will be expected to show the American people they can rise above the mindless partisan bickering and political sound bites by answering the following important question: What will you do in the next four years to ensure that all citizens of this country have the opportunity to better their lives.

Although the Republicans during their political convention in Tampa last week sought to make this election a referendum on Obama’s first term in office, it is more than that. Romney must fill in the blanks about his vision, blanks that were glaringly evident when he spoke to his party’s faithful.

Even with his signature issues of balancing the budget, slashing the deficit and creating 12 million new jobs, he was short on specifics.

The worst is over

By contrast, President Obama, in accepting his party’s nomination Thursday evening in Charlotte, made it clear that his second term will be a continuation of the first. The foundation has been laid, and the building blocks for the economic recovery from the worst recession the nation has faced since the Great Depression are in place — and are beginning to provide much needed stability.

The president acknowledged that the recovery will not be quick or easy, because the problems confronting the country “have built up for years.”

But just as Romney and his running mate, Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan, sought to frame the election in terms of Obama’s failed policies, the president and Vice President Joe Biden made it clear to the American people that the election is about the future.

“You can choose leadership that’s tested and proven,” Obama told enthusiastic crowd, seeking to distinguish his experience from that of Romney’s.

In detailing the actions taken from the time he took office in January 2009 to halt the economic slide that began in 2008 under Republican President George W. Bush, Obama, like other speakers durinh the three-day convention, paid special attention to the federal bailout of the auto industry.

Strong recovery

While Romney is standing firm on his position that General Motors and Chrysler should have been allowed to undergo a managed bankruptcy, the Democrats are celebrating the fact that federal intervention has made the two companies stronger than they have been in many years.

“After a decade of decline, this country created over a half million manufacturing jobs in the last two and a half years,” the president said.

On national security, Obama sought to draw a clear line between him and his GOP challenger.

“Four years ago I promised to end the war in Iraq. We did. I promised to refocus on the terrorists who actually attacked us on 9/11, and we have. We’ve blunted the Taliban’s momentum in Afghanistan and in 2014, our longest war will be over. A new tower rises above the New York skyline, al-Qaida is on the path to defeat and Osama bin Laden is dead,” the president said.

There are clear differences between the Democratic and Republican visions for the nation, and over the next two months, the American people will “face the clearest choice any time in a generation,” as the president put it.

This is too important an election for anyone to sit it out.


Comments

1theotherside(333 comments)posted 2 years ago

If past performance is the only indicator, then voters should be very wary about considering more of the same trickle down economic policies that got the country into the mess to begin with. And that is the only thing Romney has to offer. He won't talk about his plans because he knows it would inform too many voters of his real intentions. Tax cuts for the wealthy at expense of the middle class is no solution. Ohioans can learn the lesson from the election of John Kasich, who never indicated in the campaign what his real intentions were, and then once in office, began to show his true colors. Think about that on a national scale with Romney. The problem with the President's program isn't the program itself. It is the obstructionist Party of No republicans whose only goal in governing over the last 3 years has been the defeat of Obama. All while Rome burns. So the choice is clear.

Suggest removal:

2mgourley(32 comments)posted 2 years ago

"Tax cuts for the wealthy at expense of the middle class is no solution"
Which tax cuts are these? Oh, you mean the "Bush" tax cuts? You mean the same tax rates that we
have had for over 10 years?
"The problem with the President's program isn't the program itself. It is the obstructionist Party of No republicans whose only goal in governing over the last 3 years has been the defeat of Obama"
Oh, you mean the obstructionist party that was in the minority in the House for the first two years
and has never been in the majority in the Senate in the last four years? That obstructionist party?

Some of you people really need to stop listening to and mindlessly parroting talking points and do
some homework. I realize it might take a little work, but intellectual laziness is not exactly
a virtue.

Suggest removal:

3theotherside(333 comments)posted 2 years ago

"Oh, you mean the "Bush" tax cuts? You mean the same tax rates that we
have had for over 10 years?"

Obfuscation. Obama wants to retain the middle class tax cuts. It's the tax cuts for the wealthy that are the issue. If you are on the wrong side of this issue, you must be one of the wealthy who stand to benefit. Don't blame you for wanting Romney. He will give them to you and charge the bill to the rest of us.

"Oh, you mean the obstructionist party that was in the minority in the House for the first two years
and has never been in the majority in the Senate in the last four years? That obstructionist party?"

Anyone with a high school education knows you need both houses to get an agenda done. That's why the Affordable Car Act passed in the first two years and nothing has been able to get done since because of the republican obstructionist, tea party agenda driven House of Reps.

I think mgourley needs to take some of his own advice about being a parrot.

Suggest removal:

4theotherside(333 comments)posted 2 years ago

There is extremism on both sides. To think that somehow the conservative extremism is more palatable than the liberal extremism is naive and arrogant. Most Americans are moderate in their views and expect their government to be moderate and compromising, not polarizing and obstructionist. The only reason republicans take a stance is to obstruct with the goal of denying Obama any hint of success so they can use the failure they perpetuated against him politically. All the while crying when he exercises executive authority as a result of republican refusal to moderate and compromise. As far as inter party platform squabbles, meh. Who gives a rats arse. Romney no more supports the republican stand on abortion (at least this week) anymore than Obama supports every democrat platform issue like God and Jerusalem. The United States belongs to the American People. Not to the Tea Party, who has the attitude that it's their way or the highway. And it certainly doesn't belong to the corporations. A distinction that our predecessors were fond of making regardless of party affiliation.

Suggest removal:

5mgourley(32 comments)posted 2 years ago

I'm certainly not wealthy. I just don't believe you have a right to someones earnings just because you have a problem with them having a dollar more than you do. If your neighbor made a dollar more than you, and that put them in a higher tax bracket, how would that improve your life?

Tea Party? Sure, sure. Boehner and Cantor et all are card carrying members. I think not. The Republican establishment would rather the Tea Party (which, I'm sure you know is not a party at all, but a group of concerned citizens) just shut the hell up.

I do not believe there has been a time in recent memory when the two political parties have been so diametrically opposed when it comes to ideology. There is no possible way for compromise. That leaves defeat at the polls as the only resolution. Just like the founders envisioned.

Suggest removal:

6mgourley(32 comments)posted 2 years ago

The only rational thing theotherside has said is "The United States belongs to the American People". I certainly hope you still feel the same way if the American people decide that they desire a change in the Presidency. Somehow, I think he will not.
The upshot is that theotherside is free to work to change that in the next election, or flee to another country that better fits his world view.
Diversity of opinion and tolerance are mainstays of the left, unless your opinion does not agree with theirs. In that case you need to be gotten rid of. Dabble in hypocrisy much?

Suggest removal:

7theotherside(333 comments)posted 2 years ago

Boehner and Cantor et al may not be card carrying members of the Tea Party but they also do not have the Tea Party under control. The Tea Party is hijacking the republican party. That's why Paul Ryan is on the ticket. To appease the Tea Party. mgourley is right. The republican establishment wants the Tea Party to shut up and they won't. They want control of the republican party and that is in fact what is happening. So at the same time mgourley bemoans that there is little hope for compromise, he in fact is part of the problem since he supports the extreme wing of the republican party. The Tea Party doesn't want compromise because they are convinced they know what is best. As far as dabbling in hypocrisy, people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. There is plenty of hypocrisy to go around on both sides. So anyone who is convinced their position is the only position is an extremist in my opinion.

Suggest removal:

8mgourley(32 comments)posted 2 years ago

I don't bemoan the lack of compromise at all. I welcome it. You need to let go of the bugaboo of the Tea Party.. the majority of the Republican Party will still try to get along. You might try that throwing stones analogy again, somehow it did not work.
So you are admitting you are an extremist? You don't seem to think my position has any merit. So using your own logic...

Suggest removal:

9theotherside(333 comments)posted 2 years ago

Hilarious. The bugaboo of the Tea Party is something the republicans have to deal with, not me. Something they are incapable of doing since the Tea Party is gaining control. The throwing stones analogy is focused at the hypocrisy charge. Try to keep up. I think the republican party in general are extremists at the moment because they are being controlled by the Tea Party, who are extremists. Your position may have merit but that doesn't change the fact that your desire for compromise is thwarted by the extremists in your party. Get them under control and let's talk.

Suggest removal:

10mgourley(32 comments)posted 2 years ago

So, basically, you refuse to look inward and continue to attack straw men. How brave of you. You apparently think the Tea Party is a "thing". That just shows your ignorance. For argument sake, I'll give you your premise. Why is a "thing" that you disagree with "extremist"?
Can you actually say that limited government and lower taxes are extremist? If so, why?
Is big government and more spending good? If so, why?
You have the choice of personal liberty or state sponsored equality. Which would you choose and why?

Suggest removal:

11mgourley(32 comments)posted 2 years ago

Oh, and another thing, why do you assume my party affiliation based upon what I have written? Have I said anywhere that I am a member of any party? You know what they say about assuming.
I'm all about principle, not what party spews the "correct" rhetoric.
Something you, who obviously have a high school education, should realize.

Suggest removal:

12theotherside(333 comments)posted 2 years ago

Limited government and lower taxes are fine as long as everyone benefits from them. Unfortunately, the "straw man" you refer to is all too real. And that "straw man" is willing to exclude large swaths of the citizenry to advance an extremist agenda. And who is actually spewing the "correct" rhetoric, like phrases such as "state sponsored equality"? You really need to take a look in the mirror while you accuse others of things you yourself are guilty of. Back to that hypocrisy thing again. As far as education level goes, name calling is far more primitive then making assumptions.

Suggest removal:

13mgourley(32 comments)posted 2 years ago

You brought up education in your first post, as a shot, I suppose. You might want to re-read your post to see who is name calling or making assumptions.
Why can't you simply answer the questions? Is it too hard or are there no "correct" answers on your flash cards?

Suggest removal:

14mgourley(32 comments)posted 2 years ago

I'm still waiting to hear what this "extreme" is all about. Just because you say something over and over does not make it factual. Please cite for me what you consider "extreme" in the party that you oppose.

Suggest removal:

15cambridge(3004 comments)posted 2 years ago

mgourley....this is what "extreme" is all about.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mwO8vC...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VG-bKy...

There are thousands more where those came from if you're not convinced.

Suggest removal:

16mgourley(32 comments)posted 2 years ago

youtube does not count..have the balls to spell it out here.
Unless of course you are incapable of original thought, or too lazy to type.

Suggest removal:

17mgourley(32 comments)posted 2 years ago

I could compile a list of youtube clips of people on the left saying stupid things and acting badly. There are thousands of them out there.
And that proves what?
Some people act badly and are stupid.
OK...so get back to the original topic.

Suggest removal:

18cambridge(3004 comments)posted 2 years ago

mgourley....You're the one that asked what "extreme" is all about. I posted extreme comments from extremely defective people that think and vote the same way you do. You should have the balls to own your views.

Suggest removal:

19mgourley(32 comments)posted 2 years ago

How do you know how I think or vote?
Perhaps you need to dial back your extreme hatred and get into the diversity and tolerance game.

Suggest removal:

20theotherside(333 comments)posted 2 years ago

mgourley, your questions are rhetorical so the answers depend on your point of view. I am not going to get into a rhetorical debate with you because your mind is made up and my mind is made up. Incidentally, I voted for McCain in 08' and thousands of Ohioans just like me will never vote for another republican again because of the SB5 issue. We are Romney's worst nightmare. When Ohio goes to Obama, you can thank John Kasich for that. Also, Paul Ryan said today that he and Romney will not divulge which tax loopholes they want to close until after the election. Isn't that nice? Translation: Romney and Ryan won't tell you what middle class tax deductions they want to eliminate to pay for the tax cuts they want to give to the wealthy (there goes your mortgage interest deduction for one). Like Bill Clinton said, the arithmetic doesn't add up. Done here.

Suggest removal:

21mgourley(32 comments)posted 2 years ago

Easy to say done when you have nothing to say. Why are you so worked up about tax deductions? Is that the reason you vote? Because someone is for or against what they give you? Dude.. try personal responsibility on for a change.

Suggest removal:

22doubled(210 comments)posted 2 years ago

hey "thinker" - let me give you a tip. No one reads your posts. You talk too much. And you're sort of boring. After reading the first few lines, i once again realize that your screen name should really be "theliar" instead of "thethinker". You've got some serious problems.

Suggest removal:


News
Opinion
Entertainment
Sports
Marketplace
Classifieds
Records
Discussions
Community
Help
Forms
Neighbors

HomeTerms of UsePrivacy StatementAdvertiseStaff DirectoryHelp
© 2014 Vindy.com. All rights reserved. A service of The Vindicator.
107 Vindicator Square. Youngstown, OH 44503

Phone Main: 330.747.1471 • Interactive Advertising: 330.740.2955 • Classified Advertising: 330.746.6565
Sponsored Links: Vindy Wheels | Vindy Jobs | Vindy Homes | Pittsburgh International Airport