The unofficial Obama and Romney VP speculation thread

[Color Me Badd Fan]

Sometimes I'm mystified by Mitt Romney. First he picks a running mate with a ton of baggage and then his Super PAC (we all learned this past week that campaigns coordinate directly with Super PAC's right?) produces an ad essentially putting some of this baggage on full display. Lol, what a moran.

[YOUTUBE]dZ5LWaytSZw[/YOUTUBE]

[calicoug]

Paul Ryan has so much baggage that he only received 64% of the vote in 2008 in his district which went for Obama in that same election. After he became more of the face of the GOP in Congress in the two years following that he only increased his vote percentage to 68% in 2010. Yes, an absolute ton of baggage for this guy.

I suppose "we have to stop giving so much shit away. We can't afford it and it causes those on the receiving end to rely on it into perpetuity" passes for baggage in the current Democratic party. In case anyone was paying attention, voters in 2010 were pretty pissed off about the government giving too much shit away. I hope we debate all this Paul Ryan "baggage" for the remainder of the race.

Good call. We should extrapolate out from his 700,000 person House district and assume proportional approval ratings across the nation.

Or I guess we could just look at approval polls taken of him nationally so far (where he has a 27% favorability rating according to a CNN poll just last week). I suppose we could also take a look at polls re the budgets he has sponsored too, but why waste the time when he got over 60% in a Wisconsin district?

Solid analysis.

[SCcoug]

Last month's Rasmussen VP poll had Ryan polling at 39/25 positive/negative. In the 65+ crowd it was much higher 52/29. He polled the best in most demographics in the VP poll.

[Color Me Badd Fan]

Good call. We should extrapolate out from his 700,000 person House district and assume proportional approval ratings across the nation.

Or I guess we could just look at approval polls taken of him nationally so far (where he has a 27% favorability rating according to a CNN poll just last week). I suppose we could also take a look at polls re the budgets he has sponsored too, but why waste the time when he got over 60% in a Wisconsin district?

Solid analysis.

You're full of shit, why don't you share with us what his disapproval was in that poll? I notice you left that little tidbit out because it doesn't help your argument, in fact it renders your argument meaningless which is why you willfully left it out.

To everyone else -- since Cali's not interested in pointing anything out that doesn't help him obfuscate this point -- I'll spill the beans about this apparent "29% approval rating" homerun that Cali thinks he just arrived on. Here it goes: Paul Ryan's disapproval rating is 19% in that same poll compared to a 27% approval rating. Now if I employed Cali's tactic that he used in the post I'm responding to, I would simply say "look Ryan only has 19% disapproval rating" leaving it to everyone to assume that Ryan is enjoying stratospheric approval ratings in the 70s.

But I don't use that tactic, because I don't assume that any of you are stupid.

Anyway, back to Cali's 27% homerun. This poll also happens to poll on a number of other candidate's approval ratings (McDonnell, Pawlenty, Jindal, Christie, Portman and Rubio) -- and Ryan performs about as well or better than all but one of the former potential candidates, Chris Christie. So, while Cali wants to act like this is some specific knock against Paul Ryan, fact is Cali would have employed this half-truth with any candidate Romney would have picked with the exception of Chris Christie. Also, if we extrapolate a 95% response from that poll, Ryan would stand at 56 approval vs. 39 disapproval. Also, his approval vs. disapproval gap increased from the last poll CNN conducted two months before, though I'm not going to be disingenuous and say it's something that's statistically significant.

Cali, you're a disingenuous hack for blurting out that ridiculous 27% approval argument. Quit being intellectually lazy.

Rasmussen has Ryan's approval at 39% vs. 25% disapproval (a ratio fairly close to CNN's ratio). Rasmussen also broke it down by seniors, and they approve of him by 52 to 29 margin. For some reason the rockeater from the Never Ending Story's efforts to make seniors scared of Romney has so far not worked very well.

Also, that 700,000 district went for Obama by 4 points in 2008, which means it's only slightly more GOP leaning than the country as a whole which went for Obama by about 7 points. So a sample of several hundred thousand voters in a +3 GOP district over the national results (hey Ohio went to Obama by 4.5 points in 2008, Ryan's district sure voted pretty close to that didn't they?) chose to elect this guy with all of this "baggage" with 64% of the vote and then chose to reelect him again with 68% of the vote in 2012. Ryan only has baggage with hacks like Cali.

[wuapinmon]

While I'm no expert on the subject, I think Romney just lost. I hope I'm wrong though.

[calicoug]

You're full of shit, why don't you share with us what his disapproval was in that poll? I notice you left that little tidbit out because it doesn't help your argument, in fact it renders your argument meaningless which is why you willfully left it out.

To everyone else -- since Cali's not interested in pointing anything out that doesn't help him obfuscate this point -- I'll spill the beans about this apparent "29% approval rating" homerun that Cali thinks he just arrived on. Here it goes: Paul Ryan's disapproval rating is 19% in that same poll compared to a 27% approval rating. Now if I employed Cali's tactic that he used in the post I'm responding to, I would simply say "look Ryan only has 19% disapproval rating" leaving it to everyone to assume that Ryan is enjoying stratospheric approval ratings in the 70s.

But I don't use that tactic, because I don't assume that any of you are stupid.

Anyway, back to Cali's 27% homerun. This poll also happens to poll on a number of other candidate's approval ratings (McDonnell, Pawlenty, Jindal, Christie, Portman and Rubio) -- and Ryan performs about as well or better than all but one of the former potential candidates, Chris Christie. So, while Cali wants to act like this is some specific knock against Paul Ryan, fact is Cali would have employed this half-truth with any candidate Romney would have picked with the exception of Chris Christie.

Cali, you're a disingenuous hack for blurting out that ridiculous 27% approval argument. Quit being intellectually lazy.

Rasmussen has Ryan's approval at 39% vs. 25% disapproval (a ratio fairly close to CNN's ratio). Rasmussen also broke it down by seniors, and they approve of him by 52 to 29 margin. For some reason the rockeater from the Never Ending Story's efforts to make seniors scared of Romney has so far not worked very well.

Uh huh. So your argument is that Ryan is a slam dunk because he got over 60% vote in a house district in a conservative part of Wisconsin. I point out he only has a 27% approval rating nationally and you flip out and argue I'm a disingenuous hack? Got it. Let's just go back to judging him on your metric of vote total in the Wisconsin 1st. Yep- that makes sense.

Here's a few other data points for you:

His budget proposal on Medicare had a 58% disapproval rating in 2011.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...-to-ryan-plan/

You might also enjoy this line from Politico from 2011:

No matter how favorably pollsters with the Tarrance Group or other firms spun the bill in their pitch — casting it as the only path to saving the beloved health entitlement for seniors — the Ryan budget’s approval rating barely budged above the high 30s or its disapproval below 50 percent, according to a Republican operative familiar with the presentation.

Here's a more recent poll from 2012 which found that over 60% of individuals polled think Medicare should remain in its current form compared to about 25% which think it should be changed to a system where the government provides seniors with a fixed sum of money that they can use to buy private insurance or to pay the cost to remain in Medicare.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/daily...ndate-20120326

You'll note that Obama's health care plan has also polled very poorly in the past, and you would be correct. That's a huge factor for why his overall polling numbers are down relative to most incumbents who have a chance to win reelection.

Romney has realized the problem with the health care plan and has run as far from it as he can, even to the extent of ignoring the obvious similarities with the plan he sponsored. He's been able to put a bit of distance between himself and the federal health bill, but now he has intentionally walked into a trap which polls just as poorly if not worse- Ryan's Medicare proposal.

Now, you can sit there and scream and say I am disingenuous and a liar and don't understand anything about politics. You can argue Ryan has zero baggage and is the perfect pick. You can ignore that Romney would have only made this choice if he felt he had to, because it is a huge gamble. You can do all of those things. And I'll just keep sitting back and smiling.

I love this pick.

[Maximus]

http://m.washingtontimes.com/blog/in...d-99-0-senate/

I bet those who want to keep Medicare in its current form don't know its unsustainable

[ERCougar]

I love this pick.

Just who are you trying to convince?

The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

[calicoug]

http://m.washingtontimes.com/blog/in...d-99-0-senate/

I bet those who want to keep Medicare in its current form don't know its unsustainable

Here's a great article on just that point:

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes...medicare-plan/

In this poll, respondents were asked to compare which Medicare plan they preferred- Obama's or Ryan's. 50% liked Obama's, and 46% liked Ryan's (not a bad result for Ryan). The trouble came after that point, though.

From the article:

The problem is what happened when Kaiser read different arguments about the plan, arguments which resemble those which voters will hear over the next 18 months. To the 50 percent who were opposed to the plan originally, Kaiser recited a series of arguments that resemble those that Mr. Ryan himself is making: That the plan would reduce the deficit, that the plan would increase choice and that it would save Medicare from fiscal insolvency. Some respondents, 17 percent of those who were originally opposed to the plan, changed their mind after hearing these arguments.

Meanwhile, to the voters who originally supported the plan, Kaiser read another set of arguments, those which resemble the ones that Democrats are making. They said that the plan would increase health care costs and reduce benefits, would do too much to empower private insurance companies, and would “eliminate traditional Medicare.” Upon hearing these arguments, 42 percent of voters who originally supported the plans changed their minds and said they were no longer in favor of it.

Democrats, in other words, seem to have the more persuasive side of the argument — their case was more than twice as likely to change a voter’s mind.

The Kaiser poll is not an isolated example. A poll last month from Democracy Corps, a Democratic firm, inquired about Mr. Ryan’s overall approach to the budget (not just the Medicare provisions) in somewhat the same fashion. Initially, a 48-33 plurality of likely voters supported the plan. After being read a set of arguments both for and against it, however, a number of voters changed their mind and the plan was opposed 51-44.

[calicoug]

Just who are you trying to convince?

The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

What's funny is that this exact line was given to me on Cougarguard after I pronounced how in love I was with the Palin pick.

Carry on.

[Maximus]

Here's a great article on just that point:

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes...medicare-plan/

In this poll, respondents were asked to compare which Medicare plan they preferred- Obama's or Ryan's. 50% liked Obama's, and 46% liked Ryan's (not a bad result for Ryan). The trouble came after that point, though.

From the article:

if obamas budget was any good, why didn't anyone vote for it?

[Color Me Badd Fan]

Uh huh. So your argument is that Ryan is a slam dunk because he got over 60% vote in a house district in a conservative part of Wisconsin. I point out he only has a 27% approval rating nationally and you flip out and argue I'm a disingenuous hack? Got it. Let's just go back to judging him on your metric of vote total in the Wisconsin 1st. Yep- that makes sense.

Here's a few other data points for you:

His budget proposal on Medicare had a 58% disapproval rating in 2011.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...-to-ryan-plan/

You might also enjoy this line from Politico from 2011Y



Here's a more recent poll from 2012 which found that over 60% of individuals polled think Medicare should remain in its current form compared to about 25% which think it should be changed to a system where the government provides seniors with a fixed sum of money that they can use to buy private insurance or to pay the cost to remain in Medicare.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/daily...ndate-20120326

You'll note that Obama's health care plan has also polled very poorly in the past, and you would be correct. That's a huge factor for why his overall polling numbers are down relative to most incumbents who have a chance to win reelection.

Romney has realized the problem with the health care plan and has run as far from it as he can, even to the extent of ignoring the obvious similarities with the plan he sponsored. He's been able to put a bit of distance between himself and the federal health bill, but now he has intentionally walked into a trap which polls just as poorly if not worse- Ryan's Medicare proposal.

Now, you can sit there and scream and say I am disingenuous and a liar and don't understand anything about politics. You can argue Ryan has zero baggage and is the perfect pick. You can ignore that Romney would have only made this choice if he felt he had to, because it is a huge gamble. You can do all of those things. And I'll just keep sitting back and smiling.

I love this pick.

Why don't you defend your 27% homerun? After that stunt why should anyone either believe or be interested in anything you say in this thread? You're obviously not interested in a truthful discussion.

Everything you say for now on has to be verified because you've shown we can't trust what you say.

[ERCougar]

What's funny is that this exact line was given to me on Cougarguard after I pronounced how in love I was with the Palin pick.

Carry on.

That IS funny!

What's funnier is that your partisan brain has somehow found a way to equate Paul Ryan to Sarah Palin.

[calicoug]

Why don't you defend your 27% homerun? After that stunt why should anyone either believe or be interested in anything you say in this thread? You're obviously not interested in a truthful discussion.

Everything you say for now on has to be verified because you've shown we can't trust what you say.

What is there to defend? YOU said he won by over 60% in Wisconsin, ergo he will do great nationally. I countered by noting his actual approval rate nationally is nowhere near 60% (27% according to CNN). That's a 33% gap from the number YOU were pushing. And you think I am the one being disingenuous?

Then you fly off the handle all the while maintaining Ryan has no baggage. Based on most all media reports, I think it's safe to say your opinion is part of a very small minority.

Some out there may think he can overcome the baggage or it's worth the risk, but nobody I've seen other than a guy who likes Color Me Badd too much thinks he doesn't have baggage.

The Ayn Rand crowd is going to love this pick. And it will take until November 7 for them to understand why I love it too.

[calicoug]

That IS funny!

What's funnier is that your partisan brain has somehow found a way to equate Paul Ryan to Sarah Palin.

Wasn't hard. Both=bad picks.

This isn't a new position for me. I've been hoping for Ryan for sometime now.

http://cougaruteforum.com/showpost.p...9&postcount=88