SeniorsfavorRyan 52/29, according to this Rasmussen report, for whatever that’s worth. Not quite 3 to 1, but more than 2 to 1. Of all the potential vice president picks, seniors favored Ryan at a rate higher than the combination of the next two highest possible choices.
Seniors like conservatives. That’s just how it is. The more conservative someone is, the better. They’re easily the single voting block in the country whose votes are the most out of line with their interests. I blame dementia.
Less than two to one.
With Rasmussen, less is more.
Republican math. :smack:
One thing Ryan’s detractors need to explain is if he is too extremist for the country, how come he keeps on getting elected in a swing district?
Obviously he can sell himself to independent voters.
The fuzzy kind?
Math - not even once.
Hell, I can’t explain how a harpy with eyes on acid gets elected in otherwise calm and sensible Minnesota. Ditto with Lil’ Stevie King. Or Louie Louie Goober, from Texas. Well, actually, that’s bit easier, they’re nuts.
But rather than us explaining why he does win, maybe you could explain why you think he should?
I wish people wouldn’t put forth the argument that campaigns must know what they’re doing. Campaigns do stupid stuff all the time. Even the Obama campaigns, which are on the whole pretty polished and smart, do stupid stuff. The Romney campaign hasn’t been knocking my socks off with their adroit political skills and prescient positioning. It hasn’t even untied my shoelaces.
Even better - what profiteth a man to (maybe) win Wisconsin, Minnesota & Iowa but to lose Florida?
It still leaves him negative 3 electoral votes.
And I don’t think he has a shot in hell of winning all three. Probably not even two of them.
Bullshit. And you can stick your “dementia” comment where the sun don’t shine, junior.
Okay, Romney picks Ryan and then immediately seems to be trying to backpedal from the Ryan budget and distance himself.
I’m getting whiplash over here.
You poor dear, here, let me get those shoelaces for you. Mind if I keep them? Little hobby of mine…
I begin to wonder if you’re going to hand me an orange jumpsuit soon.
The percentage of the US that has any political awareness is what, 10%? Less?
You appear to not know the difference between favorability ratings and head to head voter preference numbers! Wow.
Well, if it matters (which it probably doesn’t), it’s worth pointing out that senior (65+) liked Ryan’s/the Republican’s plan than they did Obama’s/the Democrat’s plan.
The last 3+ years have seen spending increase. Seriously, what are you talking about? The annual budget now clocks in at around $3.5 trillion dollars, closing in on $4 trillion. It’s gone up every year. The spending under Obama has been staggering.
I’ll believe the Dems are serious when entitlements are on the table. Nothing else moves the meter materially (including taxing the rich). That’s the spending we need to manage. Taxing the rich is going to accomplish squat in the grand scheme of things. It’s pandering.
Which plan? IIUC there are a few versions already voted (or dead in the senate) and later modified, and if it is the one Krauthammer reviewed:
It actually went down from 2009 to 2010. $3.51 trillion in outlays to $3.46 tillion. 2011 went back up to $3.6 trillion. Spending has basically been flat under Obama, although at historically very high levels.
As to what needs to be “on the table”, Obama did put entitlements on the table. You may have heard of the “grand bargain” in 2011 that fell apart - it included smaller COLAs for SS and raising the Medicare eligibility age. It was somewhere between 3-to-1 and 4-to-1 spending cuts to tax increases. But Boehner couldn’t pull it off and the Administration got scared that their base would crucify them if they didn’t get more in revenues in exchange for touching the third rails.
I also notice you left the third largest budgetary department off your list of things that “move the needle” - you know, the one Romney actually wants to increase spending on.