Hawkeye Love
Bill Whalen ·
Aug 11, 2011 at 2:48pm
No wonder Mitt Romney's not so wild about the concept of spending quality time in Iowa . . .
Your thoughts?
- Comment (29)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| © 2012 Silent Cal Productions | Help • About • Contact • FAQ • Code of Conduct • Terms & Conditions • Privacy • Store • Site Map • DMCA |
Comments :
Dec '10
Re: Hawkeye Love
Standard "discussion" with a liberal. He didn't answer the question though. That sounds like the same plan Obama has.
Dec '10
Re: Hawkeye Love
That was a very disappointing performance by Romney. First, he tried to shut up the questioner -- bad move. Then, having decided to take the question, he didn't listen to it but instead spent the time it was being asked to formulate his retort.
And when it came time for him to give an answer, he changed the subject entirely. That makes it look like the questioner is right when he implies that Romney will weaken Social Security/Medicare, cut benefits, or both.
"I won't raise taxes" and "Barack Obama is killing jobs" have nothing specific to do with entitlements -- and it was Romney who was on the subject of entitlements before the question, so the questioner wasn't dragging him off-topic.
Indeed, the question was a perfect hanging curve-ball for a response about preserving all the benefits for current and near-term beneficiaries, making modest adjustments to retirement ages and means-based contributions, and putting the programs on a solid footing, Romney struck out. Now I'M questioning whether he even has a plan for entitlements, and if so, what it might be.
Dec '10
Re: Hawkeye Love
Entitlements is an easy thing for an R to run on.
If we don't reform them, they disappear. Entirely. Medicare has <9 years left if Obamacare doesn't completely destroy it.
Jun '10
Re: Hawkeye Love
I agree with Stuart. Romney's answer was weak. If I were a betting man, I'd put serious money down that this guy used up any medicare premiums he actually paid for several years ago. What he is complaining about is how he's going to get his free health care at other people's expense, his grandchildren's perhaps. All we ever talk about is providing care for more people. Never are we trying to find ways to reduce the cost of care so more people can afford to buy their own. This process can only lead to spreading escalating costs amongst more users, thereby lowering dramatically the quality. If flat screen TV's still cost $5000 instead of $700, how many people would own them? We have allowed the socialists to overtake the conversation. Their solutions end up in bankruptsy every where they are instituted. The USA is no different. Again I agree with Stuart. Romney showed no plan, just the same avoidance of reality at which ordinary politicians excel.
Aug '10
Re: Hawkeye Love
In defense of Romney it is difficult to give a detailed answer to this sort of question in a wild and wolley forum like that. Chances are you won't have time to give a detailed answer and any attempt at a partial answer could hurt you.
Even though it seems like he was ducking the guy's question you need to keep it short and sweet in our sound-bite driven age or you may give your opponents a chance to misrepresent your position.
Aug '10
Re: Hawkeye Love
Based on your answer, Stuart, the headlines would read, "ROMNEY TO RAISE RETIREMENT AGE AND LIMIT BENEFITS FOR SENIORS!"
Accurate? Not really, but how many voters read beyond the headlines?
Jul '11
Re: Hawkeye Love
Nice analysis. I actually had high hopes at the beginning of the clip that Romney would show a little spark, maybe a little mettle. But he whiffed big-time. That "I'm not gonna raise taxes" in response was just cringe-inducing. Especially since his lead-in to the topic was so strong, citing the 44% tax-rate necessary to fully fund
the program.
But that's always the way it seems to be with a lot of Republicans - talk big about cutting spending, then fold like a cheap suit when confronted by some angry voter who tries to say they'll be eating puppy chow if they don't get the COLA they think they deserve. "Your entitlements are safe sir, its that other spending I'm talking about."
Sep '10
Re: Hawkeye Love
"Gabby Johnson is right! I've paid into social security and paid my taxes all my life! I'll be damned if you're going to take them away so you can pay off some Wall Street fat cats!"
"Roffle!"
It wasn't a great response but it got the job done. I assume Romney will have a better answer ready next time.
Jul '11
Re: Hawkeye Love
This defense may have some merit if he was caught flat-footed in another situation. But he was talking about social security himself, at that very moment. What was he going to say next? He must have been going somewhere with that 44% tax bit. Seems to me he had a perfect opportunity to spell out his ideas. Unless, perish the thought, he was just indulging in some good old-fashioned demagoguery about government spending with no real ideas to address the root problem.
Aug '10
Re: Hawkeye Love
Cobalt Blue
This defense may have some merit if he was caught flat-footed in another situation. But he was talking about social security himself, at that very moment. What was he going to say next? He must have been going somewhere with that 44% tax bit. Seems to me he had a perfect opportunity to spell out his ideas. m. · Aug 11 at 4:01pm
Let's play a game - you give me your response to the question and I will play the MSM and generate a sound bite from your response.
I'm not trying to be glib here but the reality of our media driven political culture is that it largely precludes candidates from giving detailed answers whether the forum is a debate or a townhall style meeting.
Wonks like you and I love the detailed stuff - your average independent voter? Not so much...
Dec '10
Re: Hawkeye Love
Frozen Chosen
Based on your answer, Stuart, the headlines would read, "ROMNEY TO RAISE RETIREMENT AGE AND LIMIT BENEFITS FOR SENIORS!"
Accurate? Not really, but how many voters read beyond the headlines?
Disagree. The answer starts with: "we will not change your benefits, nor the benefits promised to anyone close to retirement -- these are promises you were made that we will keep." (Mark Levin's standard line.)
"But the only way to afford to keep those promises to your generation is to adjust the program for younger generations. They're going to be healthier and live longer, so it makes sense to adjust the retirement age for them upward. And it makes sense to seek solutions based on competition and innovation rather than simple wealth transfer.
"Because the truth is, if you add up all the money you paid into Social Security and Medicare over your lifetime, you get back all of it in benefits within a few years of retirement. After that, your benefits come straight out of the payroll taxes of current workers. That's why the system will collapse if we don't take decisive action."
Anyone afraid to say that out loud is unfit for office.
Aug '10
Re: Hawkeye Love
Stuart Creque
Frozen Chosen
Based on your answer, Stuart, the headlines would read, "ROMNEY TO RAISE RETIREMENT AGE AND LIMIT BENEFITS FOR SENIORS!"
Accurate? Not really, but how many voters read beyond the headlines?
Disagree. The answer starts with: "we will not change your benefits, nor the benefits promised to anyone close to retirement -- these are promises you were made that we will keep." (Mark Levin's standard line.)
"But the only way to afford to keep those promises to your generation is to adjust the program for younger generations. They're going to be healthier and live longer, so it makes sense to adjust the retirement age for them upward. And it makes sense to seek solutions based on competition and innovation rather than simple wealth transfer.
My headline is still valid despite your well thought out answer. Distorted? Sure, but that is how the MSM treats Republicans.
How many seniors will listen to that complete answer vs the number that will simply read the headline? Politics is the art of the possible, not the science of ideological purity.
Edited on Aug 11, 2011 at 4:21pmMay '11
Re: Hawkeye Love
Trying to say something intelligent in 200 words or less is hard enough when you have time to think. Romney did not hurt himself here. He is slick. Is he truly committed to a vision of government that will get us moving out of this morass?
Jul '11
Re: Hawkeye Love
Frozen Chosen
Let's play a game - you give me your response to the question and I will play the MSM and generate a sound bite from your response.
I'm not trying to be glib here but the reality of our media driven political culture is that it largely precludes candidates from giving detailed answers whether the forum is a debate or a townhall style meeting.
That doesn't sound like a fun game at all ... and your point is well taken. But, from the clip it sounded like Romney was about to say something about the level of entitlement spending. Couldn't he have just continued with that line of thinking? By changing the subject it sounded like he either chickened out or got totally sidetracked. Neither sounds particularly praiseworthy.
Dec '10
Re: Hawkeye Love
Frozen Chosen
My headline is still valid despite your well thought out answer. Distorted? Sure, but that is how the MSM treats Republicans.
How many seniors will listen to that complete answer vs the number that will simply read the headline? Politics is the art of the possible, not the science of ideological purity.
However, your point is that NOTHING is possible because of the mean old MSM. I say that a candidate who thinks that way is unfit to lead. Because if he lies and misdirects and makes sweet-sounding promises to get elected and then thinks he'll ignore all that once in office and do what's right, he won't: he'll be trapped by his lies into continuing to do what's wrong in order to get re-elected.
If people won't vote for solutions that actually, you know, have a chance in Hades of working, the exercise is moot anyway. I believe that they will vote for workable solutions if they're put forward in an honest and hopeful way, like Reagan did.
May '10
Re: Hawkeye Love
This is a tactic on the left that the GOP had better be ready to deal with, both in primary and general election season. It is easy as pie for the left to send a few interlopers to campaign rallies to stir things up. If they do that, they can get favorable press coverage like this:
"Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney faced a rowdy crowd at the Iowa State Fair Thursday, with people interrupting his answers to chant "Wall Street greed" and him snapping "corporations are people, my friend."
One questioner asked the GOP presidential candidate what he would do to strengthen Social Security. The voter didn't like Romney's pledge not to raise taxes, and interrupted him.
Romney pointed angrily at the crowd and told them to give him a chance to answer."
Rowdy? Snapping? Angry? Not exactly. But the press drove its narrative that the voters don't like GOP positions and conservatives are mean, when it might only be a couple of people.
We had better be ready for this, because the left isn't going to wait for the autumn of 2012...
Dec '10
Re: Hawkeye Love
You're implying that Romney didn't bother to think of anything to say about entitlement reform before stepping onto the platform to speak about entitlement reform to a group of Iowa voters.
Romney's answer was the equivalent of "Look! A squirrel!" Or perhaps the Code of Conduct violating answer that the cool kids abbreviate "FY; NQ."
You always hurt yourself when someone asks you a question (and you explicitly say, "Let him ask his question") and then you pointedly change the subject. You look like you didn't really think about the subject before you started talking about it, and like you aren't sharp enough to come up with a halfway decent response off the top of your head. Was it a harder question than what Romney's opponents would ask in a debate?
Edited on Aug 11, 2011 at 4:51pmJul '11
Re: Hawkeye Love
Even though I was definitely not impressed by his response, your take on the matter is probably correct. No one will care tomorrow. I tend to be a little overly critical of Mitt because, with respect to your question, I'm not convinced that's he's convinced in small government.
Dec '10
Re: Hawkeye Love
This guy didn't strike me as an interloper, just a retiree who was terrified of having his benefits cut. A decent response by Romney would have turned the guy into an ally by acknowledging and validating his fear and then explaining how the Republicans were the ones with an actual plan to save his benefits from the collapse of the system, while the Democrats had no workable plan.
By the end of a decent answer, Romney would have extracted a promise from the guy to ask a Democrat politician what would happen to the guy's benefits if the Democrats block the Republican's sensible reforms.
Aug '10
Re: Hawkeye Love
Stuart Creque
However, your point is that NOTHING is possible because of the mean old MSM. I say that a candidate who thinks that way is unfit to lead. Because if he lies and misdirects and makes sweet-sounding promises to get elected and then thinks he'll ignore all that once in office and do what's right, he won't: he'll be trapped by his lies into continuing to do what's wrong in order to get re-elected.
Aug 11 at 4:35pm
I'm not saying that politicians can never give complete answers but they need to pick their battles. This wasn't exactly a controlled situation, after all.
Look, Romney's probably not the best candidate at this type of back and forth and he does stick to the talking points more than I would like but I do believe that he is committed to finding solutions to our mess using market-based solutions that don't involve raising taxes. More importantly, he has the skills to get it done.