Tell us why Romney will be a great president.

[GG]

Ok, if executive experience is an important trait, we ought to consider Romney's record in Massachusetts, where he managed to grow his state more slowly than the national average and, like Obama, managed to invest state funds in failed green energy businesses.

Any leader who is doing anything will make mistakes.   The only people who don't make mistakes are those that are doing nothing.   However, doing nothing in itself is most likely a mistake too.

http://aboutmittromney.com/economic.htm

The year he left office (2007), the trend in Massachusetts' unemployment rate was 12th in the nation [15], a big improvement from the 50th place it was in the year he won office.

IMPROVED STATE'S CREDIT SCORE  Massachusetts saw its S&P rating rise to double-A from double-A-minus under Romney.  When Romney took office as Governor of Massachusetts, the S&P was threatening to downgrade the state's debt. Romney met with them in their offices in New York, invited them up to Boston and met with them in his office, and laid out a debt reduction plan that instilled so much confidence in the S&P folks that they not only relented on the downgrade, they upgraded Massachusetts debt.

Between January 2003 and December 2006, Massachusetts was one of seventeen states to accelerate its job growth every year (creating more jobs each year than were created the year before), and one of only two states — Illinois being the other — to accelerate its job growth by at least 20,000 jobs each year. Massachusetts was one of the top ten most-improved states (seventh overall) in terms of job creation, going from 49th in the nation in the first year of the Romney Administration to 36th in the nation in the last year.

STATE ECONOMICALLY RANKED #1:
With Increased Lead During Romney's term in office

Let me preface all this by saying.  I am a firm believer that Mayors, Governors and Presidents get too much credit when times are good and too much blame when times are bad.   However, this does not change my opinion that Mitt Romney is more aliened with my values and political opinions than President Obama.  I will be voting for Mitt Romney in the fall.  Just like what was pointed out earlier nothing I say or anyone else says on here is going to change any minds.   Everyone at Tulsa Forum is pretty opinionated or else we would not be making comments.   I took the bait earlier to fuel the discussions for the beer swilling audience to have some entertainment on a Saturday night.  We can continue to have this big pissing contest back and forth (happens when you drink beer) but it is not going to change any opinions   

[nathanm]

Ok. As you are probably aware, I think Obama's record as an executive speaks for itself. He's effectively switched the war on terror from a ground war to a drone war that seems to be rather successful. And managed to redirect resources which had been taken away from the hunt for bin Laden back where they belonged and now he's dead as a result. His leadership in the face of serious public opposition to the auto bailout has placed Michigan among the top in job growth in that region and probably saved a minimum of a hundred thousand jobs between GM, Chrysler, and suppliers.

What I would like to see out of him in regards to the above is bringing the drone war out into the open. Once a strike has been made, the details surrounding it and video thereof should be released within a few days to a week. The lack of transparency is turning many Pakistanis against us, understandably. (Would you like to have Chinese drones circling overhead?)

Oh, and it seems that his NASA initiatives are bearing fruit also. Funny how the Congressional Republicans and talking heads were largely against privatizing the mundane stuff NASA does. (probably because Obama was for it) So again, he's doing what needs to be done despite the opposition.

On the other hand, Romney basically wants the economic policies we've been laboring under for the past year combined with the cuts (except the defense cuts, of course!) already written into current law. Nothing really new there, so I'm again unsure why I should vote for the guy who denies that anything has gone right with the current administration. I'm not terribly interested in steps backwards, especially on the (what should be) uncontroversial issues listed in this post.

I'm probably not going to change any minds, but at least it's out there.

[Conan71]

Guido, your argument that it is a waste of time to lay out the arguments for Romney to left leaners is also bunk. You think only left leaners are reading these posts? Independents, moderate Republicans and moderate Democrats are also asking this question. They are watching and many are  wondering why Romney is being throttled. Make a case for the guy if you can. If you can't then, yes, bow out.

Conan challenged me to discuss Obamas' blunders, his failed presidency, lack of leadership, and general destruction of the economy. I refused to play that game. Had he asked me the same question RM asked of you guys I'd have at least offered a couple of my reasons for supporting him.

No I didn't.  I challenged you to point to all the successes of Obama's presidency and all I got was a bunch of hemming and hawing.  I've previously stated my case for why I think Romney would be a really great president at this juncture.  I'm not going to waste my time repeating it to people who obviously didn't pay attention to what I wrote the first go 'round.

[Hoss]

No I didn't.  I challenged you to point to all the successes of Obama's presidency and all I got was a bunch of hemming and hawing.  I've previously stated my case for why I think Romney would be a really great president at this juncture.  I'm not going to waste my time repeating it to people who obviously didn't pay attention to what I wrote the first go 'round.

Copy and paste really that difficult?  I understand why RM is doing this; to centralize the talking points of everyone.  While Republicans in here may not like it, if the party was reversed, wouldn't the Repubs be sniping about having to search for the Dems responses?

Oh wait, you're not a Republican anymore.



Myself?  There are still nearly five full months left until the elections, and the nominations aren't even completed yet.  I'd rather see at least a few debates before I solidify my opinion of someone whom I suspect will not be able to stay on point with a given subject throughout the debates.

He's not called 'Etch-A-Sketch' for nothing!

[BKDotCom]

Because the media said Romney is the guy everyone wants?

[RecycleMichael]

Furthermore, Romney successfully led the effort to save the 2002 Winter Olympics, which had previously been plagued by a bribery scandal and a huge budget deficit. This is exactly the type of turnaround management that America now requires.

Romney got the federal government to bail out the games. We taxpayers paid $1.5 billion for it. His first act as Chairman was to spend $3.5 million to hire lobbyists. The result is that we spent twice as much money for these Olympics as any other. Included in this money was millions of taxpayer dollars building a highway to a privately owned ski resort.

Turnaround management funded by the federal government must make Romney a socialist.

[AquaMan]

No I didn't.  I challenged you to point to all the successes of Obama's presidency and all I got was a bunch of hemming and hawing.  I've previously stated my case for why I think Romney would be a really great president at this juncture.  I'm not going to waste my time repeating it to people who obviously didn't pay attention to what I wrote the first go 'round.

BS. You don't see the difference in the two questions? One is a judgement on performance. The other is a question of why you support your candidate.

Its been a constant barrage of criticism on this forum of this administration and a steady defense of a mediocre republican candiate. It says reams that when narrowed down to a simple question of "why"......... you guys leave the room.

[PonderInc]

I like his firm jawline and handsome, if insincere, smile.  The subtle greying at his temples gives him a certain gravitas.  And of course, he's white...

Debate the issues?  What issues?  All I need's a bumper sticker about freedom, guns and babies.

[RecycleMichael]

Thank you GG for not being afraid of answering the question. While I disagree with your comments on the Olympics and Romney's leadership of them, I still respect your views. The other republicans on this forum seem to unable or unwilling to defend Romney. They only care that he has an (R) in front of his name.

If I asked them why they married their wives, I suspect their answer would be that their spouses weren't men.

[Red Arrow]

Ok. As you are probably aware, I think Obama's record as an executive speaks for itself.

I believe that most of us will agree with that much.  We diverge on the analysis of that record.

[Teatownclown]

I guess we should just ban all presidential discussion on this forum. We should delete the hundreds of anti Obama youtube videos and cartoons that guido and gaspar have posted. It must be futile for them to have posted them as well.

Go for it, Big Daddy! You da man!

[guido911]

Tell us why Romney will be a great president? Because Clinton told us so.

I think he had a good business career.  If you go in and you try to save a failing company, and you and I have friends here who invest in companies, you can invest in a company, run up the debt, loot it, sell all the assets, and force all the people to lose their retirement and fire them. Or you can go into a company, have cutbacks, try to make it more productive with the purpose of saving it.  When you try, like anything else you try, you don't always succeed.  I don't think that we ought to get into the position where we say this is bad work.  This is good work.  There's no question that getting up and going to the office and basically performing the essential functions of the office, a man who's been governor and had a sterling business career crosses the qualification threshold.

Now that Romney has been qualified, and thus far is not a campaign cheat and race baiter (an important qualifier from the OP), he is at least positioned to do an adequate job if elected. Will he be "great", who knows and right now who cares. I don't vote for a person to replace a failure at the end of the day because they necessarily will be great. I vote for that replacement thinking he will do a better job than his predecessor.

With that said, I cannot recall ever being a Romney supporter, so I will not pretend to suddenly love the guy after my candidate didn't get the nomination. That would be embarrassingly hypocritical (ahem). He is closer to me on not supporting abortion rights, however, which for the most part is my primary voting issue.

Edited to add this pee protestor smackdown, which I support.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/romney-to-occupy-heckler-go-back-to-russia/2012/01/19/gIQAmrqdBQ_blog.html

[Teatownclown]

He is closer to me on not supporting abortion rights, however, which for the most part is my primary voting issue.

So, you agree with me that SCOTUS is the real issue. You pass the litmus test. Nate is right, this will only increase the odds of more righties on the court. This will not cause Roe v Wade to be over turned.

Got your calculators handy? 

Volunteer campaign worker for his dad's gubernatorial campaign 1 year. (no brainer)

Unpaid intern in Governor's office 8 years. (conflicting interests?)

Mormon missionary in Paris 2 years. (Draft dodging)...

Unpaid bishop and state president for his church 10 years. (cult activist)...

No salary as president of the Olympics 3 years. (socialist).....

No salary as MA governor 4 years. (RomneyCare)....

That's a grand total of 28 years of unpaid service to his country, his community and his church flock. Why? Because that's the kind of man RMoney is!

Axelrod is correct: different planet...Plan It Privilege. Out of touch with the middle class.....

[nathanm]

Now that Romney has been qualified, and thus far is not a campaign cheat and race baiter (an important qualifier from the OP), he is at least positioned to do an adequate job if elected.

Personally, I think that suckling on the teat of government far beyond what a thousand government employees make in a lifetime is a pretty strong DQ. I'm really tired of this socialism for the rich smile. How many millions of dollars did Romney take from the taxpayers by fobbing off pension obligations on the PBGC, for example?

Also, why does he think unearned income should be taxed at a lower rate than earned income? Adam Smith would not approve. Hell, even Milton Friedman doesn't approve.

[AquaMan]

This thread effectively ended after one and a half pages. Now they're just out ropin' goats.