Paul Ryan is Romney's running mate

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Ouze**

source article here. Looks like someone leaked it a little bit early.

EDIT - changed the title since it's now confirmed - Kid Kyoto

**Kid_Kyoto**

Ninja'd.

Speaking now, he's good.

**d-usa**

It is kind of sad when the VP candidate has more of a plan on the economy than you do.

I think Romneys plan was to pick a VP the Tea Party would want to have as president and then promise them "if you vote for me even though you don't like me, you will get the tea party favorite as the presidential candidate after my terms are over"

**Melissia**

The MittsVP application confirmed it, and that's an official campaign thing.

The guy wants to fund the entire US government, INCLUDING defense, social security, medicare, etc, with 565 billion.

Today, after massive amounts of cuts that have caused the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs, we're at 12.5% of gdp, or roughly 2 trillion. Almost all of which is not discretionary spending. Discretionary spending maks up about a third of the total budget, and of that, most of it is security or military related.

Even if discretionary spending was wiped out entirely-- including defunding the entire US miltiary-- you'd still not get a budget as low as Paul Ryan wants. But he's not touching defense spending, and he's not gonna increase taxes. So his suggested budget is pretty much mathematically impossible.

**MeanGreenStompa**

And in placating the frothy mouthers in the tea party, he's solidified an electoral team that is far to the right and alienates middle of the road voters and the moderates in the GOP.

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2012/08/11/677171/12-things-you-should-know-about-vice-presidential-candidate-paul-ryan/?mobile=nc

Ayn Rand fan eh. Quelle surprise.

**Melissia**

Throne on Earth... he's a Randian, too.

I'm gonna go and cry.

**Kid_Kyoto**

"Throne on Earth"

What a great oath, I'm going to have to work that into a conversation.

**Chowderhead**

So, from what I can tell, this guy's a male Palin?

But he's kinda cute, so it makes up for it.

**olympia**

double-down on male whiteness.

**whembly**

uh... ya'll... he's NOT going to make policy. THATS Romney's job.

The reason why Ryan was picked is purely for the "attack dog" mode.

This is one of the few guys (Romney aint one of those) that can articulate an attack/criticism without looking like the "angry Republican".

I'm more of a Rubio guy (for Florida), but this will get interesting.

Remember that "throw granny off the cliff" add against Paul? That backfired (surprisingly)... it's like he's made of teflon.

Isn't Ryan a Tea Party dude? I don't remember... (I bet that's another reason why he's picked).

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

Romney must be the Democrats' Manchurian candidate!
On the bright side, at least I'll be spared Romney's inauguration speech

Four more years of Obama...is that good or bad? Hard to tell...

**Melissia**

whembly wrote:uh... ya'll... he's NOT going to make policy

I have no illusions that he will not try to influence Romney towards his extremist views.

**whembly**

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:Romney must be the Democrats' Manchurian candidate!
On the bright side, at least I'll be spared Romney's inauguration speech

Four more years of Obama...is that good or bad? Hard to tell...

You're underestimating this pair... (I do think Obama will win tho).

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Melissia wrote:
whembly wrote:uh... ya'll... he's NOT going to make policy
I have no illusions that he will not try to influence Romney towards his extremist views.

I bet you say that to every guy...

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

After the London Olympics debacle, I don't rate Romney at all. I never rated him before, but I rate him even less now if that makes sense

This is not a bitter Brit being offended by Romney's comments, instead it's a realisation that if Romney can't even handle a simple trip to London, what's he going to do when a real crisis pops up?
Romney has picked somebody as running mate that is only going to entrench the divide in American politics. Obama by comparison, always gives off the image that he is willing to compromise. For undecided voters fed up with a lack of action in congress, this will give Obama a few million votes.

And best off all, Romney has picked somebody who has vowed to cut the budget, but still maintain defence spending at current levels. As Doctor Evil once said: Right....

**mattyrm**

Well, I just spent ten minutes reading about the bloke, and I can inform you all that he is an absolute ball bag of a man.. complete with draconian-abortion legislation.

On the plus side, I've got money on Obama winning, so its fething great news for me.

**hotsauceman1**

ISnt this the guy ho tried to ban birth control?

**mattyrm**

hotsauceman1 wrote:ISnt this the guy ho tried to ban birth control?

Yeah kinda, he co-sponsored a “personhood” amendment, an extreme anti-abortion measure which declared that a fertilized fething egg “shall have all the legal and constitutional attributes and privileges of personhood.”

This would basically outlaw abortion and some contraception.

What a feth. Why do women even go out with guys like that? How do they ever get a date!?

**Chowderhead**

mattyrm wrote:
hotsauceman1 wrote:ISnt this the guy ho tried to ban birth control?

Yeah kinda, he co-sponsored a “personhood” amendment, an extreme anti-abortion measure which declared that a fertilized fething egg “shall have all the legal and constitutional attributes and privileges of personhood.”

This would basically outlaw abortion and some contraception.

What a feth. Why do women even go out with guys like that? How do they ever get a date!?

He's got a body like an angel?

**whembly**

All... The rep and dem voters has already decided...

It's the independent that the candidate needs to whoo...

Saw a little blurb on CNN that there's speculation that Hillary is "saying goodbye" to staffers at the States Dept.

If Obama convinces Hillary to run as is VP... it's over for Romney/Ryan.

**Chowderhead**

Or he could go with Biden again, who was a damned good choice.

**whembly**

Okay... I saw this on twitter... LOL:

**Melissia**

mattyrm wrote:
hotsauceman1 wrote:ISnt this the guy ho tried to ban birth control?

Yeah kinda, he co-sponsored a “personhood” amendment, an extreme anti-abortion measure which declared that a fertilized fething egg “shall have all the legal and constitutional attributes and privileges of personhood.”

This would basically outlaw abortion and some contraception.

What a feth. Why do women even go out with guys like that? How do they ever get a date!?

So if that's the case, can a mother evict the child?

Automatically Appended Next Post:
http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2012/08/paul-ryan

IN THE polarised world of American politics, achieving bipartisan agreement on any topic is a rare feat nowadays. So perhaps it's worth celebrating the fact that, had it been put to a vote, the pick of Paul Ryan as Mitt Romney's running-mate likely would've gained support from both parties. Less encouraging is the prospect that both sides will now use Mr Ryan, and his controversial budget plan, to further divide the electorate.

The momentum behind Mr Ryan's candidacy had picked up steam in the past week. Editorials in the Wall Street Journal, Weekly Standard and National Review had urged Mr Romney to select the representative from Wisconsin in order to clear up his own ideological fuzziness and clarify the stakes of the election.

The choice certainly does that. Nothing has defined the Republican agenda more than Mr Ryan's budget proposal, which aims to slash the deficit in the near term and bring the budget into balance by around 2040. Noble goals both, but in order to achieve these ends, the Congressional Budget Office says the plan would decimate nearly all government programmes except for Social Security, health care and defence by 2050.

This is unlikely to squelch the caricature of Mr Romney as a heartless elitist. While programmes for the poor would be cut, the "path to prosperity", as Mr Ryan's plan is titled, is paved with tax cuts for businesses and individuals. The plan would also transform Medicare into a voucher system aimed at controlling costs. Democratic attack dogs are salivating. The new ticket will undoubtedly face charges of "ending Medicare as we know it", an attack that was successfully field-tested in an upstate New York House race last year.

With the pick, Mr Romney has shored up his base. But conservatives already seemed rather motivated to boot Barack Obama from office. Will Mr Ryan cost him a share of the centre, just as Sarah Palin did John McCain? Mr Ryan is a different political animal—more substantive and less vitriolic—but coming from the House he is associated with a specific form of conservatism that is all about insurgency, purity and Washington dysfunction. Remember, it was Mr Ryan's polarising budget plan that attempted to scupper an earlier bipartisan deal.

Conservatives are rejoicing. They welcome an honest fight over entitlement reform and the budget. In a contest of personalities, Barack Obama would likely defeat Mr Romney. The poor economy doesn't seem to be taking a toll on the incumbent. But the Republicans feel they have the upper hand if the election is seen as a choice between two divergent views of the role and size of government. Democrats, of course, feel the same way.

Regardless of the merits of Mr Ryan's views, his willingness to deal in the details is admirable. In this way, Mr Romney's pick is a boon to the campaign. Over the next four months, America will have a serious argument about fiscal and governing philosophy. Pity the demagoguery that will accompany the debate.

**Ouze**

I think this was a poor choice. In my armchair analysis, I think his unfavorables are too high (especially among the elderly, who are very likely to vote!), and delivering Wisconsin - a swing state he may have won anyway, with merely 10 electoral votes - isn't worth it. If he wanted a Tea Party candidate, I think Rubio would have done better in all arenas. My last analysis was that Obama would win but it would be a very tough race. I'm even more inclined to believe that.

**Melissia**

Selecting Paul Ryan opens up a huge amount of attacks on Romney now, involving Paul Ryan's disgusting budget plan.

**purplefood**

This fellow seems to be a few drinks short of a good night...

**whembly**

Ouze wrote:I think this was a poor choice. In my armchair analysis, I think his unfavorables are too high (especially among the elderly, who are very likely to vote!), and delivering Wisconsin - a swing state he may have won anyway, with merely 10 electoral votes - isn't worth it. If he wanted a Tea Party candidate, I think Rubio would have done better in all arenas. My last analysis was that Obama would win but it would be a very tough race. I'm even more inclined to believe that.

Agreed... Rubio would've been better for Romney. I guess that the Romney campaign felt they needed help from the indie/tea partiers (Ryan is a Tea Party rock star).

**Ahtman**

Ouze wrote:If he wanted a Tea Party candidate, I think Rubio would have done better in all arenas.

Rubio also has the more interesting name. Just say it a few times out loud and let it fill the air with it's comforting, dulcet sound. Ruuuuuubbbbiiiiiooooo. I thought he was great in Hook.

**whembly**

Melissia wrote:Selecting Paul Ryan opens up a huge amount of attacks on Romney now, involving Paul Ryan's disgusting budget plan.

eh... at least he has a plan.

Name someone else who put out "ideas" into the conversation. What he advocated may never come to exact fruitation, but he at least he got people talking about it.

And we do need to talk about it in our lifetime... the status quo can't stay. So, cuts/raise taxes must happen soon.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

purplefood wrote:This fellow seems to be a few drinks short of a good night...

Browsing thru twitter and message forums, a lot of the wimminz. were talking about "how good looking" Ryan is...

Um... so is that why Romney picked him?

o.O

**Melissia**

whembly wrote:eh... at least he has a plan.

Just because he has a plan doesn't mean his plan is actually worthy of consideration. A stupid plan is worse than no plan at all.

whembly wrote:And we do need to talk about it in our lifetime... the status quo can't stay. So, cuts/raise taxes must happen soon.

The guy plans on cutting taxes for the richest and for corporations, raising taxes for most anyone on the lower end of the middle class or in the working class, and cutting the budget by 75% even though he isn't going to touch defense spending, which will continue to grow in his budget.

This isn't "talking about it", this is political posturing to score points.

**AustonT**

mattyrm wrote:
hotsauceman1 wrote:ISnt this the guy ho tried to ban birth control?

Yeah kinda, he co-sponsored a “personhood” amendment, an extreme anti-abortion measure which declared that a fertilized fething egg “shall have all the legal and constitutional attributes and privileges of personhood.”

This would basically outlaw abortion and some contraception.

What a feth. Why do women even go out with guys like that? How do they ever get a date!?

Women who believe the same thing I suppose. I'm not terribly surprised by his support of the sanctity of life; he is a Catholic after all. He has also gone on the record to say Republicans need to stop trying to push social issues and agree to disagree. He still votes his beliefs but he doesn't go out and evangelize them; which is how I prefer my pro-life politicians. The most concerning aspect of the fetal personhood bill was that it would have outlawed invitro fertilization.

Chowderhead wrote:Or he could go with Biden again, who was a damned good choice.

In that he really doesn't bother anyone? Uncle Joe is a fairly bland politician. I doubt Hillary would run on a ticket with Barry. I get the impression the Clintons HATE him.