Two reasons to vote for Mitt Romney

Two reasons to vote for Mitt Romney

Is anyone actually voting for Mitt Romney? Certainly some people like his business acumen and would like to see the country run like a business.

But of the people voting for Mitt Romney, what percentage is actually voting for him? Better stated, what percentage is voting against Barack Obama? 60%? 70%? Does it matter who is running against Obama for the vast majority of Romney voters?

John Kerrey was a beneficiary of the "anybody but the incumbent" feeling back in 2004. Will it lead to a different result in 2012?

Regardless, there are two excellent reasons to vote against Barack Obama, or for Mitt Romney, come November 6th.

1. The Middle Class Squeeze

As I was getting ready for work Tuesday morning, the Today Show had on an Arizona family that since 2008 had to run through its 401(k) and its entire life savings. After going through every asset, they still lost their home to foreclosure, even though the husband was working 12 hours a day.

Of course we could question that family’s choices and spending, but the fact is many middle class Americans are squeezed. We are working harder, earning less money for more work, all while paying more for everything. We are paying more for gas. We are paying more for groceries. Our utility bills have gone up. Although federal taxes haven’t gone up, many of our state and local tax burdens have increased. All Washington is able to do is bicker while we’re getting squeezed to death.

One of the commentators for the segment noted that the middle class squeeze looks like an hour glass– with the middle class getting squeezed up or down. I don’t agree as it seems not too many people are getting squeezed up; my belief is a pear is a better visual.

And that squeeze is ultimately President Obama’s problem. Yes, he inherited the mess. But now, it’s his mess. And the conversation going on around many kitchen tables around America– which bills must be paid and what can be waited on– is his problem. Just like it was George H.W. Bush’s problem in 1992. Bush 41 was highly popular with approval ratings at 89% after winning the Gulf War in 1991. But largely because of a dismal economy in 1992– Bush lost his bid for reelection. It could happen again in 13 days.

Ultimately, Barack Obama knew he was betting his presidency on health care. Obama was too arrogant to recognize that people care more about their pocketbooks than their neighbors. People are more concerned with their own bottom line– and when people are earning less and spending more for everything, they could give a shit about whether Joe down the street has health insurance.

If our pocketbooks are fine, then we’ll help our neighbor. Obama should have made jobs his only domestic priority. Just like McCain had to answer for Bush in 2008, now Obama has to answer for four years of Americans being unemployed and underemployed.

2. The National Debt is over $16,000,000,000,000!

Our deficit is over $1 trillion a year. That is a number Barack Obama has to wear around his neck like that Kryptonite necklace Lex Luthor made for Superman.

Barack Obama has increased the national debt by roughly $6 trillion in four years. We couldn’t afford the deficits under George W. Bush. President Obama has exploded it.

I would give President Obama the benefit of the doubt in 2009, given what was going on with the economy. Maybe even 2010. But there comes a time, when the annual deficit needed to be reduced. He has failed to do that. We can blame Republicans for the failure, but ultimately, he’s the president and he must take responsibility for the exploded deficit under his watch. The buck stops with him.

Even more problematic is Barack Obama acknowledges the problem with the deficit, yet hasn’t provided a solution. We can’t afford to have a debt of over $20 trillion when he leaves office (we can’t afford a $16 trillion debt).

So, those are two very good reasons to vote for Mitt Romney. The president failed to show the same fight for jobs as he did health care. And he has shown absolutely no urgency toward this ballooning federal debt. Maybe its time that voters keep our presidents accountable: Don’t spend money we don’t have or you won’t get my vote.

Comments

Leave a comment
  • You basically contradicted the premise of this article. The premise was "reasons to vote for Romney as opposed to voting against Obama." Then you gave two reasons that you were dissatisfied with Obama's performance.

    The real questions are:
    (1) What is Romney going to do about the middle class squeeze, other than more tax cuts for him and others similarly situated? Especially when there are reports that he intends to do away with the home mortgage interest deduction? More offshoring by Bain?

    (2) What is Romney going to do about the national debt, other than put Paul Ryan on the ticket?

    Unless you can point to Romney statements showing evidence of any plan, there is no reason to vote "for" Romney. At least you haven't provided one.

  • fb_avatar

    It should be "should have" not "should of." I also agree with the previous comment.

  • In reply to Betty Antoinette:

    Ugh! Where were you when I was writing this last night Betty?!?

    Thanks for reading and pointing that out. Mistake changed.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Betty Antoinette:

    It's okay! This article 'rocks'! Whether with grammatical errors, or not!

  • The "anyone but Obama" reasoning is why TWO jobs bills did not get past the republican fillibuster - including one specifically for veterans.

    Romney is great at creating jobs - for CHINA. He's an expert at outsourcing. Hell Bain is outsourcing a company in Freeport Illinois as we speak.

    The reason the debt went up so high under Obama is the wars had not been put on the books. Yes it's great when you say you've paid off most of your debts - except for those two maxed out credit cards that you never talk about. Once on the books, the debt went out of control.

    When you have to decide on paying rent or getting medication - healthcare becomes a HUGE issue. If you didn't have to worry about that decision, then getting back on track financially becomes a very plausible light at the end of the tunnel.

    Under romney, there will be no middle class - just those in the same financial situation as he is and the rest of us .

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to goofyjj:

    Thank You.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to goofyjj:

    agree

  • This does not convince me at all to vote for Romney. The man has not indicated any real plan that would restore our economy, he just keeps saying that he knows how to do it. Maybe he does, but at the expense of health care, medicare, and education, not to mention other human factors that he seems to continue to forget. Your article is only a critique of Obama, not a real reason to vote for Romney.

  • In reply to pattycarroll:

    Thanks Patty for commenting. I wasn't trying to convince anyone to vote for Romney-- I just gave two reasons why one could vote him. Ultimately, it's up to you to decide.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Brian C. Thomas:

    Brian, It looks to me that you keep ignoring logic. I mean:

    1. How do you suggest providing reasons to vote for Romney is not a way of convincing people to vote for him???
    May be you mean that it is not your purpose to convince people, but providing reasons - this exactly what you are doing.
    So basically what you are saying is that you do not intend to do what you are doing? lol

    2. Although you mentioned that Obama inherited the problems in question - you blame them on him. Those are not reasons to vote against Obama unless you are sure that Romeny would have handled the problems better.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Ilya Dudanoff:

    Now I'm thinking may be you are trying to convince people to vote FOR Obama, by offering such lame reasons to vote Against him lol

    Maybe I'm being rough on you, but seriously, those are really lame reasons. By offering lame reasons to vote for someone [Romney], one does achieve quite the opposite. May be this is your goal?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Ilya Dudanoff:

    Blame has to be put on someone who for 4 years has not brought the deficit down (his promise) and stated that if he could not do that, he would be a "one term president".

    Blame is not important. It IS who can get the job done and Mr. Obama has not shown an overwhelming (or even a minimal) effort at tackling that issue.

    What we need is an individual with a proven track record at creating jobs. Mr. Obama sorely lacks that credential...even after 4 years in office.

    I'm lucky. I have a great job in the entertainment industry. So really, whoever wins doesn't affect me much. But the bottom line is who can maintain what we have and create even more opportunities for Americans to have the opportunities that used to be afforded to our parents.

    I completely agree with this article writer and his reasoning.

    For all who disagree, take a moment and put this article in context, open your minds and READ what has been written.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Urban Ledgend:

    I DID read it all. But he gave reasons not to vote for Obama, not on why we should vote Romney. If someone is only voting Romney just to not vote Obama, then vote Gary Johnson. He is a hell of alot more qualified than Romney.

  • You have just dismissed the Presidential Election to an A+B= C equation.

    I am convinced as well that there are only (2) reasons to vote for Mitt Romney. And I mean just two and not more than that....and those two reasons are very different than yours. They are:

    1. He won the republican nomination
    2. He has accepted and spent campaign contributions

    Your comments are limited in scope and superficial. Instead of watching TV in the morning have breakfast then coffee, you will wake up.

    The President did not create the deficit or the increases in the deficit during his administration. It was the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and medical costs associated with the returning veterans which will continue to mount until 2050 long after this election.

    Congress and the Pentagon has advised the President on of the "Art of War" and the importance of the United States maintaining a presence in that area of the world. It is a shared responsibility among all Americans who value freedom above tyranny and terrorism.

    The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2003 - 2010 cost $6,300 per American. In you equation above Substitute A = 330,000,000 Americans
    B = $6,300 per American . C= Deficit

    Source: Congressional Budget Office (CBO)

  • In reply to Fitzachary:

    You do know that the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 was signed into law by President Obama in February 2009 with an estimated cost of ~$780 billion over the next ten years, right? You can support whomever you like, but make sure you have your facts right when you are trying to argue for one candidate over another. "The President did not create the deficit or the increases in the deficit during his administration." That sure looks like an increase in the deficit to me.

  • Romney would be disastrous. We certainly don't need a president who shows such an incredible propensity for mendacity as Romney.

    As to the two points argued here:

    1. Romney would extend the "middle class squeeze", directing more to the already wealthy as the Republican Party has been doing as its primary quest for decades. Obama has begun to reverse that. It takes time to undo decades of damage, which is why he needs a second term.

    2. Overwhelmingly, economists say that running deficits to repair recessions and depressions is not only acceptable, but essential. Adopting austerity plans to severely reduce the deficit now would send the nation back into recession or worse. The time to deal with deficits is after the economy is fully back to significant expansion, when eliminating it is comparatively easy. Besides, most of the federal deficit is in bonds held by the wealthy in the United States, so most of the money stays at home anyway.

  • I agree with the commenters above - you haven't given a reason TO vote for Romney, only two reasons one should consider to vote AGAINST Obama.

    I saw a Facebook cartoon featuring Lucy yanking the football away from Charlie Brown. The caption went something like "blaming Obama for not fixing the economy is like blaming Charlie Brown for not kicking the football." The Republicans want us all to forget that they've happily played the part of Lucy for the last four years.

    Mitt Romney's plan for fixing the economy is the exact same plan George W. Bush employed that broke it. Romney offers nothing that we haven't seen before and everything that we've seen that has failed.

    In my post today, I revealed what we can expect from a Romney Presidency. Ironically, his time at Bain Capital serves as the perfect metaphor for how he would govern. When all the stakeholders are seated at the table, he'll guarantee one thing - the money men will not lose and everyone else will make sacrifices. (http://www.chicagonow.com/easy-as-riding-a-bike/2012/10/lance-armstrong-mitt-romney-and-the-pitfalls-of-trusting-a-winner/)

    There is a clear choice this election. A candidate who has empathy for every American and desires equal opportunity and a level playing field for all or one who will take us one step closer to a plutocracy and fascism.

    The middle class hasn't been pinched in an hour glass - we've been trickled upon...

    Obama/Biden 2012!

  • fb_avatar

    I also have dual reasons to vote for Mr. Romney that differ from those you listed. First, we won't have to worry about him being too rigid on any issue since he changes opinions so convincingly and readily. As Horace Silver wrote, “This way or that way, which way shall I go?” Why would we want to have a President that burdens himself with the yoke of conviction? Second, his record of overcoming such tremendous odds in life (e.g., born into a family of extreme wealth and political power, toiling through the finest private schools, avoiding military service by proselytizing in the dangerous confines of France, following in father’s footsteps without screwing it up), represents a shining example of achieving the American Dream for rich white guys. It is just too obvious. Being a privileged, entitled male representative of the 1% of Americans like him ought to send us flocking to polls so we can vote against our own best interests.

  • fb_avatar

    This article is absurd for several reasons. Barack Obama is not the reason the middle class is suffering. He is helping, but the Republicans made it their mission to make sure they wouldn't pass a single bill to help him out.
    Here's why Romney would be a disaster:
    1. Romney refuses to explain how his "five point" economic plan will work. We are supposed to find out after he's elected.
    2. His numbers don't add up if he doesn't raise taxes on someone, and since he won't tax the rich, it will be the middle class that gets hit.
    3. There surely will be Supreme Court appointments, and anyone who cares about a woman's right to control her own body has to worry about who he will pick for those appointments. Women are concerned!
    4. Judging from his past at Bain Capital, Romney will reward firms that send jobs overseas. He's not skilled at creating jobs. He's best at "offshoring" them.
    5. He's completely unready to be Commander-in-Chief. At the foreign policy debate he even called Syria Iran's "pathway to the sea," when Iran has two coastlines, one on the Persian Gulf! He also calls Russia our number-one geopolitical enemy when Russia is now one of our allies. All his foreign policy advisors are the neocons who advised George W. Bush.
    6. His economic policies, from what we can tell, will be W. redux. They will simply bring back the recession that Obama has slowly arrested and reversed. It takes time to stop a recession as bad as the one we had. We are doing much better than Europe. With Romney, we are likely to fall back much further than Europe and end up in worse shape than Greece.

    I hope people read this and think deeply about the folly of voting for Mitt Romney and the Republicans.
    Barack Obama would have gotten much farther with his plans to arrest the recession had not the congress deliberately made a pact to reject every single bill to improve the economy, even a drought relief bill to help farmers this summer!

  • Although many of you may think I'm an idiot for today's post (which certainly is OK-- I have always said, just because I write it doesn't make it correct), I just wanted to thank you all for reading and commenting. I've been working hard at my "real job" the last six weeks or so and haven't posted as much as I would have liked-- your comments today served as a reminder as to why I love writing here so much.

    Thank you for reading and caring enough to comment-- even if its to tell me how I couldn't be more wrong!

  • People need money and whoever is giving the money will win. It would be foolish to vote for someone who will take your money. http://bit.ly/Ukmrit

  • fb_avatar

    considering that Romney's bain capital just closed a plant in illinois, had those workers train chinese workers and is shipping those jobs to china, he is the last person that will help middle class familys.

  • fb_avatar

    I read your post a few days ago and have wanted to respond. I have great respect for what you wrote. I agree on both your points. We are a family of 9, my husband and I and our 7 children. My husband is a school teacher and coaches high school football to supplement income. I think this qualifies us as a middle income family at best. I have been home with our children since our oldest was born and we feel blessed with each one. First, we have felt the squeeze. We are on a tight budget already and it has felt tighter. Everything that we need is costing us more and thus we have less to spend. How have we responded? We spend money on only the things that are needed. We are nervous about what the future will bring so we don't spend. I don't think people not spending money is what helps the economy grow but under this administration we must be extra careful to not over spend.
    I strongly agree with your last statement, "don't spend money we don't have." This is something we practice in our own home. We only spend money we have. As a family of 9 on one income we live simply. We only buy something if we have the money for it. If not we don't have the money we keep putting small amounts away until we do have the money. I don't say this to have others feel sorry for us, I think we are blessed. I say this to point out spending habits should reflect income, not the income I wish we had. The federal government keeps spending more than it has and then they keep wanting more money from us. It's not working. I understand that the federal government's budget is extremely complicated but still the goal is to spend what you have, not keep borrowing. There is great peace and security in not having debt in our own family, this would be true of our nation if it were true. I would not describe people in our nation as feeling at peace with our economic situation. Why would any of those people think four more years of the same bring a different result?

    The government keeps taking our money that we have worked for and spending it foolishly and the Obama Administration will not admit they have made mistakes nor have I heard Obama say they may be tweeking their plan. Four more years is too much to risk. I don't know of anyone who is better off today than four years ago. I know of close friends that have lost their homes, and I know many who are just keeping steady, realizing if Obama is reelected it will only get worse. Most people I know who have remained steady through this have said, "I'm just happy to have a job." Is that the 'Hope' the Obama administration wants for America. While we each should feel blessed for the work we have I don't think that just being glad we just have a job is what has made America a strong nation.

  • fb_avatar

    You know, I keep reading a lot of people's comments on here about why this article is not convincing and how there is not really even facts or plans from Romney central in order to convince you as an American that Romney would be a good person to do the job of POTUS! Well, all I can say is if you listen to your gut (maybe not after a big meal!) but just that quiet inner voice that sums up all that you've heard, seen, lived, discussed, and reasoned, it will tell you that our current situation is so grave that it is almost past the red flags, holy sh!t, anxiety level that should be tolerated here in our country. Inherited messes should be ones you can clean up or at very least keep at bay till one can get a good working plan in place. However, this is just not simply the case. It is far beyond me to comprehend how anyone, and I mean I couldn't care less party lines, who could think voting in the same system is going to get the job done!!!! The question I have for you fine fellow Americans is; Isn't this the definition of insanity? DOING THE SAME THING OVER AND OVER EXPECTING DIFFERENT RESULTS!! As a responsible American one has to truly put their ego away and vote for SANITY and for someone who truly wants to abide by our Constitution of U.S. of America. That is what true patriotism is, voting not by party, person but rather by the candidate who would uphold OUR (that means you and me btw) CONSTITUTION. It doesn't get any more complicated than that!

Leave a comment