Which presidential candidate mirrors your opinions the most?

[Alphataru]

You totally missed the point. The US government and the economy is a lot like a giant company, not a "business". That is why Obama's current cabinet includes several former and current CEO's of huge global companies. Warren Buffet and Jeff Immulet are a few examples.

Tell me why the government is so different than a huge global company?

I think the main argument is that the government's mandate is to help the people, whereas a company's mandate is to generate profit for shareholders.

However, I completely agree with you, in that Romney will certainly be better at handling economic issues than Obama. The thing about him working in a PE (which people REALLY don't understand) is that, he has experience with gauging efficiency of companies and knows how to restructure. The current budget crisis is analogous to a failing company that as a high amount of debt in need of restructuring. I believe Romney is capable of knowing where to cut spending in order to at least alleviate the huge debt. Obama had no experience in finance, nor business, and has demonstrated that he is unable to even find people who are capable of fixing the issues, thus, he has to go.

The only problem I have is that his conservative social views are ridiculous. On the other hand, I suspect he might be a lot less conservative than people believe. Though that doesn't matter, as he is bound by his party's doctrines to vote a certain way, less he lose all his votes the next election cycle.

Still don't know who to vote for...

 

[Frankie22]

I think the main argument is that the government's mandate is to help the people, whereas a company's mandate is to generate profit for shareholders.

However, I completely agree with you, in that Romney will certainly be better at handling economic issues than Obama. The thing about him working in a PE (which people REALLY don't understand) is that, he has experience with gauging efficiency of companies and knows how to restructure. The current budget crisis is analogous to a failing company that as a high amount of debt in need of restructuring. I believe Romney is capable of knowing where to cut spending in order to at least alleviate the huge debt. Obama had no experience in finance, nor business, and has demonstrated that he is unable to even find people who are capable of fixing the issues, thus, he has to go.

The only problem I have is that his conservative social views are ridiculous. On the other hand, I suspect he might be a lot less conservative than people believe. Though that doesn't matter, as he is bound by his party's doctrines to vote a certain way, less he lose all his votes the next election cycle.

Still don't know who to vote for...

You articulated what I was trying to say much better than I was able to, kudos.

In regard to the government vs. business issue, you're right one if for profit, the other is for people. I feel like in this case managing America like a big business will pay dividends and prove out to be in the best interests of "the people". If Mitt can turn America around from a budgetary and economic standpoint, as well as create new jobs, I believe that he will fix the main issues plaguing "the people" today. Look at pro sports. Is there ever any dysfunction on a team that is winning? Of course, but it's always far more manageable as opposed to when everyone feels like they are losing.

I also am at odds with many of Mitts conservative views. I live a stones throw away from Harvard, in one of the most liberal cities in America. But, I'm a realist, and I see that the things that Mitt can provide outweigh (to me) some of his conservative views.

We need a balanced budget, more jobs, prosperity and a focus on capitalism and education. We need jobs created in the private sector, and that is where I totally agree with Mitt.

I voted for Obama; I have him a shot. I think Mitt is the clear cut choice if you only care about the main tasks we need to do to fix this thing. I do understand why people are put off buy his ultra conservative stance, which is over hyped. I'm taking a simple approach and focusing on the key benefits.

 

[Gibonius]

I'm not going to argue the comparison to Obama, but saying that Romney's experience with Bain makes him more qualified than all 44 of our previous presidents seems absurd to me. You're talking about people who literally wrote the Constitution and helped birth the nation, people with a lifetime of government service (often more than one branch and many more years than Romney), military leadership, the works. Romney has literally no experience at national politics unless you count managing Bain or running for President. He wasn't a party leader prior to winning the nomination. He's never served in the legislature, never served in the military. A discrete ranking would require ranking all these various components which I'm not going to do, but I really can't see "ran Bain and made a lot of money" as outweighing the accomplishments prior to winning the Presidency of men like Washington, Adams, Jefferson, LBJ, Nixon, etc, etc.

Note: I'm not saying he's unqualified, just that he is not extraordinarily qualified by historical standards.

 

[itsstillmatt]

GHWB was as qualified as anybody we will see in our lifetimes.

 

[Gibonius]



GHWB was as qualified as anybody we will see in our lifetimes.

There you go. Military career, VP, Congress, oil millionaire, Director of CIA, envoy to China. Well rounded and very extensive experience.

 

[Frankie22]

I'm not going to argue the comparison to Obama, but saying that Romney's experience with Bain makes him more qualified than all 44 of our previous presidents seems absurd to me. You're talking about people who literally wrote the Constitution and helped birth the nation, people with a lifetime of government service (often more than one branch and many more years than Romney), military leadership, the works. Romney has literally no experience at national politics unless you count managing Bain or running for President. He wasn't a party leader prior to winning the nomination. He's never served in the legislature, never served in the military. A discrete ranking would require ranking all these various components which I'm not going to do, but I really can't see "ran Bain and made a lot of money" as outweighing the accomplishments prior to winning the Presidency of men like Washington, Adams, Jefferson, LBJ, Nixon, etc, etc.
Note: I'm not saying he's unqualified, just that he is not extraordinarily qualified by historical standards.

I said maybe ever. I don't mind conceding that he might not be the most qualified ever. He's got to be up there though!

Fixed Bain
Totally turned around Bain capital - led them to their best years ever
Reorganized Olympics - made wild success
Highly Educated
National level political experience as Gov of one of Americas most influential states

 

[Frankie22]

There you go. Military career, VP, Congress, oil millionaire, Director of CIA, envoy to China. Well rounded and very extensive experience.

A good nomination no doubt. I would argue Romney has a more impressive results based resume. As in, the jobs Romney took on were operated at the highest levels possible. The guy literally was a titan of prosperity to every private sector organization he ran. I believe the same results will be generated for America, because of the unique challenges we are facing right now. I just think it's right in this guys wheelhouse.

Maybe GWB is better, I dont know the finer details of his performance prior to taking office.

 

[Gibonius]

So basically you believe business experience is more meaningful than absolutely anything else. I guess that's your opinion and we'll have to disagree there.


I don't believe the US has ever had a President whose experience was primarily in business. Had a lot of extremely well off men, but they've mostly made their case for President as politicians. It would be an interesting experiment at least.

 

[itsstillmatt]

To be fair, the Olympics experience is being underrated. He was able to whip a big bureaucracy with lots of whining interests into shape very well.

 

[jrd617]



To be fair, the Olympics experience is being underrated.

 

[Frankie22]

So basically you believe business experience is more meaningful than absolutely anything else. I guess that's your opinion and we'll have to disagree there.
I don't believe the US has ever had a President whose experience was primarily in business. Had a lot of extremely well off men, but they've mostly made their case for President as politicians. It would be an interesting experiment at least.

In this case, at this period in time, I do. Frankly, had Romney not operated and reorganized the Olympics as well as he did, I would be less sure. There were a lot of multi cultural issues and politics swirling around when he took that mess over.

When I look at the current state of our country I see three major issues: The Economy, Jobs and Healthcare. Jobs being a red hot topic. I believe Romey has the practical real world experience to improve these issues, which by default will improve prosperity overall.

If there was another guy who was more qualified I'd be in his camp. Can Clinton run again? Ha-ha.

 

[Frankie22]

To be fair, the Olympics experience is being underrated. He was able to whip a big bureaucracy with lots of whining interests into shape very well.

I agree with this and just mentioned it in my last post. The Olympics is what put me over the edge. He had to deal the bureaucracy and private interests you mentioned, multiple nations, his own nation the economic piece, the operational piece, the political piece, etcetera.

 

[Frankie22]

Hey guys nice debating with you. Ill check back tomorrow.

-Mitt Romney brown noser

 

[brokencycle]

Gary Johnson 98%
Ron Paul 98%
Mitt Romney 54%
Obama 3%