REVEALED: THE GOP STRATEGY
A political video that every American voter needs to watch.
Mitt Romney loves people.
Paul Ryan does not much resemble Newt Gingrich to look at, but, like Gingrich, he’s the stupid person’s idea of what a smart person sounds like. The two men approach questions to which they don’t have answers in strikingly similar fashion: First, they alter the premises of the question, subtly attributing the change not to an ideological disagreement but to the questioner’s perhaps well-intentioned ignorance. Then they dive into a glib answer that sounds detailed and intimidatingly smart, but upon dissection it turns out to contain little actual substance. Gingrich uses flowery abstractions; Ryan uses numbers and statistics. But all those numbers and statistics are used in the service of evasion.
In his Tuesday interview with Fox News’ Brit Hume, Ryan put all of his evasion skills to work. Hume repeatedly pressed Ryan on what, exactly, the Romney-Ryan budget plan would look like, but despite Ryan’s confident assertions that this plan “is about offering solutions to get us back on track, create jobs, balance the budget, get people back to work,” when it came to the details of how many jobs, over how long a period, with what kind of service cuts or revenue sources, there was really no there there. Ryan dodged and ducked, from “We can get into complicated baseline issues, but …” to “I don’t know exactly when it balances, but—I don’t want to get wonky on you, but we haven’t run the numbers on that specific plan.” Ryan ran away from his own House budgets, basically responding to Hume’s repeated questions about Ryan’s budget by saying, “That’s old stuff! why are you asking me about old stuff? I’m promoting the Romney-Ryan plan now, and we haven’t run the numbers on that.” Then, pressed about the Romney-Ryan plan, he evaded some more:Hume: When will we see Romney plan in all its particulars laid out?
Ryan: You have seen more details from Mitt Romney on fiscal policy, on saving entitlements, on getting back to work than the incumbent president of the United States has offered.
Hume: Well, wait a minute, he proposed a full-blown budget.
Ryan: His budget didn’t even try to balance the budget.
How’s that for running away from a question? First lie, then when called out for it, change the subject: What counts isn’t whether Obama proposed a budget at all, it’s whether he proposed one that Paul Ryan likes. That was the question, wasn’t it? No? Well, no worries, let’s just move to the next question.
To his credit, Hume repeatedly returned to questions about the budget and Medicare, and every time, Ryan ran away, often running in circles simultaneously, dropping in meaningless numbers along the way. The budgets he’s on the record having proposed are old news, pre-Romney, not worth talking about. The Romney-Ryan plan is very detailed and yet no details are available, nor will he say when they might become available.
And this is what passes for a Republican who’s serious and knowledgeable about policy.
(Via Laura Clawson at Daily Kos)
“Last night, newly ensconced Republican vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan sat down for his first solo interview with Fox News’ Brit Hume and let slip an admission about Mitt Romney’s budget plan — an admission that’s receiving surprisingly little press attention. Asked by Hume when the Romney plan would balance the budget, Ryan said he didn’t know because ‘we haven’t run the numbers on that specific plan.’”
This is an amazing statement. You’re proposing a budget… and you don’t know what the bottom line result of the implementing the budget is going to be? How is that even a budget? Imagine you were discussing your family budget with your spouse, and you suggested that items x, y, and z be purchased. Your spouse asks “can we afford that?” You reply, “well, I haven’t run the numbers on that yet”. That discussion would not go well at my house.
The problem, of course, is that Romney’s “budget” “proposal” consists of little more than hand-waving, so there aren’t really any numbers to add up.
I am not an American and having no allegiance to any party in the US but I have been watching the media coverage of the US elections.
As an outsider I have tried to follow both sides of the argument but I find it hard to believe that it is still possible for the current Republican party to win the election.
The budget they seem to want to run on appear to only benefit the rich & would cripple the poor & middle classes. I say “appear” because they never release any details so it is hard to know for sure.
Mitt Romney comes across as the most insincere type of politician imaginable and does not seem to have any principles of his own. He has just adopted whatever principles would get him the Republican nomination.
I watched some of the Republican debates & the only person that seemed to have any sensible ideas & solutions was Ron Paul.
I definitely didn’t agree with everything he said but he seemed to have an understanding of what his own ideas & arguments were. With Mitt Romney it just seems he is saying things that he has been told to say & has no idea why.
I don’t particularly care who wins the US election. It won’t keep me up at night if Romney wins. I will start to worry if he decides to start a war with Iran but even then I don’t think the UK government could possibly back him with anything.
I just hope for the average American that if Mitt Romney does become President he sees sense and changes his mind (again).