Skip to comments.A very basic primer on deciding between Romney and Obama in November
Posted on 06/06/2012 11:23:45 AM PDT by Starman417
In business there is something called sunk costs which refers to funds that have been spent and are unrecoverable. At any given point sunk costs are irrelevant to the decisions going forward. An example of this would be a company that has spent a billion dollars building a plant and now has to choose whether or not to spend another billion dollars hiring staff and actually operating the plant. At the point of the decision the only thing that should be relevant to the decision makers is what makes best sense for the firm going forward. Does the company make more money by staffing and operating the plant or by selling it? The decision should be based solely on whats best going forward, with no sentimental attachment to the billion dollars already spent building the plant.
The key element of sunk costs is recognizing that you cant change or undo anything that has already happened and therefore the focus of your attention should be what you can do today to impact tomorrow.
The last three years should be looked at as sunk costs or simply unalterable history. The November election cannot turn back the clock. It can only look at a course for the future.
As such, voters should evaluate Barack Obama and Mitt Romney as a board of directors would if they were seeking to hire a president or CEO to run their organization.
The first thing youd do is take a cursory look at their resumes. Obama earned an undergraduate degree from Columbia while Romney earned his from BYU. Both men earned graduate degrees at Harvard. On that score youd have to say that the men were very similar. As for their success as students it is not currently possible to compare the two. Romney graduated in the top 5% of his class at Harvard while Obama has refused to release any of his school transcripts.
The next thing you might look at their relevant work experience.
Obama worked as a community organizer in Chicago, taught Constitutional law at Columbia, was elected to the Illinois Senate and then the US Senate. His most important work experience comes from his three years as President of the United States.
Romney worked as a business consultant, founded a private equity firm, managed the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City and served as Governor of Massachusetts for four years.
Finally you might look at their family situations and personal life as you wouldnt want your new leader embarrassing your organization. Obama is a nondenominational Christian and is by all measures a devoted husband and dedicated father of two little girls. Romney is Mormon, has been married to his wife for 43 years and the couple has raised five boys.
On first blush both men seem to have the basic qualifications necessary to be President. But one needs to look at the experience a bit deeper now.
Barack Obamas career was fairly unremarkable prior to entering the White House. As such, his best case can be made when looking at his time in office. He was presented with a difficult situation of the American economy in 2009. What has he done? The most obvious thing is that hes borrowed and spent a great deal of money. Results? Higher unemployment than when he took over. Fewer people are actually working than when he became President. Inflation is 3% higher although the economy is experiencing stagnant, albeit positive, growth; the slowest recovery since the Great Depression. He passed ObamaCare and was subsequently sued by 27 states and the law is in front of the Supreme Court. Osama Bin Laden is dead. American troops are out of Iraq.
(Excerpt) Read more at floppingaces.net...
Brokered convention. Romney and Paul both sidelined. Rand, Palin, West, or someone equivalent rides in for White Knight/Savior duty.
It really is our only real hope at this point.
A few more cycles of Socialism and there won’t be anything left worth saving.
In 1980 the country wanted to get rid of Carter. But, at the same time, WANTED to elect Reagan.
Romney, so far, only has a chance with the first part of that equation - getting rid of Obama. He has yet to understand how to connect on the idea of getting folks to WANT to vote for him.
Right now, if I had to bet, I think he’ll run his campaign more like McCain in 2008 than Reagan in 1980.
Here are the main points of my argument for an OPEN or Brokered Convention.
1.) Ron Pauls ONLY value to those of us that want to convincingly beat Obama, is to use Pauls DELEGATES to deny Romney the nomination and thus force an OPEN or Brokered Convention.
2.) All the other Primary Candidates, but Ron Paul, who had vowed to Campaign all the way to the Convention, have melted away like summer soldiers. Thus, Ron Pauls DELEGATES are our last chance to have an OPEN Convention.
3.) If Romney is going to lose to Obama, then we must REPLACE Romney with a strong Candidate at an OPEN or Brokered Convention. WE MUST BEAT OBAMA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
4.) ALL Primary Candidates INCLUDING Ron Paul have been proven by REPUBLICAN Voters and Polls to be weak Candidates against Obama.
5.) My main point is this: Let us learn in JUNE, 2012 that weak Candidates lose to Obama in November, and thus we must choose a strong Candidate to be our Nominee at an OPEN Convention in Tampa.
The Primary elections taught us that all Primary Candidates that ran will lose to Incumbent Obama.
It is time to thank all Primary Candidates for their time, expenses and efforts, but they ALL need to step aside for the good of the United States of America.
In 2008, we bought the RINO Primary BS on McCain, and shame on them.
In 2012, if we buy the RINO Primary BS on Romney, then shame on us.
You must not have listened very well.
"America is the greatest country in the world, now join with me as we set out to change it."
Well, there's only one place to go from the top, and he's been doing his damndest to get us there. There's your change. While he has lied about the impact of his programs since taking office, even to the point of trying to take credit for increases in oil production we accomplished in spite of his policies, he has been true to his fundamental pre-election promise of fundamentally changing America.
Of course, that is no improvement, quite the opposite, but that is what the Obamites voted for, sans due dilligence. Now that Marxist fellow is trying to wreck the Republic.
Romney? The jersey might be different, but plenty of the results are the same:
Government gets bigger, individuals lose liberty.
Right now, "None of the Above" would win my vote.
Nice comic strip outline, but I was referring to reality.
Revision of Post # 24:
1. revised) Ron Pauls ONLY value to those of us that want to convincingly beat Obama, is to use Pauls DELEGATES to convince other Candidates Delegates to vote to ABSTAIN on the first Ballot. This action for “None of the above” would deny Romney the nomination and thereby produce an OPEN or Brokered Convention to Nominate a Stronger Candidate than ANY of the Primary Candidates.
Vote for Romney?
He can't win. For the same reason Dole and McCain didn't.
Vote for Paul?
He can't even win a straw poll and has cash flow issues to boot.
Vote 3rd Party? Show me the 3rd Party candidate that doesn't have as much or more baggage than any of the above... Take your time, we'll wait.
No. Best bet is to get the Delegates to find a real conservative and put them in the top slot in Miami.
” - - - I was referring to reality.”
REALITY from last week: Romney said “I would be satisfied with a 50.1 % win against Obama.”
IOW, if you flipped a coin 1000 times, 499 times Romney would lose to Obama, according to the very weak, but “satisfied” Romney.
BTW, what would a Las Vegas Odds Maker give you on a bet that Romney will win in November based on the above statement by Romney?
Weak Candidates lose to Incumbents - - THAT IS REALITY!
If the RINOs want to beat Obama, then they will DUMP Romney.
If the RINOs want to lose AGAIN to Obama in a really close election, then they will Nominate Romney.
Failure leaves tracks.
” - - - Best bet is to get the Delegates to find a real conservative and put them in the top slot in - - - “ Tampa.
The IDEA is to beat Obama convincingly. Forget about your favorite politician, and focus on the IDEA of beating Obama.
The REPUBLICAN Primary Candidates have proven that NONE of THEM can fight their way out of a wet paper bag!
The REPUBLICAN Primary was merely a test run to the GENERAL NATIONAL ELECTION.
REALITY CHECK: NONE OF THE REPUBLICAN PRIMARY CANDIDATES CAN BEAT OBAMA IN NOVEMBER.
Given that reality, let us learn from the lessons of History, insist that the Convention delegates vote to ABSTAIN (=None of the above), OPEN the Tampa Convention to discussion and chose the Candidate that CAN beat Obama.
Why is this so hard?
We owe NO loyalty to ANY of our Primary Candidates.
We owe NO loyalty to the Primary Election results.
We owe no loyalty to the RINO Wing of the Republican Party.
We owe loyalty ONLY to what is best for the United States of America, and that , IMHO, is to CONVINCINGLY DEFEAT OBAMA in November.
BTW, for all of you that consider Romney to be that guy, just answer this question:
” What will Romney have to do to keep from being DUMPED at the Tampa Convention?”
Anyone thinking the likes of Romney will save this nation from doom doesn’t understand the situation or Romney.
Quit whining and tell us your realistic alternative.
It isn’t about your theories on a Romney presidency.
It is about the certainty of Obama’s destruction of America.
Have you noticed that the 2% of FReepers who believe that it is possible to emerge from the Republican convention, with a candidate other than Romney, are insufficient to achieve that result?
Yep. And the remaining 98 % of Freepers are in lock step unity with Romney’s RINOs to lose to Obama in November.
BTW, is there Lemming DNA in RINOs?
You will not find an issue on which you are more conservative than I.
The difference is that I recognize the only 2 choices for President are Romney and Obama.
Your hate for Romney exceeds your love of this country, so you are bent on actions that will only contribute to Obama’s re-election and the destruction of this country.
Romney has proven to be the same person. The worst Obama has done to the country Romney did to Massachusetts.
Speak for yourself instead of projecting your own toxic emotions onto others. Are you afraid of admitting that these emotions define you?
Romney is the father of Romney”care” and the grandfather of Obama”care.”
Obama”care” is the death knell for the US Federal Government, IMHO, of course.
Hence, I oppose Obama AND Romney.
BTW, you did read my tagline, didn’t you?
My dad, who was very wise, used to say, if you want to know what someone is going to do, look at what they’ve done. I was a legal intern with Liberty Counsel in VA, during Mitt’s time in MA, and I can tell you with certainty he will run roughshod over conservatives who object to the murder of the unborn, because that is exactly what he did in MA. It is still a grief to me we were unable to help the people who called us. The reasons are complex, and confidential. Suffice it to say I learned at that time all I needed to know to permanently reject Romney as candidate for dog-catcher, let alone President. No mind reading necessary. Just enough life experience to not buy the snake oil he’s selling.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.