Replies

RE :”The second question was, “Who would better handle the economy?” The answers amounted to a virtual tie. To the question, 48% said Obama was more capable, and 98% of that group voted for the president. On the other side, 49% chose Romney as more capable, and 94% of these voted for Romney.
The final important money question was, “Who would better handle the federal budget deficit?” Again, it was almost a tie, with 47% choosing Obama to handle the deficit, and 98% of that group voting for him. Of the 49% who chose Romney for deficit management, 95% gave him their votes.
Considering the weak economy, the exploding spending, and huge deficits of the past four years, it's amazing that Romney could not make a better case for managing the economy and the deficit—almost as amazing as the ability of 23% of those polled to perceive a healthy economy in 2012. “

Republicans were not trusted on the economy since 2008 to begin with so why was it supposed to be an easy issue for Romney to win? What did he pitch as different? All the samebbuzz phrases were repeated. "If any taxes go up on 'job creators' (aka 'the rich') the economy will tank"

And what in his background made him look like the economy doctor?

The one common theme I see in most flavors of the Republicans was that last year would be an easy win for any R candidate, a fatally flawed assumption.

Republicans were not trusted on the economy since 2008 to begin with so why was it supposed to be an easy issue for Romney to win?

What did he pitch as different? ... And what in his background made him look like the economy doctor?

You have the right answers by asking your own right questions.

When this, as well as Romney's preposterous claim of "creating 100,000 jobs," was pointed out during the primaries by some candidates and outsiders, they were angrily accused by the GOP-e and the "conservative media" of "attacking Romney from the left"** as if essentially equating Romney or Bain with the "capitalism"?

By the same token, would the same people come to the defence of, let's say, Jon Corzine or his ilk, since he was a self-made multi-millionaire and far more successful in both accumulating more wealth (without Romney's initial political name recognition and privileged "community" ties and Harvard education, and having served in the Marine Corps) and using it in politics, successfully buying a Senate seat and the Governorship.

_____________________________________________
** I still don't quite understand what in bloody hell this phrase is supposed to mean, as if the real facts don't matter to the "right" anymore than they do to the loony left and can't be aired or spoken, if one is being deified as the "epitome of capitalism"?

” The one common theme I see in most flavors of the Republicans was that last year would be an easy win for any R candidate, a fatally flawed assumption. “

Romney: “ Vote for me,because I’m a rich banker. Don’t hate me because you are out of work! 47% of you are just mooches anyway......”

Uh.....never mind

: )