Paul Ryan Polling Worse Than Sarah Palin?

If a new Gallup poll is any indication, Paul Ryan was not a great pick.

 

If a new Gallup poll is any indication, Paul Ryan was not a great pick.

USAT/Gallup Poll: Paul Ryan gets low marks for VP

Americans don’t believe GOP presidential contender Mitt Romney hit a home run with his choice of Paul Ryan as a running mate, a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll finds, with more of the public giving him lower marks than high ones.

Ryan, a Wisconsin congressman, is seen as only a “fair” or “poor” choice by 42% of Americans vs. 39% who think he is an “excellent” or “pretty good” vice presidential choice.

Romney pollster Neil Newhouse said in a statement that the findings reflect the fact that Ryan, a House member since 1999, isn’t widely known.

USA TODAY/Gallup polls of registered voters after the announcements of running mates since Dick Cheney in 2000 all showed more positive reactions. Only Dan Quayle in a 1988 Harris Poll of likely voters was viewed less positively than Ryan, with 52% rating Quayle as a “fair” or “poor” vice presidential choice. The Ryan poll includes all adults, not just registered voters.

[…]

“All these numbers indicate is the simple fact that Congressman Paul Ryan was not a nationally known figure prior to being named as Gov. Romney’s vice-presidential pick,” Newhouse said. “Congressman Ryan’s selection reinforces the seriousness of the issues that will be debated in this election and President Obama’s failure to get Americans back to work and his inability to strengthen the middle class.”

Dave Weigel takes a look back:

The first few days of a veep candidate roll-out are often the apogee of his/her public image. We remember Sarah Palin’s 2008 debut as rough and nasty and personality-focused, which it largely was. But the first polls of Palin’s favorability, at the end of August 2008, had her favorables at a net +15 or so; the Washington Post/ABC and USA Today/Gallup polls taken right after her convention speech gave her, respectively, 58 percent and 53 percent favorable ratings. (Republicans liked to point out that this was higher than Barack Obama’s own favorability rating, which was momentarily sort of true.)

But there’s no shock or surprise or tabloid family story with Ryan. He is being introduced, basically, as a smart young guy who spent 14 years in Congress. He got there at age 28, Joe Biden got there at age 30. Both men, initially, were picks that barely moved the needle.

Kevin Drum doesn’t buy the “unknown” explanation:

 Among non-political junkies (i.e., normal people) Jack Kemp wasn’t very well known. Cheney wasn’t well known. Biden wasn’t very well known. And Palin wasn’t well known. But initially, they all polled better than Ryan.

My guess is that we’re saying two things here. First, while both Palin and Ryan were largely unknown at the time of their announcement as running mate, Ryan has been taken seriously enough by the Democrats that they’ve already spent months working to bring down his public standing. Second, we’re getting more polarized by the minute. I don’t know that there’s anyone Romney could have picked that 42 percent of the public wouldn’t disapprove of at this point.

To the extent a vice presidential choice matters, I’m skeptical that Ryan was going to be helpful in bringing undecided voters to the Republican side. But there’s simply no question that he’s far, far better prepared to be president and to be on a presidential ticket than Palin was four years ago.

UPDATE: Moments after hitting Publish on the above, I see Jim Geraghty‘s link to Jon Cohen’s posting at WaPo (“Positive views of Ryan jump higher after pick“) showing Ryan’s inevitable post-announcement bump:

Little known nationally before Saturday’s announcement, favorable impressions of Ryan jumped 15 percentage points among the overall electorate with positive views soaring from 49 to 70 percent among conservative Republicans.

In Wednesday through Friday interviews, fully 45 percent of Americans expressed no opinion of Ryan, dropping to 30 percent on Saturday and Sunday. The increasing familiarity all went to the positive side of the ledger, giving Ryan an initial advantage in the sprint to define his candidacy.

Overall, in interviews after his selection, 38 percent of all Americans express favorable views of Ryan, 33 percent negative ones. (Before the the announcement, Ryan was somewhat underwater, scoring 23 percent favorable, 32 unfavorable.)

It’s worth noting, too, that the overall numbers are less important than the demographics. Most of Ryan’s “surge” is with people likely to vote for Romney anyway:

One of the largest movements on Ryan’s favorability numbers was the 21-point jump among conservative Republicans, but the initial movement was positive among independents as well, doubling from 19 to 39 percent. The shift among Democrats was similar in both a positive (up 10 percentage points on favorability) and negative direction (up eight on unfavorability).

Before the announcement, senior citizens split 28 percent apiece positively and negatively on Ryan, but afterward his favorable number shot to 46 percent with no change on the other side of the equation. Seniors are likely to get even more outsized attention in the coming months due to Ryan’s controversial proposal to change the Medicare entitlement. A Post-Kaiser poll released over the weekend shows broad, cross-party opposition to such a change.

As with Palin, it’s not the first weekend’s impressions that will matter (again, to the extent the Veep matters at all) but how it plays out after the long haul. It’s quite possible that American swing voters will find Ryan’s policies too extreme. But my gut instinct is that they’ll find the man himself likable and credible.

Image: Hey Girl, It’s Paul Ryan

FILED UNDER: Campaign 2012, US Politics
James Joyner
About James Joyner
James Joyner is Professor and Department Head of Security Studies at Marine Corps University's Command and Staff College and a nonresident senior fellow at the Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security at the Atlantic Council. He's a former Army officer and Desert Storm vet. Views expressed here are his own. Follow James on Twitter @DrJJoyner.

Comments

  1. legion says:

    What I don’t understand is why so many people are calling this a “bold move” for Romney – what’s “bold” about it? It sets in stone the kind of economic plan he was already pretty well committed to (as committed as Romney can be, anyway), and Ryan is wildly popular with the upper-crust punditry folk that have been driving his campaign all along… Someone like Bachmann, or Trump – that would have been “bold” (and many other things) but Ryan? “Unsurprising” is about the politest thing one can say about him.

  2. I disagree with with Drum about Kemp. He’s a guy who had been around political circles since the late 1970s, before that he was in the NFL. Before he was picked by Dole in 1996, he had run for President in 1988 and served in President GHW Bush’s cabinet for four years. In an era before cable news was a big thing, he was frequently on television talking about the issues of the day, and he would campaign for Republicans across the country.

    He was, in other words, far from an unknown.

    I’d make the same argument about Cheney. This was the guy who, along with Colin Powell., was Bush’s closest adviser during Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm.

    Ryan has been in the public eye for a few years now, but we live in a far more polarized nation than we used to. It’s no surprise his numbers might be a little down initially.

  3. My guess is that we’re saying two things here. First, while both Palin and Ryan were largely unknown at the time of their announcement as running mate, Ryan has been taken seriously enough by the Democrats that they’ve already spent months working to bring down his public standing. Second, we’re getting more polarized by the minute. I don’t know that there’s anyone Romney could have picked that 42 percent of the public wouldn’t disapprove of at this point.

    I would tell it differently. Democrats saw “attack Romney via Ryan” as viable when all Romney had done was endorse his budget. Why? The budget is straight up everything Democrats have accused Republicans of supporting. Lower taxes for the rich, check. Higher taxes for the poor, check. Cuts to the safety net, check. A debasement of Medicare, check.

    Democrats are not so frightened of that plan that they have to defend against it. It is a feast of opportunity.

  4. I really don’t know why I have to remind you that the Ryan plan is all the things you oppose … except that you’ve apparently locked yourself in the basement and programmed yourself with “it’s a starting point, and that makes it all OK”

  5. Truth101 says:

    Another goof ball that has to knock down the female. Let’s be clear, Ryan is a man and there won’t be any tabloids attacks. Palin and Hillary are women and the corrupt MSM and tabloids went full in with attacks.

    You people disgust me.

  6. James Joyner says:

    @john personna: Oh, I agree that Dems were running against the Ryan Plan for good reason. I’m just saying that, while people don’t know much about Ryan, Democrats have been running against his name for a while now; Palin by contrast was completely off the radar.

    @john personna: That’s really a separate argument. My knee-jerk reaction to Palin, before she’d embarrassed herself by demonstrating herself an ignoramus on the stump, was that she didn’t pass the seriousness test. Whatever my disagreements with Ryan, he’s widely considered a serious policy guy who knows the issues back and forth.

    I agree with Ryan that we’ve got to get entitlements under control before they bankrupt us. I’m skeptical that the answer is a voucher system. But we’re not going to privatize Medicare any more than we did in 2004 after Bush got re-elected running on that platform. So, yeah, it’s a starting point. I’d take Bowles-Simpson, for example, as a decent compromise that will piss everyone off.

  7. Tsar Nicholas says:

    The chances of USAT/Gallup not coming up with negative readings for Ryan fell somewhere between zero and nada. I mean, come on, they included “all adults,” not even the obligatory registered voter sample, much less likely voters. Agendas are not merely for meetings.

    In any case, Ryan was a poor choice, but not because of what Zombieland at large thinks or doesn’t think. What matters are actual voters and for them it’s a function of gravitas (mere representatives have little to none), Electoral College math (OH has double the number of votes of WI and Fla. nearly triple that sum) and age-based demographics (Medicare is a touchy subject for seniors, Ryan’s plan is a tough sell and easily can be demonized, and to boot Ryan looks like he should still be a grad school).

  8. Rob in CT says:

    Whatever my disagreements with Ryan, he’s widely considered a serious policy guy who knows the issues back and forth

    But this is myth.

    He’s not a serious policy guy. He’s a fraud, selling a fantasy.

  9. David M says:

    Palin didn’t have much of a record to attack, while Ryan has a relatively well known and fairly easy to attack record, so they aren’t really comparable. Even if it eventually became obvious that Palin didn’t pass the seriousness test, that is still a much more drawn out process than it will be for Ryan. “He wants to end Medicare” isn’t a concept that takes voters long to understand.

  10. Drew says:

    If a Gallup poll is any indication…..

    Well, that’s the problem, right? The predicate. Pure crap.

    As a seasoned investor I never listen to anyone but my training, my experience, my trusted partners and my guts. I trust my bones,and it’s made me wealthy. I watch the left freaking out and laugh. Oh,and “independents” like JP, snicker.

    I was chided for my dead grandma reference in another thread. Well, here comes the dead grandma argument. Enough said. It’s all they’ve got. What a pathetic crew.

  11. Derrick says:

    The chances of USAT/Gallup not coming up with negative readings for Ryan fell somewhere between zero and nada.

    Republican Vicitimization
    MSM complaints
    Rinse
    Repeat

  12. @James Joyner:

    We have plenty of time to explore this before November, but I suspect that your positions are mathematically closer to the “pre-compromised” positions offered by President Obama.

    He is not offering a Gore Vidal budget, as a “starting point.”

    In the case of Medicare he’s willing to means-test, but also wants to broaden the tax base supporting the plan.

  13. gVOR08 says:

    @James Joyner: We are not going to get entitlements, the deficit, or anything else under control until we deal with unemployment. As far as I’m aware the Galt and Gekko ticket (props to Krugman) has made no proposal to deal with unemployment except a lot of trickle down, supply side blatant nonsense. Our current Republicans seem congenitally unable to deal with unemployment. Or is it just unwilling?

  14. C. Clavin says:

    “…they’ll find the man himself likable and credible…”

    Likeable…maybe.
    Credible? I don’t think that word means what you think it means.
    Ryan claims he can cut taxes without loss of revenue by closing loopholes…but he doesn’t say which ones.
    Ryan claims he can cut discretionary spending to levels not seen since Calvin Coolidge…but he doesn’t say how.
    I fail to see how any of that is any more credible than Romney’s economic plan that is MATHEMATICALLY IMPOSSIBLE.

  15. @Drew:

    Me and Mike Lofgren and all the other lapsed Republicans.

  16. C. Clavin says:

    @gVOR08…
    Not to quibble with you…or Krugman for that matter…but I think it’s Gekko and Galt.

  17. OzarkHillbilly says:

    But my gut instinct is that they’ll find the man himself likable and credible.

    My gut tells me they won’t find him quite so credible around about the 17th time he defends R/R tax proposals by saying, “Trust me, we can make it work, we just can’t tell you how.”

  18. Rob in CT says:

    Right, that’s just it: even if you buy the basic ideology behind such proposals, the plan is still fantasy.

    Can I play that game? Because gosh, I’m sure I could come up with a deficit reduction “plan” that would work if I got to assume absurd growth rates (“dynamic scoring” FTW!), unrealistically low unemployment figures, and other magical thinking. I bet I could even do it without screwing the bottom ~80% of the population so I could cut Mitt Romney’s taxes some more.

  19. James Joyner says:

    @gVOR08: Obama has been president four years. What’s his plan for ending unemployment? How’s it working out for him?

    @C. Clavin: I’m not a fan of the “close loopholes” explanation, which ranks right up there with “end fraud, waste, and abuse.” But I fully get why a politician isn’t going to put forth detailed cuts in a campaign platform, either; it’s just too easy to run against those cuts, especially if you’re not proposing any hard choices of your own.

  20. @OzarkHillbilly:

    My gut tells me they won’t find him quite so credible around about the 17th time he defends R/R tax proposals by saying, “Trust me, we can make it work, we just can’t tell you how.”

    On that, I noticed this in the news stream and found it amusing:

    Romney wants ‘something dramatic’ to aid economy

    Mitt Romney is calling for “something dramatic” to help the economy recover, but he’s not saying exactly what.

  21. C. Clavin says:

    “…As a seasoned investor I never listen to anyone but my training, my experience, my trusted partners and my guts. I trust my bones,and it’s made me wealthy…”

    Self-aggrandizement much???
    Do you have to stop and rub one out every time you walk by a window and notice your reflection?
    Do you have rotater-cuff problems from patting yourself on the back so much?
    What a f’ing blowhard.

  22. David M says:

    @gVOR08:

    current Republicans seem congenitally unable to deal with unemployment. Or is it just unwilling?

    Who would benefit politically if the government was able to lower unemployment? If you can answer that, you’ve answered your question about the GOP.

  23. As Tsar Nicholas notes above, the Gallup poll is an “All Adults” poll. I’m not sure how useful it is in determining the potential impact of the Ryan selection or how the voting public feels about it.

  24. Rob in CT says:

    Obama has been president four years. What’s his plan for ending unemployment? How’s it working out for him?

    Fiscal stimulus. It helped, but wasn’t enough.

    Look, the GOP position on taxes, even after all we’ve seen, is STILL that the rich pay too much and the poor/middle class pay too little. That’s the fundamental argument. Every GOP plan reflects this belief.

    And the Dem response boils down to “what about Clinton-era rates was so terrible?”

    I can understand the “now is not the time to raise taxes” argument, which is fundamentally Keynesian in nature. I cannot understand this argument from the party that claims/pretends/sincerely believes (?) that Keynes was totally wrong.

  25. OzarkHillbilly says:

    @Drew:

    As a seasoned investor I never listen to anyone but my training, my experience, my trusted partners and my guts. I trust my bones,and it’s made me wealthy. I watch the left freaking out and laugh. Oh,and “independents” like JP, snicker.

    Jesus Christos Drew, can you ejaculate all over my screen in any more of a self-congratulatory masturbatory screed?

  26. @James Joyner:

    Obama has been president four years. What’s his plan for ending unemployment? How’s it working out for him?

    I don’t think this game, where you don’t do what he suggests, and then blame him anyway, is too honest.

    Obama Jobs Plan Voted Down By Senate

  27. C. Clavin says:

    “…especially if you’re not proposing any hard choices of your own…”

    You mean like sequestration?
    Or the Medicare cuts in the PPACA that Republicans love to mislead about?

  28. BTW, Obama’s jobs bill was a good example of a “pre-compromise”

    Obama’s bill was a mix of tax cuts and new spending aimed at spurring job creation in the short term. It included $270 billion in payroll tax cuts and other tax relief, along with $175 billion in new spending on roads, school repairs and other infrastructure projects, as well as an extension of unemployment benefits and aid to local governments to prevent impending teacher and police layoffs.

    Seriously. Republicans are all about the tax cuts, but they can’t take them when Obama offers them.

  29. EddieInCA says:

    @James Joyner:

    Obama has been president four years. What’s his plan for ending unemployment? How’s it working out for him?

    How about a little historical perspective, Dr. Joyner? How about a modicum of intellectual honesty?
    When he took office, the country was losing 700,000 jobs per month. We’re now in double digits in consecutive quarters of a growing (albeit slowly), and increasing employment.

    Remember this…

    What distinguishes this jobs recovery from others is the sheer scale of the job loss that preceded it. The economy has regained 3.6 million jobs since employment hit bottom in February 2010, but it is still missing nearly 10 million jobs — 5.2 million lost in the recession and 4.7 million needed to employ new entrants to the labor market. The Economic Policy Institute estimates that at the average rate of job creation in the last three months, it would take until the end of 2017, fully 10 years from the start of the Great Recession in December 2007, to return to the prerecession jobless rate of 5 percent.

    And there is no guarantee we will ever get there. It took about four years to close the job gaps created by the recessions that began in mid-1981 and mid-1990. In the tepid expansion after the 2001 recession, the job gap had still not closed by 2007.

    Without good jobs, families certainly can’t power the economy with spending. Incomes always fall in recessions, but they usually rebound and then reach a new high. That didn’t happen after the 2001 recession. Analysis of government data by Moody’s Analytics shows that median household income, in 2011 dollars, peaked at $56,000 in 2000, and did not rebound to that level. When the Great Recession hit, income fell again. Though there has been some progress in the last two years, median income, now at $52,000, is about where it was in 1997.

    At the same time, home equity — for most families, the most important store of wealth — has been devastated by the housing bust, with $7.4 trillion wiped out since home prices peaked in 2006. Nascent signs of life in the spring selling season are welcome, but it will take a far stronger economy, or far more aggressive antiforeclosure efforts, to substantially rebuild lost equity anytime soon. Even at that, many of the nearly 12 million homeowners who owe more on their mortgages than the homes are worth will never get above water.

    Without a revival in jobs, income and home equity, other indicators of recovery — like a rising stock market and more consumer spending — largely reflect gains among the top echelon of earners. Such lopsided growth can make for good numbers, but doesn’t presage broadly higher living standards.

    So how to nurture the recovery, such as it is? If long-term unemployment remains high through 2012, Congress will need to renew federal jobless benefits beyond their expiration at the end of the year. If incomes and spending remain constrained, tax relief for low- and middle-income earners will also need to be extended. The high-end Bush-era tax cuts should be allowed to expire, with the money going toward programs that have more economic impact. Congress, which has committed to deficit reduction starting in 2013, must avoid heedless cuts, in favor of minimal and balanced tax increases and spending reductions. And the Federal Reserve must resist calls for premature tightening.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/08/opinion/sunday/still-crawling-out-of-a-very-deep-hole.html

  30. OzarkHillbilly says:

    @john personna:

    Mitt Romney is calling for “something dramatic” to help the economy recover, but he’s not saying exactly what.

    Heeheeheehehhehheh…. Thanx John. I needed that.

  31. @OzarkHillbilly:

    😉 glad to help

  32. Rob in CT says:

    Republicans are all about the tax cuts, but they can’t take them when Obama offers them

    They were probably the wrong kind of tax cuts (tax cuts that would matter to little people – which would be the most stimulative kind of course, since they’d get spent).

  33. C. Clavin says:

    “…Obama has been president four years. What’s his plan for ending unemployment? How’s it working out for him?”

    The problem is the reflexively obstructionist opposition party.
    I’d say that 27 or 28 straight months of private sector job creation is working out OK. Now if we could invest in some infrastructure and get some construction going, and then get some aid to states so they can start to put teachers and cops and firemen back to work…it would be working out well for the people of the United States. Unfortunately the ideologues in the Republican party won’t allow that to happen…because they see political gain in preventing it.
    Whatch how fast both of those things happen if Gekko and Galt are elected.

  34. jan says:

    @john personna:

    Obama’s jobs plan that was voted down, was not even liked by democrats, similar to the budget that he submitted — that one having nary a democratic vote.The democratic party has had trouble standing behind Obama’s lack of leadership, especially in the areas of domestic policy.

    Obama’s jobs bill blocked by Reid over lack of Democratic support

    Oops, can’t blame it all on the republicans, JP!

  35. @James Joyner:

    I’m not a fan of the “close loopholes” explanation, which ranks right up there with “end fraud, waste, and abuse.” But I fully get why a politician isn’t going to put forth detailed cuts in a campaign platform, either; it’s just too easy to run against those cuts, especially if you’re not proposing any hard choices of your own.

    As I’ve said this morning, that reduces to “trust me, I’m a Republican.”

    That isn’t going to sell well with the lapsed Republicans, those who have gone independent, and I can’t imagine that it is going to play with long-time independents either.

    I know you are all about the “lean” and assert that lean means there are no real independents, but that isn’t the way our minds work. We may lean, but we aren’t a locked in vote. We want to hear those plans, and we want to grade them on merits.

    As I’ve said, “trust me” kind of burns in the post Bush/Cheney era.

  36. David M says:

    @jan:

    Epic Fail. That’s literally the worst argument I’ve ever seen. John posted a link showing the bill had majority support (vote was 51-48) on October 11th, and your response was to worry there maybe wasn’t enough support on October 5th.

  37. @jan:

    My link said there were 2 Democratic defections and it went down 51 to 48.

    Not very honest to say “not even liked by democrats” when they were for it, 48 to 2.

    So the Republicans were against it 51 to 0, right?

    And you say “can’t blame it all on the republicans, JP!”

    Wow. No spinning there. No, none at all.

  38. Katharsis says:

    @C. Clavin:

    More like watch how fast we move on to saber rattling vs insert middle east country here after G & G get elected to distract from doing any of what you mention. The only form of stimulus that Repubs understand are local state pork to reward their buddies. National politics doesn’t pay as much attention to that stuff and is therefore easier to hide.

  39. slimslowslider says:

    @jan: LOL, you really got him there, Jan. Take that, pesky JP!

  40. OzarkHillbilly says:

    @David M: Shhhhhhhhh….. You’ve caught on to Jan’s super secret plan….. Obfuscate, obfuscate, obfuscate….. If you say it too loud, every one else will catch on….

  41. Mark Ivey says:

    Does looking at Paul Ryan give other people the creeps also? Or is it just me?

    Every time i look at face close ups of his “vampire pale” skin with those “zombie sparkly” blue eyes under that thick black hair, i get a strange inner feeling that i should go pour a ring of salt around my home, check my locks, and hang a picture of Barry Goldwater on the wall.

  42. Scott says:

    @john personna: I’m at the point where I want spending cuts, loophole closures and everything else agreed to prior to any discussion over tax cuts. It seems as though tax cuts go through and no spending cuts happen. I want the collective public to say what they want in terms of government goods and service so we know what to tax for.

  43. Drew says:

    @john personna:

    I’m not Odograph. No, I’m really not. I’m not Odograph, believe me. I’m not a liar, really, I’m not. I’m not Odograph. Trust me, believe me. Never heard of him……

    Snicker.

    Go to bed. Credibility quotient: zero.

  44. jan says:

    James, I’m glad you were able to include that last minute WAPO in your analysis, giving your piece more balance. However, Ryan has been on the ticket for only a few days, to make an impression on quite a large swathe of people who only know him as a republican.

    The democrats, though, are wasting no time trying to cast him as a mean-spirited guy. However, Ryan will be on the road for months displaying who he is, and the unknown qualities about him will be revealed. What people will see is a youthful, articulate, brilliant, optimistic reformer. He will talk about opportunity versus status quo, relishing giving the right to succeed or fail back to the individual, rather than capitulate to government as a ‘big brother’ savior. There will be a stark difference in philosophies that now dominate the country — that of social progressivism (supported by the majority at OTB), or conservatism. Ryan will also be able to explain his medicare ideas, as applying to those under 55 years — far from the age of granny. Furthermore, according to his plan, there would be no change for anyone enrolled before 2023. OTOH, Ryan will also be able to expose how Obama’s plan is taking monies out of medicare to fund his ACA.

    Basically there will be much to discuss about policies in this campaign — both those that Obama/Biden are hawking and those that Romney/Ryan have in mind. Like on the 60 Minute interview, Romney said with much enthusiasm: “I love policy. I love solving tough problems.’ It’s ironic that this competing ticket to the current administration is looking forward to turning things around, while all Obama can do is look backwards and blame others. The job of POTUS has obviously been way over Obama’s pay grade!

  45. al-Ameda says:

    @Drew:
    Drew, there’s a lot more than “dead grandma” to this.

    Ryan’s Plan proposes to reduce the top marginal tax rate by 27% – from 34% to 25%, while increasing defense spending and (by their own numbers) we’d still have very wide deficits for the next ten years.

    That sounds a lot like like doubling down on the Bush years when we cut taxes twice while aging 2 wars and passing a Medicare Prescription Drug Program – all deficit funded.

    Then we get to the “dead grandma” part – beginning the privatization of Medicare, with a private voucher program that will transfer hundreds of billions of dollars in expenses on to retired Americans.

  46. OzarkHillbilly says:

    @Drew:

    Go to bed. Credibility quotient: zero.

    Drew, up until this moment, I thought you were completely without even a single shred of self-awareness.

    Personally, I still think anyone who can’t help telling the world how rich and perfect he is (as you do) is actually a 24 yr old college drop out living in his parents basement still wearing his pj’s at 3 o’clock in the afternoon, who’s biggest “deal” he ever negotiated was for a used Ford Taurus that doesn’t even run anymore….

  47. al-Ameda says:

    @jan:
    Will Paul Ryan be talking about the endless deficits that his “Plan” projects?

  48. Drew says:

    @OzarkHillbilly:

    If that’s your fantasy, have at it. You got a perty mouth, Hillbilly?

    I’m rich, I have a history of great decisionmaking in the investment world. It’s how I make living. Its the real world. Not some internet site. I’m sorry you find that distressing. I suspect your track record is, well, lesser. you might want to look in the mirror, and have a serious self assessment. Because you know I have you pegged.

    This of course will get about 20 thumbs down, which tells you exactly the deptths this sight has fallen to. Trash.

    I bid you adieu . But have fun fondling each other…..

  49. @Drew:

    Try not to go all pathetic on us … we might have to start bucking you up.

  50. Ron Beasley says:

    @OzarkHillbilly: Unicorns!

  51. slimslowslider says:

    @Drew: Have fun fondling yourself.

  52. jan says:

    @David M:

    @john personna:

    @slimslowslider:

    The article I posted was about Reid withholding the vote because he didn’t have enough dem support. It was written on Oct. 5th 2011. It was finally brought up for a vote Oct. 11th, after Reid undoubtably had whipped more dems into alignment, and so the vote was more favorable, even though it wasn’t enough for passage. Nothing I said belies the fact put forth, that the dems were not enthusiastically behind Obama’s jobs bill.

    I made it easy for you guys to read, posting it all here!

    Barack Obama continued his sales blitz across the country Tuesday, touting his jobs plan and scolding Republicans in Congress more than once to “pass this bill.”
    There was only one rather embarrassing problem: his $447 billion proposal was blocked in the Senate—by his fellow Democrats.

    Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid stepped up to stop the vote in the Senate on the president’s measure, which had been requested by an obviously satisfied Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, because both men knew what the president cannot or will not admit— that he does not have enough votes within his own party, let alone from Republicans, to pass the bill he’s been hyping for weeks.

    The last-minute move by Reid saved Obama from the immediate embarrassment of losing a battle inside the family, but it highlighted the gulf between Obama and Congressional Democrats, who now operate almost entirely apart from the White House and have, in many cases, decided that supporting their unpopular president today is not worth losing their own jobs next November.

    McConnell launched his surprise attack in the afternoon, when it had become clear that a vote on the bill would produce at least a handful of no’s from moderate Democrats, who object to tax increases in the bill, especially on oil companies, and a few liberals who have insisted for months that the president increase at least some taxes on millionaires to begin to close the budget gap and finance jobs measures.

    “What I am trying to do here today by requesting this vote on the president’s jobs bill is to honor the request of the president of the United States that we vote on it now,” McConnell said with a smile. “He has been asking us repeatedly over the last few weeks that we vote on it now.”

    Reid stepped in to call McConnell’s move “ridiculous,” a “charade” and a “stunt,” but even he acknowledged that some Democrats would stray from the president’s measure.

    Reid promised that he would bring the bill up in some form, sometime this month. That’s hardly a commitment to deliver the bill the president wants, but is as much as Reid can produce from a caucus peppered with incumbents from red and swing states, where Obama’s approval ratings are sinking like a stone.

    In West Virginia, for example, the president has sunk to an abysmal 28 percent approval rating, dragging down the fortunes of the state’s two Democratic senators and Democratic governor.

    His ratings in the home states of other key incumbents aren’t much better. In Montana, where Sen. Jon Tester is up for reelection, Obama has a 39 percent approval rating. Sen. Claire McCaskill’s Missouri has the president at 41 percent, while he is underwater in Sen. Ben Nelson’s Nebraska, with 44 percent.

    Sen. Dick Durbin shed some light on those Democrats’ thinking last week, when he admitted the Obama bill is a no-go in its current form.

    “There are some senators who are up for election who say I’m never gonna vote for a tax increase while I’m up for election, even on the wealthiest people. So, we’re not gonna have 100 percent Democratic senators,” he told WLS radio. “That’s why it needs to be bipartisan and I hope we can find some Republicans who will join us to make it happen.”

    Many Democrats have decided that supporting their unpopular president today is not worth losing their own jobs in November.

    By Tuesday night, Reid had floated the idea among Senate Democrats of changing Obama’s proposal to pay for the bill by swapping out the White House’s idea to cap itemized deductions for people making more than $200,000, and replacing it with a surtax on millionaires and billionaires, a hugely popular idea among liberals that Obama has touted frequently, but never put into legislation.

    Whether that bill could actually pass the Senate is also in doubt, but one Senate Democratic aide said it would at least have the benefit (for some) of making Republicans look bad for opposing a bill specifically named to sell with voters— “The American Jobs Act.”

    “Reid will modify the bill to either make it easier for some Republicans to vote for it, or make it a better messaging event against those Republicans who vote against it,” the aide said. “Should be a lot of fun in any case.”

  53. C. Clavin says:

    @ Jan…

    “…that of social progressivism (supported by the majority at OTB), or conservatism…”

    Ryan is not a Conservative by any accepted meaning of the word. (hint…neither are you…by a long shot)
    He is in fact a Radical ideologue…as evidenced by his own words…and his own policies.
    Radical Ideology is not Conservative. Ayn Rand…Ryan’s joie do vivre…was not a Conservative. Buckley ran her out of the party along with the John Bircher’s. Y’all have brought both of them back. Not Conservative. Not at all.
    Ryan’s economic plan increases the deficit. That is not Conservative.
    Voodoo economics…the defining charachteristic of both Romney’s and Ryan’s plans…is not Conservative.
    Ryan voted for every single one of the things that are currently the biggest drivers of the deficit…the unpaid for Bush Tax Cuts, the unpaid for Medicare Expansion, the unpaid for Wars of Choice that the Republicans couldn’t finish. None of those things were, or are, Conservative. Certainly exploding the debt and squandering a budget surplus is not Conservative.
    You seem to not understand the meaning of Conservatism. Perhaps you should try to understand it before you spend all your time typing meaningless prattle.

  54. David M says:

    @jan:

    OTOH, Ryan will also be able to expose how Obama’s plan is taking monies out of medicare to fund his ACA.

    How has the ACA hurt people on Medicare? How are their benefits changing for the worse?

  55. C. Clavin says:

    “…I’m rich, I have a history of great decisionmaking in the investment world…”

    Ooooooh….more Drew spooge.
    What a phony mother f’er.

  56. @jan:

    I still think 51 to 48 was close, but let’s leave it as what it is for a moment.

    At what point is it a ding of the President’s policies that even more reviled politicians in Congress can’t support them?

    Presidential approval rating: 49% (term average to date)

    Congressional approval rating: 16% (July 2012)

    I think you might be missing something here. I think everyone who faults Obama for what the hated Congress won’t do might be missing something.

  57. Ron Beasley says:

    You can’t think of Paul Ryan without thinking about Ayn Rand. Kung Fu Monkey had this to say:

    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.

  58. wr says:

    @Drew: So what grade did you get in the Donald Trump School of Self-Aggrandizing Bullsh!t?

    With the singular exception of The Donald, I have never come across a single human being who was so rapturously in love with singing his own praises.

    And I worked in Hollywood for 25 years.

  59. sam says:

    @JJ

    It’s quite possible that American swing voters will find Ryan’s policies too extreme. But my gut instinct is that they’ll find the man himself likable and credible.

    Those aren’t mutually exclusive, right? ‘Credible’ can mean, “Hey, he believes what he says — and that scares the shit out of me!!”

    I know they’ll find him likable. Hell, I find him likable. But in a perverse way, this works against Romney by showing what a stiff, unlikable guy he is. Ryan ain’t gonna do a lot for Mitt’s favorability methinks. And folks, and least non-insane folks, vote for president, not vice-president.

  60. jan says:

    @al-Ameda:

    Will Paul Ryan be talking about the endless deficits that his “Plan” projects?

    No, he is already talking about the 5 trillion dollar deficit Obama has encumbered the country with in just under 4 years. He is already talking about the worst recovery, the longest UE rate over 8%, the despair of people being out of work for so long. There’s lots to talk about dealing with what is already in place under Obama.

    As far as Ryan’s own budget, here is something Erskine Bowles had to say about Ryan and his plan:

    “Have any of you met Paul Ryan? We should get him to come to the university. I’m telling you this guy is amazing, uh. I always thought that I was OK with arithmetic, but this guy can run circles around me. And, he is honest. He is straightforward. He is sincere.

    And, the budget that he came forward with is just like Paul Ryan. It is a sensible, straightforward, serious budget and it cut the budget deficit by $4 trillion…just like we did.

  61. C. Clavin says:

    “…Ryan will also be able to expose how Obama’s plan is taking monies out of medicare to fund his ACA…”

    Jan – you are so stupid…I couldn’t even make it up if I tried.
    First – Ryan’s plan takes the same money out of Medicare administration costs that Obama does…so I’m not sure exactly what you think Ryan is going to expose.
    And yes…of course it pays for the ACA…that’s how budgeting works. You shift money from one place that you determine is not efficient to pay for something somewhere else that you think adds value.
    In any case the PPACA reduces the deficit…and is already reducing Medicare costs…and has extended the programs life-expectancy. Neither Gekko or Galt have an answer for sky-rocketing Helath Care costs or the 30 million un-insured. Actually Romney had an good idea…and it works great…then he became a Ideological Radical like you.

  62. jan says:

    @john personna:

    I still think 51 to 48 was close, but let’s leave it as what it is for a moment.

    You’re skirting the original comment I shared about the dems not being behind this jobs plan at all. It was only under political pressure did they have a dog and pony vote, allowing for it to fail so they could blame republicans, but not having it fail so much as to embarrass the president like he was with his budget bill.

    Why can’t you just admit an honest point for once? If such a ruse had happened under, let’s say Bush, you would be all over how fake this vote really was, rather than talking about how close it was!

  63. al-Ameda says:

    @C. Clavin:

    Ryan voted for every single one of the things that are currently the biggest drivers of the deficit…the unpaid for Bush Tax Cuts, the unpaid for Medicare Expansion, the unpaid for Wars of Choice that the Republicans couldn’t finish. None of those things were, or are, Conservative. Certainly exploding the debt and squandering a budget surplus is not Conservative.

    As Jan would probably say,

    But … but … but …. all of that was okay when the president was Republican.

  64. @jan:

    Do you really believe Erskine? Because after his praise, this was his conclusion:

    However, there were great differences of opinion in each of these budget proposals on just what specifically should be cut, on whether there should be any cuts in the income support programs and entitlements, and on whether there should be any revenue enhancements at all. By and large, the Republicans felt strongly that there should not be any tax increases, and Democrats felt there should not be any entitlement cuts. Unfortunately, excluding either revenue increases or any cuts in entitlement programs makes achieving deficit reduction of $4 trillion practically impossible.

    Are you and Ryan peddling one of those impossible plans?

    One that only cuts spending and does not raise revenue?

  65. C. Clavin says:

    @ Jan…
    This Obama deficit you are always talking about never happened.
    If you have to lie to make your point…that makes your point worthless…and you a liar.
    You are a liar.

    http://articles.marketwatch.com/2012-05-22/commentary/31802270_1_spending-federal-budget-drunken-sailor

  66. @jan:

    Jeebus. You are really going to rest everything on 2 Democratic defections out of 50?

    A 4 percent opinion?

  67. al-Ameda says:

    @jan:

    No, he is already talking about the 5 trillion dollar deficit Obama has encumbered the country with in just under 4 years.

    that’s amusing because, Ryan’s Plan projects deficits of the same magnitude from 2013 to 2023.

  68. michael reynolds says:

    Polls on people nobody knows, in the first moments of a reveal, are meaningless. Ask again in a week. Still won’t matter. Ask again in two weeks and it may matter.

  69. matt says:

    @Drew:

    This of course will get about 20 thumbs down, which tells you exactly the deptths this sight has fallen to. Trash.

    My god man you’re so rich you cannot afford a simple spell check or be bothered to use the proper word?

  70. michael reynolds says:

    @Drew:

    Yes, Drew, it’s everyone else, it’s not you. It’s not that your entire argument on every topic is:

    I’m a successful businessman, you must agree with me!

    And when challenged your follow up is:

    Twaddle!

    And when asked for some rationale, any rationale, to back up your position, you pout, attack all around you and flee the room.

  71. OzarkHillbilly says:

    @Drew:

    If that’s your fantasy, have at it. You got a perty mouth, Hillbilly?

    Wow, Drew…. I did not think you were that virile but my screen is now double layered with your fantasies. I take it back. You are not 24 yrs old, only a 15 yr old could spew that much.

    I’m rich, I have a history of great decisionmaking in the investment world. It’s how I make living. Its the real world. Not some internet site. I’m sorry you find that distressing.

    Heeheeehee…. I don’t find it distressing, I find it hilarious, Drew, you are a caricature. The real world is filled with blood, sweat, and tears. Tell me…. just exactly how much did Daddy leave you?

    I suspect your track record is, well, lesser. you might want to look in the mirror, and have a serious self assessment.

    Ya know what Drew? I have to look in the mirror every day. And you know what? I earned everything I got (however little it may be) with blood, sweat and more than a few tears. But you would not know about any of those things. Would you?

    Because you know I have you pegged.

    Yeah, I am just a (presently) unemployed Union Carpenter, 54 yrs old and hurting in ways you could not dream of, with a wife who is the love of my life AND who has a job that comes with health insurance, I wake up every morning at 3:30 am (cause I am used to it)(and in a certain amount of pain that keeps me awake) and go to work on making our 12 & 1/2 acres a little more supportive for our old age every day…. WHICH…. god willing…. we will reach.

    You however, are a titan of industry.

    Tell me, everybody, who has the more believable story?

  72. jan says:

    @john personna:

    You are side-stepping what I said, and going in another direction, entirely. It has NOTHING to do with the final vote, but all the political maneuvering, and arm-twisting that was going on about this unpopular Obama bill, that you earlier were touting as being killed by the Republicans! It was manipulated, by the dems, having small dem defections disallowing passage, a ploy setting up the other party to take disingenuous heat so someone like you can complain about it in the future.

  73. David M says:

    @jan:

    I’m confused, isn’t a bill just a starting point?

    The [Obama] plan is but a framework, or work in progress, which will experience modifications, updates, and tweeks, before it is ever adopted. [Obama] encouraged [Congress] to at least present it to their members, and then do what ever re-writes they wanted, just to get a [jobs] conversation started.

  74. OzarkHillbilly says:

    @jan: Let me be the first to say…. BULLSHIT! The final vote tells the tale Jan. If you can not spin that, (and you can’t) do us the favor of shutting up.

  75. @jan:

    I’m sorry, I am having trouble following. Final votes pretty much matter in a democracy. They matter more than anything, really.

    If this is about the quality of the President’s ideas then I think the party split (with 2 defections) and the low congressional approval rating would be pretty darn important.

    I’m trying to be generous here, but it really looks like your argument is “we can totally blame Obama because 2 Democrats failed to come through.”

    It looks like you’ve got the binoculars reversed, and think you’ve found a little place to focus, some fragment of the picture where you win.

    If we can see that game, it isn’t such a bit win.

    @David M:

    Yeah, funny contrast.

  76. jukeboxgrad says:

    drew:

    I’m rich

    You haven’t given us enough information to conclude that you’re actually rich; you’ve only given us enough information to conclude that you’re actually a jerk. But that’s a far more important thing to know about someone, so thanks for telling us what we needed to know. Your inadvertent candor is appreciated.

  77. legion says:

    @Drew: I don’t think you get this “Internet” thing… we’re all here, on a blog, posting under pseudonyms. Unless somebody volunteers their actual personal information (which I don’t suggest), nobody here can really check anyone else’s claims to knowledge or experience in any subject we discuss. All we can judge each other by is what we say here and how we say it. Whether or not you’re rich and successful in the Real World, down here it’s very clear that you are an emotional child and an intellectual pissant. And no matter how much you think we should bow down and respect your opinions, that will never happen until you change something yourself.

    G’night, sweetcheeks.

  78. Janis Gore says:

    But I liked Sarah Palin. I didn’t want her as vice-president, but she’s welcome to my home anytime for crawfish macque-choux and commiserating about wayward children.

    This guy leaves me cold.

  79. Spartacus says:

    James wrote: ” . . . Ryan has been taken seriously enough by the Democrats that they’ve already spent months working to bring down his public standing.”

    Have Democrats been trying to “bring down” Ryan’s public standing or have they been shedding light on Ryan’s plan? If the plan itself is the cause of Ryan’s public standing being down, that is not the fault of Democrats. That’s Ryan’s fault.

  80. anjin-san says:

    It will be interesting to see some numbers after the Romney/Ryan “Farewell to Medicare” tour has been on the road for a month or so.

  81. anjin-san says:

    emotional child and an intellectual pissant.

    Amen. I met with some clients the other day, both of them are rich, neither are dicks, and they never sound like an insecure 14 year old who is trying to impress other kids. Sad.

  82. C. Clavin says:

    @ Jan…

    “…What people will see is a youthful, articulate, brilliant, optimistic reformer. He will talk about opportunity versus status quo, relishing giving the right to succeed or fail back to the individual, rather than capitulate to government as a ‘big brother’ savior…“”

    How do you square that with the fact that we all put Ryan through school, we all have supported him ever since, and we all pay for his sleeping accommodations every night, we all pay for his gym membership and his meals?
    The facts and your ideology never quite line up do they?
    How do you justify that in your mind?

  83. stonetools says:

    My guess is that by the time the Republican convention ends after a couple of weeks of Team Obama definition, Ryan ‘s approval ratings will be under water for good. He’ll be known as the man who wants to privatize Social Security, end Medicare, and and have the boss’s income taxed at less than 1 per cent. And oh yeah, like his boss, he has no plan to reduce unemployment.

  84. anjin-san says:

    reformer

    What is he reforming? The damage he helped to cause when he voted for budget busting bills during the Bush era – one after another, after another?

  85. C. Clavin says:

    @ C. Clavin…
    Despite the protestations of sycophants, like Jan and Doug and James, this duo of Gekmo and Galt are phonies and grifters.
    Ryan has spent his entire adult life getting rich on the largess of the Government. He makes a salary of around $170k paid by all of us. In exchange for that he has gotten two laws passed in the last 13 years. One was the naming of a Post Office. We spent the last year throwing protesters out of public parks…but we all pay for Ryans sleeping accommodations every night.
    Romney is a corporate welfare queen. He has gotten rich on the largess of the rest of us. He takes Government money, then walks away…leaving taxpayers in the lurch… The less fortunate of them getting f’ed out of pensions and insurance…but Romney pocketing millions.
    These two are hypocrites and con men. They are selling something they don’t even believe. And people like Jan and Doug and James are buying it.

  86. Drew says:

    @OzarkHillbilly:

    You jest keep tellin yourself that………….dumb fuck.

  87. Drew says:

    Looks like I’ve accomplished my mission of shaking the animal cages at the zoo.

    Sorry folks, variously, I’m filthy rich. I’m sorry that bothers you. I once, at age 23′ looked out over Lake Michigan one night, January, midnight shift at the steel mill and below zero, and asking myself “is this my life?”.

    No. No effing way.

    Got my shit in order. And did something about it. You guys should take a lesson. Bitches whine. Men do do something about it.

    You boys are are just whining weak bitches.

    Again, I’m sorry this distresses you pussys.

    But the truth cannot be denied. Have fun on your Internet site making good on your personal failures.

  88. Drew says:

    I always love it when people question my financial means. I’m ether a prick, a braggart, or a fraud or……

    Oh, yeh, maybe I am who I say I am, and I build businesses, create jobs, and do more than 95% of the assholes on this website do.

    Bummer, fuckwads.

  89. michael reynolds says:

    @Drew:

    Well, Drew, my “personal failures” involve a 33 year marriage, 2 interesting children, 150 or so published books, 35 million or so sold, a movie deal with Sony, a possible TV deal in the works, Hollywood producers asking me to develop ideas for them, publishers asking me to get into packaging, being called a genius on a fairly regular basis (no, I don’t take it to heart) and an income of just a bit under a million dollars this year. And I’m sitting here on my deck in exclusive Tiburon, gazing out at an unobstructed view of San Francisco.

    And I suspect some of the others here are also not exactly losers.

    You sound awfully shrill for a man on top of the world. What happened? Bad investment?

  90. anjin-san says:

    It’s time for some “Best of Bithead”!

    Bithead says:
    Saturday, August 30, 2008

    Oh… and of course the energy thing, seems to me the final nail in Obama’s box. THe Democrats are dead wrong on that issue, and the polls keep telling us that my read on that particular aspect is accurate. (What was it, 70% want domestic drilling, now, last I saw? Something like that) With Palin, knowledgeable, and articulate on the subject of Energy, that being so wrong will cost them at the polls.

    Combine that with the rest, and you can more fully understand the amount of hate dripping off the left-side sites this morning. It’s called a ‘fear response’

    And here he is gloating about the coming Obama defeat:

    Sunday, November 2, 2008 at 13:34

    Heh. Personally, I’m waiting for the reports of rioting in Grant park.

  91. anjin-san says:

    Hmm. Drew has been drinking again.

  92. jukeboxgrad says:

    drew (earlier):

    I bid you adieu .

    I love how the people who say things like this always come back to prove they never meant it. It’s a big clue that their other statements are equally trustworthy.

    Bitches whine. Men do do something about it.

    The misogyny is a nice touch.

  93. G.A. says:

    Looks like I’ve accomplished my mission of shaking the animal cages at the zoo.

    Sorry folks, variously, I’m filthy rich. I’m sorry that bothers you. I once, at age 23′ looked out over Lake Michigan one night, January, midnight shift at the steel mill and below zero, and asking myself “is this my life?”.

    No. No effing way.

    Got my shit in order. And did something about it. You guys should take a lesson. Bitches whine. Men do do something about it.

    You boys are are just whining weak bitches.

    Again, I’m sorry this distresses you pussys.

    But the truth cannot be denied. Have fun on your Internet site making good on your personal failures.</blockqu

  94. G.A. says:

    Rats! I was gonna say lol:), but something got fouled up….

  95. G.A. says:

    Or do a…hmmm..

  96. jukeboxgrad says:

    here is something Erskine Bowles had to say about Ryan

    That’s the same speech where Bowles lavished praise on Newt Gingrich, Trent Lott and David Brooks. So there are a few reasons to take his words with a grain of salt (link, link).

  97. Moderate Mom says:

    This made me laugh. My son forwarded it to me:
    http://www.theonion.com/articles/admit-it-i-scare-the-everloving-shit-out-of-you-do,29160/

    Given the reaction of so many on the left, I’m wondering if it’s more truth than satire.

  98. anjin-san says:

    Well, “Moderate” Mom, there is truth in it, but not in the way you think.

    Republicans do scare Democrats.

    We remember Bush.

    We remember how he led us to the brink of a depression. Something that would make today’s economic problems look like cotton candy and puppies. We remember Katrina – how Bush and McCain were partying as the hurricane bore down on New Orleans. We remember how Bush gave up searching for Bin Laden, and started a disastrous war in Iraq. We remember how he cooked the books to hide the cost.

    We remember “deficit hawk” Ryan voting for every budget busting bill that came before him. We remember the GOP putting Sarah Palin, who is now apparently persona non grata, in a positon to be a heartbeat away from the Presidency. We remember McCain saying that Bin Laden could not be touched if he was in Pakistan. We remember the Ryan Plan passing in the house. I have an elderly mother and mother in law. They need health care, there are no ice floes in California I can put them on.

    I could go on for a while, but its late. The point is, yes, Republicans are scary. Hell yes.

  99. anjin-san says:

    Mitt was in the heartland today, visiting the real folks who are suffering under Obama.

    Mitt on the farm

    Mitt Romney recently passed through Iowa to acknowledge this drought, currently affecting 78% of the country. The situation threatens already struggling farmers with outright ruin. To show concern, Romney visited the farm of Lemar Koethe, an Iowa corn farmer, touring crops, surveying the damage, and posing for photo ops. But the Romney campaign neglected any photos of Koethe’s home, possibly because that home isn’t exactly the modest all American farmhouse we might expect in this situation. In fact, Koethe isn’t the typical all-American farmer.

    According to the Des Moines Register, Koethe is faring rather better than the average rural farmer. He owns “54 soy and corn farms.” And, as reported by Think Progress, “that’s just one of his jobs.” Koethe is a millionaire, “a real estate mogul, and a former concert promoter who booked acts like Slipknot at his 24,000 square foot event center.”

    Koethe’s home, which stands on the corn farm Romney toured but didn’t make the photo ops, reflects his success. And we think it deserves a tour. Apparently part home, part spaceship, this one of a kind design features an underground garage large enough for several vehicles– complete with personal car-wash to keep them all sparkling clean. Also on the lower level is a recreation center and art gallery. From there, an elevator or a 35-foot stairway leads to the main living area offering 360 degree view of the property.

    I guess Romney is working research on car elevators into his campaign schedule…

  100. Janis Gore says:

    Drew, modesty is most becoming in the well-to-do.

  101. Rob in CT says:

    Ah yes. The script holds. Drew appears, declaims from on high, gets pushback and has nothing but insults in response. And, of course, it ends with The Flounce (in this instance, a rather extended flounce).

    Just being rich (and, not that it matters, but I bet Drew is actually rich) doesn’t make someone brilliant, and it certainly doesn’t make them wise.

    As for Mr. Ryan, a little something I hadn’t known about him:

    In 2008, Ryan sponsored a bill repealing the requirement that the Federal Reserve act to reduce unemployment, and specifying that it should determine a specific definition of “price stability” and then act to promote that.

    The Fed has, at least theoretically, a “dual mandate” to keep inflation and unemployment from becoming too high. Hence things like QE.

    He also wanted to tie the dollar to some sort of bundle of goods, which is basically a psuedo gold standard. It’s the old “OMG, fiat currency! Ahhhhh!”

    It’s funny. It used to be that when we pointed to Ayn Rand, Republicans would say that she was some fringe character. Oh, she’s that crazy libertarian, you can’t tar us with her.

    Ryan believes that stuff. Oh, I know, he partially back his Rand love (when people pointed out her anti-theistic* views), but that was just running away from the atheism for the fundy crowd. He loves her economic ideas. He’s been enthusiastically promoting them for years, and has sponsored bills trying to put them into effect. It’s all there on the record.

    And this has become mainstream GOP thinking. Pointing this out is not a smear.

    * – she wasn’t just an atheist. She was a strident one who thought religion was awful. IIRC, there were extended rants about it (not that extended rants were uncommon in her work). I don’t mind that, being an atheist with a pretty low opinion of religion myself, but YMMV.

  102. jukeboxgrad says:

    moderatemom:

    This made me laugh. My son forwarded it to me

    The article you are citing says this:

    people automatically recognize me as a man with deep convictions he will stand up for, no matter what

    Ryan does a good job of pretending to be that person, but everyone is going to know that he’s not that person. He voted for all of Bush’s major budget-busting actions. Everyone is going to know this, which means that everyone is going to know that he’s a fraud.

    And even if there are people who insist on seeing Ryan “as a man with deep convictions he will stand up for, no matter what,” this is just going to make Mitt look bad, by comparison. Because even Mitt’s supporters realize that he is the antithesis of “a man with deep convictions he will stand up for, no matter what.”

    A lot of people in the GOP wanted Ryan to run, and I’m sure that in the GOP right now there are a lot of people who wish they could reverse the ticket. In many ways, Ryan is a stronger candidate than Mitt. By picking Ryan, Mitt made sure that people are going to be reminded of how weak Mitt looks, in comparison.

  103. Rob in CT says:

    Ryan’s plan:

    Cut the top income rate (more – not an extension of the Bush tax cuts. More cuts)
    Close unspecified loopholes
    ???
    Profit!

    Except that nobody can make the numbers work such that it doesn’t end up being a huge tax cut for the tippy top. There simply aren’t enough “loopholes” to close. If you are shooting for a revenue-neutral reform, you have to cut/eliminate things like the mortgage interest rate deduction and other things the working & middle class use*. Which means it pushes the tax burden down the income ladder, in a big way.

    That’s before you even get to the cuts he wants to make (some of which are also unspecified, like projecting non-military discretionary spending dropping to absurd levels w/o saying how), and the increased military spending.

    Terrible priorities coupled with fantasy math. Call it voodoo is probably an insult to voodoo.

    * – not that it really matters, but in principle I’m not against phasing out such tax deductions (I think the mtg interest deduction may do more harm than good), but that would have to be part of a plan that wasn’t designed to make the middle class pay more and the rich pay less. The bottom ~80% of the country is already struggling. The top ~5% (particularly 1%) are doing great. In that context – context is key! – it makes no sense to cut taxes at the top, again, while increasing taxes at the bottom/middle. Unless, of course, you’re a Randian ideologue.

  104. @Rob in CT:

    Yes, and of course many of the numbers to make it “work” were just “supplied:”

    The amounts of revenues and spending to be used in these calculations for 2012 through 2022 were provided by Chairman Ryan and his staff. The amounts for 2023 through 2050 were calculated by CBO on the basis of growth rates, percentages of gross domestic product (GDP), or other formulas specified by Chairman Ryan and his staff. For all years, the Chairman specified that there would be no spending for subsidies to purchase health insurance through new exchanges established under the Affordable Care Act. CBO calculates that, under the specified paths, federal revenues and spending would evolve as follows:

    The most egregious thing here is the “supplied” growth numbers. It isn’t about self control, or reserve, or testing your own hypothesis, you simply supply growth numbers based on your faith in the cuts, and use those.

    Mitt’s proposal is even more a pig in a poke.

    Gingrich has supplied the campaign message: Do Not Trust CBO or State Department

    Which means the election comes down to how many solid partisans there are, people who will reject CBO accounting, and just take it on faith.

  105. Oh oh. David Stockman has a lot of cred:

    Paul Ryan’s Fairy-Tale Budget Plan

  106. jukeboxgrad says:

    David Stockman has a lot of cred

    Excellent, thank you. More from Stockman:

    … to stand before the public and rub raw this anti-tax sentiment, the Republican Party, as much as it pains me to say this, should be ashamed of themselves … The Republican Party has totally abdicated its job in our democracy, which is to act as the guardian of fiscal discipline and responsibility. They’re on an anti-tax jihad — one that benefits the prosperous classes

  107. C. Clavin says:

    Ryan has picked up on the Romney campaigns distortion lie about what Obama said…”you didn’t build that”…but Ryan fails to mention that he is heir to a family fortune built on Government work.
    Ryan Incorporated Southern…just one subsidiary of the family business…states on its Web site;

    “The Ryan workload from 1910 until the rural interstate Highway System was completed 60 years later was mostly Highway construction.”

    Ryan Incorporated Central…another subsidiary…has had at least 22 defense contracts with the federal government since 1996 including one worth $5.6 million.
    So much for individualism and not relying on the Government.

  108. jukeboxgrad says:

    rob:

    it makes no sense to cut taxes at the top, again, while increasing taxes at the bottom/middle. Unless, of course, you’re a Randian ideologue.

    Here’s the main problem Gecko/Galt are trying to solve: the poor aren’t poor enough and the rich aren’t rich enough. All their plans and positions lead back to this underlying philosophy.

  109. raoul says:

    There are so many problems with the posting but I would only address the principal one: E-.B fixes a problem that barely requires fixing (SSA) and ignores a problem that does require addressing (SSA)- does sound like a Republican plan and good to see JJ drinking the kool-aid.

  110. C. Clavin says:

    In addition to making a family fortune off Government work, The Boston Globe today reports that;

    “…In 2009, as presumptive GOP vice presidential nominee Rep. Paul D. Ryan was railing against President Obama’s $787 billion stimulus package as a “wasteful spending spree,” he wrote at least four letters to Obama’s secretary of energy appealing for a pair of Wisconsin energy conservation groups to receive millions of dollars in grants from the program, according to documents obtained by the Globe. The advocacy appeared to pay off, as both were awarded federal the economic stimulus funds…”

    http://bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2012/08/13/paul-ryan-district-supported-energy-funds-while-decrying-stimulus-program/qkXIN2eHgyt4yyBSH81WEJ/story.html
    This is supposed to be a man of principle???

  111. stonetools says:

    @C. Clavin:

    Amazing. So the Ayn Rand disciple had a family fortune built on government contracts, grew up in a town that benefited from government contracts, went to college on Social Security benefits, and has been on the Government payroll for most of his adult life . Who knew that Ayn Rand was all about being a creature of federal government: but then, she relied on Social Security benefits at the end of her life anyway.

    What’s clear is that already the story is developing that Ryan is a gigantic fraud and hypocrite and Team Obama has hardly opened fire yet. Its going to be a bumpy ride for RR, Inc.

  112. sam says:

    @Rob in CT:

    Ryan’s plan

    As Kevin Drum puts it, “Cut taxes on the rich, cut spending on the poor. Everything else is just window dressing.”

    That’s the plan.

  113. al-Ameda says:

    @stonetools:

    Amazing. So the Ayn Rand disciple had a family fortune built on government contracts, grew up in a town that benefited from government contracts, went to college on Social Security benefits, and has been on the Government payroll for most of his adult life . Who knew that Ayn Rand was all about being a creature of federal government: but then, she relied on Social Security benefits at the end of her life anyway.

    Ryan is a kind of fiscal and budgetary tele-evangelist.
    Much like Michele Bachmann, Paul Ryan is almost entirely a creature of the federal government.