Does anyone else feel promises like this are a threat in disguise? "Vote for me, because I know how to fix the country. But if you DON'T vote for me, I'm certainly not going to tell anyone else how to do it and you can all go fuck yourselves."
"We need jobs? Then I will create jobs! No, I will not tell you how. What else do we need? Hm... I will also fix the economy! No, I will not tell you how I will do that either. I will fix all the problems and give everyone everything they want. But you have to elect me president first. Then I'll make all that happen. Just trust me, ok?"
Just the other day 'pubs were bagging on Obama for failing to deliver on his FOUR million job promise. The only way Rmoney can create three times as many jobs (and deliver - I don't know, five or six times more than Obama could) is if the GOP has deliberately NOT been taking action to improve things. In other words, playing a game of chess with unemployed Americans as the pawns.
Personally, I've already believed this to be the case - they won't let the jobs bill come to the floor. I'm not sure if it's even left its committee, or gotten any kind of hearing there. They won't even take it as a starting point and add all their poisonous amendments. The only reason I can surmise is what I stated above.
@9 The worst part is that talking to conservative friends, they actually believe him when he's making these promises. Because he "seems really trustworthy."
It's the "I feel like I could have a beer with Bush and that's cool" thing all over again.
@11, they don't have to be deliberately holding back measures they know would create jobs to issue this kind of projection. Romney's engaging in the usual executive practice of projecting sunny results while preparing to blame the rain on circumstances beyond his control.
The same article quotes Romney and his team claiming they would reduce federal spending from 24% of GDP to 20% of GDP. Of course they don't explain how they would do it. Simple math suggests a spending reduction of $500 billion a year for 4 years or 3% of GDP.
The thing is we've seen this type of austerity plan implemented already. What happened? Modest recoveries were turned into renewed recessions. Want proof see the UK, Spain and Italy to name 3.
So Romney's plan amounts to throwing the US into a deeper recession then we are in now in order to create 12 million new jobs. Damn those are some magic undies he's wearing.
When Jon Stewart asked Grover Norquist about why, despite the fact that supply-side economics, and shrinking government spending, has failed to produce the net increase in jobs and economic prosperity that Republicans promise, his response was: "It wins elections."
Eight years (in his wettest wet dream), each containing twelve months. Take that number, 96, and divide the 12 million jobs promised by Mitt the Twit. By my count, that's 125,000 new jobs a month.
We just had figures today saying that July (not the peppiest month of any year) added 163,000 new jobs.
@22 Ok, ok. So I didn't read the linked article first. Alright, he promised it in 4 years, not 8. Still, that's 250,000/month, and we just had 163,000 in a traditionally dead summer month. It's reasonable to assume that job growth will continue to accelerate. As usual, though, Mitt is not revealing any policy specifics. Chances are, whoever is president will benefit from the momentum, barring of course the teabaggy repugnicants tossing us off the fiscal cliff.
The Republicans don't even have to hold back any job-creating legislation. Since they constantly call themselves the job-creators, all they have to do is NOT HIRE PEOPLE. That makes Obama look bad, because they blame him for no jobs. Of course that doesn't make any sense, but Republicans don't make sense and their base doesn't demand it of them.
Is this anything like Richard Nixon's secret plan to (not) end the Vietnam War? Has anybody told Rmoney that Nixon's is not perhaps the best playbook in political history?
i think we can point out the fact that he's a douche without resorting to childish names, chuckles.
Safe for work. Unless you've just sipped a liquid beverage.
Personally, I've already believed this to be the case - they won't let the jobs bill come to the floor. I'm not sure if it's even left its committee, or gotten any kind of hearing there. They won't even take it as a starting point and add all their poisonous amendments. The only reason I can surmise is what I stated above.
It's the "I feel like I could have a beer with Bush and that's cool" thing all over again.
The thing is we've seen this type of austerity plan implemented already. What happened? Modest recoveries were turned into renewed recessions. Want proof see the UK, Spain and Italy to name 3.
So Romney's plan amounts to throwing the US into a deeper recession then we are in now in order to create 12 million new jobs. Damn those are some magic undies he's wearing.
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/jo…
That's it.
Eight years (in his wettest wet dream), each containing twelve months. Take that number, 96, and divide the 12 million jobs promised by Mitt the Twit. By my count, that's 125,000 new jobs a month.
We just had figures today saying that July (not the peppiest month of any year) added 163,000 new jobs.
So, this is better, how?
OF COCK.
Can't wait to hear what Meinert has to say.
This new Five Point plan gets us a million jobs more, using a lean, mean Twenty Points to do the trick!