Woodruff wrote:Night Strike wrote:john9blue wrote: what he didn't realize is that much of what he posted is accepted by many people and is why they ARE voting for ryan.
That's actually what I was thinking as I read the post. Same kind of thing is happening in the US Senate race in Missouri.
So then why is it a problem? That's how a "presentation of facts" works.
None of my posts in this thread have been challenging anything presented in the first post of the thread.
Neato Missile wrote:I don't think it's fair to conflate one staffer's remarks with the entire campaign. Her "felon" accusation was out of line and I would greatly respect a statement from Obama putting it right, but excluding her remarks the motivation behind seeking the tax returns is seemingly to prove that Romney pays an unusually low tax rate. The Democrats really want to prove that the wealthy pay a smaller share of their larger amounts of money than the vast majority of Americans this election, and Mitt Romney's tax returns are a means to that end. It is perfectly justifiable to seek a candidate's economic information when said candidate is running on a largely economic platform.Night Strike wrote:Actually, it has occurred more than once. In fact, it's been the only thing coming from the campaign and surrogates for the past 2 weeks. From Harry Reid making up the claim to the campaign itself now running ads alleging the action.
The whole point of wanting to see all of Romney's tax returns is so they can comb through every legal action to reduce his tax rate. Every single person goes through their taxes to reduce the amount of money they owe, so why should Romney or any other rich person be vilified for doing that. The Obama campaign wants to make this election about Romney's success as a businessman instead of running on what Obama has done as president. They despise success and want to make sure it is vilified throughout the election.
Neato Missile wrote:"Predatory capitalism" is not mentioned in the ad, it's a term I cribbed from elsewhere regarding Romney's perceived corporate strategy of buying companies, "eating" them, and moving on. It wasn't meant insultingly, though I see that it's a somewhat loaded term.Night Strike wrote:Where is "predatory capitalism" ever even alluded to in the cancer ad? The guy is blaming Romney for firing him and killing his wife. The accusations are quite simple but the truth is far from what is shown in the ad.
That said, at no point in the ad does Soptic blame Romney for killing his wife. The point of the whole ad is that when Bain Capital closed down factories, real people suffered. It's more affecting than reams of statistics or graphs representing thousands of fired humans, and it should in no way be interpreted as an accusation of personal wrongdoing on Romney's part.
Except that even the factory closing didn't cause the real suffering in this case. The woman died of cancer 5 years after the factor had closed, and she had a job with insurance for at least one year after the factory closed. So why is he blaming the death on Bain Capital when, using his completely flawed logic, he should be blaming the woman's former employer.