[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"][QUOTE="QuistisTrepe_"]I'm way beyond contrasting ideologies at this point. Romney couldn't be any worse than Obama, it just isn't possible.
jonathant5
It's quite easy for a president to be worse than Obama... Exactly, for a recent example, look at Bush. Clinton had brought the country to a surplus, the economy was functioning well, and etc. Bush on the other hand (and his administration) is responsible for the majority of the problems that the US faces today. Bush is the reason for the deficit. His policy on reducing taxes for the high earners was flawed, he started the war (before the war, Iraq was a much less messed up country than it is now), and his relaxing of laws governing corporations, as well as his/Greenspans statements on the usage of variable interest rates when it comes to mortgages, is one of the main reasons for the recession. You can easily do MUCH MUCH worse than Obama. This is revisionist histroy at best. Clinton came into office off of a strong economy that he had little to do with, slapped America with what was then the largeest tax hike in American history, and then got reigned in by the massive turnover in Congress in the '94 midterm election. That surplus was an accounting gimmick. And any such "surplus" was wiped out by 9/11, it had little to do with Bush's spending.Though Bush;s speding binge in the following years didn't help matters in the slightest.
Obama was handed a pretty bad hand, but he has only exacerbated the problem. This isn't debatable. His green jobs initiatives have been disasters costing us billions. Hell, I think Solyndra alone is an impeachable offense given what he knew and when he knew it. I would say we had a medicore president, followed by a terrible president, and this is why we're in the fix that we're in.
Romney, given his background, couldn't do worse than Obama if he tried.
Log in to comment