Accomplishments of a Romney first term?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 19, 2024, 01:01:26 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  Accomplishments of a Romney first term?
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Accomplishments of a Romney first term?  (Read 597 times)
anvi
anvikshiki
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,400
Netherlands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: October 16, 2012, 11:18:11 AM »

Let's assume that Mitt Romney wins on November 6th and becomes the 45th president.  What do you expect his first term will accomplish?  Of course, there is always a gap between campaign commitments and actual outcomes because of the unforeseen complexities of the legislative process, unforeseen events in the nation as a whole, priority changes and so on.  So, after four years of a Romney first term, what do you think can actually, reasonably be expected as results of Romney's policy agenda in the areas of the economy, the labor market, the federal budget, health care policy and international relations?
Logged
Sol
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,021
Bosnia and Herzegovina


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: October 16, 2012, 12:47:50 PM »

Tax cuts seem fairly probable. They'd easily pass the house, and Senate blue dogs might be friendly.
Logged
Link
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,426
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: October 16, 2012, 01:57:09 PM »

There is no way to know.  Romney has spoken out of both sides of his mouth his entire political career.  I truly have no idea what he would do.  Obviously the Middle East is a write off or worse.  After he barn stormed through the place and left people calling him a racist on his way out he would be starting with negative political capital.

I don't think China or Russia take the guy seriously.  Really foreign policy is an area where I am absolutely terrified of a Romney administration.  He is going to undo all the work Obama has done.  Traveling in a post Bush world with Obama in the White House is so much better.  I don't want to return to the days that I got a scowl from passport control before I even formally stepped into a country.
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,851


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: October 16, 2012, 02:09:30 PM »

Medicare, social security and medicaid will no longer exist in any meaningful way.

The tax code will be significantly more regressive.

The national debt will still be growing.

A disastrous military operation against Iran will be in the process of being waged.
Logged
Vosem
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,562
United States


Political Matrix
E: 8.13, S: -6.09

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: October 16, 2012, 03:01:31 PM »

Obamacare will be gone. Otherwise, I don't know.
Logged
anvi
anvikshiki
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,400
Netherlands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: October 16, 2012, 03:36:54 PM »

Obamacare will be gone. Otherwise, I don't know.

I appreciate that response, Vosem. 
I find it curious that none of your Republican compatriots have responded to the OP question yet.
Logged
DC Al Fine
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,085
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: October 16, 2012, 07:14:46 PM »

Obamacare will be gone. Some sort of tax cut will be made. There will be some discretionary spending cuts, but nothing major. None of the major entitlements will be reformed in any meaningful way.
Logged
TNF
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,440


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: October 16, 2012, 11:39:46 PM »

Obamacare will still be in place. It will be far too popular to repeal.

No major changes to Social Security or Medicare. Romney and Ryan are just trying to get base support. If they actually try to do anything to these programs, they will certainly suffer political suicide.

Window dressing social conservatism with no real lasting impact and/or teeth.

Massive tax cuts for the rich that will explode the deficit and national debt.

Probably another credit rating downgrade.

Gas prices fall, but only because the economy completely tanks because of cuts to social services.

Double-dip recession, unemployment heads back into double-digits.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi/Steny Hoyer/Chris Van Hollen.

Trade deficit gets even larger as no action is taken against Chinese/German/Japanese currency manipulation and tax cuts for outsourcers continue or are expanded.

Saber-rattling with Iran, Syria, China, Russia, et al.

A Democratic President come 2016.
Logged
Spanish Moss
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 395
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: October 17, 2012, 05:27:51 AM »

Either way, the economy will flatline within this generation.  You can't have a debt-based economy, and have that economy sustain itself.  Obama's band-aid approaches will help us hold on longer, if Romney somehow manages to gets elected, I see it flatlining around the end of his first term.
Logged
TNF
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,440


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: October 17, 2012, 06:31:52 AM »

Either way, the economy will flatline within this generation.  You can't have a debt-based economy, and have that economy sustain itself.  Obama's band-aid approaches will help us hold on longer, if Romney somehow manages to gets elected, I see it flatlining around the end of his first term.

Uh, yes you actually can. Capitalism needs debt to actually work and thrive. "You have to spend money to make money" and all that jazz. When government runs at a deficit, people can save; the opposite is also true. If government is continually running surpluses or balanced budgets, the private sector has to pick up the tab for spending that would have normally been done by government, which in turns leads toward recession.

Now I agree that the current debt arrangement is unsustainable, but only because these debts are not held by Americans, for the most part. Japan is hitting upwards of 230% of GDP to debt ratio but it fundamentally doesn't matter, because the debt is held by the  Japanese people, which allows for large scale economic growth. That's why we didn't collapse outright during World War II. We owed ourselves the money, which gave us opportunity to invest in economic growth and development. Today, however, we owe Tokyo and Beijing the money, which only allows us to become less sovereign and further within the grip of these nations.
Logged
Spanish Moss
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 395
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: October 17, 2012, 06:44:21 AM »

Either way, the economy will flatline within this generation.  You can't have a debt-based economy, and have that economy sustain itself.  Obama's band-aid approaches will help us hold on longer, if Romney somehow manages to gets elected, I see it flatlining around the end of his first term.

Uh, yes you actually can. Capitalism needs debt to actually work and thrive. "You have to spend money to make money" and all that jazz. When government runs at a deficit, people can save; the opposite is also true. If government is continually running surpluses or balanced budgets, the private sector has to pick up the tab for spending that would have normally been done by government, which in turns leads toward recession.

Now I agree that the current debt arrangement is unsustainable, but only because these debts are not held by Americans, for the most part. Japan is hitting upwards of 230% of GDP to debt ratio but it fundamentally doesn't matter, because the debt is held by the  Japanese people, which allows for large scale economic growth. That's why we didn't collapse outright during World War II. We owed ourselves the money, which gave us opportunity to invest in economic growth and development. Today, however, we owe Tokyo and Beijing the money, which only allows us to become less sovereign and further within the grip of these nations.

I'm not talking about government debt.  I'm talking about an economy built on companies constantly lending money to people that they don't have with interest they ultimately can't afford (i.e. credit, etc).  It's a bubble that will inevitably burst.
Logged
Skill and Chance
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,486
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: October 17, 2012, 08:29:28 AM »

It all depends on whether the EU still exists come 2016.  That will define Romney or Obama's presidency (okay, if it's Obama the long term status of universal health care also matters).

As for Obamacare, a Democratic senate would mean the important parts stand until at least 2015.  Whether Romney gets a swing at it all comes down to the 2014 congressional elections.  If Romney is to become a transformational president, the really important legislation will come during the second 2 years, much like FDR and Social Security.
Logged
Fmr. Pres. Duke
AHDuke99
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,956


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -3.13

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: October 17, 2012, 10:31:49 AM »

Probably not much different than Obama's second term. Taxes will go up regardless. I doubt Mittens will be able to reform the tax code as complicated a task as that is, and I expect Iran will get nukes regardless of who is in office. Taxes will not be cut. We simply cannot afford that without steep spending cuts, and steep spending cuts would result in another recession given our current state.

Obamacare isn't going away. It's too far implemented now for it to be repealed, and it would be far too complicated. I would hope with Mittens that spending would be held in check and some sort of entitlement reform would be in the works, but that's just hopeless optimism right now.
Logged
anvi
anvikshiki
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,400
Netherlands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: October 17, 2012, 03:21:48 PM »

I tend to think that you are right, Duke.  On entitlements, the reluctance of both Ryan and Mitt to make major cuts is evidenced by their putting reforms off for ten years and laying them at the doorstep of an entirely different Congress.   I really doubt, by the way, given deficit worries, that a president Romney would really follow through on his first debate pledge to add back the $750 billion in Medicare Advantage cuts of Obamacare.  If Romney is not going to cut defense, and perhaps even raise appropriations for it, and if he is not going to take a hatchet to discretionary spending, which even conservative states would oppose and which would hurt the recovery, then he has to raise revenues net in a way that has a chance of promoting growth.  One way to do that of course would be by dropping the nominal rate to higher than where the effective rate for top earners and businesses is now as well as take out some loopholes and deductions that allow those businesses to invest toward market opportunities and not toward the tax code, but I wonder if such a plan would pass the House.  And if the Dems hold the Senate or even maintain enough people to filibuster, there is no way Obamacare as a whole is going anywhere, and not much will happen to Dodd-Frank either.  And, for all the tough talk about China, Mitt is not dumb enough to provoke a trade war with them by labeling them a currency manipulator, and it's really not clear what other viable options are on the table with regard to Iran and Syria.   So, except for a different set of judicial nominations it's all, it being the results of the election in practical terms, is kind of a wash, isn't it?
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.23 seconds with 11 queries.