Romney: "Economy is recovering in spite of Obama"

[old timey villain]

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-romney-claims-economy-recovering-in-spite-of-obama-20120529,0,6325279.story

Today in Colorado, Mitt Romney continued to attack Obama on the economy.

"‘Look, things are getting a little better, aren’t they?’ And the answer is yeah, things are getting a little better in a lot of places in this country, but it’s not thanks to his policies,” he said. “It’s in spite of his policies. You see, every recession ultimately comes to an end, but you’d expect that this deep recession might come back to an aggressive turnaround, but it didn’t happen.”

Is this a convincing argument? One that will convince swing voters in states like Colorado to take a risk and vote for Romney? It seems pretty weak to me. I understand what Romney is saying, but all I hear from that is 'recovery' and 'turnaround'.

He's in a tight spot. He can't ignore the fact that the economy is recovering, but he still has to paint a gloomy enough picture to convince people to vote for him over Obama.

[old timey villain]

can a moderator move this to general election discussion?

[President von Cat]

It is a weak argument, but I'm sure Harry Potter of the Deep and that Republican from New Hampshire will find a way to paint this as Obama's downfall.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

Hilarious.

[Likely Voter]

In 2010/2011 Obama and team were arguing that things might be bad, but they could be worse...and that didn't really fly. So now Romney is arguing, things might be better, but they could be even better...that also wont fly.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

It is a weak argument, but I'm sure Harry Potter of the Deep and that Republican from New Hampshire will find a way to paint this as Obama's downfall.

Nah, his argument doesn't play well. Even though he's right.

By all means, it's currently advantage Obama. We'll probably see the president's traditional summer dip come around (maybe even as early as the next job reports), and then it'll truly be a toss-up.

[bgwah]

Well, he is sort of right. And if Romney is elected this year, the economy will continue to recover, and he won't have much to with it. He would of course take credit for it in 2016, though.

[milhouse24]

In 2010/2011 Obama and team were arguing that things might be bad, but they could be worse...and that didn't really fly. So now Romney is arguing, things might be better, but they could be even better...that also wont fly.

I guess some people are comparing Obama to Reagan's performance the last time we had 10% unemployment.

Romney's job was to fix companies and make them profitable.  Does that translate at all to government - should a government be well run, efficient, and profitable? 

Obama has always supported the lower class safety net.  His landmark legislation is Universal Health care which will guarantee expensive benefits for every adult American.  Obama is more interested in ensuring that lower class workers and lower class unemployed maintain a quality of life.  That is not necessarily help improve government efficiency or the deficit.  It does lead to more government beauracracy and spending. 

This election will be a stark contrast between lower class union voters and upper-class business owners.  With the middle-class voters deciding which candidate helps their lives. 

We also have the 99% of occupy wall street voters who think that the economy is in shambles and that things are extremely bad now for them.  They may have a point, especially if that point is to change lives, change government, and change the economy by being a homeless and unemployed camper in an urban park.