Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KLP who wrote (504450)	8/27/2012 12:50:40 AM
From: simplicity	Respond to of 794299

Bravo! Well said.

To: KLP who wrote (504450)	8/28/2012 7:02:54 PM
From: Sr K	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 794299

The primary process in 2007-2008 was grueling, especially for someone with the lack of experience you cite. Obama showed executive capability in how he ran for President, and in how he was prepared for and met the tests of the debates. He appealed to more people* (of his party) than any of his opponents. Actually, I think that was close, but he got more delegates* by being prepared, compared to Hillary who expected to win on Super Tuesday, and let Obama run the table for the rest of February. If Romney thinks about what he would have done had he won in 2008, he would have taken a different course. He would not have reappointed Ben Bernanke. Many Republicans would have intentionally repeated the mistakes of 1937. And they're critical now, during a political campaign, when it only costs them credibility. Except Glenn Hubbard, who broke away this week from Romney's harsh words for and commitment to replace Bernanke. What this showed is that Romney doesn't pay attention to or understand macroeconomics. We had that problem with the last Republican President.