Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Mitt Romney)   Mitt Romney releases infographic detailing his first 100 days in office. 'Republican Road to Recovery' infographic was better   (mittromney.com) divider line 240
    More: Misc, infographics, Mitt Romney  
•       •       •

3600 clicks; posted to Politics » on 13 Jun 2012 at 11:55 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



240 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-06-13 01:14:08 PM  
i194.photobucket.com
 
2012-06-13 01:16:12 PM  

sweetmelissa31: [i194.photobucket.com image 595x289]


well done
 
2012-06-13 01:17:03 PM  
The most amusing thing about it is that everything on the "Obama" side is essentially Obama's 2008 campaign. "...the same failed policies that got us in this mess in the first place."
 
2012-06-13 01:18:40 PM  
Day One: No more waxy build-up on your golf spikes! Mitt Romney will make sure Porterhouse strips that wax down, creams and buffs them with a fine chamois and gets it done chop-chop!
 
2012-06-13 01:18:47 PM  

Dinki: Rmoney will run the country like he ran the companies Bain Capital bought- run up debt, take massive payouts for his shareholders (the wealthy), cut benefits, wages and employees, and when the debt gets too large, jump out leaving the hollowed out shell to collapse on someone elses watch.


Isn't this what W did? -- Run up debt (off books wars), cut benefits, wages and employees, help the wealthy (bush tax cut) and then leave a burning hulk for the next president?

/Republican president would surely crush us into a depression worse than 1929.
 
2012-06-13 01:19:49 PM  

Sock Ruh Tease: [i.imgur.com image 279x412]
Bubbles... bubbles everywhere.


imagecache6.allposters.com
 
2012-06-13 01:20:15 PM  
"I am telling you, I want you all to pay attention over the next five months and see if they're offering a single thing that they did not try when they were in charge, because you won't see it." - Barack Obama
 
2012-06-13 01:20:23 PM  

sweetmelissa31: [i194.photobucket.com image 595x289]


oh my goddddd
 
2012-06-13 01:24:44 PM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: "I am telling you, I want you all to pay attention over the next five months and see if they're offering a single thing that they did not try when they were in charge, because you won't see it." - Barack Obama


It's not even much of a prediction since the GOP has been pushing nothing but Trickle Down Economics and religious fundamentalism since the Reagan years...

"It's going to work this time...We promise!"
 
2012-06-13 01:25:27 PM  
Send Congress a bill slashing discretionary non defense spending by 5%

Do presidents often write legislation?


/serious question
 
2012-06-13 01:26:04 PM  
I like how Romney's side of the infographic always says "Mitt Romney" whereas Obama's side always says "President Obama." It's like they know they're going to lose, and are subconciously braced for it.
 
2012-06-13 01:28:13 PM  

I_C_Weener: The most amusing thing about it is that everything on the "Obama" side is essentially Obama's 2008 campaign. "...the same failed policies that got us in this mess in the first place."


Yes, because the republican policies before that were great. Who doesn't win when you reduce revenue and increase spending. Romney has a different vision though. Reduce spending and reduce income even more. So lets see how that works out. By the way, whats his stance on the deficit? Oh, don't pay it down. That's right. Just like Bush in 2000. Fantastic idea then too.
 
2012-06-13 01:28:27 PM  

simplicimus: cameroncrazy1984: LasersHurt: So basically turn us into a Capitalist wonderland staffed by the underclass for the purpose of fueling Military expansion. AWESOME DUDE.

Isn't that literally the Roman Empire right there?

No, the Roman Empire collapsed because of huge trade imbalances and an over-reliance on mercenaries. Nothing like what we're doing.


I swear to God, you'll see tax farming next. Why not auction off the right to collect taxes to your corporate pals? The government gets an up-front fee, and the corporations get to keep anything they can collect over the agreed amount.
 
2012-06-13 01:29:28 PM  
The thing I love best about this graphic is the notion that somehow, a President can just do these things by decree.

Because that's what Americans actually believe about the executive branch.

We are that stupid.
 
2012-06-13 01:30:18 PM  

vernonFL: Approve the Keystone Pipeline on Day One. (not too bad)

Begin the process of repealing and replacing Obamacare (replace with what?)

Impose a regulatory "cap" on Federal agencies (what does that even mean?)

Send Congress a bill slashing discretionary non defense spending by 5% (Would Congress pass that? Does he know that discretionary non defense spending is like 20% of the budget. So he would "slash" 20% of the budget by 5%.)

Fundamental Tax reform (not a bad idea if done properly)

Stand up to China's unfair trade practices (How?)


"Regulations" is one of those scary buzzwords the right is constantly afraid of.
I just got back from visiting family in the deep South Bible Belt. We were driving home one afternoon when we passed a burned out house. We commented on the burnt shell of the house and why it hadn't been torn down or re-built. My father-in-law said it was because go 'government regulations.'
"What?"
"Yeah, they can't tear it down or re-build it because of government regulations."
Well, that didn't make sense to me so I asked which regulations. Turns out, the owners of the house had probably burned it down on purpose for the insurance money. The house couldn't be torn down until the fire department and police finished their arson investigation. So, 'government regulations' really meant 'active crime scene.'
But it's all the evil government's fault.
 
2012-06-13 01:31:49 PM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: "I am telling you, I want you all to pay attention over the next five months and see if they're offering a single thing that they did not try when they were in charge, because you won't see it." - Barack Obama


Shows what you and Barry know. When they were in charge, they decided to bomb Iraq. The new plan is to bomb Iran.

Of course, there is the distinct possibility that most republicans don't know the difference between the two and this its just some kind of blue collar vs. elite spelling difference.
 
2012-06-13 01:32:33 PM  
yardcrap.typepad.com
 
2012-06-13 01:36:57 PM  

Oerath: I like how Romney's side of the infographic always says "Mitt Romney" whereas Obama's side always says "President Obama." It's like they know they're going to lose, and are subconciously braced for it.


It wouldn't surprise me if they did that intentionally to make Mitt seem more of a common man, salt of the earth type and Obama an elitist.

The whole Keystone thing drives me nuts. Obama will approve it once the new route is established, and Romney will have to change the infographic to god knows what. The right will of course claim it only got approved because they put pressure on Obama, even though TransCanada never wanted it fast-tracked in the first place and their response has basically been "oh ffs, stop 'helping' already".

The claims of Obama's plan to implement super secret "Job Destroying Regulations" and "One Of The Biggest Tax Increases In History" are a nice touch.
 
2012-06-13 01:39:29 PM  
4.bp.blogspot.com

Yep, if we dare do something as radical as cut the defense budget by 10% we might as well just surrender to China.
 
2012-06-13 01:41:32 PM  

MayoSlather: Part of me wants Romney to win just so I can mock him for 4 years. His ideas are awful and most Republicans will regret voting him if he does win.


I am going to save that list just in case he become presidents so I can mock him about these BS stances.
 
2012-06-13 01:43:27 PM  

apoptotic: The whole Keystone thing drives me nuts. Obama will approve it once the new route is established, and Romney will have to change the infographic to god knows what. The right will of course claim it only got approved because they put pressure on Obama, even though TransCanada never wanted it fast-tracked in the first place and their response has basically been "oh ffs, stop 'helping' already".


Not to mention that the Republican Governor of Nebraska asked Obama to deny TransCanada the permit. Then the GOP decided to attack Obama on the issue so he changed his mind (way to sellout his constituents).
 
2012-06-13 01:46:04 PM  
1. Wow I did not know that the Keystone pipeline only needed presidential approval. I am sitting her thinking they still need to pick an exact path. Get EPA and DoE approval. Get the local state governments on board, and actually buy the land and/or do eminent domain crap that is barely legal and highly immoral.

But Romney can get all that done day one. Amazing!

2. Replace with what, Romney care? So if we change the name and therefor make it a Republican plan, Americans will love it!

3. Well we all know regluations are bad, everything was fine when rivers caught on fire, or had surface tension that could hold the weight of an adult male. Or those pesky banking ones that prevent the rich from picking up the poor and shaking the change from their pockets. And who really needs to test drugs, people will take anything just look at bath slats.

4. Fark the poor, they don't need money. Old people, far them too - not on medicare get some private insurance. We need to make sure we can spend government money on the job creators to create jobs.

5. We all know tax cuts pay for themselves. This is a no brainer, never mind the fact there is very few cases where that is true. Republican Jesus will help.

6. China is bad................... Dammit I think something popped in my brain, how do the trolls keep up with this farking crap.
 
2012-06-13 01:46:26 PM  
Can someone repost the chart? Not giving Rmoney a web click.
 
2012-06-13 01:47:22 PM  
Oh, I get it now.

Romney simply wants to apply common-sense solutions to our nation's problems, while Obama wants to continue the tax-and-spend-and-kiddie-rape policies of the Democrats.

My choice is clear.
 
2012-06-13 01:50:23 PM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: Can someone repost the chart? Not giving Rmoney a web click.



i.imgur.com
 
2012-06-13 01:50:48 PM  
i48.tinypic.com

So he is going to stop ALL federal guaranteed loans including the tens of billions we give to the nuclear industry if he become president?

Does anyone (even Romney supporters) actually believe this?
 
2012-06-13 01:52:31 PM  
Anyone care to tell me the difference between what President Obama is offering up and candidate Romney? That is, besides the Keystone Pipeline and a trade war with China. Both of which would be a monumental failure if allowed to progress.

And that President Obama is even more conservative with his spending cuts and reforms.

Kinda makes you wonder which one is the Democrat ... oh yea ... the black one.
 
2012-06-13 01:55:28 PM  

HellRaisingHoosier: And that President Obama is even more conservative with his spending cuts and reforms.


Yeah I thought it was funny that Romney's campaign promise cuts are actually LOWER than actual cuts made under Obama.
 
2012-06-13 01:57:21 PM  

HellRaisingHoosier: And that President Obama is even more conservative with his spending cuts and reforms.

Kinda makes you wonder which one is the Democrat ... oh yea ... the black one.


I am for fiscal responsible budgets.

People having the opportunity to succeed if they work hard.

Real competition in the market place.

...So yeah I am a democrat.
 
2012-06-13 01:57:34 PM  

PDid: [yardcrap.typepad.com image 288x314]


fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net
 
2012-06-13 01:58:40 PM  

hillbillypharmacist: vernonFL: Impose a regulatory "cap" on Federal agencies (what does that even mean?)

It's pure absurdity.

There is, hypothetically, an unlimited number of new markets and industries that could develop. Some of them will need to be regulated. Either the regulations will be well written and thoughtful, and then enforced, or they won't. That's up to the lawmakers in place at that time.

But to limit the absolute number of regulations that the government can place, period, is rank absurdity. It's not even trying to act in good faith.


"Well, we need a new regulation on Internet commerce, so we've got to get rid of a different regulation."

"Um...how about this one about how nuclear plants have to dispose of their nuclear waste away from water aquifers?"

"Yeah! Let's get rid of that one! That's one's been a pain in the ass from day one!"
 
2012-06-13 01:59:06 PM  

God Is My Co-Pirate: simplicimus: cameroncrazy1984: LasersHurt: So basically turn us into a Capitalist wonderland staffed by the underclass for the purpose of fueling Military expansion. AWESOME DUDE.

Isn't that literally the Roman Empire right there?

No, the Roman Empire collapsed because of huge trade imbalances and an over-reliance on mercenaries. Nothing like what we're doing.

I swear to God, you'll see tax farming next. Why not auction off the right to collect taxes to your corporate pals? The government gets an up-front fee, and the corporations get to keep anything they can collect over the agreed amount.


Did he somehow forget about all the "private security contractors" we've been hiring?
 
2012-06-13 01:59:52 PM  

vernonFL: Moopy Mac: When you can create hundreds of temporary jobs and the only cost is billions of dollars of added gasoline expense through higher prices in the MidWest, you have to do it!

Would that be the case? Was there a study done that predicted that would happen?

Sometimes its a good idea to take the time to do impact studies, instead of just 'approving it on day 1'


Google "cornell university keystone pipeline" to see a pretty objective study (it's a PDF, so I won't link it directly). To summarize - it will create temporary work for about 1000 pipe-fitters (known throughout the midwest as "Mexicans") and purchase most of the steel from a Chinese company with a horrible track record for leaks, bursts, and other safety issues.

And it makes a convincing case that the only reason this is being done is to get the tar-sand oil to the export market. The reason the Keystone route is being pushed? It would be more expensive and more dangerous to build it over the Rockies and get the oil to Canada's own harbors.

If there was ever the slightest intent that this would reach the US market, the proposal would simply add capacity to the existing refineries. You know - where that very same oil currently gets refined. It's nonsense to say that the Gulf Coast refineries are the most efficient way to get this oil into the US market. And midwest fuel prices directly affect nationwide food prices, and food prices are already in trouble simply because of this year's weather. So, um, let's make it much worse?
 
2012-06-13 02:03:21 PM  

ModernPrimitive01: How anyone believes Romney would make this country a better place to live is beyond me.


I've had Republicans tell me they will vote for Romney because he has an R next to his name and sign the legislation he is told to sign by the Republican leadership. he doesn't need to have any ideas or foreign policy experience. there's nothing going on in the world anyway.
 
2012-06-13 02:05:38 PM  
Ha! Ha!

Oh, wait. He is serious.

Bwhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahh! This is the most ludicrous thing I've read all week.
 
2012-06-13 02:09:37 PM  

PDid: [yardcrap.typepad.com image 288x314]


What the hell does badly written sciences fiction have to do with this thread?
 
2012-06-13 02:09:46 PM  

BKITU: ManateeGag: vernonFL: Send Congress a bill slashing discretionary non defense spending by 5% (Would Congress pass that? Does he know that discretionary non defense spending is like 20% of the budget. So he would "slash" 20% of the budget by 5%.)

He has no idea about how much of the budget "discretionary spending" is. he just knows it sounds bad.

Actually, I'm sure he knows how much it is. He's counting on John Q. Average Voter to hear "slashing discretionary non-defense spending by 5%" and parse it as "SLASHING discretionary non-defense SPENDING BY 5%."

It's a standard marketing/messaging tactic. People hear and parse keywords, and generally ignore everything else. Think back to the run-up to the Iraq War. The administration was careful, but deliberate, in its wording -- pairing "Iraq" with all manner of phrases invoking the 9/11 attacks, but not actually saying the two were connected. Pretty soon, a large percentage of the population actually believed Iraq caused the 9/11 attacks. The messages were specifically crafted to be technically true, but incredibly misleading.

Any time someone is selling something -- a car, a product on TV, themselves for political office, anything -- think like a lawyer. Every word the seller is saying has a specific meaning. Parse each phrase down to its most basic, technical truth. Then, compare that technical truth with what the person is trying to get you to believe is true. The gap between the technical truth and the fairy-tale you're being sold is the precise amount of bullshiat you're being fed at that moment.


Hmm... that would be a very interesting algorithm to try to write in software... and incredibly useful if it could be done.
 
2012-06-13 02:11:39 PM  

Slaves2Darkness: PDid: [yardcrap.typepad.com image 288x314]

What the hell does badly written sciences fiction have to do with this thread?


Didn't you read Romney's infographic?
 
2012-06-13 02:13:49 PM  
What office?
 
2012-06-13 02:14:21 PM  

jst3p: Do presidents often write legislation?

/serious question


Sometimes. As we all learned in civics class, "The President proposes, the Congress disposes."
 
2012-06-13 02:15:23 PM  

clkeagle: If there was ever the slightest intent that this would reach the US market, the proposal would simply add capacity to the existing refineries. You know - where that very same oil currently gets refined. It's nonsense to say that the Gulf Coast refineries are the most efficient way to get this oil into the US market.


Not to mention that our supply of refined Gas already outpaces demand to the point where we are a net exporter of it on the global market. What we really need is more gas, because Shut Up Lib.
 
2012-06-13 02:15:32 PM  

Zasteva: BKITU: ManateeGag: vernonFL: Send Congress a bill slashing discretionary non defense spending by 5% (Would Congress pass that? Does he know that discretionary non defense spending is like 20% of the budget. So he would "slash" 20% of the budget by 5%.)

He has no idea about how much of the budget "discretionary spending" is. he just knows it sounds bad.

Actually, I'm sure he knows how much it is. He's counting on John Q. Average Voter to hear "slashing discretionary non-defense spending by 5%" and parse it as "SLASHING discretionary non-defense SPENDING BY 5%."

It's a standard marketing/messaging tactic. People hear and parse keywords, and generally ignore everything else. Think back to the run-up to the Iraq War. The administration was careful, but deliberate, in its wording -- pairing "Iraq" with all manner of phrases invoking the 9/11 attacks, but not actually saying the two were connected. Pretty soon, a large percentage of the population actually believed Iraq caused the 9/11 attacks. The messages were specifically crafted to be technically true, but incredibly misleading.

Any time someone is selling something -- a car, a product on TV, themselves for political office, anything -- think like a lawyer. Every word the seller is saying has a specific meaning. Parse each phrase down to its most basic, technical truth. Then, compare that technical truth with what the person is trying to get you to believe is true. The gap between the technical truth and the fairy-tale you're being sold is the precise amount of bullshiat you're being fed at that moment.

Hmm... that would be a very interesting algorithm to try to write in software... and incredibly useful if it could be done.


Another option is to buy about 10 to 15 of these every year and keep them in a desk drawer:

Link

First time an individual hands you a steaming pile of bullshiat, GIVE them a copy of the book. Seems like a heck of an investment, but saves a lot of time.
 
2012-06-13 02:20:23 PM  

rohar: Another option is to buy about 10 to 15 of these every year and keep them in a desk drawer:

Link

First time an individual hands you a steaming pile of bullshiat, GIVE them a copy of the book. Seems like a heck of an investment, but saves a lot of time.


I have never seen that book before, but it's very encouraging. =D
 
2012-06-13 02:22:04 PM  

grokca: What office?


I'm guessing his father's.
 
2012-06-13 02:22:10 PM  

The Homer Tax: clkeagle: If there was ever the slightest intent that this would reach the US market, the proposal would simply add capacity to the existing refineries. You know - where that very same oil currently gets refined. It's nonsense to say that the Gulf Coast refineries are the most efficient way to get this oil into the US market.

Not to mention that our supply of refined Gas already outpaces demand to the point where we are a net exporter of it on the global market. What we really need is more gas, because Shut Up Lib.


Maybe we should fire up the pipeline's we've got. There's a refinery in Billings and consumption in Spokane/Seattle. There's a pipeline between Billings and Spokane that sits dormant. Oil comes out of the ground in ND, gets refined in Billings, then we truck/train it across the mountains. How much sense does this make?
 
2012-06-13 02:23:38 PM  
dammit, extra apostrophe in my post
 
2012-06-13 02:24:01 PM  
Here is a question about the Keystone stuff. Lets compare it to something we already have. Say the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System. How many jobs did this create that are still around today? Repair crews and inspectors are basically all you would have. I mean realistically we are talking about running a long pipe. Will it make a few thousand jobs? Sure, just not much more. And most job creation is very temporary.
 
2012-06-13 02:24:21 PM  

thornhill: apoptotic: The whole Keystone thing drives me nuts. Obama will approve it once the new route is established, and Romney will have to change the infographic to god knows what. The right will of course claim it only got approved because they put pressure on Obama, even though TransCanada never wanted it fast-tracked in the first place and their response has basically been "oh ffs, stop 'helping' already".

Not to mention that the Republican Governor of Nebraska asked Obama to deny TransCanada the permit. Then the GOP decided to attack Obama on the issue so he changed his mind (way to sellout his constituents).


And if something goes wrong with the pipeline you know the Republicans will claim it was all Obama's idea in the first place.
 
2012-06-13 02:27:38 PM  
My personal prediction, if Romney wins, he will eventually become the first president lynched by his own party, as the clueless constituents discover that they voted for their own pain quite happily.
 
2012-06-13 02:28:56 PM  

BigTexas: Here is a question about the Keystone stuff. Lets compare it to something we already have. Say the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System. How many jobs did this create that are still around today? Repair crews and inspectors are basically all you would have. I mean realistically we are talking about running a long pipe. Will it make a few thousand jobs? Sure, just not much more. And most job creation is very temporary.


It might create a lot of jobs when the cheap Chinese made pipe ruptures and spills oil all over the prairie. Just like in the Gulf, we can put people to work cleaning up!
 
Displayed 50 of 240 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report