All I know is that the Union got 40% ownership in GM. Last year for the first
time I purchased a new car from Toyota Motor Co. I will never buy GM or
Still Blue after all these yearsThere were no private funds
available for the bailout, so Romney's scheme wouldn't have worked.
Who from the private sector would have financed the bailout? Who did you hear
was willing and able to do the financing?Second the UAW doesn't
own 45% of GM, they own 10.3%. A trust for the UAW owns 41% of Chrysler. The
government bailout wasn't illegal, in fact because it was a government
bailout it moved through the courts more quickly than a private bailout. Speed
was of the essence, where are you getting the bailout was illegal, what is your
source? I would also like to know your source regarding the teachers,
firefighters and police pension funds. I regret the salaried non-unionized
retirees from Delphi didn't fair as well as the unionized workers, but that
is the benefit of being part of a union, you aren't treated individually,
you have some pushback. I believe Sherrod Brown, Ohio Senator, is trying to get
the salaried workers pensions restored.
I'm sorry but PTM is dead, dead wrong. Obama's bankruptcy hurt a lot
of people that never should have been hurt including many firemen, policemen and
teachers pension funds. They got screwed over in favor of the UAW.
Romney's plan would have treated everyone fairly and legally (Obama's
was illegal but he forced parties to sign off on it), would have allowed private
capital to come in, would have never allowed the UAW to get 45% of GM and would
have included government funding if private capital was not available. This
would have been the most ideal long term solution. But we now see GM is
failing, the vaunted VOLT is a joke and the UAW has the last laugh on America.
But this is how its done in Chicago. Cough it up America.
Remember, the supposed "fatal headline" was penned not by Romney, but by
the New York Times editors. They knew what they were doing.
UtahBlueDevil, be insulted all you want. The truth hurts. And, yes, you're
mostly correct. The GOP will continue to lose elections for telling people what
they don't want to hear. So be it. I know I'm not going to change. And
like I care we won't win any more elections? Like Paul Ryan's
'radical' budget was going to do anything? It was bandaid delay. We
need real radical budget reforms to save our horribly bloated finances. Those
desperately needed reforms just aren't going happen given a mostly welfare
dependent electorate. Is that insulting to you? I make no apologies. The truth
hurts. Maybe when we turn into Greece people will like me again. I don't
really care. I won't be the one who suffers. The ones totally reliant on
food stamps will. Sooner or later, those dependent on the government for their
livelihoods are going to realize the government is powerless to save them.
Moderate,We don't spend a trillion on welfare? How much do we
spend then? Please enlighten us.
killpack said "We spend one trillion per year on welfare."Conservative David Frum went to the Republican convention and asked two
questions that the Tea Partiers could not answer correctly.1) Have taxes
gone up in the last 4 years?No. They will go up now, but they have not in
the last 4 years.2) Do we really spend a trillion dollars a year on
welfare?No, but it is universally believed by the Tea Party.Why can Tea Partiers (and killpack) not answer the questions correctly? Frum
says it is because "the Republicans have been fleeced, exploited, and lied
to by the conservative entertainment complex." Until conservatives reclaim
their message from the noisy entertainment complex, they are doomed to fail.
Coug in China - yeah I caught that when I reread the post. In fact, it will be
a while be for we have Chinese built or assembled cars on these shores.... so my
bad on that one as well. Good catch.
@killpack - you said;"The reason Mitt Romney lost the election
is because more people in this country believe in the socialist ideology of
bailouts, handouts, welfare, and all those other horrible things that are taking
us down the road of a worthless dollar and overwhelming indebtedness than
don't. Well, the people have spoken. Let them suffer."I
will give you this - you are mostly right why Romney lost... but its not
because the things you said are true, but that people like you have the above
attitudes. The absolute total and complete lack of respect - viewing those who
don't agree with you as inferior and socialist.... that is the reason
Romney lost. The idea of putting people into power that how their fellow
citizens is such low regard is frightening to most Americans. The idea that so
many people adhere to political radio and TV shock faux news as though it is
real.... that is much more frightening. The 47% comment and yours
above pretty much explains the election.
Meadow Lark Mark: Apparently we're just not as smart as you!
Romney lost ohio because he wasn't willing to support the automobile
industry in this country. He also lost because he couldn't run far enough
from Aikin or Mourdoch or Trump. He lost because he was restricted to appealing
to grumpy, old white guys. He lost because the country changed and he, and his
party, cannot. He lost because the reality the people around him created was
false. He lost because he didn't keep religion private. He lost because
America matured and his party did not. He lost because people didn't vote
It is quite simple. When a politician does something that people like, or
something that affects them positively, they are more likely to vote for them
rather than vote for someone that just talks and makes promises. Thank goodness
people in Ohio do not just blindly vote based on partisan bias, but rather on
real issues that affect them.
@UtahBlueDevil - Sorry to be the one to burst your bubble, but factory workers
in China are not unionized. Labor unions will NEVER be allowed under the
communist Chinese government. Doing so would lessen the government's
centralized contorl of power. As long as the communist party is in policy
maker, unions will not exist in China.
Wildcat said,"For the rest of you, keep on insulting the
majority of the nation as takers or socialists, it will assure the GOP of
defeats in elections to follow."Lol. So you think this election
wasn't economically motivated? You really think people voted for the guy
with the best personality? You really think Romney lost because he failed to
'sell is image' or 'message' or some other lame excuse like
that? Remember James Carville's words of wisdom. This is pure economics. We
spend one trillion per year on welfare. The federal government is far and away
the single largest employer in the land, and federal government salaries are
well above private sector ones. The biggest campaign donors get billions in
bailout money when they fail to competently manage their businesses. To me, it
is crystal clear why Mitt Romney lost this election. If the GOP keeps losing
elections for telling people what they don't want to hear, so be it. Things
will continue to get worse. I guess $16 trillion in debt wasn't bad enough.
Maybe $20 trillion will wake people up. Either way, I don't really care.
Don't forget his attempts to woo the votes of the trees. Those trees that
are the perfect height. Too bad they couldn't get to the polls (dang
You can analyze this to death. I think this election was between two
ideologies:"Free stuff" vs. "Free enterprise" (jobs)
pure and simple. The free stuff won. We will be able to tell shortly how that
mentality will play out when the jobs start disappearing that pay for the free
stuff. I guess they will just have to print more money to pay for the free stuff
that people want. Stop kicking Mitt Romney like a can around the block. He is a
good man and would have served our country well.Some questions that
aren't being addressed is how a county in Ohio had 108% of the registered
voters vote for BHO. In a county in Florida 140% of the registered voters voted
for BHO. Hmmm?! The math doesn't figure.....Conspiracy? Voter fraud? God have mercy on us; God bless America!
Romney's company made millions on the auto bailout. Being ever
inconsistent, he really loved the bailout.He also made millions selling
cigarettes in Russia after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
With no private capital available at the time, Romney's auto bailout scheme
would not work. The Government can take a bankruptcy through the Courts more
quickly; in as little as 40 days vs. many months or years for the Romney route.
In short the only viable avenue for success was the one taken by Obama, like it
or not. The Obama scheme saved millions of jobs. Please give credit where credit
where is due, and it is due to President Obama. If your job was on the line,
which route would you have preferred, Romney's or Obama's.
One look no further than the article in the last Newsweek Magazine, from
Republican David Stockman, regarding Mitt Romney. It was the most damaging
article that could ever be written against a person I voted for, Mitt Romney.
Ah, the excuses just keep on coming, don't they?
All I need to know about Romney's run for president is that he lost
Massachusetts, the state that knew him best.
Instead of trying to claim the bailout was his idea and running ads that scared
workers enough to the point where the CEOs had to come out and say the ads
weren't true, Romney should have admitted it was mistake, and that he would
always stand and support workers...but that might upset his donators and
base...he never showed the leadership to stand up to anybody.When
the story came out about the bullying incident when he was 18 about giving a
forced haircut (today, he could have been charged with assault), he could have
used it as a teachable moment by saying how deeply he regretted it and issuing a
statement concerning the dangers of bullying. His approach...I don't
remember it.He should have released his taxes early showing he
probably didn't pay any through loopholes, and stated that it was important
for people like himself to pay their fair share.For the rest of you,
keep on insulting the majority of the nation as takers or socialists, it will
assure the GOP of defeats in elections to follow. If you are serious, run a
reasonable candidate like Jon Huntsman Jr.
The criticism over "Let Detroit go bankrupt" article was unfair because
the points Romney discussed were pretty much what the Obama administration
did.Romney's problem was that he was unable to redefine how the
Obama camp were portraying him as a ruthless corporate baron. But that is how
the game is played I guess, and Obama was much better at it.
This morning I listed to a KSL news report that was making the point that Utah
voters "knew" the real Romney like most in the country didn't. And
that lack of understanding, they suggested, was the reason for Romney's
loss.Romney did not lose because of the Auto Bailout issue, nor Bain
Capital, Nor because he was a wealthy oligarch. He lost because he did not
firmly demonstrate core moral values and the intellectual and moral honesty that
any candidate for high office must show. It's political suicide to
reverse your prior positions an issues just when it is conveniently necessary to
gain political advantage. And, if part of your perceived political advantage is
moral superiority, you cannot be found to be lying and misrepresenting your
opponent's accomplishments and political views. When Romney's
disingenuous tactics were pointed out by the pundits, Romney's campaign
simply responded that they were not running a campaign for the "fact
checkers".Utah may not have seen (or cared about) Mr.
Romney's issue pandering and deception, but a majority of the rest of the
country did. And that is why he lost.
DN Subscriber - how do you explain this " This would have allowed the makers
to reorganize (including renegotiating union contracts) and come out stronger
than before. This would have been better, long term, for the workers, but less
good for the union bosses.:"1) in what way would the "union
bosses" benefit more from this... do you think they get a percentage or
something?2) How would having the pensions funds defunded of people
who have worked jobs 30 years or more been a good thing for them?The
Romney campaign as usual left huge holes in the details, such as how it thought
these reorganizations would have been funded, when there was no private equity
to fund these deals. The santa you are speaking of is this mythical private
money that would have come in. It didn't exist. If you prefer
to buy cars from "socialist" counties like China, Japan, Korea, and
Germany that all have unionize work forces to prove a point... and put Americans
out of work.... that if fine. You will be making a point, just not sure what it
will be.When did Americans helping Americans turn into a bad thing.
"Low information voters" are hard to persuade, when their small minds
are already made up. Throw in misinformation from their union bosses, and the
badly biased news media which were clearly in the tank for Obama, this is not
surprising.Yes, Romney opposed the bailouts. No, he did not want to
shut down auto makers. He wanted them to use the readily available legal method
prescribed for bankruptcy. This would have allowed the makers to reorganize
(including renegotiating union contracts) and come out stronger than before.
This would have been better, long term, for the workers, but less good for the
union bosses.As it was, the "Government Motors" bailout
thoroughly cheated many salaried workers out of their pension, and have wasted
billions of tax dollars keeping union bosses in charge. And, it has guaranteed
that millions of Americans will never again buy a GM or Chrysler product.Romney and his policy were right, but a campaign of lies, and the
"vote for Santa"mentality won the election. Our national economy and
security and our children's future lost.
The reason Mitt Romney lost the election is because more people in this country
believe in the socialist ideology of bailouts, handouts, welfare, and all those
other horrible things that are taking us down the road of a worthless dollar and
overwhelming indebtedness than don't. Well, the people have spoken. Let
I guess every man, woman, and child for themself. Well, that is hopeful.