By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Election time, who did you vote for?

 

Which presidential candidate will you vote for?

Barack Obama 356 55.89%
 
Mitt Romney 137 21.51%
 
Gary Johnson 38 5.97%
 
Jill Stein 15 2.35%
 
Somebody else 87 13.66%
 
Total:633
richardhutnik said:
gergroy said:
I have been undecided mostly because i dislike all the choices. However, I have decided I am going to be one of those people that votes against somebody instead of for them. So i have decided to vote for Mitt Romney.

My reasons mostly stem from the early portion of Obamas term when he had a super majority in congress. The economy was in the tank and instead of working on that, he pushed for healthcare that ultimately ends up being a large tax on small businesses. He also didnt bother with bipartisan efforts during this time either.

Basically, I dont like how obama handled his term, and im not a fan of Romney, but I think it I would rather see somebody else get a chance then another term of Obama.

A little caveat here, I live in Utah so my vote doesnt actually matter. Utah will go for romney by over 70%...

You do realize Obama had a super majority in congress less than 90 days, right?


I am aware that he had only about 5 months in the senate, yes.  two years in the house though.  During those 5 months, what did Obama do?  Affordable care act, one of the worst bills that could have possibly been signed in the middle of a recession.  Followed up the next year with Dodd-Frank (which while good intentioned, was poorly written and ended up hurting way more than helping).  

Like I said, I really did not like the way Obama handled the time when he had the supermajority.  



Around the Network

Gary Johnson still believes NDAA gives authority to the president to detain US citizens without trial. This has been debunked by fact checkers for quite some time, and I have read the actual legislation. It explicitly states that the intent is not to usurp existing laws. Dude's a moron.

As to Obama's supermajority. This 2-year myth has been debunked as well. Regardless, he was able to pass obamacare during this time despite 70% of americans disapproval. He could have spent this time actually helping us, instead of proposing a new tax.

GM bailed out only to have them open a plant in China.
Obama touted an administration of transparency and now we have the Libya fiasco.

Obama is a man of what he says, and what he does. Most would agree with what he says, most would disagree with what he does. Sorry, but this guy isn't falling for anymore BS. Wake the hell up.



gergroy said:
bluesinG said:
gergroy said:
bluesinG said:
gergroy said:
bluesinG said:
gergroy said:

nah, read the full transcript.  They are just taking one line out of context.  He has been consistent on it.  

Romney expressed his support for raising the minimum wage in February. Then conservative pundits freaked out. Then, in March, Romney said "there's probably no need to raise the minimum wage." To my knowledge, that's the last time he said anything about the minimum wage. I used google to search for "minimum wage" on Romney's campaign website, and couldn't find anything supporting an increase in the minimum wage.

If you can find a more recent quote from Romney expressing support for raising the minimum wage, please post it.

you should just watch the video of what Romney said.  You are taking a quote out of context.  When Romney said that, he was replying to Larry Kudlow when Kudlow said, "there is very little to no inflation now."  Romney's reply is that that probably means that we don't need to raise the minimum wage now.  It is consistent with his position.  

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/03/05/romney-no-need-to-raise-the-minimum-wage/

I would embed the video, but I can't figure it out.  It is at the bottome of the page in this article.   

I watched the video, and at no point did he say that he supports raising the minimum wage. First he pointed out that, as Governor, he vetoed a bill to raise the minimum wage. Then he said that "right now, there's probably no need to raise the minimum wage."

I just don't see where you get the idea that, right now, Romney supports raising the minimum wage. Again I ask: When was the last time that Romney said he supports raising the minimum wage? I don't think he's expressed any support for that since before this interview.

lol, take off the blinders buddy and watch the video again.

Seriously, I'm just asking you to quote me *one line* from that interview, or anything Romney has said since then, where he says that he supports raising the minimum wage right now. Just give me one quote.

Got anything?

Wow

Ok, starting out the interview

Larry Kudlow, "A lot of conservatives, led by the wall street journal editorial page, were horrified when you said you want to index the minimum wage for inflation, and they said look, thats just going to raise the minimum wage, thats going to raise the unemployment rate, especially for young people, especially for minorities, it sort of a little bit of unfinished business.  Why do you want to raise the minimum wage, why do you want to index it for inflation?"

Mitt Romney, "Well actually when I was governor, the legislature passed a law raising the minimum wage, I vetoed it.  I said look, the way to deal with minimum wage is this.  On a regular basis, in the proposal I said every two years we should look at the minimum wage.  We should look at whats happened to inflation, We should also look at the jobs level throughout the country, the unemployment rate, competetive rates in other states or in this instance nations.  So, certainly the level of inflation is something you should look at and whats the right way to keep america competitive.  

Larry Kudlow, "There hasn't been any inflation or at least very minimal so far."

Mitt Romney, "Yes, so that would tell you that right now there probably isn't a need to raise the minimum wage.  What I can tell you is had one indexed the wage back to say 1990, the minimum wage would be lower now than it actually is.  Democrats make big hay of this every few years, oh, we are going to raise the minimum wage and get a lot of hooplah for it.  Uh, frankly the right way to process this is to look at the minimum wage, look at how unemployment rates are, make adjustments as time goes on based upon our need to compete, the need of the job market, and of course what has happened to inflation.

 

You see, you seem to be ignoring huge parts of this conversation.  The question initially asked is why does romney support indexing minimum wage for inflation.  That is Romneys state position in this interview.  He then talks about how as governor he vetoed a bill that just wanted to raise the minimum wage without looking at outside factors like inflation and unemployment.  He doesn't support just increasing the minimum wage, he wants to set up a long term goal of gradual increases over the years to match inflation.  

When he says there probably isn't a need to raise minimum wage, to you see what he is responding to?  Do you see why that statement is being taken out of context?  Romney has had this position of raising the minimum wage to match inflation since he ran for senate in the 1990's, it hasn't changed.  He doesn't have any statements on minimum wage after this because this is actually the last time minimum wage has been brought up this election cycle.  

I am not ignoring any of the conversation. I've listened to it twice, and now I've read your transcript of it. I see that Romney explains why he *doesn't* support raising the minimum wage right now. But your original claim was that Romney has *consistently supported* raising the minimum wage: that he has supported raising the minimum wage in the past, and that he continues to support raising the minimum wage now.

Here's the key statement that I pointed out from the interview: "Right now there probably isn't a need to raise the minimum wage." So, again, please point out the key sentence from that interview where Romney says "I support raising the minimum wage right now."



bluesinG said:
gergroy said:
bluesinG said:
gergroy said:
bluesinG said

I watched the video, and at no point did he say that he supports raising the minimum wage. First he pointed out that, as Governor, he vetoed a bill to raise the minimum wage. Then he said that "right now, there's probably no need to raise the minimum wage."

I just don't see where you get the idea that, right now, Romney supports raising the minimum wage. Again I ask: When was the last time that Romney said he supports raising the minimum wage? I don't think he's expressed any support for that since before this interview.

lol, take off the blinders buddy and watch the video again.

Seriously, I'm just asking you to quote me *one line* from that interview, or anything Romney has said since then, where he says that he supports raising the minimum wage right now. Just give me one quote.

Got anything?

Wow

Ok, starting out the interview

Larry Kudlow, "A lot of conservatives, led by the wall street journal editorial page, were horrified when you said you want to index the minimum wage for inflation, and they said look, thats just going to raise the minimum wage, thats going to raise the unemployment rate, especially for young people, especially for minorities, it sort of a little bit of unfinished business.  Why do you want to raise the minimum wage, why do you want to index it for inflation?"

Mitt Romney, "Well actually when I was governor, the legislature passed a law raising the minimum wage, I vetoed it.  I said look, the way to deal with minimum wage is this.  On a regular basis, in the proposal I said every two years we should look at the minimum wage.  We should look at whats happened to inflation, We should also look at the jobs level throughout the country, the unemployment rate, competetive rates in other states or in this instance nations.  So, certainly the level of inflation is something you should look at and whats the right way to keep america competitive.  

Larry Kudlow, "There hasn't been any inflation or at least very minimal so far."

Mitt Romney, "Yes, so that would tell you that right now there probably isn't a need to raise the minimum wage.  What I can tell you is had one indexed the wage back to say 1990, the minimum wage would be lower now than it actually is.  Democrats make big hay of this every few years, oh, we are going to raise the minimum wage and get a lot of hooplah for it.  Uh, frankly the right way to process this is to look at the minimum wage, look at how unemployment rates are, make adjustments as time goes on based upon our need to compete, the need of the job market, and of course what has happened to inflation.

 

You see, you seem to be ignoring huge parts of this conversation.  The question initially asked is why does romney support indexing minimum wage for inflation.  That is Romneys state position in this interview.  He then talks about how as governor he vetoed a bill that just wanted to raise the minimum wage without looking at outside factors like inflation and unemployment.  He doesn't support just increasing the minimum wage, he wants to set up a long term goal of gradual increases over the years to match inflation.  

When he says there probably isn't a need to raise minimum wage, to you see what he is responding to?  Do you see why that statement is being taken out of context?  Romney has had this position of raising the minimum wage to match inflation since he ran for senate in the 1990's, it hasn't changed.  He doesn't have any statements on minimum wage after this because this is actually the last time minimum wage has been brought up this election cycle.  

I am not ignoring any of the conversation. I've listened to it twice, and now I've read your transcript of it. I see that Romney explains why he *doesn't* support raising the minimum wage right now. But your original claim was that Romney has *consistently supported* raising the minimum wage: that he has supported raising the minimum wage in the past, and that he continues to support raising the minimum wage now.

Here's the key statement that I pointed out from the interview: "Right now there probably isn't a need to raise the minimum wage." So, again, please point out the key sentence from that interview where Romney says "I support raising the minimum wage right now."

No, my original claim was that romney consistently supported raising the minimum wage to match inflation.  As in change minimum wage to change every year based off of inflation.

you evidently didnt read my original statement very well.



gergroy said:
bluesinG said:
gergroy said:
bluesinG said:
gergroy said:
bluesinG said

I watched the video, and at no point did he say that he supports raising the minimum wage. First he pointed out that, as Governor, he vetoed a bill to raise the minimum wage. Then he said that "right now, there's probably no need to raise the minimum wage."

I just don't see where you get the idea that, right now, Romney supports raising the minimum wage. Again I ask: When was the last time that Romney said he supports raising the minimum wage? I don't think he's expressed any support for that since before this interview.

lol, take off the blinders buddy and watch the video again.

Seriously, I'm just asking you to quote me *one line* from that interview, or anything Romney has said since then, where he says that he supports raising the minimum wage right now. Just give me one quote.

Got anything?

Wow

Ok, starting out the interview

Larry Kudlow, "A lot of conservatives, led by the wall street journal editorial page, were horrified when you said you want to index the minimum wage for inflation, and they said look, thats just going to raise the minimum wage, thats going to raise the unemployment rate, especially for young people, especially for minorities, it sort of a little bit of unfinished business.  Why do you want to raise the minimum wage, why do you want to index it for inflation?"

Mitt Romney, "Well actually when I was governor, the legislature passed a law raising the minimum wage, I vetoed it.  I said look, the way to deal with minimum wage is this.  On a regular basis, in the proposal I said every two years we should look at the minimum wage.  We should look at whats happened to inflation, We should also look at the jobs level throughout the country, the unemployment rate, competetive rates in other states or in this instance nations.  So, certainly the level of inflation is something you should look at and whats the right way to keep america competitive.  

Larry Kudlow, "There hasn't been any inflation or at least very minimal so far."

Mitt Romney, "Yes, so that would tell you that right now there probably isn't a need to raise the minimum wage.  What I can tell you is had one indexed the wage back to say 1990, the minimum wage would be lower now than it actually is.  Democrats make big hay of this every few years, oh, we are going to raise the minimum wage and get a lot of hooplah for it.  Uh, frankly the right way to process this is to look at the minimum wage, look at how unemployment rates are, make adjustments as time goes on based upon our need to compete, the need of the job market, and of course what has happened to inflation.

 

You see, you seem to be ignoring huge parts of this conversation.  The question initially asked is why does romney support indexing minimum wage for inflation.  That is Romneys state position in this interview.  He then talks about how as governor he vetoed a bill that just wanted to raise the minimum wage without looking at outside factors like inflation and unemployment.  He doesn't support just increasing the minimum wage, he wants to set up a long term goal of gradual increases over the years to match inflation.  

When he says there probably isn't a need to raise minimum wage, to you see what he is responding to?  Do you see why that statement is being taken out of context?  Romney has had this position of raising the minimum wage to match inflation since he ran for senate in the 1990's, it hasn't changed.  He doesn't have any statements on minimum wage after this because this is actually the last time minimum wage has been brought up this election cycle.  

I am not ignoring any of the conversation. I've listened to it twice, and now I've read your transcript of it. I see that Romney explains why he *doesn't* support raising the minimum wage right now. But your original claim was that Romney has *consistently supported* raising the minimum wage: that he has supported raising the minimum wage in the past, and that he continues to support raising the minimum wage now.

Here's the key statement that I pointed out from the interview: "Right now there probably isn't a need to raise the minimum wage." So, again, please point out the key sentence from that interview where Romney says "I support raising the minimum wage right now."

No, my original claim was that romney consistently supported raising the minimum wage to match inflation.  As in change minimum wage to change every year based off of inflation.

you evidently didnt read my original statement very well.

Ok, in that case the US inflation rate was 3.2% last year, and is averaging about 2% this year. So if Romney were being consistent, he would have said that, right now, he supports a 2 or 3% increase in the minimum wage--from $7.25 to $7.45 per hour. Or, since the current minimum wage was set in 2009, he could have said that supported increasing it to $7.72, to account for inflation since 2009. Instead, he said "Right now there probably isn't a need to raise the minimum wage."

That isn't being consistent.

Source: http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/historical-inflation-rates/



Around the Network
bluesinG said:
gergroy said:
bluesinG said:
gergroy said:

Wow

Ok, starting out the interview

Larry Kudlow, "A lot of conservatives, led by the wall street journal editorial page, were horrified when you said you want to index the minimum wage for inflation, and they said look, thats just going to raise the minimum wage, thats going to raise the unemployment rate, especially for young people, especially for minorities, it sort of a little bit of unfinished business.  Why do you want to raise the minimum wage, why do you want to index it for inflation?"

Mitt Romney, "Well actually when I was governor, the legislature passed a law raising the minimum wage, I vetoed it.  I said look, the way to deal with minimum wage is this.  On a regular basis, in the proposal I said every two years we should look at the minimum wage.  We should look at whats happened to inflation, We should also look at the jobs level throughout the country, the unemployment rate, competetive rates in other states or in this instance nations.  So, certainly the level of inflation is something you should look at and whats the right way to keep america competitive.  

Larry Kudlow, "There hasn't been any inflation or at least very minimal so far."

Mitt Romney, "Yes, so that would tell you that right now there probably isn't a need to raise the minimum wage.  What I can tell you is had one indexed the wage back to say 1990, the minimum wage would be lower now than it actually is.  Democrats make big hay of this every few years, oh, we are going to raise the minimum wage and get a lot of hooplah for it.  Uh, frankly the right way to process this is to look at the minimum wage, look at how unemployment rates are, make adjustments as time goes on based upon our need to compete, the need of the job market, and of course what has happened to inflation.

 

You see, you seem to be ignoring huge parts of this conversation.  The question initially asked is why does romney support indexing minimum wage for inflation.  That is Romneys state position in this interview.  He then talks about how as governor he vetoed a bill that just wanted to raise the minimum wage without looking at outside factors like inflation and unemployment.  He doesn't support just increasing the minimum wage, he wants to set up a long term goal of gradual increases over the years to match inflation.  

When he says there probably isn't a need to raise minimum wage, to you see what he is responding to?  Do you see why that statement is being taken out of context?  Romney has had this position of raising the minimum wage to match inflation since he ran for senate in the 1990's, it hasn't changed.  He doesn't have any statements on minimum wage after this because this is actually the last time minimum wage has been brought up this election cycle.  

I am not ignoring any of the conversation. I've listened to it twice, and now I've read your transcript of it. I see that Romney explains why he *doesn't* support raising the minimum wage right now. But your original claim was that Romney has *consistently supported* raising the minimum wage: that he has supported raising the minimum wage in the past, and that he continues to support raising the minimum wage now.

Here's the key statement that I pointed out from the interview: "Right now there probably isn't a need to raise the minimum wage." So, again, please point out the key sentence from that interview where Romney says "I support raising the minimum wage right now."

No, my original claim was that romney consistently supported raising the minimum wage to match inflation.  As in change minimum wage to change every year based off of inflation.

you evidently didnt read my original statement very well.

Ok, in that case the US inflation rate was 3.2% last year, and is averaging about 2% this year. So if Romney were being consistent, he would have said that, right now, he supports a 2 or 3% increase in the minimum wage--from $7.25 to $7.45 per hour. Or, since the current minimum wage was set in 2009, he could have said that supported increasing it to $7.72, to account for inflation since 2009. Instead, he said "Right now there probably isn't a need to raise the minimum wage."

That isn't being consistent.

Source: http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/historical-inflation-rates/

It's consistent when somebody says to you, but there is no inflation, or at least it is very minimal, and you say that PROBABLY means minimum wage doesn't need to increased.  You see, you are falling victim to politicanese.  The language politicians use to express opinions that conflict with their base.  What romney is doing in this whole interview, is just qualifying his position, but not abandoning it.

Here is an article from the NYtimes that is pretty good about explaining romney motives and ideology on the matter.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/28/us/politics/mitt-romney-pulled-in-2-directions-over-economy.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0



gergroy said:
the2real4mafol said:
gergroy said:
TheShape31 said:
Jill Stein!

By the way, the debates aren't completely over. Next Tuesday on freeandequal.org will be the second debate between the 3rd party candidates. Yesterday was the first, which featured the top 4 (watch the whole things here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDqkenIayAI). There's a runoff vote happening on the website to narrow it down to 2 candidates for next week. Judging by the audience's reactions, it'll be Jill Stein and Gary Johnson.

The top 2 candidates are a complete joke, in my opinion. Nothing will change with either of them in office.


The top 2 may be a joke, but one of them will be president.  Voting for one of this years 3rd parties is essentially abstaining as none of them even have a remote chance of even taking one state.  

I respect your choice of voting 3rd party, but dont pretend they actually have a chance.

I know people always like to say voting 3rd party is a waste of time, but what's worse voting between 2 people who don't represent your political beliefs or "wasting" your vote for someone who wants real change? If people who didn't want democrats or republicans elected, all voted for a 3rd party. I'm sure it would eventually make a dent in the top 2 parties. People just need to stop thinking it's a waste to vote for a 3rd party now. This is a democracy afterall, people can vote for anyone, so they should


It is a waste of a vote though.  Is a vote for a 3rd part going to change who gets elected? No, it wont.  You are essentially not voting by voting 3rd party, at which point, how is it different from staying home?  

Also, the US is a republic, not a democracy.

If people are willing to "waste" their vote like i would, change will come in it's own time.

Finally, the USA is democratic because it holds regular elections, i though that was common knowledge



Xbox One, PS4 and Switch (+ Many Retro Consoles)

'When the people are being beaten with a stick, they are not much happier if it is called the people's stick'- Mikhail Bakunin

Prediction: Switch will sell better than Wii U Lifetime Sales by Jan 1st 2018

the2real4mafol said:
gergroy said:
the2real4mafol said:
gergroy said:
TheShape31 said:
Jill Stein!

By the way, the debates aren't completely over. Next Tuesday on freeandequal.org will be the second debate between the 3rd party candidates. Yesterday was the first, which featured the top 4 (watch the whole things here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDqkenIayAI). There's a runoff vote happening on the website to narrow it down to 2 candidates for next week. Judging by the audience's reactions, it'll be Jill Stein and Gary Johnson.

The top 2 candidates are a complete joke, in my opinion. Nothing will change with either of them in office.


The top 2 may be a joke, but one of them will be president.  Voting for one of this years 3rd parties is essentially abstaining as none of them even have a remote chance of even taking one state.  

I respect your choice of voting 3rd party, but dont pretend they actually have a chance.

I know people always like to say voting 3rd party is a waste of time, but what's worse voting between 2 people who don't represent your political beliefs or "wasting" your vote for someone who wants real change? If people who didn't want democrats or republicans elected, all voted for a 3rd party. I'm sure it would eventually make a dent in the top 2 parties. People just need to stop thinking it's a waste to vote for a 3rd party now. This is a democracy afterall, people can vote for anyone, so they should


It is a waste of a vote though.  Is a vote for a 3rd part going to change who gets elected? No, it wont.  You are essentially not voting by voting 3rd party, at which point, how is it different from staying home?  

Also, the US is a republic, not a democracy.

If people are willing to "waste" their vote like i would, change will come in it's own time.

Finally, the USA is democratic because it holds regular elections, i though that was common knowledge

You are confusing terms, that is not what democratic means.  There is a big difference between a democracy and a republic, you should goggle it.  The US is a republic.



gergroy said:
bluesinG said:
gergroy said:
bluesinG said:
gergroy said:

Wow

Ok, starting out the interview

Larry Kudlow, "A lot of conservatives, led by the wall street journal editorial page, were horrified when you said you want to index the minimum wage for inflation, and they said look, thats just going to raise the minimum wage, thats going to raise the unemployment rate, especially for young people, especially for minorities, it sort of a little bit of unfinished business.  Why do you want to raise the minimum wage, why do you want to index it for inflation?"

Mitt Romney, "Well actually when I was governor, the legislature passed a law raising the minimum wage, I vetoed it.  I said look, the way to deal with minimum wage is this.  On a regular basis, in the proposal I said every two years we should look at the minimum wage.  We should look at whats happened to inflation, We should also look at the jobs level throughout the country, the unemployment rate, competetive rates in other states or in this instance nations.  So, certainly the level of inflation is something you should look at and whats the right way to keep america competitive.  

Larry Kudlow, "There hasn't been any inflation or at least very minimal so far."

Mitt Romney, "Yes, so that would tell you that right now there probably isn't a need to raise the minimum wage.  What I can tell you is had one indexed the wage back to say 1990, the minimum wage would be lower now than it actually is.  Democrats make big hay of this every few years, oh, we are going to raise the minimum wage and get a lot of hooplah for it.  Uh, frankly the right way to process this is to look at the minimum wage, look at how unemployment rates are, make adjustments as time goes on based upon our need to compete, the need of the job market, and of course what has happened to inflation.

 

You see, you seem to be ignoring huge parts of this conversation.  The question initially asked is why does romney support indexing minimum wage for inflation.  That is Romneys state position in this interview.  He then talks about how as governor he vetoed a bill that just wanted to raise the minimum wage without looking at outside factors like inflation and unemployment.  He doesn't support just increasing the minimum wage, he wants to set up a long term goal of gradual increases over the years to match inflation.  

When he says there probably isn't a need to raise minimum wage, to you see what he is responding to?  Do you see why that statement is being taken out of context?  Romney has had this position of raising the minimum wage to match inflation since he ran for senate in the 1990's, it hasn't changed.  He doesn't have any statements on minimum wage after this because this is actually the last time minimum wage has been brought up this election cycle.  

I am not ignoring any of the conversation. I've listened to it twice, and now I've read your transcript of it. I see that Romney explains why he *doesn't* support raising the minimum wage right now. But your original claim was that Romney has *consistently supported* raising the minimum wage: that he has supported raising the minimum wage in the past, and that he continues to support raising the minimum wage now.

Here's the key statement that I pointed out from the interview: "Right now there probably isn't a need to raise the minimum wage." So, again, please point out the key sentence from that interview where Romney says "I support raising the minimum wage right now."

No, my original claim was that romney consistently supported raising the minimum wage to match inflation.  As in change minimum wage to change every year based off of inflation.

you evidently didnt read my original statement very well.

Ok, in that case the US inflation rate was 3.2% last year, and is averaging about 2% this year. So if Romney were being consistent, he would have said that, right now, he supports a 2 or 3% increase in the minimum wage--from $7.25 to $7.45 per hour. Or, since the current minimum wage was set in 2009, he could have said that supported increasing it to $7.72, to account for inflation since 2009. Instead, he said "Right now there probably isn't a need to raise the minimum wage."

That isn't being consistent.

Source: http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/historical-inflation-rates/

It's consistent when somebody says to you, but there is no inflation, or at least it is very minimal, and you say that PROBABLY means minimum wage doesn't need to increased.  You see, you are falling victim to politicanese.  The language politicians use to express opinions that conflict with their base.  What romney is doing in this whole interview, is just qualifying his position, but not abandoning it.

Here is an article from the NYtimes that is pretty good about explaining romney motives and ideology on the matter.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/28/us/politics/mitt-romney-pulled-in-2-directions-over-economy.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Here the key section of that article:

When he endorsed inflation indexing during his 2002 campaign for governor, he said it would let businesses plan better than they could with intermittent minimum wage increases at the whim of politicians. “I do not believe that indexing the minimum wage will cost us jobs,” he said. “I believe it will help us to retain jobs.”

He said that again in 2008, during his first presidential campaign, and in January while campaigning in New Hampshire.

But under fire from conservatives, he modified his position, saying that automatic increases in the minimum wage should be suspended in some circumstances, like periods of high unemployment.

So Romney has "modified" his position. You think that modification isn't big enough to say he's been inconsistent. I think it is. I guess we'll have to leave it at that.

One other note: I agree with you, and with the Mitt Romney of 2002-2011, that indexing the minimum wage to inflation is a good idea. And I bet Obama would agree, too.



bluesinG said:
gergroy said:
bluesinG said:
gergroy said:

No, my original claim was that romney consistently supported raising the minimum wage to match inflation.  As in change minimum wage to change every year based off of inflation.

you evidently didnt read my original statement very well.

Ok, in that case the US inflation rate was 3.2% last year, and is averaging about 2% this year. So if Romney were being consistent, he would have said that, right now, he supports a 2 or 3% increase in the minimum wage--from $7.25 to $7.45 per hour. Or, since the current minimum wage was set in 2009, he could have said that supported increasing it to $7.72, to account for inflation since 2009. Instead, he said "Right now there probably isn't a need to raise the minimum wage."

That isn't being consistent.

Source: http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/historical-inflation-rates/

It's consistent when somebody says to you, but there is no inflation, or at least it is very minimal, and you say that PROBABLY means minimum wage doesn't need to increased.  You see, you are falling victim to politicanese.  The language politicians use to express opinions that conflict with their base.  What romney is doing in this whole interview, is just qualifying his position, but not abandoning it.

Here is an article from the NYtimes that is pretty good about explaining romney motives and ideology on the matter.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/28/us/politics/mitt-romney-pulled-in-2-directions-over-economy.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Here the key section of that article:

When he endorsed inflation indexing during his 2002 campaign for governor, he said it would let businesses plan better than they could with intermittent minimum wage increases at the whim of politicians. “I do not believe that indexing the minimum wage will cost us jobs,” he said. “I believe it will help us to retain jobs.”

He said that again in 2008, during his first presidential campaign, and in January while campaigning in New Hampshire.

But under fire from conservatives, he modified his position, saying that automatic increases in the minimum wage should be suspended in some circumstances, like periods of high unemployment.

So Romney has "modified" his position. You think that modification isn't big enough to say he's been inconsistent. I think it is. I guess we'll have to leave it at that.

One other note: I agree with you, and with the Mitt Romney of 2002-2011, that indexing the minimum wage to inflation is a good idea. And I bet Obama would agree, too.

Obama probably would, but like romney said in the video, democrats like to increase it every few years and make a big "hooplah" out of it. :) As far as i know, Obama has just recomended raising the wage to 9.50.  I like romneys plan better, because, like he said, it gives businesses the ability to plan better because they can better budget in wages and workers will get consistent inflation raises every year.

As far as his modification, yeah we can agree to disagree, because he still supports indexing the minimum wage.