Originally Posted by patteeu
I already did. One of the examples I used was his tax policy philosophy. He accepts the wisdom shared by conservatives with respect to the benefit of a lower-rate, broader-base tax being good for economic growth, but he's not so ideological that he's calling for a flat tax. Even if he's tinkered with the details of his taxation proposals over the past 5 years to account for criticisms from both the right and left or to account for new economic conditions, he's remained consistent on his view that lower rates and a broader base are what the economy needs.
All campaign, he endorsed the Paul Ryan plan, so much so that he selected the dude to be his running mate. That's classic conservative movement material. Period.
They moderated the Ryan plan slightly a week after Ryan was on board. But in this past debate, he kept it an ocean's distance away. This is actual new information.
Once again, you defer to Republicans and ascribe beautiful intentions to everything they do. You paint Democrats as crass political creatures who put poll numbers ahead of reality.
And this is why, to you, Obama is simultaneously a poll-watcher and a usurper of the American people's will. Somehow.
While at the same time, Romney to you is a principled conservative who's simultaneously run a consistent platform that hasn't changed in any significant way, even though you admit it has but it was with pure intentions in mind.
You're exposed. This is ridiculous.
You want to argue Romney kicked ass two nights ago? No one here will argue with you.
But if you want to overreach and claim Romney did so cleanly, without running from his record and dramatically changing his positions that he's advanced for the past four years?
That's a disingenuous bridge too far. Which is not new behavior for you. It's just slightly more amusing this time around.