If you were the boss in charge of your own company, who would you hire to work for you, Obama or Mit

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
known for destroying companies

It is funny that out of the 77 companies that were going into bankruptcy and/or just total failure that old Mitt and crew saved 70% of them and they are STILL successful companies today...30% failed no matter what they did, but it is an amazing percentage of success for such a huge risk.

If you want to call that "destroying companies" I'm not really sure what you mean...

Originally posted by Nite_wing

Originally posted by UnaChispa

Running the country for a profit would have dire consequences.

It's called a Balanced Budget. You know, like most families try to do.

Oh no! I've never heard of a balanced budget before!

You should teach the guys in Washinton how to do it.

Originally posted by UnaChispa


Ok, so now we are talking about a non-profit organization? My pick... Obama.

Hmm let's see Obama community organizer.. I don't know if that is non-profit or not... but what were his successes that he might put on a résumé?

Mitt...non-profit...takes winter Olympics from 300 million in the red to 100 million in the black over three years without taking a single dime as pay.

You want to bet once again on Obama's résumé? It didn't look very good in 2009 and still doesn't look good today, but hey some people just can't admit when they pick wrong and just keep doubling down.

Las Vegas loves that kind of attitude....

reply to post by CyberTruth


I dunno, but lets not find out. Lets put tax rates back to where they were 20 years ago, when we (the US) were still capable of (and actually accomplishing) great things.

Originally posted by UnaChispa

Originally posted by CyberTruth
reply to post by UnaChispa

 

Agreed CEO and President are not exactly the same but not completely different either. The Executive Office as you have mentioned is surely called Executive Office for a reason.

And what reason is that?

Ok I'm not totally sure but it is a fact that CEO stands for by the way - Chief Executive Officer. And our Commander in Chief is as you have said is in charge of the Executive Office. What may people do not understand is that running a large company with multiple employees is in of itself is like running a micro government as well

It equally amazes me that people think that 4 years is enough to completely clean up the mess Bush and his cronies left.

Anyways can someone tell me why so many republicans tout Romney as a great businessman? When I think about great businessmen the names Bill Gates and Steve Jobs come to my mind

You know, men who actually sold people a product and grew tbeir companies into multi billion dollar businesses.

reply to post by CyberTruth


Except the purpose of OUR government is to provide for the common defense, and to promote the general welfare. Neither one of those have anything to do with steadily increasing profit, unless of course you are FOR a never ending parade of phony rationalizations for more war.

Or if you are FOR UHC in the states we protect, at the cost of basic care for the people footing the bill.

Originally posted by Xtrozero

Originally posted by UnaChispa


Ok, so now we are talking about a non-profit organization? My pick... Obama.

Hmm let's see Obama community organizer.. I don't know if that is non-profit or not... but what were his successes that he might put on a résumé?

Mitt...non-profit...takes winter Olympics from 300 million in the red to 100 million in the black over three years without taking a single dime as pay.

You want to bet once again on Obama's résumé? It didn't look very good in 2009 and still doesn't look good today, but hey some people just can't admit when they pick wrong and just keep doubling down.

Las Vegas loves that kind of attitude....

Don't forget, we are talking about Obama the incumbent, not Obama the candidate.

I'm so sure Mitt did that all by himself too.
What a coincidence that Mitt's father was a famous politician too.

I didn't pick wrong. I voted McCain. What does that say?

I would probably hire neither since neither of them actually held a real job.....

Originally posted by UnaChispa

I didn't pick wrong. I voted McCain. What does that say?

I actually picked neither...didn't like McCain either...

reply to post by muse7

It equally amazes me that people think that 4 years is enough to completely clean up the mess Bush and his cronies left.

I'd be quite happy if Obama projected better economic conditions even 10 years out. However, the deficit is still running over a half trillion even that far out and the Department of Defense budget never does go down any dramatic degree. How can it though? Afghanistan is only one place we're fighting right now and even there, the days after Biden said in 100% absolute terms in the debate that we were going to to be out by 2014, the State Department was talking about it being longer. ....and on it goes.

The federal budget sure is shown to grow and grow and grow though, right on, every year out to 2022. I've seen the future...and it's Obama's own projections. His own numbers... That future sucks. I'll try door #2.

Originally posted by UnaChispa
Comparing the Executive office to a CEO position isn't a good match-up.

But to answer your question, I would hire Mitt. But if I had to choose a President out of the two, I would choose Obama.

Running the country for a profit would have dire consequences.

edit on 1-11-2012 by UnaChispa because: Typos

Running the country for a profit is the main objective of every single government on earth. Are you serious? Ever heard of the term GDP?

Any business owner with half a mind would pass on both of them.

It would depend on the job I am hiring for on which I would hire.

Does the job require them to get their hands dirty?
Or
Does the job require them to dirty others?

Neither. They both work for someone else behind the scenes and that someone else does not have the best interests of my company at heart. Hiring either of them would be like shooting myself in the head.

Originally posted by UnaChispa
Comparing the Executive office to a CEO position isn't a good match-up.

But to answer your question, I would hire Mitt. But if I had to choose a President out of the two, I would choose Obama.

Running the country for a profit would have dire consequences.

edit on 1-11-2012 by UnaChispa because: Typos

Yes, such as not being 16 trillion in debt. The horror ...

Neither one has worked a day in their lives so neither. I'd hire a man with rough hands, scars and wrinkles a man who has seen hard times. A man that had no choice but to make sacrifices.

Romney

There is a number of three letter government agencies that hire large numbers of Mormons for a reason.
They don't drink and become security risks. No vices to be blackmailed for
even area %! has a high number of Mormons working there.

as for Bain Capital

A companies main job is to make money for the investors even if it means taking companies that are no longer profitable and file bankruptcy.

Look at what money Obama has lost for his investors (taxpayers).
“Obama green-energy failure” list contains 23 bankrupt and 27 troubled green energy companies which were backed by the federal government.
Nevada Geothermal Power:
money.cnn.com...
money.cnn.com...
money.cnn.com...
www.rushlimbaugh.com...
blog.heritage.org...
money.cnn.com...

i will take Romney any day over Obama in protecting investors money be it taxpayers or investors money.

The problem with the Romney Unit at the moment is that he's been re-programmed so many times that his software is suffering from severe degredation. He's been either for or against everything recently. What are the odds that he's going to grind to a halt with smoke pouring out of his ears soon? Anyway - I'd choose Obama to be President.

reply to post by CyberTruth


No it's not. And it amazes me that the Romney supporters keep playing that card. Go back over the list of Presidents and find me a correlation between Presidential private sector business experience and an expanding domestic economy. You can't becuase it doesn't exist. Even the GOP's torch bearer, Reagan, was an actor. Bush was a private sector businessman. Where did that get us? The fact is --- as uncomfortable as it may be --- there is NO evidence of any kind that 'business experience' in the private sector translates to effective government. Totally different model.

I'm an instrument rated, private pilot. I have about 700hrs in single engine aircraft. I've flown from New England to the Carribean through the Bermuda Triangle 4 times, once at night during a full moon. I have proven myself a very competent pilot. So given that, I want you and all your family and friends to join me on a Hawaii vacation. I'm going to fly us all there in a 747. You OK with that?