Mitt Romney would make a bad president.

The points I would like to make in this round are the following: 1) Romney is driven by money. His business past means that he will push for de-regulation and more freedom for the banks (who got us in this mess. ) 2) Romney has no idea about how to play foreign policy. If he is elected (god forbid), the U. S's international credibility will be diminished and more importantly the frostiness that will corrode relationships between countries like Russia and Israel. My first point regards Mitt Romney and money. I will address his economic policies and also his own personal economic past. His website has a great deal of material on his tax policies and plans [1], but how can any of it even be taken the slightest bit seriously when the man fails to release his own tax returns from his career as a business man? It is obvious that he has something to hide as this has become a real problem for Romney. It was exactly the thing that Obama needed for his, 'Just another venture-capitalist,' portrayal of Romney which is beginning to look more and more accurate. If his tax returns were perfectly legitimate and there was nothing in there which could be politically damaging, he would have released them by now. This means we can be reasonably sure that he has had a dodgy financial history. He is from the very organisations and individuals who threaten the economy today. His economic ideology consists of bizarre policies which help the large American businesses and wealthy individuals and not the American people. He pushes for de-regulation which means these organisations can take even bigger risks and behave even more irresponsibly as there is no one telling them what they can and can't do. There is quite literally no rule book. The Governments fee for bailing them out just gets bigger and bigger and there is nothing they can do, as the way the U. S economy is set up means that it simply cannot afford to let the banks fail. The problem is it can't afford to bail them out either. The problem with the economic system is another debate, but the point is relevant as Romney strides for freedom for all of these banks and private firms. This means that they can continue to behave like rich children in a sweet shop because Daddy's always going to be there to bail them out (and doesn't have the power to restrict the child's budget). The last Government bailout reached $700 billion [2] and if Romney wins and he continues to kiss all the banker's backsides then bailout debt will continue to grow and grow. This will mean that all Romney's policies about curbing federal spending will be pointless as they will be dwarfed by the hundreds of billions they will have to pay to bail out Wall Street. His record on his foreign policy is even worse than his economic one. His 'gaffe trip,' proved that he has no idea of how to handle relations. He has so far managed to annoy Russia, China, Gaza and he hasn't even been elected yet. Let's start with China. His website proudly trumpets, 'Mitt Romney will implement a strategy that makes the path of regional hegemony for China far more costly than the alternative path of becoming a responsible partner in the international system. ' [3] First of all, it's simply not possible. Romney still lives in a world in which America is mighty and powerful and everyone else relies and fears it. It just doesn't work like that anymore. China's economic power surpasses America's easily and there is no way that Romney will be able to implement any sort of legislation which will, 'Make the path of regional hegemony for China far more costly than the alternative path of becoming a responsible partner in the international system. ' Secondly, China is massively important to American trade and the economy in general. Starting off your campaign by saying you are going to force it to become more responsible partner in the international system and criticizing it's human rights record, probably isn't the best start. However bad the Chinese regime is, the way to deal with it is not to launch scathing attacks on it but to negotiate and gently ease it into a more modern model. This is what Obama has done, and it has proven largely successful. The same analysis applies to Russia and so does not require any further explaining. His 'gaffe,' in Israel was even worse and perhaps more shocking. Romney said that the reason Palestine was less well off than Israel was because of it's culture. "Culture makes all the difference. And as I come here (Jerusalem) and I look out over this city and consider the accomplishments of the people of this nation, I recognize the power of at least culture and a few other things. One, I recognize the hand of providence in selecting this place. .. There's also something very unusual about the people of this place. [In Start-Up Nation, Dan Senor] described why it is Israel is the leading nation for start-ups in the world. And why businesses one after the other tend to start up in this place. And he goes through some of the cultural elements that have led Israel to become a nation that has begun so many businesses and so many enterprises and that is becomes so successful. " If he makes similar speeches as President, I dread to think what the U. S's reputation will look like. In this round I have shown why two vitally important aspects of his campaign are flawed and bound to fail. In the next round I will be arguing similar cases but on healthcare and also on the military. I look forward to reading my opponents case. [1] . http://www.mittromney.com... [2] . http://useconomy.about.com... [3] . http://www.mittromney.com...