Support NeoGAF

[NullPointer]

Which is why I want to watch the Republican party go down in flames. Not to remove opposition, but to renew it.

 

[TacticalFox88]

Philosophical Question: Would you be for or against a ban on formal political parties in the US?

Rise of political parties is an inevitability. We should try to have parties that aren't spineless or fearmongering assholes who's only agenda is to fuck the country over because even after three years they still bitter they lost to a minority on a national stage.

 

[Invisible_Insane]

Philosophical Question: Would you be for or against a ban on formal political parties in the US?

this is just a dumb question.

this grad school thing is rough.

 

[FyreWulff]

Philosophical Question: Would you be for or against a ban on formal political parties in the US?

'

As Tactical pointed out, they'd still form, they just wouldn't be formally recognized anymore.

Which is why I want to watch the Republican party go down in flames. Not to remove opposition, but to renew it.

The question is how do we reboot the damn party. We vote out fundie Republicans and they interpret this as "WE LOST BECAUSE WE WEREN'T HARDCORE ENOUGH" and put an even crazier dude up to the stage.

Rise of political parties is an inevitability. We should try to have parties that aren't spineless or fearmongering assholes who's only agenda is to fuck the country over because even after three years they still bitter they lost to a minority on a national stage.

This, pretty much. The current GOP basically thinks in 4 year increments. They want to get rid of Nebraska's split electoral vote, because they're still hurt that Obama split the vote last time. So they want a short term "feel good" where they prevent the OTHER GUY from getting a couple of votes, and what they don't realize is this action will actually result in Nebraska going entirely to the Democrat column in presidential elections once Omaha's population is big enough to determine the electoral vote. Under our current system it'll become 3-2 Dem/Pub (Omaha vs rest of the State) and if they got their change all 5 would go to the Dems in a decade or two.

 

[makingmusic476]

Once again, get rid of FPTP.

Also, I was at work today and two coworkers were talking about how they got refund checks from their health insurance providers. I was like "Oh yeah, that's part of the Affordable Care Act, 85%, rebates, yadda yadda yadda."

One of them goes, "Finally, something that gives a little back. My premiums have gone up so many times because of that damn Obamacare."

I was thinking "But... Affordable Care Act... is... Obamacare... affordable... rebates... AHHH" but didn't say anything.

 

[Vyroxis]

Under our current system it'll become 3-2 Dem/Pub (Omaha vs rest of the State) and if they got their change all 5 would go to the Dems in a decade or two.

This is why ALL states should have their vote split between parties. It always comes down to the big cities vs. rural areas where the demographics are pretty much night and day. The winner take all method just means that upwards of 49% of the people voting for a candidate could just as well have not voted for them at all.

 

[NullPointer]

The question is how do we reboot the damn party. We vote out fundie Republicans and they interpret this as "WE LOST BECAUSE WE WEREN'T HARDCORE ENOUGH" and put an even crazier dude up to the stage.

Beats me. I'm just preparing for the inevitable Great Internet crash to reset us back to feral hunter gatherers where we can start again.

 

[Wilsongt]

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/conservatives-supreme-court-anger-betrayal-song-211749932.html

GOP still butthurt over Roberts.

 

[Flying_Phoenix]

Once again, get rid of FPTP.

What would it take to do this?

 

[pigeon]

This is why ALL states should have their vote split between parties. It always comes down to the big cities vs. rural areas where the demographics are pretty much night and day. The winner take all method just means that upwards of 49% of the people voting for a candidate could just as well have not voted for them at all.

If we're going to reform the electoral college, we should just go to popular vote. I know lots of people who don't bother to vote because we live in a state that's not in play and Californians have less Congressional representative than any other state. (Although the fact that D.C. doesn't even count is another thing that we should probably fix.)

The question is how do we reboot the damn party. We vote out fundie Republicans and they interpret this as "WE LOST BECAUSE WE WEREN'T HARDCORE ENOUGH" and put an even crazier dude up to the stage.

I sympathize -- the Democrats spent fifteen years in the wilderness before they came up with Bill Clinton. Change will come!

 

[brianmcdoogle]

Do any of your read any newspaper columnists? If so, who?

 

[Averon]

If/when Romney loses, the GOP will just go further right. They'll conclude that Romney was too liberal/nice/not conservative enough.

 

[PhoenixDark]

If/when Romney loses, the GOP will just go further right. They'll conclude that Romney was too liberal/nice/not conservative enough.

No, they'll realize the error of their ways, apologize to Obama, and help him pass infrastructure and immigration bills. duh

 

[GaimeGuy]

What would it take to do this?

legislation on a state by state level would do it, or a constitutional amendment at the federal level, or an inter-state

The constitution says there has to be an electoral college, but it leaves it up to each state to determine how it goes about appointing its Electors (and its congresspersons, for that matter).

Aside from Nebraska and Maine, every state does a winner take all system right now. (Maine and Nebraska use the "Congressional District Method", where the winner within each congressional district by popular vote gets 1 Elector from that district, and selecting the remaining two electors by the statewide popular vote).

Any state can change its systems, or enter an agreement with any other number of states to coordinate their efforts (A treaty, essentially).

For instance, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida could agree to coordinate an instant runoff voting model for the electoral college.

They may even be able to do it for their congresspersons. (They certainly can incorporate an instant runoff model for their congresspersons within the state)

 

[Sirpopopop]

The problem is far greater than the Republican Party's supporters just thinking going further right is the answer.

They are not even asking the same questions that most people are asking. There is no agreement on what the problems are that are facing society. There isn't even agreement on the principle issues that we should be concerned with resolving today.

To boil down their platform to one question, it would be this one:

"How can we get most of America to turn back to Christianity?"

Anyone who doesn't care about the answer to that question can leave the Party.

 

[empty vessel]

What would it take to do this?

Like anything else, an organized popular movement. People have to do political work, and that doesn't mean going to a voting booth every two or four years. It means forming and being a part of organizations that do actions.

 

[Flying_Phoenix]

Like anything else, an organized popular movement. People have to do political work, and that doesn't mean going to a voting booth every two or four years. It means forming and being a part of organizations that do actions.

And how do I, a lone individual, do that?

 

[Sirpopopop]

And how do I, a lone individual, do that?

Find other like minded people.

 

[PantherLotus]

Do any of your read any newspaper columnists? If so, who?

Eh...they're not all, or even mostly, newspaper guys. Mostly magazine guys now blogging:

Ezra Klein
Paul Krugman
Jonathan Chait
Andrew Sullivan
Josh Marshall
Matt Taibbi
Jonathan Cohn
Tim Noah
Noam Sheiber
Nate Silver

 

[pigeon]

The "maybe Romney didn't pay any taxes at all in 2009" trial balloon in the Obama ad earlier is now being floated at a couple of left-wing blogs.

Mother Jones: http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/07/mystery-mitt-romneys-lame-defense-his-bain-years
Joshua Green at Bloomberg: http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-07-17/whats-romney-hiding-in-his-tax-returns
Start Making Sense: http://danshaviro.blogspot.com/2012/07/why-wont-romney-release-his-2009-tax.html

Could just be hysteria. Or it could be CHICAGO STYLE seed-sowing.

 

[makingmusic476]

Find other like minded people.

Well, there are many like-minded people here.

I wonder what we could do together, that could possibly enable us to be more proactive locally.

The general attitude I get from those to whom I've explained the problem with FPTP is "but that's probably something that'll never change, so meh." If we could demonstrate that it's something that could change, it'd be easier to get people interested and on board to make change.

 

[RDreamer]

The "maybe Romney didn't pay any taxes at all in 2009" trial balloon in the Obama ad earlier is now being floated at a couple of left-wing blogs.

Mother Jones: http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/07/mystery-mitt-romneys-lame-defense-his-bain-years
Joshua Green at Bloomberg: http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-07-17/whats-romney-hiding-in-his-tax-returns
Start Making Sense: http://danshaviro.blogspot.com/2012/07/why-wont-romney-release-his-2009-tax.html

Could just be hysteria. Or it could be CHICAGO STYLE seed-sowing.

Kind of silly to try and go for the gold and claim he didn't pay any at all. I think that's a long shot that could make everyone look stupid as hell if he releases them and he does pay some. Even if he pays very very little if you go around saying he pays NONE, then you're getting the wrong surprise if he ever does release. You want to insinuate bad, but leave enough room that you can't be called out on it. Let people's imaginations do the dirty work for the most part.

Personally, I think he just has a really really low rate. I read an article today that a few experts looked at what was there and said it's not likely he paid zero. He'd really have to work to get to that.

 

[GhaleonEB]

For much of the Senate's history, the majority was respected even with the filibuster. The permanent supermajority is a recent phenomenon. But now that the dam has broken, the problem will not correct itself. Moreover, I'd favor removal to the status quo. But I prefer to retain a limited filibuster to ensure minority party access to a healthy deliberation. The minority has been completely marginalized in the House. And that would be unfortunate occurrence in the Senate. I think we can produce a workable balance.

I am for extended debate, but opposed to the minority's ability to block legislation. In no particular order, here are some reforms I support. These cover a spectrum from minor fixes to full removal:

1. Annual spending bills and debt ceiling votes are not subject to filibuster. This would prevent the minority party from shutting the government down, or threatening to do so. Rules should be in place to ensure only germane amendments are included in the bills to prevent bundling, along with rules to ensure ample time for debate.
   
2. Harkin's idea for a diminishing filibuster. The first time a bill is voted on, the filibuster is set to 55 votes. Then drops two votes in each subsequent round of voting, with a few days of debate set between votes. After several days, a bill can pass with a simple majority.
   
3. Exempt all but SCOTUS confirmations from filibuster. The minority party should not be able to prevent the government from fully functioning, as the GOP has been doing.
   
4. Elimination of the cloture motion on anything but the final vote of a bill. This would prevent the rule from being abused as it is now, which is to halt bills from even getting to the floor of the Senate for debate, a true perversion of the original intent.
   
5. Full removal of all super majority requirements in the Senate, but with rules in place to ensure lengthy debate of all bills. This is my preferred choice.

There are many other combinations and possiblities along these lines, but this is the range I hope that reform lands in.

 

[GTI Guy]

What's the deal with the rumor that Romney has an IRA that exceeds $100,000,000?

If true, how is that even possible?

 

[Oblivion]

Eh...they're not all, or even mostly, newspaper guys. Mostly magazine guys now blogging:

Ezra Klein
Paul Krugman
Jonathan Chait
Andrew Sullivan
Josh Marshall
Matt Taibbi
Jonathan Cohn
Tim Noah
Noam Sheiber
Nate Silver

In addition:

-Steve Benen
-Matt Yglesias
-Kevin Drum
-David Corn
-Charlie Pierce
-Brad Delong
-Cenk Uygur (doesn't do many articles, but you should listen to his show, the Young Turks on the youtubes)


Also, take out Nate.

 

[speculawyer]

Stanford's George Shultz on energy: It's personal

George Shultz leads a group preparing to propose a federal tax on carbon to slash U.S. greenhouse gas emissions and oil consumption, a seemingly unlikely policy from a Republican Party statesman.
BY MARK GOLDEN AND MARK SHWARTZ

George Shultz was an economist in the Eisenhower administration, as well as secretary of the Treasury and Labor, and director of the Office of Management and Budget in the Nixon administration. Under President Ronald Reagan, he was secretary of state for almost seven years. Despite the reluctance of his fellow Republicans to embrace action on global warming, Shultz is confident that when the time is right conservatives will support a carbon tax, for a number of reasons.

....

Q. You recently traded in your hybrid car for an all-electric one, which is powered by solar panels on your roof. Can you talk about that a little?

A. If you speak out about something, you've got to walk the talk, you've got to do it yourself. The biggest consumer of oil is the automobile, so I've been interested in driving a car that is more efficient. My solar panels have long since paid for themselves by the savings in electricity costs. I have my electric car running on electricity from the sun, which costs me nothing and there is plenty of it here. So, I'm driving on sunshine. Take that, Ahmadinejad!

What we do today is going to have a big impact on the future. I have three, soon to be four, great-grandchildren. I've got to do what I can to see that they have a decent world. And if we let this go on and on the way it's going right now, they're not going to have one. Getting control of carbon is right at the heart of the problem.

http://news.stanford.edu/news/2012/july/george-shultz-energy-071212.html


WTF happened to the GOP? They used to be such nice boys. How did they go so far off the rails? Man if he were to propose that stuff in the modern GOP he'd be RINO'ed and Norquisted out of existence.

 

[pigeon]

What's the deal with the rumor that Romney has an IRA that exceeds $100,000,000?

If true, how is that even possible?

It's true and a matter of record in his tax returns, and God only knows. Most of the theories involve Romney contributing stocks or financial instruments to his IRA at specific times, such as before or after a leveraged buyout, when they would temporarily be worth very little. As a partner, Romney had access to equity in multiple companies at very favorable terms for him and at times when the companies were temporarily crippled with debt from a leveraged buyout or could otherwise be manipulated by management into having extremely low book value.

edit: Quick example -- Bain bought Domino's Pizza in 1998. Domino's was doing fine before the buyout, so their stock was valuable, but immediately after the buyout many of Domino's assets were mortgaged to pay off the bridge loans Bain had taken to raise the money to buy Domino's. Essentially, Bain bought Domino's with its own money, which naturally caused the value of Domino's stock to tank since it was suddenly broke on paper. Then when Domino's goes public in 2004 the stock jumps back to its original value.

 

[Aaron Strife]

Had a dream where someone leaked Romney's tax returns. The highest he paid in taxes from 2000-2010 was something like 4%. Three years he didn't pay anything.

I'm going to assume it's true.

 

[Measley]

This is quite a list of Republicans/Conservatives;

Republicans tell Mitt Romney to turn over tax returns

Mitt Romney is facing a rising tidal wave of pressure to make public more tax returns — and that’s from his supporters.

The list of prominent Republicans and conservatives urging Romney to put out more than the two years of tax returns he has promised is continuing to grow each day. If he simply hands over, say, five to 10 years of returns, they argue, Romney can end the controversy and focus his campaign on the nation’s economic woes to defeat President Barack Obama.

Over the last few days, a number of prominent Republicans and conservatives - including Haley Barbour, George Will and Bill Kristol - have called on Romney to quickly release years worth of his returns, and more stepped forward with the same message Tuesday.

Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) became the latest Republican to urge Romney to put an end to the tax returns flap and release more information. Paul told POLITICO on Tuesday he thinks it would help the presumptive GOP nominee “politically,” adding that “in the scheme of things politically, you know, it looks like releasing tax returns is what the people want.”

Texas Gov. Rick Perry on Tuesday joined in the debate and called for more transparency in the presidential race.
“I’m a big believer that no matter who you are, or what office you’re running for, you should be as transparent as you can be with your tax returns and other aspects of your life so that people have the appropriate ability to judge your background and what have you,” he told reporters in Austin, according to the Houston Chronicle.

Perry, who has released his tax returns dating back to 1992, added, “I think anyone running for office, if they get asked within reason to give people background about what they have been doing, including tax returns, should do that. That’s my deal on it.”

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0712/78616.html

Is Romney's party slowly turning against his campaign?

 

[speculawyer]

Romney has been beating the "Obama as foreigner" drum for three years alongside most of the republican leadership. It's not new, and is never challenged by the media. It's pretty clear the point here is that a large group of republicans feel Obama is illegitimate in one way or another, hence the constant outrage when he does anything that other presidents have done (you know, like address school children at the start of the semester); the message is always that there is something different about Obama. Republicans play it up with their base and have whipped up quite a frenzy. They did a lot of this with Clinton to, as he also represented a shift from previous presidents (Vietnam protests, no military service, Civil Rights era, etc).

Well this may backfire on them. They've been using the argument in friendly circles for so long they they think it is a winner. But now that they are using as part of a general election, independents get a bit turned off by this dog whistle aspect of it.


BTW, I think it is a bit funny that they are trying to portray Obama as some unAmerican guy when Mitt Romney hung out for years in Paris France to dodge the draft by trying to convert French people to be Mormons.

 

[Measley]

Polls on Romney's tax returns;

From a new Public Policy Polling survey:

Q12. Do you think Mitt Romney should release his tax returns for the last 12 years, or not?

He should......................................................56%

He should not................................................34%

Not sure........................................................10%

Among independents, it's a 61-27 split in favor of releasing the returns.

And here you thought this was just part of a "media distraction."

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0712/78616.html

 

[Dr. Pangloss]

Any release will not occur till Friday.

Also, just to add to Ghaleon's list:

1. Actually have 40 members sign a motion to filibuster. Instead of needing 60 to overturn it, make 40 actually come out into the open to do it. Basically the inverse of what we have today. That way the government can't be held up by one single Senator (example being Alabama Senator Shelby putting a hold on over 60 nominees). Also, hate secret holds.

 

[PhoenixDark]

End secret holds and allow cloture votes after a week of filibuster.

 

[Clevinger]

If he is going to release the returns, I think he's going to do it at the exact same time he's announcing his VP pick.

 

[Aaron Strife]

End secret holds and allow cloture votes after a week of filibuster.

But then how would Tom Coburn block food subsidies for seniors and people in poverty

If he is going to release the returns, I think he's going to do it at the exact same time he's announcing his VP pick.

Makes sense as a method of neutralizing the political effect of releasing his returns, but if he picks someone boring then I'm sure Obama's campaign will make his tax returns a news item, and if he picks someone crazy that's a story in and of itself.

Romney's campaign seems to be similar to McCain's in that everything works out on paper, all it takes is common sense to see the flaws however (picking a woman = we get all those hillary voters!)

 

[TacticalFox88]

If he is going to release the returns, I think he's going to do it at the exact same time he's announcing his VP pick.

That will backfire in so many ways, :lol

 

[PantherLotus]

Yeah Oblivion, I don't really read Nate. Just wanted to include him because a smart baseball guy.

 

[speculawyer]

If he is going to release the returns, I think he's going to do it at the exact same time he's announcing his VP pick.

Well people are going to need a few days (or weeks) to go through them so that won't really help.

I don't think he has anything seriously wrong in them . . . just a lot of stuff that smells bad and seems unfair. Such as:
-This will again emphasize the whole GOP supported policy of multi-millionaires paying only 15% tax rates while you common people pay 25 or 33% tax rates.
-The crazy growing IRA
-More deferred pay from Bain where he doesn't work but gets paid for not working.
-Swiss accounts, Cayman island accounts, etc.

 

[speculawyer]

Rush Limbaugh Has An Awesome And Insane Conspiracy Theory About The Batman Villain 'Bane' And Bain Capital

http://www.businessinsider.com/rush-limbaugh-bain-capital-batman-bane-obama-romney2012-7

Well of course the Obama team set this up back in 1993 when the character of Bane first appeared in the comic books. I mean that was child's play compared to when they got those two Hawaii newspapers to run fake birth announcements back in 1962. Duh.

 

[pigeon]

I don't think he has anything seriously wrong in them . . . just a lot of stuff that smells bad and seems unfair.

Aside from the very real possibility that he reported a previously undisclosed Swiss bank account during the 2009 amnesty (making him guilty of fraud in fact, though unprosecuted), I doubt Romney did anything illegal -- that would be pretty dumb, and Romney may be dumb about some things (the public, pitch control) he's obviously smart about money.

But Obama's not running on the idea that there are lots of wealthy Americans who fraudulently don't pay taxes -- he's running on the idea that there are lots of wealthy Americans who, perfectly legally, pay way less in taxes than you or I by exploiting the tax code. (He hasn't actually come out and said we need tax code reform to deal with this, because the Buffet Rule plays better even though it probably won't really work, but that's the direction of the argument.) I'm pretty confident Romney's tax returns will make that point very, very clear. Because he's pretty smart about money.

 

[GaimeGuy]

I don't like generalizing whole districts based on their representatives but there is something wrong with that district. As a born and bred New Yorker, I can't pretend to understand the sensibilities of the people around St. Cloud. Suffice to say, I have no plans to ever visit that area ever in my life.

St cloud isn't the problem. Anoka is.

 

[Aaron Strife]

St cloud isn't the problem. Anoka is.

Even the city of Anoka isn't the problem, just the rural area surrounding it.

Rush Limbaugh Has An Awesome And Insane Conspiracy Theory About The Batman Villain 'Bane' And Bain Capital

http://www.businessinsider.com/rush-...a-romney2012-7

Well of course the Obama team set this up back in 1993 when the character of Bane first appeared in the comic books. I mean that was child's play compared to when they got those two Hawaii newspapers to run fake birth announcements back in 1962. Duh.

They are having so much batsex!

 

[War Peaceman]

http://news.stanford.edu/news/2012/july/george-shultz-energy-071212.html


WTF happened to the GOP? They used to be such nice boys. How did they go so far off the rails? Man if he were to propose that stuff in the modern GOP he'd be RINO'ed and Norquisted out of existence.

Green ideas are a natural fit for conservative ideology (it's in the name). Unfortunately the right wing in Western nations have become completely absorbed in liberalism (although their credibility in actually enforcing such economic ideas is low) and the two ideas are often incompatible. Add in the lunatic fringe of the party and no reasonable green policy is remotely feasible.

 

[Amir0x]

yay go Drudge

i wonder if Republicans are even conscious just how much damage this birther shit is doing to them. But I am sure Obama would love for this to be news again, once again painting the far right as the insane nutjobs they have become.

 

[Zzoram]

So you guys think the hypothesis that Mitt Romney refuses to release old tax returns is due to him taking amnesty for an undisclosed Swiss bank account during the crackdown in 2009? Revealing that would probably completely kill his candidacy. Supporting evidence is that McCain got to see all his financial information in 2008 and found Sarah Palin a better candidate than Romney after something he saw in the data. Romney appealed to the conservatives better than McCain and was less offputting to moderates and liberals than Palin so there had to be something especially damaging hidden in the financial data for McCain to take such a gamble on Palin. Maybe McCain recognized that an undisclosed Swiss bank account might come out one day and ruin Romney's national image. When you consider McCain wanted to attack Obama for lack of experience, a McCain/Romney ticket would be screaming experience while taking on Palin only hurt his argument about needing experience. 2008 was also before "Obamacare" so "Romneycare" was still something Republicans could admit was a good thing.

 

[Averon]

The only logical conclusion you can make is that there's stuff in Romney's tax returns that will kill his chances in Nov. At least that's the determination the Romney camp concluded. No sane, competent campaign would willing bear the attacks the Romeny campaign is currently facing if they can avoid it. The fact that they are doing just that tells me that whatever is in the returns will make life much harder for team Romney if they got out.

 

[War Peaceman]

I find it difficult to believe that there is a horrific secret behind Romney's refusal to publish his tax affairs. He will have paid a low amount of tax, or at least an amount that most will find appallingly low. But I doubt there will be a huge smoking gun, it will just be generally bad. I am not convinced it would change many people's minds on him either.

As for the John McCain stuff, while it is amusing to note that he saw the many tax returns, we all know that Palin's pick was a wildcard selection to try and draw away from the uniqueness of Obama as the first black president.

 

[XMonkey]

So you guys think the hypothesis that Mitt Romney refuses to release old tax returns is due to him taking amnesty for an undisclosed Swiss bank account during the crackdown in 2009? Revealing that would probably completely kill his candidacy. Supporting evidence is that McCain got to see all his financial information in 2008 and found Sarah Palin a better candidate than Romney after something he saw in the data. Romney appealed to the conservatives better than McCain and was less offputting to moderates and liberals than Palin so there had to be something especially damaging hidden in the financial data for McCain to take such a gamble on Palin. Maybe McCain recognized that an undisclosed Swiss bank account might come out one day and ruin Romney's national image. When you consider McCain wanted to attack Obama for lack of experience, a McCain/Romney ticket would be screaming experience while taking on Palin only hurt his argument about needing experience. 2008 was also before "Obamacare" so "Romneycare" was still something Republicans could admit was a good thing.

I don't think there's this huge of a secret lurking in those returns. There are other reasons for McCain to have picked Palin over Romney besides just his taxes.

 

[Mario]

I find it difficult to believe that there is a horrific secret behind Romney's refusal to publish his tax affairs. He will have paid a low amount of tax, or at least an amount that most will find appallingly low. But I doubt there will be a huge smoking gun, it will just be generally bad. I am not convinced it would change many people's minds on him either.

I think this is probably the likely case. I suspect the general plan would have been to hold back what might be a low level of tax paid because they guessed the level of heat they'd receive from disclosing that would be less than the pressure received to release them.

If that is the case, hindsight will probably show they would have been better off releasing them, taking the hit, then moving on. Instead they have managed to draw attention to the tax records which will amplify the impact of whatever skeletons are lurking in there.

This will be a big monkey on their back if they try to ride out the rest of the election without disclosing.

Damned if they do, damned if they don't.

As for the John McCain stuff, while it is amusing to note that he saw the many tax returns, we all know that Palin's pick was a wildcard selection to try and draw away from the uniqueness of Obama as the first black president.

Yeah, I don't think Romney was passed over specifically because of tax records. There was a bunch of stuff in his "file" that could have been viewed as tarnishing his record or potentially used as ammunition by the opposition (as this race is showing). I think on paper Palin just looked like the better candidate because she had the cleaner "outsider" record, was female, and had a spark and a presence they thought they could leverage to fire up the populace.

 

[The Librarian]

I find it difficult to believe that there is a horrific secret behind Romney's refusal to publish his tax affairs. He will have paid a low amount of tax, or at least an amount that most will find appallingly low. But I doubt there will be a huge smoking gun, it will just be generally bad. I am not convinced it would change many people's minds on him either.

As for the John McCain stuff, while it is amusing to note that he saw the many tax returns, we all know that Palin's pick was a wildcard selection to try and draw away from the uniqueness of Obama as the first black president.

Several Republicans are calling on him to release his tax returns because if he does that the issue will go away. In a taped radio interview done yesterday, Mitt Romney said he won't do it because the Democratic party has a very different approach to taxes these days.

He's essentially saying the following if he releases his tax returns: "No, the issue will not go away."