• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2012 Community Thread |OT2| This thread title is now under military control

Status
Not open for further replies.

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
There's still time for him to get out. I still think he will. I'd like to be proven wrong.

I think he's going to wait for the next round of polling. The current polling was done when basically the entire country was actively shitting on him. He's probably going to wait until the media storm moves on to something else and then see where things settle.

Also I believe he resigned from the House to run for the Senate. So he really doesn't have anything else to do. As long as he gets enough donations to keep the machine running a few more weeks, he's probably going to see it to the end. Right now it's basically a family business.
 
Victor Fleischer, Tax law professor from the University of Colorado, says Romney and Bain have not paid all the taxes required under law.

A bit of that is over my head, but generally it's an interesting read. No wonder he's hiding those taxes...
Interesting. I think the whole 15% rate is terrible . . . but it is legal. But this whole thing of allowing them to convert their fixed fee into 'priority profit' when they pick the best investment in the portfolio and feel good about it is really really shady. What . . . so getting most of your income at 15% wasn't good enough for you . . . you had to take the smaller part that got taxed at ordinary income and through sleight-of-hand only pay 15% on that too? You fucky greedy unpatriotic bastard.

It just irks me that here is some guy already making many millions, most of it taxed only 15%. But that is not enough, so they have to stretch the rules so that it ALL gets taxed at 15%. Meanwhile some kid is getting paid next-to-nothing to get his leg blown off in Iraq.
 

Puddles

Banned
Yep, churches are businesses, that's why we should tax them.

What they spend on food, money, clothing, medicine/treatment for the needy should be the only revenue that is tax-free.

What kind of tax would you levy against churches?

I know my parents' church barely keeps its doors open. Under your plan, would churches have to clear a certain amount of revenue in excess of their operating budgets before they had to pay taxes?
 
Virginia is my most closely watched state. I consider it as Obama's firewall. If he wins it, then he's likely re-elected.
Yeah, he's doing really well in the polls there - as well as Ohio, surprisingly (or not given their decent economy). If you give him those two there's not many permutations Romney could win under, he'd have to start stealing blue states.
 

sc0la

Unconfirmed Member
Thanks. Interesting stuff, but appears a little dated (is that ore crash, 2005 or so?)

It hit some interesting things I had not thought about like its method of addressing the concern of double taxation on corporate profits.

In general I completely against national sales taxes and VATs etc. they are regressive and opaque to the tax payer.

In my ideal world we would abolish payroll taxes and capital gains and move everything into income taxes. Eliminate itemization and most deductions (I like the papers idea of changing popular deductions into spending programs, the version of the mortgage interest deduction in the paper is hilarious and support would drop immediately lol), lower marginal rates overall but introduce additional brackets with much larger top level marginal rates.
 
The left's response to Rasmussen has been fascinating. Kos purposely removed Ras tracking numbers when he discusses the Obama/Romney race on a national level, but takes them into account when they are providing a story for Obama on state levels. Same with the response to that 10 point McCaskil lead; granted that has been confirmed by another pollster.

Personally I don't believe Obama is within 5 points in Missouri. Akin would have to be THE dominating issue there for him to win, same with Ryan's budget (lots of old people in MO).
 

tranciful

Member
Yep, churches are businesses, that's why we should tax them.

What they spend on food, money, clothing, medicine/treatment for the needy should be the only revenue that is tax-free.
What kind of tax would you levy against churches?

I know my parents' church barely keeps its doors open. Under your plan, would churches have to clear a certain amount of revenue in excess of their operating budgets before they had to pay taxes?
...businesses are only taxed on the profits. If their revenue does not exceed their operating budgets, they wouldn't owe any income taxes (they'd owe social security taxes for employees, but my quick googling says they most likely already pay those anyway). And the guy you quoted seems to think spending is revenue, but I think what he means is that those expenses should be tax deductible (like other business expenses).
 

Jackson50

Member
A more trustworthy pollster (Mason-Dixon) says Claire McCaskill is up by 9 in Missouri.

Her approval/disapproval spread has also narrowed to 39-41, while Akin's has gotten much worse at 17-56.

Thanks for saving the Senate, Todd!
A few more polls are necessary to confirm the magnitude of his dive. But if it's as large as they and Rasmussen estimate, it should be largely insurmountable. He may recover nominally. But I doubt it's sufficient to threaten McCaskill.
He can attempt to relocate towards the center, but it's futile with only two months until the election. And even then the prospective gains are only marginal. Plus, Republicans are agitating for militance. I doubt Romney's intrepid enough to cross his base.
 
The left's response to Rasmussen has been fascinating. Kos purposely removed Ras tracking numbers when he discusses the Obama/Romney race on a national level, but takes them into account when they are providing a story for Obama on state levels. Same with the response to that 10 point McCaskil lead; granted that has been confirmed by another pollster.

Personally I don't believe Obama is within 5 points in Missouri. Akin would have to be THE dominating issue there for him to win, same with Ryan's budget (lots of old people in MO).
Eh, it's Kos' job to spin.

I disregard Rasmussen entirely whether it's a good or bad poll for Democrats. Ever since they released those WI/FL polls on the same day that had 16-18 point swings each, one in the GOP direction (WI), one in DEM direction (FL). That's not indicative of a good pollster, unless those races really changed that drastically.
 
A few more polls are necessary to confirm the magnitude of his dive. But if it's as large as they and Rasmussen estimate, it should be largely insurmountable. He may recover nominally. But I doubt it's sufficient to threaten McCaskill.He can attempt to relocate towards the center, but it's futile with only two months until the election. And even then the prospective gains are only marginal. Plus, Republicans are agitating for militance. I doubt Romney's intrepid enough to cross his base.

Considering this is MO and McCaskil is a bad senator, it's not hard to believe she'll still lose a close 2-5 point race. Remember, this is still MO and and Obama is at the top of the ballot. Lots of upset old people and Evangelicals
 

Jackson50

Member
Considering this is MO and McCaskil is a bad senator, it's not hard to believe she'll still lose a close 2-5 point race. Remember, this is still MO and and Obama is at the top of the ballot. Lots of upset old people and Evangelicals
Normally, perhaps. But the backlash seems to be severe enough where that's unlikely.
 
Considering this is MO and McCaskil is a bad senator, it's not hard to believe she'll still lose a close 2-5 point race. Remember, this is still MO and and Obama is at the top of the ballot. Lots of upset old people and Evangelicals
Many of them will already be splitting their ticket for Gov. Jay Nixon - don't see why they couldn't do the same for McCaskill, even if she is closer to Obama than Nixon is.
 

sc0la

Unconfirmed Member
Ohhhhh, ok. Was really confused there, as eliminating capital gains tax didn't seem like something you'd be in favor of.
Yeah, I wasn't very clear by lumping it all in a run on sentence. Typing on a phone, impatience and punctuation are my downfall.
 
Ahead by nine points, and she's still just at 50%. I consider her still vulnerable, though her chances have improved greatly.
It sounds like her plan was always to win simply based on Akin being a terrible candidate - though I doubt she or anyone in her campaign could have seen this coming.
 
Looking at that poll, McCaskil is leading big in the urban, large city areas like St Louis, and Akin's lead is not huge in the the rural and suburban areas he's ahead in. Perhaps McCaskil can win if dems can heavily gotv in the cities. I'd imagine some ambitious dems will be heading there to try and win this thing. I'm doubtful but it'll be worth the money. Especially if Obama can force Romney to spend time and money there too
 
Looking at that poll, McCaskil is leading big in the urban, large city areas like St Louis, and Akin's lead is not huge in the the rural and suburban areas he's ahead in. Perhaps McCaskil can win if dems can heavily gotv in the cities. I'd imagine some ambitious dems will be heading there to try and win this thing. I'm doubtful but it'll be worth the money. Especially if Obama can force Romney to spend time and money there too
I don't know if Akin will have much effect on Romney. He might scare off a few women from voting Republican at all, but Romney seems to be distancing himself pretty well from Akin's comments.

Running up the score in cities and outvoting the rest of the state can work (IL-GOV 2010), but only if they keep the margins close in the suburbs and rural areas, otherwise they'll lose like in the WI recall.
 
A few more polls are necessary to confirm the magnitude of his dive. But if it's as large as they and Rasmussen estimate, it should be largely insurmountable. He may recover nominally. But I doubt it's sufficient to threaten McCaskill.
Thank God we have Huckabee rallying the Religious conservative in MO around Akin!
Speaking harshly about establishment Republicans who have tried to force Akin from the Missouri race, Huckabee at one point compared the National Republican Senatorial Committee to "union goons" who "kneecap" their enemies.

The former Arkansas governor said party bosses were "opening up rounds and rounds" of ammunition on Akin and "then running over with tanks and trucks and leaving him to be ravaged by the other side."

“This is unprecedented, to see to this orchestrated attempt to humiliate and devastate a fellow Republican,” Huckabee said of Akin, who has deep ties to the Christian conservative movement. Akin spent Thursday in Florida meeting with evangelical leaders and evaluating his political future.

Acknowledging the political damage done to Akin, Huckabee encouraged the pastors and radio hosts to aggressively defend Akin to their congregations and listeners.

"The poll numbers need to come back up," he said. "Todd needs to show that he can raise money and be competitive. That will be a game changer. If not, the pressure will still be there for Todd to exit the race and clear the field for somebody else."
That's the spirit Huck! Fight THE MAN
 

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
Romney just can't help digging further:

"I don't see what the big deal is. The President himself has joked about his birth certificate before. Why can't the American people?"-Mitt Romney


Okay, he hasn't said this....yet. But come on, this is the Mittster we're talking about.

And the 11 millionth time satire imitates reality, Rep. Jack Kingston (R-GA) actually used this argument to defend Romney's birther "joke".

Sigh.
 
And the 11 millionth time satire imitates reality, Rep. Jack Kingston (R-GA) actually used this argument to defend Romney's birther "joke".

Sigh.

I'm waiting for someone to use the defense that Obama vaguely referenced the Mitt Romney car-on-dog thing in his windmill speeches (which actually was funny), but there's two problems with that: 1. Romney ACTUALLY put his dog on the roof, 2. making a joke about it doesn't appeal to some racist element of your base.
 
I'm waiting for someone to use the defense that Obama vaguely referenced the Mitt Romney car-on-dog thing in his windmill speeches (which actually was funny), but there's two problems with that: 1. Romney ACTUALLY put his dog on the roof, 2. making a joke about it doesn't appeal to some racist element of your base.

Normally I'd say at times we've gotten too overly-sensitive in our politics these days. All the fake outrage over every single awkward comment is one of the reasons why politicians stay confined to a strict talking point script and keep themselves sequestered from the media at all times.

That said, Romney's "birther" joke is absolutely terrible and isn't getting enough fake outrage in the media so far, IMO. The next logical question to ask Romney would be, "Why do you think you've never been asked to show your birth certificate while Obama has?" I doubt he could answer it because Romney basically said, "I've never been asked to show a birth certificate because I'm a white guy and Obama is some strange black/foreign looking dude."

Furthermore, this is just more proof that Mittens is the biggest gaffe machine in recent memory surpassing even Biden. Granted if you put Romney next to Michelle Bachmann, Herman Cain, and Rick Perry, then Romney doesn't look so bad. But those were joke characters and goes to shows how weak the GOP presidential field was this cycle. The '08 GOP candidates would have ate these guys for lunch.
 
547167_466872243347198_1963497508_n.jpg

Can't unsee
 

sc0la

Unconfirmed Member
Yeah to me the problem wasn't the birther aspect of Mitt's comment. It was the racial connotations and othering in the implication of it "lol no one asks me for my papers because I am white and rich AMIRITE?"

Beyond birtherism it feeds into the whole subtext of racial and xenophobic attitudes. It's the same thing that drives people to support or not care about Arizona's racial profiling or other states impending voter ID laws. Why care if you have the privilege of this never being a problem for you?
 

Gr1mLock

Passing metallic gas
I'm waiting for someone to use the defense that Obama vaguely referenced the Mitt Romney car-on-dog thing in his windmill speeches (which actually was funny), but there's two problems with that: 1. Romney ACTUALLY put his dog on the roof, 2. making a joke about it doesn't appeal to some racist element of your base.

The minimum requirement of a joke would be the part where is actually funny. I cant even count how many times ive heard just regular insults in a guise of a 'joke'. Saying something tasteless doesn't make it a joke. Claiming a tasteless comment was a joke after the fact is just pathetic. Mitt's birth certificate comment didnt strike me as inflammatory, but generally when the right jokes there seems to be a distinct lack of laughter.
 
Furthermore, this is just more proof that Mittens is the biggest gaffe machine in recent memory surpassing even Biden. Granted if you put Romney next to Michelle Bachmann, Herman Cain, and Rick Perry, then Romney doesn't look so bad. But those were joke characters and goes to shows how weak the GOP presidential field was this cycle. The '08 GOP candidates would have ate these guys for lunch.
This was scripted. It was right after 'Ann was born at this hospital, I was born at this hospital . . . '

The Biden 'chains' remark seemed to be a very poorly thrown in ad-lib. (Maybe I'm wrong but the way it was phrased & thrown in it did not seem like part of the speech.)
 
Stupid.

WASHINGTON — To the myriad indignities suffered by Congress, including stagnant legislation, partisan warfare and popularity on a par with petty criminals, add this: the Capitol’s roof is leaking, and there is no money to fix it.

The Capitol dome, the nation’s grandest symbol of federal authority, has been dinged by years of inclement weather, and its exterior is in need of repair.

The dome has 1,300 known cracks and breaks. Water that has seeped in over the years has caused rusting on the ornamentation and staining on the interior of the Rotunda, just feet below the fresco “The Apotheosis of Washington,” which is painted on the Rotunda’s canopy.

Like most of what the federal government is on the hook to fix — highways, bridges and airports — the dome is imperiled both by tough economic times and by a politically polarized Congress. While Senate appropriators have voted to repair the dome, which has not undergone major renovations for 50 years, their House counterparts say there is not money right now. In that way, the dome is a metaphor for the nation’s decaying infrastructure.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/25/u...mperiled-by-cracks-and-a-partisan-divide.html

Repairing the Capitol would have created a few jobs, but our illustrious Republican representatives are too stupid to understand where money comes from. Unless there was some reason to believe that the government's purchase of the labor and materials required to fix the dome would bid up the price of those things, there is not a single argument against the government's creating money--i.e., spending money--to command those particular resources at this point in time.
 

Brinbe

Member
Another strong poll for Bams in PA.

Ten weeks before the election, a voter poll commissioned by The Inquirer finds President Obama leading Republican rival Mitt Romney by a significant margin in Pennsylvania, raising the question of whether the Keystone State is up for grabs on Nov. 6.

The Inquirer Pennsylvania Poll, led by a bipartisan team of top political analysts, concluded that if the election were held now, Obama would win the state by nine percentage points - 51-42 - with 7 percent of voters undecided.

The telephone survey of 601 likely voters, conducted from Tuesday through Thursday, had a statistical margin of error of plus or minus 4 percent. The results are comparable to those of other recent polls, including one released Thursday by Muhlenberg College, which also found Obama leading by nine points in the state.

Jeffrey Plaut of Global Strategy Group, a Democratic polling firm, said the results may indicate Pennsylvania has lost some of its "swingy-ness." He said Friday that Democrats would have to fail to turn out their base voters to "put the state in play."

His survey partner, Republican Adam Geller of National Research Inc., said Romney clearly was behind in the state. But he said Obama's current lead could be less - perhaps six, five, or four points - in light of the margin of error and the proven tendency of undecided voters ultimately to vote against incumbents.

"Maybe if Romney decided to spend more time and resources in the state of Pennsylvania, the state certainly could be in play," Geller said.

Barely half of poll respondents approved of the job Obama has done as president, a finding that Romney could build on, Geller said. He said he expected the race to tighten.

But only about four in 10 respondents had a favorable view of Romney, who, starting with this week's Republican National Convention, must burnish a personal image tarnished by a summer's worth of negative Obama ads.

Romney's choice of Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin to be his running mate does not appear to have given him a Pennsylvania boost. Plaut said the numbers showed Romney might have done better in the state if he had picked Gov. Christie, who has a strong favorability rating across the Delaware from his home turf.

Plaut said it was significant that 57 percent of poll respondents said they believed Obama would win Pennsylvania and its 20 electoral votes; only 29 percent said they thought Romney would. That expectation could become self-fulfilling if it influences Election Day turnout.


The country's sixth-largest state, Pennsylvania has not favored a Republican for president since 1988, when it picked George H.W. Bush over Michael S. Dukakis.
 

ezekial45

Banned

Is this also considering the influence of the Voter I.D?

anyway, Patton Oswalt wrote a piece about the upcoming elections.

http://90days90reasons.com/17.php

Romney is money’s bitch. He’s ambition’s bitch. He’s success’s bitch and he’s victory’s bitch. And, like those particular sort of pampered dogs you see in the laps of the very rich, he yaps and snaps and snarls at the everyday mutt. He’s frightened and confused by a dog who’s happy to treasure the sunshine and play with the other dogs and eat enough food to fill its belly and lap enough water to slake its thirst and then get out of the way for the other dogs to have their turn. Romney’s been trained since birth that not only are there No Other Dogs But Him And His Ilk, but that dogs who don’t aspire to immobility on a fat lap are to be snarled at, chased away, and bred out of existence.

In 2010 and 2011, Mitt and Ann paid $6.2 million in federal tax on $42.5 million in income (get away from my food!!!) for an average tax rate just shy of 15 percent (get away from my water!!!), substantially less than what most middle-income Americans pay (yapyapyapyap!!!)

He’s curled up so snugly and safely in the lap of wealth that he’s never once bolted and gallivanted and lived in the world. The freedom’s there, but he’d rather put more diamond studs, more trinkets and jewels, and more frills and feathers on his too-tight collar, and double-check that his leash is double-clasped to it, never to come loose.

And there’s nothing wrong with any of that—except that Romney has zero sympathy for those who don’t feel the same way he does. And he’s infecting other people—former friends of mine, who have warped and mutated into creatures of liquid ambition, effortless greed, with zero compassion for anyone who would dare to be happy to work a job and then simply value time with their families and friends and maybe expect some reasonable amount of health care and comfort. I’m seeing too many people, people who should know better, who truly think that life should be an endless hunching over a food bowl, chasing everyone else away, without respite. Fear is the fuel, and nothing frightens them more than people who aren’t fueled by fear.

Nothing wrong with being rich. Nothing wrong with striving and bettering yourself. But there’s definitely something wrong with people confusing capitalism and corporatism (the latter wants to destroy the former)—and then demanding everyone else make the same mistake. Obama is rich—by his own hand. He made his money writing two books—and those didn't even make him bestseller bucks until after he became president. And he's acted, as president, the way that people who become rich and know how to spend their money act. He's traveled the world, broadened his horizons. And in his travels, maybe, maybe he's tried to conquer some of the fear which, let's face it, none of us truly never rid ourselves of. But goddamit, he's trying. Mitt Romney is the only person I've ever seen who's traveled the world in wealth and comfort and managed to narrow the canvas of his experience and opinions.

Obama has heroically, foolhardily, quixotically tried to make things work for both sides—the super-rich and the people who are genuinely repelled by the world of the super-rich. They can both live on this planet. Not according to Romney, though, who's repeatedly said, over and over, “I believe everyone should live this way.” This statement is usually made standing on someone's private tennis court.

Well, everyone can’t have a private tennis court. Obama understands this. Romney recoils from this. Obama wants to make a world in which every strata can live, happily, on their own terms. In recoiling from the gorgeous messiness of America, Romney is building a scrubbed-clean, fenced-off citadel, surrounded by a worker dorm shantytown.

I’m voting for Obama. I’m voting for the messiness.
—PATTON OSWALT
  Los Angeles, California
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom