Neuromancer
Member
Just saw the thread title, lol
-
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 |OT3| If it's not a legitimate OT the mods have ways to shut it down
- Thread starter pigeon
- Start date
- Status
The only groups big enough to do it are the Libertarians (who were the seeds of the Tea Party) and the Christianists (who's sole focus is on abortion and other "morality" related issues). These two contingents do not share enough in common to bond together, although you can find some people that are both. It's only because of the two party system that they are forced to endure each other. So if either one of these types of Republican decide to break away, they will effectively lose their disproportionate voice in American politics.
I guess that's the allure of Ronald Reagan, he was able to coalesce and pacify both contingents very effectively. Even though a lot of his policy actions weren't always in line with what they wanted.
I guess that's the allure of Ronald Reagan, he was able to coalesce and pacify both contingents very effectively. Even though a lot of his policy actions weren't always in line with what they wanted.
The fallout of an Obama re-election will be a sight to behold. Will GOPers like Boehner and Lindsay Graham be able to swing the party on a more moderate direction, or will people like Bryan Fischer swing the party further and further rightward?
There were two possible outcomes the media/LibGAF would run with:
"I will lower taxes on middle income families"
"Is $100K middle income?"
"Middle income is anyone making $200-250K or LESS"
"Romney thinks $250K is middle class"
"I will lower taxes on middle income families"
"Is $100K middle income?"
"Yes, according to this plan"
"Romney will raise taxes on those making over $100K, Obama only on those over $250K"
"I will lower taxes on middle income families"
"Is $100K middle income?"
"Middle income is anyone making $200-250K or LESS"
"Romney thinks $250K is middle class"
"I will lower taxes on middle income families"
"Is $100K middle income?"
"Yes, according to this plan"
"Romney will raise taxes on those making over $100K, Obama only on those over $250K"
Invisible libgaf?
I think the only way we get more than two parties is if we get at least 4. We will first need one party (most likely Republicans) to fracture, which will make the Democrats dominant. The different subgroups of Democrats will then start jockeying for control of their party, since the Republicans would (presumably) be two minor parties. Then you could see a split of the Democrats.
Pretty sure we are stuck with two parties for my lifetime.
AlteredBeast
Fork 'em, Sparky!
When you are counting on Lindsey Graham from swinging the party back, you know you are in deep crap.
Black Mamba
Member
All lost on this is that he will raise taxes on middle income earners, regardless, in his plan.
worldrunover
Member
No one under $250k is getting their taxes raised. Upper incomes will have their taxes lowered. This will be revenue neutral based on "loophole closures". SOMEONE is getting their taxes raised. Who are these people? ITS A MYSTERY.
Kosmo, please enlighten us if you know whos taxes are being raised under Romney's plan.
cartoon_soldier
Member
lol Bush won't attend a fundraiser in his own house for Romney. Talk about toxic.
Joe Shlabotnik
Banned
AlteredBeast, I can understand living on commission being way more stressful than a set salary, even if it's currently averaging out to 78K a year.
Romney qualifies what he thinks defines 'middle class'
Wow
http://gawker.com/5943330/romney-believes-middle+income-americans-make-200000-to-250000-a-year
Wow
AlteredBeast
Fork 'em, Sparky!
If only Romney had the balls to come out with a plan that would raise taxes. Beyond all the batshit insane stuff that he has said, I would vote for him if he pledged to do this.
AlteredBeast
Fork 'em, Sparky!
New news. Than you for this informative and timely update.
speculawyer
Member
Well here is how the AP reports it:
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/romney-middle-income-200k-250k-152818009.html
So even if one assumes the flub is contorted in the way where Romney is not capable of giving rational yes/no answers, the clarification his campaign gave still didn't fix it! They just pointed out that the number he gave is for household income not individual income. The Romney campaign seems to disagree with you.
Your due diligence is worthy of praise.
AlteredBeast
Fork 'em, Sparky!
Yeah, one month pulling in 5 after tax would be great, then the next month it be around 3...not good! Makes it super hard to plan finances and pretty much any necessary big ticket items.
You guys think they'll let Romney's campaign handle rebuttals during the debates?
Black Mamba
Member
No No No. He said the tax cuts for the rich will pay for itself with reduction in deductions he won't disclose.
Ignoring that it's impossible to do this mathematically and even if it was, it would still take years for it to happen. It would be a massive tax cut in year one..
Or Romney means that 250K individual income is above middle income.
That cuts both ways ... I don't think Romney is eager for a photo-op with Bush while the current President is trying to paint Romney as a continuation of the Bush years.
AlteredBeast
Fork 'em, Sparky!
Romney Clearly Defines What He Believes to Be Middle Class Income
http://gawker.com/5943330/romney-believes-middle+income-americans-make-200000-to-250000-a-year
worldrunover
Member
If one was to change the tax code in such a way that the same people would pay the exact same amount of taxes.... Why change the code at all? Anyone who thinks about what Romney is saying for more than 20 seconds realizes what hogwash it is.
Are you mocking me? That's the link I posted above.. that you specifically called out for being old news
Byakuya769
Member
Anyone trying to pass off an income of 200k as middle income should be ashamed of themselves, Obama included. That's "but I have to buy new dresses so that I never wear the same as someone else at a cocktail party" territory. I've been all over the income spectrum, and feeling middle class while living in a million half million dollar home us delusional.
Also, is there language from Obama calling 250k middle class? Or are you all inferring that from his proposed tax plan and the "I won't raise taxes on the middle class" language? Cause that's not the same.
Also, is there language from Obama calling 250k middle class? Or are you all inferring that from his proposed tax plan and the "I won't raise taxes on the middle class" language? Cause that's not the same.
worldrunover
Member
Jay Carney said:
hahaha, its funny that Kosmo thinks that the truth is "delusional". It just explains so much.
That's what I'm wondering. But Romney could have had his tax plan context in mind just the same. Still a stupid way to word it though
Blergmeister
Member
We are stuck with two parties until we get rid of our winner take all FPTP system. The way our system is setup it is in a persons best interest to only look at the two people most likely to win and vote against the one you want to win the least. A vote for anyone but those two is a vote wasted.
If I could change the system but keep the positions (President/House/Senate) I'd recomend an Alternative vote system for the President and a proportional vote system for Congress, generally speaking, with some tweaks for the House/Senate.
Proportional Vote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QT0I-sdoSXU
Alternative Vote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Y3jE3B8HsE
Problems with Winner Take All/First Past the Post: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo
Black Mamba
Member
For the most part, yeah. Of course, lowering marginal rates does have a benefit even if the taxes were the same.
It is better to have lower marginal rates and less deductions. But by the amount he wants to raise them by, it's not feasible.
PhoenixDark
Banned
You do know German and other European embassies were attacked today right?
AlteredBeast
Fork 'em, Sparky!
Dr. Pangloss
Member
Kosmo may I suggest turning your argument around on Obama? Instead of saying where Romney considers middle class, ask why does Obama not want to raise taxes for those under $250,000? Maybehe considers those people middle class.
It's a video that's offensive to Muslims - a video that we allow in the US because we have freedom of speech and are not populated by a bunch of crazy, kill and riot over a stupid video, fuckheads. Couch it how you will, but it's the fact that we allow such videos to be made that they find offensive instead of killing when someone desecrates the name of the spaghetti monster.
Officerrob
Banned
Watching this ceremony shows exactly why it's idiotic to politicize such an event before these poor people's bodies are even laid to rest
I still don't see your problem with Carney's statement. You can dislike the video and still say the attack is disgusting, and of course the video is still allowed in the US because of free speech.
Arrowgigantic
Member
I was just talking multi-party systems last night.
I don't think we want this in America. I don't think we want to see what kind of parties we end up with and just how many seats they're capable of winning.
I don't think we want this in America. I don't think we want to see what kind of parties we end up with and just how many seats they're capable of winning.
Yup, that explains why Carney is delusional.
Dominican Power
Member
What's middle class to you?
The average salary in America is what, 40k? Anything over 100k HHI isn't middle class IMO
Republican Elector resigns because she won't vote for Romney
The question wasn't asked of me, but I'd personally say about $40k to probably $125K or maybe...maybe $150. I wouldn't put $200k in middle class. You're definitely above it at that point.
The question wasn't asked of me, but I'd personally say about $40k to probably $125K or maybe...maybe $150. I wouldn't put $200k in middle class. You're definitely above it at that point.
speculawyer
Member
I get it . . . you are giving him the benefit of the doubt. But why? Is there any context in that discussion that shows he includes $100K in 'middle income'? Nothing but the "and less" and that is after explicitly saying "no" AND giving a range of $200K to $250K such that 100K is half the lower bound.
This is not the same as Obama talking about teachers, roads, bridges . . . and then saying "If you built a business . . . you didn't build that" which had clear context that made it abundantly clearly, it was a flub. There is no context here showing it is clearly a flub.
Perhaps it is a flub but is not clearly a flub given what we know so far. And when given a chance to clarify, they still haven't fixed it.
The GOP ran their entire convention on a flub that was something clearly taken out of context. This is something that is not clearly a flub given the context and not changed after given a chance to clarify it. Are we just supposed to vote just assuming Romney knows things even though he can't say them nor can his team fix them given ample time? Why even have a campaign?
Giving them the absolute best interpretation for Romney . . . Romney flubs simple yes/no questions and has a campaign that is so incompetent they can't even clarify such things.
AlteredBeast
Fork 'em, Sparky!
Ron Paul SMH
Of course she will.
Bill has long argued that it is the RESPONSIBILITY of those capable of steering this country in what he considers the "right" direction to take the reigns and do so. Do you really think he's going to let off of that when he knows that:
1. she's a lock to win if Obama is remotely successful.
2. she'd make a damn good POTUS.
She'll be 68 by then, but lets be honest she's more of a Margret Thatcher/Madeline Albright at this point and is largely viewed without recognition of gender.
This is why Bill is pushing for Obama. If Hillary can't run until 2016 no matter what it'll be far easier to be a dem following a relatively successful dem than battling an incumbent rep who will likely see the economy rebound in the next four years. Obama winning is the path to Hillary winning in 2016.
- Status