Obama Wants $3 in taxes for each #1 in cuts

[native]

here's the problem for conks:

voters are proving to have a longer memory than they are given credit for - the VAST majority still blame Bush for the economy... so pinning the economy on Obama isn't sticking for the GOP...

A small majority, perhaps only a plurality, still blame Bush, but most ALSO blame Obama.

... also - the GOP HAVE been obstructionists - more focused on beating Obama and making him look weak than doing any actual work - and the public is PISSED. Obama's numbers aren't great - but the GOP's are abysmal...

The Republican obstruction of class warfare and redistribution is popular with a majority of voters, and Obama's personal popularity is not the correct measure of support for his policies. "Right direction/wrong direction" is a more accurate measure of support for Obama policies and support for his re-election. Boehner remains more popular than Pelosi. I hate to say it, but it was a blessing that the Republiucans failed to win the Sentae in the last election, because the Democrat Senate has been more obstructionist than the Republican House. There will be another wave election in 2012, and it will not be to usher in more Dems.

...Looking at the GOP field moreover - the only candidate that shows sustained strength against Obama is Romney... and right now his path to the nomination looks cloudy...

It will not matter who Obama's opponent is in 2012. The majority of voters will not be stupid enough to re-elect him. We are probably in a once-in-a-century cycle where all bets are off. Thank GOD the young 'uns got to see with their own eyes what Obama's policies delivered.

[Rob Iola]

Linking spending (and taxes) with jobs is a false construct that voters see right thru - put another way, how many trillions of dollars of federal spending will result in new jobs being created?

Voters really are asking how smart Obama is with their money - the Solyndra debacle has pretty much killed any momentum Obama was banking on in terms of "green energy" jobs (not to mention tainting his administration with charges of corruption), the GM bailout is clearly a hand-out to his union supporters (as is the failure to finance universal healthcare with taxes on the cadillac plans), unemployment benefits are being extended to the point of being permanent, and his proposed spending cuts don't address the 800 pound gorilla in the room - entitlements.

[Bronco]

Good post Rob

Wonder why Barack O'Johnson didn't mention his tax hikes on rich Americans . . . At his $38,500 Per Person Fundraiser in New York last night.

[TheDancinMonarch]

...universal healthcare ...

And amongst all of the daily chaos, this abomination gets one day closer to being a reality.

[TwinTownBisonFan]

here's the problem for conks:

voters are proving to have a longer memory than they are given credit for - the VAST majority still blame Bush for the economy... so pinning the economy on Obama isn't sticking for the GOP...

A small majority, perhaps only a plurality, still blame Bush, but most ALSO blame Obama.

... also - the GOP HAVE been obstructionists - more focused on beating Obama and making him look weak than doing any actual work - and the public is PISSED. Obama's numbers aren't great - but the GOP's are abysmal...

The Republican obstruction of class warfare and redistribution is popular with a majority of voters, and Obama's personal popularity is not the correct measure of support for his policies. "Right direction/wrong direction" is a more accurate measure of support for Obama policies and support for his re-election. Boehner remains more popular than Pelosi. I hate to say it, but it was a blessing that the Republiucans failed to win the Sentae in the last election, because the Democrat Senate has been more obstructionist than the Republican House. There will be another wave election in 2012, and it will not be to usher in more Dems.

...Looking at the GOP field moreover - the only candidate that shows sustained strength against Obama is Romney... and right now his path to the nomination looks cloudy...

It will not matter who Obama's opponent is in 2012. The majority of voters will not be stupid enough to re-elect him. We are probably in a once-in-a-century cycle where all bets are off. Thank GOD the young 'uns got to see with their own eyes what Obama's policies delivered.

You're conflating what you want and what is real.

Here's the polling round up on tax increases vs. cuts: polling average 64.5 for balance, 30 for cuts.

http://capitalgainsandgames.com/blog/br ... -tax-polls

Here's a summary that I was citing:
http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com ... -math.html

* A solid majority, 56-30, favors significantly cutting payroll taxes for working Americans.

* A majority, 52-40, favors Federal aid to state governments to avert public employee layoffs.

* A huge majority, 80-16, favors spending money on the nation’s infrastructure in order to try to create jobs.

* A big majority, 71, favors reducing the deficit through a combination of tax increases and spending cuts; a meager 21 percent favors only spending cuts.

* A solid majority, 56-37, favors reducing the deficit with tax hikes on households earning $250,000 a year or more.

* A solid majority, 56-29, thinks creating jobs should be prioritized over cutting spending.

[Rob Iola]

A small majority, perhaps only a plurality, still blame Bush, but most ALSO blame Obama.



The Republican obstruction of class warfare and redistribution is popular with a majority of voters, and Obama's personal popularity is not the correct measure of support for his policies. "Right direction/wrong direction" is a more accurate measure of support for Obama policies and support for his re-election. Boehner remains more popular than Pelosi. I hate to say it, but it was a blessing that the Republiucans failed to win the Sentae in the last election, because the Democrat Senate has been more obstructionist than the Republican House. There will be another wave election in 2012, and it will not be to usher in more Dems.



It will not matter who Obama's opponent is in 2012. The majority of voters will not be stupid enough to re-elect him. We are probably in a once-in-a-century cycle where all bets are off. Thank GOD the young 'uns got to see with their own eyes what Obama's policies delivered.

You're conflating what you want and what is real.

Here's the polling round up on tax increases vs. cuts: polling average 64.5 for balance, 30 for cuts.

http://capitalgainsandgames.com/blog/br ... -tax-polls

Here's a summary that I was citing:
http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com ... -math.html

* A solid majority, 56-30, favors significantly cutting payroll taxes for working Americans.

* A majority, 52-40, favors Federal aid to state governments to avert public employee layoffs.

* A huge majority, 80-16, favors spending money on the nation’s infrastructure in order to try to create jobs.

* A big majority, 71, favors reducing the deficit through a combination of tax increases and spending cuts; a meager 21 percent favors only spending cuts.

* A solid majority, 56-37, favors reducing the deficit with tax hikes on households earning $250,000 a year or more.

* A solid majority, 56-29, thinks creating jobs should be prioritized over cutting spending.

C'mon dude - essentially these questions boil down to "would you like it if we take money from someone else and give it to you?"

And what is the correlation between Federal spending and jobs creation? Don't we have data on this from the last 2 years?

[TwinTownBisonFan]

You're conflating what you want and what is real.

Here's the polling round up on tax increases vs. cuts: polling average 64.5 for balance, 30 for cuts.

http://capitalgainsandgames.com/blog/br ... -tax-polls

Here's a summary that I was citing:
http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com ... -math.html

C'mon dude - essentially these questions boil down to "would you like it if we take money from someone else and give it to you?"

And what is the correlation between Federal spending and jobs creation? Don't we have data on this from the last 2 years?

I wasn't addressing whether it would work or not... I was addressing that there is significant public support for what he wants to do - this is the fight he wants the election to be about - and that is a winning strategy.

[native]

A small majority, perhaps only a plurality, still blame Bush, but most ALSO blame Obama.



The Republican obstruction of class warfare and redistribution is popular with a majority of voters, and Obama's personal popularity is not the correct measure of support for his policies. "Right direction/wrong direction" is a more accurate measure of support for Obama policies and support for his re-election. Boehner remains more popular than Pelosi. I hate to say it, but it was a blessing that the Republiucans failed to win the Sentae in the last election, because the Democrat Senate has been more obstructionist than the Republican House. There will be another wave election in 2012, and it will not be to usher in more Dems.



It will not matter who Obama's opponent is in 2012. The majority of voters will not be stupid enough to re-elect him. We are probably in a once-in-a-century cycle where all bets are off. Thank GOD the young 'uns got to see with their own eyes what Obama's policies delivered.

You're conflating what you want and what is real.

Here's the polling round up on tax increases vs. cuts: polling average 64.5 for balance, 30 for cuts.

http://capitalgainsandgames.com/blog/br ... -tax-polls

Here's a summary that I was citing:
http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com ... -math.html

* A solid majority, 56-30, favors significantly cutting payroll taxes for working Americans.

* A majority, 52-40, favors Federal aid to state governments to avert public employee layoffs.

* A huge majority, 80-16, favors spending money on the nation’s infrastructure in order to try to create jobs.

* A big majority, 71, favors reducing the deficit through a combination of tax increases and spending cuts; a meager 21 percent favors only spending cuts.

* A solid majority, 56-37, favors reducing the deficit with tax hikes on households earning $250,000 a year or more.

* A solid majority, 56-29, thinks creating jobs should be prioritized over cutting spending.

You have indulged in a little conflating of your own, TTBF. Let's see what happens in 2012. Wanna make any bets?

It does not take much imagination to say that Republicans will keep the House and take both the Senate and the Presidency, although a thin Senate majority is likely to result in continued gridlock, whoever wins.

Your ideas and policies are bankrupt and you are determined to bring everyone else down with you.

[Rob Iola]

C'mon dude - essentially these questions boil down to "would you like it if we take money from someone else and give it to you?"

And what is the correlation between Federal spending and jobs creation? Don't we have data on this from the last 2 years?

I wasn't addressing whether it would work or not... I was addressing that there is significant public support for what he wants to do - this is the fight he wants the election to be about - and that is a winning strategy.

I agree that it appears that this is Obama's strategy, and that it could well be a winning strategy.

Worked well for Chavez in Venezuela...

[BDKJMU]

+1
Obama running on a platform of what he's done for the economy would be one set in sinking sand. He'd have to paint the GOP as complete obstructionists while continuing to blame the prior administration and the gods for why he didn't get anything done. Either that or somehow convince the public that his programs allowed the US economy to dodge a bullet and that it could have been much worse.

That being said, I haven't seen anything out of the GOP yet that gets me excited. If things don't improve economically before the donks and conks begin stumping hard, the GOP may not need it. I think that while the White House won't come out and say it, they are absolutely playing the class warfare card as an undertheme to whatever they use as a platform.

here's the problem for conks:

voters are proving to have a longer memory than they are given credit for - the VAST majority still blame Bush for the economy... so pinning the economy on Obama isn't sticking for the GOP

I calling BS unless you got a reputable poll that shows the VAST majority of likely voters still blame Bush...

[TwinTownBisonFan]

You're conflating what you want and what is real.

Here's the polling round up on tax increases vs. cuts: polling average 64.5 for balance, 30 for cuts.

http://capitalgainsandgames.com/blog/br ... -tax-polls

Here's a summary that I was citing:
http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com ... -math.html

You have indulged in a little conflating of your own, TTBF. Let's see what happens in 2012. Wanna make any bets?

It does not take much imagination to say that Republicans will keep the House and take both the Senate and the Presidency, although a thin Senate majority is likely to result in continued gridlock, whoever wins.

Your ideas and policies are bankrupt and you are determined to bring everyone else down with you.

Ironic given that my party didn't take our country to the brink of default for electoral gain - that would be the GOP. The term for what they did is, at the very least, economic nihilism - one could make a stronger charge - I won't... but you could.

As for 2012 - anyone who wants to make a forecast 14 months out is a fool. I think Obama has positioned himself well - especially given all the challenges he faces... I also think the GOP has problems in that any candidate who satisfies their base likely will repulse most voters...

[native]

here's the problem for conks:

voters are proving to have a longer memory than they are given credit for - the VAST majority still blame Bush for the economy... so pinning the economy on Obama isn't sticking for the GOP

I calling BS unless you got a reputable poll that shows the VAST majority of likely voters still blame Bush...

TTBF is blowing smoke. Recent polls suggest a convergence.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_ ... s_policies" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The question is, who will voters blame in 2012? Obama and TTBF are pathetically cynical and over-reaching in their class warfare approach, and it won't work this time.

[BDKJMU]

I calling BS unless you got a reputable poll that shows the VAST majority of likely voters still blame Bush...

TTBF is blowing smoke. Recent polls suggest a convergence.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_ ... s_policies" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The question is, who will voters blame in 2012? Obama and TTBF are pathetically cynical and over-reaching in their class warfare approach, and it won't work this time.

Yep. Obama had been in office approx 32 months. After another 13+ months even less will be blaming Bush and more will be blaming Obama. I hope the donks campaign on "Its all Bush's fault" because in late 2012 with Bush out of office 3 3/4 years that will be bound to fail big time....

[native]

....
Ironic given that my party didn't take our country to the brink of default for electoral gain - that would be the GOP. The term for what they did is, at the very least, economic nihilism - one could make a stronger charge - I won't... but you could.

As for 2012 - anyone who wants to make a forecast 14 months out is a fool. I think Obama has positioned himself well - especially given all the challenges he faces... I also think the GOP has problems in that any candidate who satisfies their base likely will repulse most voters...

Your president and your party - not the GOP - brought the country to the brink of default not once, but twice... ironic that you should bring up the concept of nihilism in a discussion about Obama...

Obama has cynically "positioned himself" on a vacuous proto-communnist platform of class warfare and you are bursting at the seams with pride for his "position." King George didn't fvck us nearly as badly as you, your party, or your president.

[BDKJMU]

Discover the Obama re-elect narrative.

Worked like a charm in Minnesota's Gov race in 2010 - an awful year for Dems...

Call for something reasonable - watch the right-wing **** their drawers and defend millionaires while attacking Social Security and Medicare... gee, wonder how that will play out with voters?

Obama's tax plan (or variations on the theme) have about 60% public support
A balanced approach to solving problems (cuts and increases) has about 68% support
A HUGE majority 75%+ believe creating jobs is more important than controlling spending.

This is a winning narrative for Obama and the Dems... the GOP - knowing no other mode but "attack attack attack" seem poised to hurl themselves on this one too - just as planned.

I'm calling BS.

64% Favor Looking for Spending Cuts Throughout the Federal Government
Friday, September 09, 2011
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_ ... government" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely U.S. Voters shows that 62% believe cutting taxes is better than increasing government spending when it comes to creating jobs.:
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_ ... b_programs" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Appaholic]

It will not matter who Obama's opponent is in 2012. The majority of voters will not be stupid enough to re-elect him. We are probably in a once-in-a-century cycle where all bets are off. Thank GOD the young 'uns got to see with their own eyes what Obama's policies delivered.

Disagree. Strongly. Let the GOP throw a Palin, Bachman or possibly even Perry against Obama and watch Obama for another 4 yrs. Fiscally-conservative, socially-moderate Indies like myself will either vote 3rd party or stay home while the progressives will rally to the polls to prevent another demagogue wrapped in a flag carrying a gun and thumping a bible from getting in the white house. If the GOP is smart, it will either nominate Romney or draft a Ryan or Christie for the nomination and put this election to bed....

[Appaholic]

... I also think the GOP has problems in that any candidate who satisfies their base likely will repulse most voters...

Bingo. The GOP, like Obama in 2008, will not win the white house without the Indies. And Indies won't support a candidate that passes all the lithmus tests required of the flesh-eating zombie faction of the uber-right....hopefully, there are some reasonable grown-ups left in the GOP to field a candidate that will at least make the next election interesting...

[kalm]

It will not matter who Obama's opponent is in 2012. The majority of voters will not be stupid enough to re-elect him. We are probably in a once-in-a-century cycle where all bets are off. Thank GOD the young 'uns got to see with their own eyes what Obama's policies delivered.

Disagree. Strongly. Let the GOP throw a Palin, Bachman or possibly even Perry against Obama and watch Obama for another 4 yrs. Fiscally-conservative, socially-moderate Indies like myself will either vote 3rd party or stay home while the progressives will rally to the polls to prevent another demagogue wrapped in a flag carrying a gun and thumping a bible from getting in the white house. If the GOP is smart, it will either nominate Romney or draft a Ryan or Christie for the nomination and put this election to bed....

You can blame Obama for not fixing an economy that someone else broke. And the class warfare thingy worked pretty well for FDR.

(not that I'm saying Obushma is anything like FDR).

[Appaholic]

Disagree. Strongly. Let the GOP throw a Palin, Bachman or possibly even Perry against Obama and watch Obama for another 4 yrs. Fiscally-conservative, socially-moderate Indies like myself will either vote 3rd party or stay home while the progressives will rally to the polls to prevent another demagogue wrapped in a flag carrying a gun and thumping a bible from getting in the white house. If the GOP is smart, it will either nominate Romney or draft a Ryan or Christie for the nomination and put this election to bed....

You can blame Obama for not fixing an economy that someone else broke. And the class warfare thingy worked pretty well for FDR.

(not that I'm saying Obushma is anything like FDR).

There's plenty of blame to go around and I'm afraid it'll take a world war to vindicate his policies & fix this economy (like FDR). It's all the other stuff he hasn't done that he said he'd do....Gitmo....Patriot Act....Bush Tax Cuts....leave Afghan & Iraq....IOW, although he ran on "Change", he's no different than the one before....

[AZGrizFan]

C'mon dude - essentially these questions boil down to "would you like it if we take money from someone else and give it to you?"

And what is the correlation between Federal spending and jobs creation? Don't we have data on this from the last 2 years?

I wasn't addressing whether it would work or not... I was addressing that there is significant public support for what he wants to do - this is the fight he wants the election to be about - and that is a winning strategy.

And Obama couldn't care LESS whether anything he proposes actually WORKS, he just wants to get reelected. He's NEVER been concerned about actually FIXING the country's problems, he just wants four more years.

[AZGrizFan]

It will not matter who Obama's opponent is in 2012. The majority of voters will not be stupid enough to re-elect him. We are probably in a once-in-a-century cycle where all bets are off. Thank GOD the young 'uns got to see with their own eyes what Obama's policies delivered.

Disagree. Strongly. Let the GOP throw a Palin, Bachman or possibly even Perry against Obama and watch Obama for another 4 yrs. Fiscally-conservative, socially-moderate Indies like myself will either vote 3rd party or stay home while the progressives will rally to the polls to prevent another demagogue wrapped in a flag carrying a gun and thumping a bible from getting in the white house. If the GOP is smart, it will either nominate Romney or draft a Ryan or Christie for the nomination and put this election to bed....

I am a fiscally conservative social moderate who will NOT be staying home under any circumstances. And once again I will probably have to hold my nose and vote for a candidate I'm not thrilled with rather than vote for one that is tearing the country apart.

[kalm]

You can blame Obama for not fixing an economy that someone else broke. And the class warfare thingy worked pretty well for FDR.

(not that I'm saying Obushma is anything like FDR).

There's plenty of blame to go around and I'm afraid it'll take a world war to vindicate his policies & fix this economy (like FDR). It's all the other stuff he hasn't done that he said he'd do....Gitmo....Patriot Act....Bush Tax Cuts....leave Afghan & Iraq....IOW, although he ran on "Change", he's no different than the one before....

Yep. Obushma.

[native]

Disagree. Strongly. Let the GOP throw a Palin, Bachman or possibly even Perry against Obama and watch Obama for another 4 yrs. Fiscally-conservative, socially-moderate Indies like myself will either vote 3rd party or stay home while the progressives will rally to the polls to prevent another demagogue wrapped in a flag carrying a gun and thumping a bible from getting in the white house. If the GOP is smart, it will either nominate Romney or draft a Ryan or Christie for the nomination and put this election to bed....

You can blame Obama for not fixing an economy that someone else broke. And the class warfare thingy worked pretty well for FDR.

(not that I'm saying Obushma is anything like FDR).

Class warfare worked for FDR but it will not work for Obama or the Democrats this time, especially if we are still in a recession. Voters are now blaming Obama and Bush equally for the economy, but Bush will not be on the 2012 ticket. And how much more will voters blame Obama by the time of the November elections in 2012? The blame game is a one-way downward slide for Obama.

It is true that Congressional Republicans are unpopular, but what you fail to recognize is that half or more of the overall dissatisfaction with Congress is due to conservative dissatisfaction with half measures, and that half of the dissatisfaction from independents is that Republicans make such an issue of avoiding tax hikes. The GOP should change tactics to emphasize tax reforms . They should not rule out tax hikes, rather they should fight on the specifics of the idiotic Democrat proposals. It is also noteworthy that voters still trust Republicans more oneconomic issues.

[Ivytalk]

It will not matter who Obama's opponent is in 2012. The majority of voters will not be stupid enough to re-elect him. We are probably in a once-in-a-century cycle where all bets are off. Thank GOD the young 'uns got to see with their own eyes what Obama's policies delivered.

Disagree. Strongly. Let the GOP throw a Palin, Bachman or possibly even Perry against Obama and watch Obama for another 4 yrs. Fiscally-conservative, socially-moderate Indies like myself will either vote 3rd party or stay home while the progressives will rally to the polls to prevent another demagogue wrapped in a flag carrying a gun and thumping a bible from getting in the white house. If the GOP is smart, it will either nominate Romney or draft a Ryan or Christie for the nomination and put this election to bed....

That's precisely the way for the GOP to win it. Which is why I'm backing Romney, at least until Christie gets in or Daniels gets back in (neither of which appears likely at this juncture).

[native]

"...Former President Bill Clinton tells Newsmax that Washington should not raise taxes until the slumping economy is turned around — and says President Obama’s plan to increase taxes on the wealthy won’t solve the debt problem...."

http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/bill-cl ... ode=D16F-1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;