2012 Poll

[AeWingnut]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Gingrich is a very bright guy. I think he might do a good job if he gets the chance.

Gingrich is too friendly with Nancy Pelosi

Americans hate phoney republicans
real ones they love but RINOs not so much

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I don't think that has ever happened in history where the incumbent didn't get the nomination. There was at least one case where the incumbent (LBJ) didn't run for re-election. But I don't think there has ever been a case where the President didn't get the nomination.

It happened fairly regularly in the nineteenth century (Millard Fillmore & Franklin Pierce to name two), but it hasn't happened in quite some time. In 1980 Teddy Kennedy launched a pretty serious primary challenge of incumbent Jimmy Carter but came up short.

That being said, the idea of Hillary challenging Obama in the primary only exists in Doreen's imagination. Anybody that knows the first thing about politics knows there is no chance that happens.

[herkhorse]

Oh, I'm sure it exists in Hillary's imagination too

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by joeydb

I think we have a lot of other things to worry about as a nation. The first several are all financial in nature. Get jobs for the people. Cut taxes so they actually have some money left over after they work their asses off. Cut MANY wasteful government programs, and for God's sake start to PAY DOWN THE DEBT so as to eliminate it as a concern.

Anything other than "trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see" - as this administration's policy has been described - has got to be a better idea.

The fact that there are still people who think you can cut taxes to reduce the deficit is scary to me. Obama has done the former, no one who was elected was going to be able to do the latter in this climate. I love the "get rid of the deficit!" refrain without any specific explanations of how to do so.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

The fact that there are still people who think you can cut taxes to reduce the deficit is scary to me. Obama has done the former, no one who was elected was going to be able to do the latter in this climate. I love the "get rid of the deficit!" refrain without any specific explanations of how to do so.

The specifics are: cut spending, period. And yeah, that means welfare too.

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by joeydb

The specifics are: cut spending, period. And yeah, that means welfare too.

Republicans in a nutshell. "Stop spending!" ... "On what?" ... "Stop spending!" ... "OK, which programs should be cut?" ... "Uh, I hate welfare!"

[Riot]

Originally Posted by joeydb

The specifics are: cut spending, period. And yeah, that means welfare too.

Why don't we cut out the largest part of what's causing the deficit over future years?

[Riot]

Since there is over two years left, what the heck, let's look at other polls, too (as nothing matters this far out)

The survey contained a batch of good news for both the President and Congressional Democrats, however.

Asked to assign blame for the balky economy, 61% point to the Bush Administration, while 27% fault Obama.

The President notched a favorable 31%-26% split between voters who believe his economic policies have helped and those who think they hurt,

while nearly 80% believe the economy is stable or heading in the right direction.

And despite the economic upheaval and political acrimony that have marked his term thus far, voters aren't pining for Obama's predecessor; they tapped Obama over George W. Bush by a 53%-33% margin.

Nor are they convinced that Sarah Palin is up to the challenges of the Oval Office. Obama clobbered Palin, 55%-34%, in a hypothetical 2012 matchup that should have Democrats salivating.

http://www.time.com/time/politics/ar...003953,00.html

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by Riot

Why don't we cut out the largest part of what's causing the deficit over future years?

But....I....but...but...small businesses.....but....welfare...but...I....uh.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by AeWingnut

Gingrich is too friendly with Nancy Pelosi

Americans hate phoney republicans
real ones they love but RINOs not so much

Romney: the Christian right has already refused to vote for "a member of a cult" (Mormon)

Huckabee: Publically said dinosaurs and humans walked the earth together (an earth which is only 6,000 years old). Gets the above vote, not much else.

I wouldn't be surprised if it's down to Gingrich vs Romney at the convention.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

But....I....but...but...small businesses.....but....welfare...but...I....uh.

This morning I was at a commercial business thing, talked to guys from the three biggest Lex banks about horse business, other small businesses - funding, future, credit, profitable business paradigms for the next 10-20 years, niche markets, etc. The money guys didn't seem to have any direction or idea whatsoever.

Tell them to invest in companies that focus on Obama and golfing.

[Danzig]

huckabee is the male version of sarah palin. i can't stand him, and would never vote for him.


and yeah, two wars are the biggest drain by far. so much squandered by bush and company.

[AeWingnut]

Originally Posted by Riot

Romney: the Christian right has already refused to vote for "a member of a cult" (Mormon)

Huckabee: Publically said dinosaurs and humans walked the earth together (an earth which is only 6,000 years old). Gets the above vote, not much else.

I wouldn't be surprised if it's down to Gingrich vs Romney at the convention.

so there won't be a republican at the GOP convention


again

[Riot]

Originally Posted by AeWingnut

so there won't be a republican at the GOP convention


again

Hang in there, John, you've always got Rand Paul

[Riot]

How to get rid of the deficit: I used to be in favor of renewing Bush tax cuts. Now?

Greenspan backs end to Bush tax cuts
By Robin Harding in Washington

Published: July 17 2010 01:37 | Last updated: July 17 2010 01:37

Congress should let all of former president George W. Bush’s 2001 and 2003 tax cuts expire to cut the long-term budget deficit, former Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan has said.

Mr Greenspan’s support helped persuade Congress to pass the tax cuts in 2001 and his comments thrust him into a heated political battle over whether to extend them beyond the end of 2010. “They should follow the law and let them lapse,” Mr Greenspan said in an interview.

“The problem is, unless we start to come to grips with this long-term [budget] outlook, we are going to have major problems. I think we misunderstand the momentum of this deficit going forward.”

The Bush cuts lowered income tax rates; created a new 10 per cent tax bracket; raised tax credits for children; and lowered taxes on dividends and capital gains. A “sunset” provision means that all the cuts will expire at the end of this year unless Congress extends them.

Doing so would increase the federal budget deficit by cumulative $2,567bn between 2011 and 2020, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation.

But that would also deepen a growing structural deficit caused by the cost of providing healthcare and social security to an ageing population.

The Congressional Budget Office projects that the national debt will balloon to 87 per cent of gross domestic product by 2020 and 185 per cent by 2035 if the tax cuts are extended and discretionary spending grows in line with the economy.

The Republicans want to extend all the cuts, while most Democrats support proposals by Barack Obama, president, to extend them only for households with incomes below $250,000, lowering the cost to $2,154bn.

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2010.

[joeydb]

The budget shortfall due to "Bush Era Taxcuts" can be easily remedied, by cutting spending. Then there is no deficit.

Typical of Democrats to always want a higher budget, and then blame tax cuts for the shortfall. Stop spending so much and the deficit goes away.

That graph is biased and leftist due to the very fact that tax cuts are NOT expenditures.

[ateamstupid]

What should be cut? I'd be willing to bet you won't say our biggest disproportionate expense, military spending.

[Riot]

The budget shortfall due to "Bush Era Taxcuts" can be easily remedied, by cutting spending. Then there is no deficit.

You're right, spending should have been cut in 2001 and 2003. But the "Bush Era Taxcuts" were both passed completely unfunded at the time (no spending cuts to live within the lowered government income).

Now that decision is coming home to roost. Unfunded tax cuts and unfunded wars. Now we have to pay up for the years of spending what we didn't have.

The choice appears to be not renew the tax cuts (eliminating most of the huge deficit) or cut a rather huge amount of government spending to live within the lower income the tax cuts created.

Which spending to you want to cut?

That graph is biased and leftist due to the very fact that tax cuts are NOT expenditures.

The graph doesn't say tax cuts are expenditures. The graph isn't about expenditures at all. The graph shows the dollar amount of different things that have contributed to our huge deficit. I don't see what's "biased" or "leftist" about that. It's just the reality of it.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by Riot

The graph doesn't say tax cuts are expenditures. The graph isn't about expenditures at all. The graph shows the dollar amount of different things that have contributed to our huge deficit.

Well, if you're going to be THAT specific.....

Cut welfare. Done. Now I can keep my tax cut and everything will be okay.

MOR WARS TOO PLZ.