Ticket to beat Obama

Overheal · 11-08-2011 2:32pm

The answer to why they didn't show up earlier is the politicians that drove and founded it didn't act until it was far too late. The people were probably always there in the voter base or at least a lot of them were but you have to admit there was a large amount of organization that took place in 2009 when this movement took off.

Suryavarman · 11-08-2011 2:47pm

Lockstep wrote: »

No, it really doesn't. Getting elected in an area as conservative as Texas is one thing, getting elected for the US is a whole different kettle of fish.

He hasn't gotten the support of Maher, Maher said he prefers him to the other Republicans (if he had to pick one Republican)
I preferred McCain to the other Republican candidates in 2008, it still doesn't mean I supported him.

Anytime he goes on Bill Maher's show he gets a positive response from both Bill and the audience. Whether they have enough in common for them to vote for Paul next November has to be seen.

Pretty much every politician will say that they predicted the crisis and have a solution. Hell, the CPUSA have that going for them. Paul's policies are very very radical. He's not proposing a few tax cuts and liberalisation but a rampant downscaling and elimination of federal agencies, the IRS, income tax and the Fed.
Regardless of how bad the economy is, this doesn't mean that most Independents and moderates will agree with him.

Paul predicted it with such accuracy on the House floor, 5 years before the bubble burst, gives him a lot more credibility than CPUSA though. I think a lot of people would be in favour of abolishing the IRS on the way to getting rid of the income tax.

When it comes down to voting time, if unemployment and inflation are on the rise and the economy is stagnant or contracting, there isn't a hope in hell independents are going to go for more of the same.

Possibly, but I think one thing he can offer is a different sort of hope, one where the two sides can work together which would be highly appealing

Will the Republicans nominate somebody who might not win the support of the Tea Party? If the scenario I applied above becomes reality, is the promise of compromise and more of the same going to be appealing?

Lockstep · 11-08-2011 5:10pm

Suryavarman wrote: »

Anytime he goes on Bill Maher's show he gets a positive response from both Bill and the audience. Whether they have enough in common for them to vote for Paul next November has to be seen.

I really, really doubt it.
Paul seems like a nice guy and with consistent/principled views. That doesn't mean liberals will vote for him.
Maher clearly said he'd vote for Paul if he had to pick one Republican. That does NOT mean he supports Paul. I'd vote for Paul over the likes of Palin and Bachmann but that most definetly does not make me a Paul supporter. I'd still support Obama over him.

Suryavarman wrote: »

Paul predicted it with such accuracy on the House floor, 5 years before the bubble burst, gives him a lot more credibility than CPUSA though. I think a lot of people would be in favour of abolishing the IRS on the way to getting rid of the income tax.

When it comes down to voting time, if unemployment and inflation are on the rise and the economy is stagnant or contracting, there isn't a hope in hell independents are going to go for more of the same.

Have you any evidence supporting your claim that 'a lot of people' would support the IRS and income tax abolishment?

The economy might be poor but I really doubt most people are radical enough to support such sweeping changes. Using the same logic, people would support the CPUSA as it offers a radical departure from the current way of doing things.

People do tend to vote for 'more of the same' but with some minor differences. That's why things stay so similar.

Suryavarman wrote: »

Will the Republicans nominate somebody who might not win the support of the Tea Party? If the scenario I applied above becomes reality, is the promise of compromise and more of the same going to be appealing?

I'd say so. The Tea Party might be loud and visible but they lack the numbers to get the votes out. Witness the poor showing of most TP candidates in the Congress elections.

Mjollnir · 11-08-2011 7:35pm

Amerika wrote: »

I'm part of the Tea Party. Help me out here... when and how did I lose my integrity? :rolleyes:

When did you ever have any?

Manic Moran · 12-08-2011 4:45pm

deepertheroots wrote: »

Ah yes the so-called tea partier, also an ex-democrat and past member of Al Gore's democrat team. He also attended this years Bilderberg meetings in Turkey, like so many past presidents and prime ministers did before they were elected.

He is also the senior Governor in the country, has a good job record on point (i.e. he's actually been running something), and is relatively charismatic. He's one of the few Republicans in the field that I could consider voting for without holding my nose. The problem is not if he can beat Obama, but if he can beat the other Republican nominees for the nomination. He doesn't resonate with very many Republicans, regardless of how well he might do with independents. In any case, he's confirmed he's running.

The Republican problem remains the same as always. They have a great opportunity to kick Obama out, but they run an excellent chance of shooting themselves in the foot by an idiotic nomination.

NTM

gargleblaster · 12-08-2011 6:31pm

Rick Perry also has some seriously scary backers. Before his prayer rally last weekend I wouldn't have thought he was tied too closely to them. Now, though, I don't know.

Rick Perry and the New Apostolic Reformation

Rick Perry's Jesus Imperative

This one's even better - features quotes from some of these people.
Rachel Maddow Outs MSM's Downplay of Rick Perry's Extremist Supporters

Amerika · 12-08-2011 7:16pm

gargleblaster wrote: »

Rick Perry also has some seriously scary backers. Before his prayer rally last weekend I wouldn't have thought he was tied too closely to them. Now, though, I don't know.

Rick Perry and the New Apostolic Reformation

Rick Perry's Jesus Imperative

This one's even better - features quotes from some of these people.
Rachel Maddow Outs MSM's Downplay of Rick Perry's Extremist Supporters

Hmmm… Is it scarier than the hysterical anti-American diatribes of Barack Obama’s spiritual advisor and minister Jeremiah Wright? Or the influence upon him early in his political career by the likes of William Ayers? Or the somewhat anti-white writings in his books? Or his ultra-left record as a "community organizer," Illinois state legislator, and Senator?

Well, at least Perry isn’t a pig in a poke.

deepertheroots · 12-08-2011 8:26pm

Manic Moran wrote: »

He is also the senior Governor in the country, has a good job record on point (i.e. he's actually been running something), and is relatively charismatic. He's one of the few Republicans in the field that I could consider voting for without holding my nose. The problem is not if he can beat Obama, but if he can beat the other Republican nominees for the nomination. He doesn't resonate with very many Republicans, regardless of how well he might do with independents. In any case, he's confirmed he's running.

The Republican problem remains the same as always. They have a great opportunity to kick Obama out, but they run an excellent chance of shooting themselves in the foot by an idiotic nomination.

NTM

He has been the longest standing governor, which was handed to him when Bush went to the white house. And no doubt he will be boasting about Texas' relatively healthy economy which is mainly due to the huge number of illegal immigrants contributing in Texas.

He doesn't resonate with many people outside of Texas, but he is financially backed by billionaires like Harold Simmons. I have a bad feeling he will get the nomination as he will appeal to the lowest common denominator (and let's face it, America is full of them). Another Bush in the making. Hopefully he will get eaten alive in the forthcoming debates.

Overheal · 12-08-2011 10:26pm

Amerika wrote: »

Hmmm… Is it scarier than the hysterical anti-American diatribes of Barack Obama’s spiritual advisor and minister Jeremiah Wright? Or the influence upon him early in his political career by the likes of William Ayers? Or the somewhat anti-white writings in his books? Or his ultra-left record as a "community organizer," Illinois state legislator, and Senator?

Well, at least Perry isn’t a pig in a poke.

I think it has as much bearing on Perry as Wright and Ayers did on Obama. Which is to say, virtually none.

Overheal · 12-08-2011 10:28pm

bnt wrote: »

Well, Newsweek likes Bachmann:

(click for MSNBC report on the cover)

It came to this:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-august-9-2011/glazed-and-confused?xrs=eml_tds

deepertheroots · 12-08-2011 10:46pm

Landslide, Ron Paul gets over half of 30,000 votes in the Ames poll!

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2011/08/12/benzinga1854956.DTL

Overheal · 13-08-2011 4:15am

Which means he wont be president

just ask other previous winners, like President Huckabee and President Romney.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar · 13-08-2011 11:41am

always makes me sad how worked up people get about the possibility of paul being president. yes it'd be fantastic, and good to see someone who didn't bleed statism in the role but it is *never* going to happen

I have more chance of winning the election and I'm not even eligble to run.

matthew8 · 13-08-2011 2:55pm

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

always makes me sad how worked up people get about the possibility of paul being president. yes it'd be fantastic, and good to see someone who didn't bleed statism in the role but it is *never* going to happen

I have more chance of winning the election and I'm not even eligble to run.

He's doing very well in Iowa and a packed field will suit him.

RichieC · 13-08-2011 4:24pm

matthew8 wrote: »

He's doing very well in Iowa and a packed field will suit him.

so you've said like 20 times... he's not going to win no matter how much you wish it. The establishment simply will not let an international isolationist in to ruin their Global size game of Risk.

The Media decides who the contenders are, Americans just get too choose between their two picks.

go on, say that isn't true.

deepertheroots · 13-08-2011 5:28pm

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

always makes me sad how worked up people get about the possibility of paul being president. yes it'd be fantastic, and good to see someone who didn't bleed statism in the role but it is *never* going to happen

I have more chance of winning the election and I'm not even eligble to run.

Why can't it happen? Cause filth like fox news and bill o'reilly say it over and over again after every poll he wins? Thankfully it's not up to fox news, it's up to the people.

deepertheroots · 13-08-2011 5:32pm

RichieC wrote: »

so you've said like 20 times... he's not going to win no matter how much you wish it. The establishment simply will not let an international isolationist in to ruin their Global size game of Risk.

The Media decides who the contenders are, Americans just get too choose between their two picks.

go on, say that isn't true.

There's that term again, how can you call someone an isolationist who wants to trade and be friends with countries, and not make them dependant on America!

RichieC · 13-08-2011 5:45pm

deepertheroots wrote: »

There's that term again, how can you call someone an isolationist who wants to trade and be friends with countries, and not make them dependant on America!

Fair enough, non-interventionist then. the point still stands.

Manic Moran · 13-08-2011 5:58pm

And no doubt he will be boasting about Texas' relatively healthy economy which is mainly due to the huge number of illegal immigrants contributing in Texas.

So how did California manage to screw that pooch, then?

NTM

Overheal · 13-08-2011 6:09pm

RichieC wrote: »

go on, say that isn't true.

Not True.

Go on, prove it.

bnt · 14-08-2011 3:51pm

Pawlenty is out. Farewell, we hardly knew ye ...

jank · 14-08-2011 5:18pm

So we are down to the big 4!

deepertheroots · 15-08-2011 9:40am

jank wrote: »

So we are down to the big 4!

The big 2, establishment v Ron Paul

Amerika · 15-08-2011 3:22pm

There might be a far left challenge to Obama… Good Will Grunting. :rolleyes:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/aug/14/matt-damon-us-presidential-race

spank_inferno · 15-08-2011 4:50pm

How about a Perry / Bachman ticket?
It will fire up the base but probably alienate too many moderates.

My thoughts turn to a Perry / Romney ticket (or vise versa)
That could have broad base appeal if the two could work together.

sarumite · 15-08-2011 6:39pm

Amerika wrote: »

Hmmmm….

Roughly 25% of American adults consider themselves “Tea Partiers”… with me being one of them. Contrary to popular liberal thought, we not affiliated with any political or social group. Rather, the “Tea Party” is more a state of mind.

If it runs as a republican, votes as a republican, has the letter "R" beside it name and is supported, by and large, by republicans then you will have to excuse me if I find it difficult to see the wood from the wood.

We here in America we’re looking at a long term deficit problem primarily due to entitlements (and the Tea Party realizes something must be done about Medicare and Social Security which will be painful for some). Our deficit is currently out of control because we have decreased tax revenues caused by the recession and a week economy, accompanied with increased government spending - with the stimulus leading the list. And the Democrat’s new regulations are scaring the hell out of businesses. How is this the “Tea Party’s’” fault? We (plural) may be against the methods the current administration are utilizing to address the situation, but we didn't cause them.

You ignored the fact that Tax takes as a percentage of GDP is the lowest in decades. The fact is if the TP republicans were serious about deficit reduction they would acknowledge that the goverment needs income to run and that eventually taxes will have to rise....pledge or no pledge!

Democrats might have inherited the recession from GW Bush, but they now own the deficit, runaway spending, and a rotten economy with little-to-no sign of recovery in the near future. They had control of the Presidency, the Senate, and the House in 2009 and 2010. What did they do right the economy when the could have gotten pretty much of anything they wanted passed? A stimulus enacted to keep unemployment under 8% which was mostly a payback to their union supporters, Cap and Trade, student loan federalization, health care mandates, and a whopping amount of federal regulations which has businesses running scared and reluctant to invest… no wonder they aren’t hiring. They fiddled with their liberal checklist while Rome burned. How is this the “Tea Party’s’” fault? We might be against these policies, but we didn't cause them.

You forgot to mention that they inherited a deficit, two unfunded wars, a decadent tax cut and an unfunded entitlement expansion. At least 1/3 of the stimulus was tax cuts, something TP'ers like....though joking aside, I don't think the stimulus was as successful as Obama boasts, but it wasn't the faiure TP'ers make it out to be either. The rest are partisan bickering points....its simply a case of chose your side!

We’re not stupid. We know the Democrats and Liberal Left are in desperate need of a bogeyman. We know if Obama loses the election next year, the Democrats will most probably also lose the Senate. We know the Democratic party (and the liberals who currently control it) are using the “Tea Party” to distract the public from their own terrible shortcomings and record. It's apparent the Democrats and Liberal Left also knows this... why don’t you?

The Tea pary don't offer a great alternative to the current administration on the economy. You can't tax yourself out of a deficit so large...but neither can you 'slash and burn' it.

(and by the way... it was GW Bush's hand in the initial stimulus at the end of his term that spawned the "Tea Party")

I accept that there was a sizeable minority of current TP'ers who galvanized around Ron Paul's message in the last election cycle. However far more jumped on the bandwagon once Obama became president.

Nodin · 15-08-2011 7:42pm

spank_inferno wrote: »

How about a Perry / Bachman ticket?
It will fire up the base but probably alienate too many moderates.

....

"terrify" would be a more appropriate term.

Amerika · 15-08-2011 8:35pm

sarumite wrote: »

If it runs as a republican, votes as a republican, has the letter "R" beside it name and is supported, by and large, by republicans then you will have to excuse me if I find it difficult to see the wood from the wood.

I had a meeting with the president of a company that we get supplies from. He is a lifelong Democrat. He said 2012 will probably be the first year in his life he won’t vote “D.” He also told me he can’t understand why the media demonizes the Tea Party (he had no idea I was part of the Tea Party), because he said the stuff they preach really makes common sense. He said he figures he’s a closet Tea Partier himself.

Funny coincidence that his name was Woody.

You ignored the fact that Tax takes as a percentage of GDP is the lowest in decades. The fact is if the TP republicans were serious about deficit reduction they would acknowledge that the goverment needs income to run and that eventually taxes will have to rise....pledge or no pledge!

Hmmm..... So how about the Accounts Receivable Tax, Building Permit Tax, Capital Gains Tax, CDL license Tax, Cigarette Tax, Corporate Income Tax, Court Fines (indirect taxes), Dog License Tax, Federal Income Tax, Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA), Fishing License Tax, Food License Tax, Fuel permit tax, Gasoline Tax (44 cents per gallon where I live), Hunting License Tax, Inheritance Tax, Interest expense (tax on the money), Inventory tax IRS Interest Charges (tax on top of tax), IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax), Liquor Tax, Local Income Tax, Luxury Taxes, Marriage License Tax, Medicare Tax, Property Tax, Real Estate Tax, Septic Permit Tax, Service Charge Taxes, Social Security Tax, Road Usage Taxes (Truckers), Sales Taxes (6 percent where I live), Recreational Vehicle Tax, Road Toll Booth Taxes, Local School Tax (one huge ass tax), State Income Tax, State Unemployment Tax (SUTA), Telephone federal excise tax, Telephone federal universal service fee tax, Telephone federal, state and local surcharge taxes, Telephone minimum usage surcharge tax, Telephone recurring and non-recurring charges tax, Telephone state and local tax, Telephone usage charge tax, Toll Bridge Taxes, Toll Tunnel Taxes, Traffic Fines (indirect taxation), Trailer registration tax, Utility Taxes, Vehicle License Registration Tax, Vehicle Sales Tax, Watercraft registration Tax, Well Permit Tax, Workers Compensation Tax, and others.

I believe none of these taxes existed 100 years ago.

And our corporate tax rate is 35%. If I’m correct... the second highest in the world.

Now what was that you were saying about a percentage of GDP?

We’re already taxed to death, and it's getting worse.

You forgot to mention that they inherited a deficit, two unfunded wars, a decadent tax cut and an unfunded entitlement expansion. At least 1/3 of the stimulus was tax cuts, something TP'ers like....though joking aside, I don't think the stimulus was as successful as Obama boasts, but it wasn't the faiure TP'ers make it out to be either. The rest are partisan bickering points....its simply a case of chose your side!

Yes he inherited much from decades of stupidity, as does every president. As I said, for two years he could have gotten pretty much anything he wanted done.

Can you tell me where the stimulus money went (other than cuts)... or is that considered a partisan bickering point? You might want to start looking at unions, then move to unions, and finally consider unions in your quest for knowledge.

I believe Bush's bailout portion has already been paid back with interest. No excuse for him doing it in the first place, but at least it was sound spending.

The Tea pary don't offer a great alternative to the current administration on the economy. You can't tax yourself out of a deficit so large...but neither can you 'slash and burn' it.

I read Obama increased the size of the Federal Gov't by 30%. Who here can tell me what huge improvements we've see from this growth, over what we had 3 years ago?

And why not try 'slash and burn'... as 'tax and spend till you drop' hasn't seemed to work so well. And spending hasn't been a democrat only type of thing. At least the "R"'s seem to now acknowledge their addiction and are attempting to get help.

I accept that there was a sizeable minority of current TP'ers who galvanized around Ron Paul's message in the last election cycle. However far more jumped on the bandwagon once Obama became president.

It wasn't Ron Paul that got us going... it was the Bush's bailouts, Obama's bailouts and stimulus, and of course Rick Santelli that put the fire in our bellies. Ron Paul almost never comes up in discussion.

sarumite · 17-08-2011 10:33pm

Amerika wrote: »

I had a meeting with the president of a company that we get supplies from. He is a lifelong Democrat. He said 2012 will probably be the first year in his life he won’t vote “D.” He also told me he can’t understand why the media demonizes the Tea Party (he had no idea I was part of the Tea Party), because he said the stuff they preach really makes common sense. He said he figures he’s a closet Tea Partier himself.

Funny coincidence that his name was Woody.

I have a friend in GA who votes normally for republicans. Voted Bush twice, was going to vote McCain but decided not to vote at all in the end as Palin scared him too much. Says if Bachmann wins the primary he would consider voting for Obama. Its not unheard of, though I wouldn't consider my friend indicative of the typical voter.

Hmmm..... So how about the Accounts Receivable Tax, Building Permit Tax, Capital Gains Tax, CDL license Tax, Cigarette Tax, Corporate Income Tax, Court Fines (indirect taxes), Dog License Tax, Federal Income Tax, Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA), Fishing License Tax, Food License Tax, Fuel permit tax, Gasoline Tax (44 cents per gallon where I live), Hunting License Tax, Inheritance Tax, Interest expense (tax on the money), Inventory tax IRS Interest Charges (tax on top of tax), IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax), Liquor Tax, Local Income Tax, Luxury Taxes, Marriage License Tax, Medicare Tax, Property Tax, Real Estate Tax, Septic Permit Tax, Service Charge Taxes, Social Security Tax, Road Usage Taxes (Truckers), Sales Taxes (6 percent where I live), Recreational Vehicle Tax, Road Toll Booth Taxes, Local School Tax (one huge ass tax), State Income Tax, State Unemployment Tax (SUTA), Telephone federal excise tax, Telephone federal universal service fee tax, Telephone federal, state and local surcharge taxes, Telephone minimum usage surcharge tax, Telephone recurring and non-recurring charges tax, Telephone state and local tax, Telephone usage charge tax, Toll Bridge Taxes, Toll Tunnel Taxes, Traffic Fines (indirect taxation), Trailer registration tax, Utility Taxes, Vehicle License Registration Tax, Vehicle Sales Tax, Watercraft registration Tax, Well Permit Tax, Workers Compensation Tax, and others.

I believe none of these taxes existed 100 years ago.

And our corporate tax rate is 35%. If I’m correct... the second highest in the world.

And 50-60 years ago the top rate of tax was north of 90%. Of course since 1911 many things have changed, two world wars, the rise and fall of soviet Russia, automotive age, space age, computer age, univerals literacy etc. Not really useful for a comparison imo. Hell, I would even hazard a guess and say that several of the taxes you listed weren't even relevant back then.

Now what was that you were saying about a percentage of GDP?

We’re already taxed to death, and it's getting worse.

You personally may be drowning in taxes, but that doesn't negate the fact that the tax base is being eroded. If you want to get serious about the deficit then that trend will need to be reversed

And why not try 'slash and burn'... as 'tax and spend till you drop' hasn't seemed to work so well. And spending hasn't been a democrat only type of thing. At least the "R"'s seem to now acknowledge their addiction and are attempting to get help.

I totally agree "tax Borrow and spend till you drop" hasn't worked...though 'slash and burn' is not the only option. I also agree the Republicans have acknowledged that spending will need to be cut, though their inability to compromise is part of the problem.

It wasn't Ron Paul that got us going... it was the Bush's bailouts, Obama's bailouts and stimulus, and of course Rick Santelli that put the fire in our bellies. Ron Paul almost never comes up in discussion.

I will have to concede this point since I was never at a tea party meeting , I wasn't even aware they existed until shortly after Obama was elected and they started to hold rallies.

Denerick · 18-08-2011 10:50pm

Obama will win the election, and so handily I'd wager. All this talk of jobs, the economy etc. etc. Elections in the US are not win like that. A combination of money (Obama can outraise any Republican beast, though far right attack adds will be a miserable sight in 2012) and aspiration wins elections. The US far right aspire to a society that is so hopelessly over-run with class conflict, injustice, and stagnation that any half sensible American will thoroughly reject them. Elections are won on the margins, Obama will win with a majority of 51 or 52%. That is all it takes. In short the Republicans are too nutty and Americans, even though they seem incapable of making rational political decisions, have not abandoned all forms of self preservation.

Ticket to beat Obama

Comments