Romney picks his VP?

[onejayhawk]

this is hilarious, as usual from you. In your world that is very foreign to mine, tax cuts make for a worse economy. I guess tax increases would improve the economy, right?

I'll ask again, if lowering taxes and reducing govt spending isnt part of fiscal conservatism, what is?

He has you there Lucky. A tax cut is a bad idea, but not because it is a drag on the economy.

J

[Mithrandir]

I'm no conservative. What is your point?

J

I was responding to Roto-Rooter (although i don't know why?)

[Lucky]

this is hilarious, as usual from you. In your world that is very foreign to mine, tax cuts make for a worse economy. I guess tax increases would improve the economy, right?

I'll ask again, if lowering taxes and reducing govt spending isnt part of fiscal conservatism, what is?

Tax increases did in fact improve the economy when Reagan was President. One of the things which made Reagan the "Great Communicator" was that he could tell his base one thing, while doing the exact opposite, and keep them eating out of his hand.

I have little doubt that your world is indeed very foreign to yours, since the mechanics of your world exist primarily in your mind. Your world view appears to be constructed largely from the daily talking points distributed to conservative commentators. Or maybe you've been listening to Representative Louie Gohmert, the dumbest SOB ever to serve in Congress.

In any event, educating you on true fiscal conservatism, as opposed to the snake oil and hokum which currently passes for GOP economic thought, is not my cross to bear.

[cardboardbox]

Tax increases did in fact improve the economy when Reagan was President. One of the things which made Reagan the "Great Communicator" was that he could tell his base one thing, while doing the exact opposite, and keep them eating out of his hand.

I have little doubt that your world is indeed very foreign to yours, since the mechanics of your world exist primarily in your mind. Your world view appears to be constructed largely from the daily talking points distributed to conservative commentators. Or maybe you've been listening to Representative Louie Gohmert, the dumbest SOB every to serve in Congress.

In any event, educating you on true fiscal conservatism, as opposed to the snake oil and hokum which currently passes for GOP economic thought, is not my cross to bear.

excellent! You have nothing to back up your idiotic statement. Its too bad, I really thought you'd at least try to come up with something.

[chancellor]

Everyone knows that only Republicans can bring race in a campaign!!! I look forward to the VP Debate in October. I suspect Ryan will make Biden look pretty silly.

Ah, c'mon, that fake accent wasn't denigrating because...well, because...well, damned if I know. Y'all call me when you're back in chains, hear?

Biden makes speeches the way the Brewers close games - the good ones cause heartburn, the bad ones are ugly, and then there's the simply catastrophic. I'm hoping Biden's in catastrophic mode for the debate...

[Moonlight J]

I'm certain there are parts I disagree with but overall, yes I think the plan looks good. Romney wants to cap spending at 20% of GDP, below 2008 levels but in line with where we usually have been.



I'm actually not for reducing taxes all that much because I'd like to balance the budget quickly and then run a surplus to begin paying off the debt. My plan would be more like, go back to Clinton income tax rates and cut spending by 2x the amount of new tax revenue. I'm not sure if thats a great plan because obviously higher taxes isnt good for the economy but I worry about how constantly lowering taxes doesnt really fit in with eventually running a surplus.

Funny

That graph is over 20% during the Reagan & Bush I years and under 20% during the Clinton years. Pushed back up under Bush II & then spiked starting with TARP and has stayed up until a recent downtick.

[Moonlight J]

There'd be protests, riots and calls for dropping out of the race.

As Palin is leading the charge for now asking to drop Biden & add Hillary

FWIW, I suggested doing that months and months ago....

[cardboardbox]

Funny

That graph is over 20% during the Reagan & Bush I years and under 20% during the Clinton years. Pushed back up under Bush II & then spiked starting with TARP and has stayed up until a recent downtick.

Clinton was the best president out of those four.

edit: I was in 8th grade in 1992 so Clinton was the first prez I paid even a little attention to.

[cardboardbox]

As Palin is leading the charge for now asking to drop Biden & add Hillary

FWIW, I suggested doing that months and months ago....

I have no idea why he hasnt done that. It makes too much sense (for him). Maybe next month.

[onejayhawk]

I have no idea why he hasnt done that. It makes too much sense (for him). Maybe next month.

Maybe because he and Hilary despise each other. He and Bill arent friendly either.

J

[revo]

As Palin is leading the charge for now asking to drop Biden & add Hillary

FWIW, I suggested doing that months and months ago....

FWIW, I posted in a thread on RJ about that over 2 years ago....


And your graph shows that the next prez, whomever he will be, will benefit from the downturn in spending, likely due to the absolute passing of the fiscal crisis. I think we all know whomever is voted prez will benefit from this, and they will say they are the reason why, when everyone knows it's cyclical. Politics is funny sometimes.....

[Fresno Bob]

Tax cuts hurt the economy because massive government spending is what is keeping out economy afloat right now

[JudeBaldo]

Tax cuts hurt the economy because massive government spending is what is keeping out economy afloat right now

Dammit I was just gonna post this. Tax cuts alone wouldn't hurt the economy, but tax cuts coupled with austerity measures would CRUSH whatever recovery we were hoping for. I wish people understood basic economics. But you did have the privilege of studying under Dr. Laura.

[B-Fly]

I have no idea why he hasnt done that. It makes too much sense (for him). Maybe next month.

I honestly think that Biden is largely irrelevant, both in the administration and to the election. Unless you've got a VP who is driving key policy, like Cheney, then the VP is generally irrelevant - particularly for an incumbent. At least for the challenger, the VP selection is a defining moment of sorts where the nominee gives some indication about his decision-making and priorities. I think dumping Biden would hurt more than help because (i) Biden's irrelevant, so he's not materially hurting Obama's re-election hopes, and (ii) dumping Biden would be a defining moment - and a bad one - suggesting panic, disloyalty, machiavellianism, etc - by the Commander in Chief. Being cool, calm and unpanicked is one of Obama's strongest personality traits with respect to electability. One could argue that it was the key distinction voters drew between him and McCain after the financial crisis hit in September 2008, and what won Obama the election handily. I don't understand why anyone, therefore, thinks that a panic-dump of Biden from the ticket would be a good strategic move for Obama - assuming Hillary would even want the job.

[Hornsby]

Everyone knows that only Republicans can bring race in a campaign!!! I look forward to the VP Debate in October. I suspect Ryan will make Biden look pretty silly.

I don't know...it's one thing doing a debate in East Bum**** in front of the Rotary club, and another thing entirely to do it in front of a national audience. Not to mention your opponent has been on the national stage for a couple of decades, and the stakes are as high as they can be.