Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Politics  > The Republicans Single Greatest Problem as a Party      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 trinity818
Joined: 9/1/2006
Msg: 151
view profile
History
The Republicans Single Greatest Problem as a PartyPage 7 of 10    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10)

^^I love it when liberals/left leaners and Democrats suggest who Republicans/right leaning voters should put forward. Would liberals pay any attention to which Democrats the Republicans suggest the Dems run?.....


I'm a Republican. And I'm not the only one who feels that way.
 427cammer
Joined: 3/1/2008
Msg: 152
view profile
History
The Republicans Single Greatest Problem as a Party
Posted: 4/6/2011 12:25:39 PM

Because I am talking about the % that the top 1% have been paying has been declining since ~1950.

If you're going to call me a liar than you should be trying to disprove what I'm talking about. Changing subjects is only going to fool the very stupid.... or those who desperately want you to win this argument... sometimes I can't tell the difference.

Congratulations on your Epic fail at logic.

No... you presented an aticle that wildly contradicts itself in the space of two sentences.

The situation has become so bad, that shortly before the crash of 2007, an important milestone was reached: for the first time ever, the top 1 percent of Americans made more than a thousand times that of the average family in the bottom 90 percent.

That same group now holds more wealth ($3.3 trillion or 33.8 percent) than the bottom 90 percent (28.5 percent).

This is the second time I pointed it out for you, do you see it yet?

It was obvious to me that your article was a failure the instant I read it.... I didn't feel the need to do any in depth research.... but, if you want to be a stickler here's some numbers for you:

Top 1% of earners in 2008 had an adjusted gross income total of $1,685,472 million

Bottom 50% of earners in 2008 had an adjusted gross income total of $1,074,514 million

source: http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/250.html

^^^^I'll do the math for you here.... the top 1 percent made roughly 1.6 times the amount the bottom 50 percent earned... this is lightyears away from the claim made in the article you provided.

*The top 25 hedge fund managers averaged a nice take — in excess of $1 billion each in 2009. The king of the street, David Tepper, actually pocketed $4 billion for himself.

While I'm not much good at searching for figures on the internet, my math is extremely good. Proof that there's at least 25 people in the US who earned a billion does not raise the average income of the top 1percent by a significant amount at all.... this is also obvious to me at a glance.

For a fellow who seems to thrive railing against the lies put out by rightwing media, you should spend some time learning to discern when the left is lying.

Math lessons wouldn't hurt either...
 CountIbli
Joined: 6/1/2005
Msg: 153
The Republicans Single Greatest Problem as a Party
Posted: 4/6/2011 8:46:16 PM


Please define "Fair"....


That's something I've been asking the people on the left for some time. I never get an answer. I also want to know what is "rich" and what is "poor". Seems to me that a reasonable definition is the top 5% of earners and the bottom 5%, respectively. Or possibly basing these same percentages on wealth rather than income (but in practice that's a difficult thing to do).
 HalftimeDad
Joined: 5/29/2005
Msg: 154
The Republicans Single Greatest Problem as a Party
Posted: 4/6/2011 10:17:27 PM
As to the topic of this thread:
"NBC News Poll: Donald Trump Tied for 2nd in GOP 2012 Field "

I don't even feel the need to elaborate.
 flyguy51
Joined: 8/11/2005
Msg: 155
The Republicans Single Greatest Problem as a Party
Posted: 4/7/2011 4:43:40 PM

The situation has become so bad, that shortly before the crash of 2007, an important milestone was reached: for the first time ever, the top 1 percent of Americans made more than a thousand times that of the average family in the bottom 90 percent.

(bolding added)

the top 1 percent made roughly 1.6 times the amount the bottom 50 percent earned... this is lightyears away from the claim made in the article you provided.

These are two very different claims, as shown by bolding of the pivotal difference.

Anyway, the major, undeniable point is that the wealth of the top 1% is increasing way beyond inflation, while the bottom 95% are making about the same they always have. Why is that? (honest, non-rhetorical question)

As for what is "fair," how about implementing marginal income tax rates in the ballpark of the 50's and 60's once the economy gets humming again?
 IgorFrankensteen
Joined: 6/29/2009
Msg: 156
view profile
History
The Republicans Single Greatest Problem as a Party
Posted: 4/7/2011 5:45:34 PM
I suggest, that logic requires that the definitions of "rich" and "poor", being relativistic words, should be given independently for each discussions on which they are used.
Similarly, "fair" is a word of JUDGEMENT, not of independent factual assignment.
In all cases where words LIKE these have been used, it is not valid to bring the values assigned to them in a discussion on ONE subject, and demand that the same definitions be used for another, even when the same people are discussing the new subject. This is not a matter of "gaming" the discussions, it is fundamental to the usage of these words. To do otherwise, would be like demanding that the word "high," when used in a talk about Mount Everest, be accepted as the SAME meaning in a discussion about counter tops.
 427cammer
Joined: 3/1/2008
Msg: 157
view profile
History
The Republicans Single Greatest Problem as a Party
Posted: 4/7/2011 10:56:08 PM

These are two very different claims, as shown by bolding of the pivotal difference.

Yeah, I reread that post last night and realized I'd screwed up.... now my boasting about my math skills (or even reading comprehension) seems pretty ridiculous....

....anywhooo...

The average individual earnings of the top 1 % is $1,204,247.48. The average individual earnings from the bottom 50% is $15,354.52. The average earner from the top 1% earns 78.4 times the amount of the average earner from the bottom 50%. This is still a far cry from the "top 1 percent of Americans made more than a thousand times that of the average family in the bottom 90 percent" claim made in the article.

Anyway, the major, undeniable point is that the wealth of the top 1% is increasing way beyond inflation, while the bottom 95% are making about the same they always have. Why is that?

I'm not sure. I could speculate that easy credit is one of the reasons the rich keep getting richer.... who back in the 1970's could imagine people paying on a television for 5 years? An increase in credit drives up consumerism... I've certainly noticed this in the last 20 years.

Also, while it's not in the field of my expertise (I'm a bluecollar guy living in a bluecollar town), it seems there is so much emphathis today for people to earn college degrees... other than doctors and engineers, it seems that most college grads main contribution to the economy is paperwork.... this is not really a viable product for export. People who build actual products are often found overseas, and much of your work is outsourced.

I'm just spitballin' here... do you have any ideas?

As for what is "fair," how about implementing marginal income tax rates in the ballpark of the 50's and 60's once the economy gets humming again?

I mentioned in an earlier post that you could go ahead and tax the rich even higher... I'd be willing to let them take over my share of the taxes; I wouldn't label it as fair, but if my rates are cut I'm not going to cry about it. As long as the economy keeps rolling....

I also mentioned earlier that the US now has the highest corporate tax rates in the world.... do you agree with me that this has the potential to hurt your economy?
 CountIbli
Joined: 6/1/2005
Msg: 158
The Republicans Single Greatest Problem as a Party
Posted: 4/7/2011 11:27:36 PM


Anyway, the major, undeniable point is that the wealth of the top 1% is increasing way beyond inflation, while the bottom 95% are making about the same they always have.


I'm not sure that's quite true. As far as I know these numbers apply to wages. Since most people get their health insurance through their employers who pay about half the costs, and employers contribute to retirement accounts, it's only fair that those contributions should be included in what the bottom 95% are making. However, I grant that even factoring this in the middle class is being screwed.



Why is that? (honest, non-rhetorical question)


Well there are lots of reasons.

1) Inflation. This is a highly regressive hidden income tax.

2) Fractional reserve banking. This allows the banks to suck the wealth out of the pockets of everyone else.

3) Income tax. The middle class pay 75% of the income taxes.

4) College tuition. Tuition rates are skyrocketing out of control. The more the government subsidizes college the more the colleges charge. The middle class pays for this through taxes and then college graduates start out $40K in the hole.

5) Federal, state, and local government regulations create barriers to economic growth which prevent (or at the very least make it very difficult) small business owners from realizing their true potential.

6) Medicare and Social Security now cost more to run than the government collects in personal income tax. This represents a huge transfer of wealth from the middle class to the poor.

7) Social safety nets have created a "welfare class" of people with no incentive to stop feeding at the government trough. True, they aren't driving Cadillacs (unless they supplement their income by selling drugs or committing other crimes) , but they lack the skills and motivation to better themselves so even if they were forced off the government dole they wouldn't be in any better financial position than before. So why not take the path of least resistance and live off the state?

8) Minimum wage laws. Not only do these not help the poor, but they actually hurt them, primarily minorities.
 FrankNStein902
Joined: 12/26/2009
Msg: 159
The Republicans Single Greatest Problem as a Party
Posted: 4/8/2011 5:37:16 AM

I also mentioned earlier that the US now has the highest corporate tax rates in the world.... do you agree with me that this has the potential to hurt your economy?

Which is all smoke and mirrors so those billionaires can cry poor.

The only companies that it hurts are the ones not smart enough to take advantage of the tax loopholes in the US that lets you avoid paying taxes by a process called Transfer Pricing* and last year it was ~60billion in lost tax revenues because of it.



* Transfer pricing refers to the setting, analysis, documentation, and adjustment of charges made between related parties for goods, services, or use of property (including intangible property). Transfer prices among components of an enterprise may be used to reflect allocation of resources among such components, or for other purposes. OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines state, “Transfer prices are significant for both taxpayers and tax administrations because they determine in large part the income and expenses, and therefore taxable profits, of associated enterprises in different tax jurisdictions.”
 trinity818
Joined: 9/1/2006
Msg: 160
view profile
History
The Republicans Single Greatest Problem as a Party
Posted: 4/8/2011 6:17:19 AM
The only companies that it hurts are the ones not smart enough to take advantage of the tax loopholes in the US that lets you avoid paying taxes by a process called Transfer Pricing*


It's not really an issue of "smart". It's just not applicable to all businesses.

http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Transfer_pricing
Transfer pricing refers to the pricing of goods and services within a multi-divisional organization. Goods from the production division may be sold to the marketing division, or goods from a parent company may be sold to a foreign subsidiary.

Perhaps I'm overlooking something here, but I don't see how this applies to small businesses.

http://www.sba.gov/advocacy/7495/8420
How important are small businesses to the U.S. economy? Small firms:
•Represent 99.7 percent of all employer firms.
•Employ just over half of all private sector employees.
•Pay 44 percent of total U.S. private payroll.
•Have generated 64 percent of net new jobs over the past 15 years.
•Create more than half of the nonfarm private gross domestic product (GDP).

These types of businesses are doing everything they can just to stay in business. Between payroll and health insurance, there isn't much left. Since most of them aren't making much of a profit, and the big corporations are hiding theirs, who is left to pay the corporate tax????
 .dej
Joined: 11/6/2007
Msg: 161
view profile
History
The Republicans Single Greatest Problem as a Party
Posted: 4/8/2011 9:40:43 AM
The only companies that it hurts are the ones not smart enough to take advantage of the tax loopholes in the US that lets you avoid paying taxes by a process called Transfer Pricing* and last year it was ~60billion in lost tax revenues because of it.

No, the only companies it hurts are the ones that don't have enough money to take advantage of deductions and credits in the tax system.


3) Income tax. The middle class pay 75% of the income taxes.

It's more like 20-30%, depending on what you call the middle class.
 427cammer
Joined: 3/1/2008
Msg: 162
view profile
History
The Republicans Single Greatest Problem as a Party
Posted: 4/8/2011 9:45:03 AM

Which is all smoke and mirrors so those billionaires can cry poor.

The only companies that it hurts are the ones not smart enough to take advantage of the tax loopholes in the US that lets you avoid paying taxes by a process called Transfer Pricing* and last year it was ~60billion in lost tax revenues because of it.

So which is worse.... being stupid or evil?

Your answer, while reinforcing the idea that corporations are bad, doesn't really answer the question of "Is it neccasary for nations to keep their corporate tax rates competitive?"

I found an interesting article from the NY Times that raises some interesting points (as long as one is interested in reading something that doesn't have the predetermined goal of making capitalism look bad... even if "facts" need to be invented to achieve this goal).

The average total tax rate for the 500 companies over the last five years — again, including federal, state, local and foreign corporate taxes — was 32.8 percent. Among those paying more than the average were Exxon Mobil, FedEx, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Starbucks, Wal-Mart and Walt Disney.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/02/business/economy/02leonhardt.html

So the combined tax rates, which include federal, state, local and foreign corporate, are larger than the corporate tax rate of a country like, say Canada, with a combined corporate tax rate (federal and provincial) of 29.52% (and there are definitely loopholes in the Canadian tax code as well).

Later in the article:

The problem with the current system is that it distorts incentives. Decisions that would otherwise be inefficient for a company — and that are indeed inefficient for the larger economy — can make sense when they bring a big tax break. “Companies should be making investments based on their commercial potential,” as Aswath Damodaran, a finance professor at New York University, says, “not for tax reasons.”

Instead, airlines sometimes buy more planes than they really need. Energy companies drill more holes. Drug companies conduct research with only marginal prospects of success.

Inefficiencies like these slow economic growth, and they are the reason that both conservatives and liberals criticize the corporate tax code so harshly. Mitch McConnell, the Republican Senate leader, says it hurts job creation. Mr. Obama, in his State of the Union address, said that the system “makes no sense, and it has to change.”

I've seen this type of beuracracy and inefficiency in business firsthand; I believe that some of this is unavoidable with mega-corporations but that the inefficiency is compounded mightily by the monolith beuracracy of our own governments.
 .dej
Joined: 11/6/2007
Msg: 163
view profile
History
The Republicans Single Greatest Problem as a Party
Posted: 4/8/2011 10:01:00 AM
I don't think most people understand how subsidies and tax breaks incentivize things that actually hurt the economy.
 FrankNStein902
Joined: 12/26/2009
Msg: 164
The Republicans Single Greatest Problem as a Party
Posted: 4/8/2011 10:03:16 AM
Your answer, while reinforcing the idea that corporations are bad, doesn't really answer the question of "Is it neccasary for nations to keep their corporate tax rates competitive?"

I do not think that corporations are bad, I just think that many of them are gaming the system at the expense of others.

Like (from same article you quoted)

...It's hardly the only company that pays far less than the much-quoted federal corporate tax rate of 35 percent. Of the 500 big companies in the Standard & Poor's stock index, 115 paid a total tax rate — both federal and otherwise — of less than 20 percent over the past five years, according to an analysis of company reports done for the New York Times by Capital IQ, a research firm. Thirty-nine companies paid a rate less than 10 percent.

A typical family, by comparison, pays a total tax rate of about 25 percent.

Arguably, the United States now has a corporate tax code that's the worst of all worlds. The official rate is higher than in almost any other country, which forces companies to devote enormous time and effort to finding loopholes. Yet the government raises less money in corporate taxes than it once did, because of all the loopholes that have been added in recent decades.

Over the past five years, Boeing paid a total tax rate of just 4.5 percent, according to Capital IQ. Southwest Airlines paid 6.3 percent. Yahoo paid 7 percent. And the list goes on: Prudential Financial, 7.6 percent; Time Warner, 11 percent; General Electric, 14.3 percent....


So lower the federal tax rate, but at the same time close the loopholes that allow companies to hide their profits offshore.





The average total tax rate for the 500 companies over the last five years — again, including federal, state, local and foreign corporate taxes — was 32.8 percent. Among those paying more than the average were Exxon Mobil, FedEx, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Starbucks, Wal-Mart and Walt Disney.

When you do not cherry pick those 500 companies you get this:


Between 2000 and 2005, the average corporate tax rate in the U.S. was 13.4 percent, according to Washington think tank the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. That was the second-lowest among the G7 leading industrialized countries and nearly 3 percent below the average rate paid by nations in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, which comprises the world’s biggest economies. Said the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service in a 2007 report:

As a result, the amount of corporate taxes collected in the U.S. has been falling for more than 30 years, even as it has risen in other developed economies. During the 1950s, federal corporate tax revenue in the U.S. averaged 4.7 percent of GDP. By 2009, corporate taxes as a percentage of GDP had fallen to 1.9 percent. That has hit the nation’s pocketbook hard. In 2007, the Treasury Department estimated the loss in government revenue from corporate tax breaks at $1.2 trillion over 10 years. Says financial pundit Yves Smith:


http://www.bnet.com/blog/financial-business/ge-8217s-scandalous-tax-breaks-are-rooted-in-politics/12187
 flyguy51
Joined: 8/11/2005
Msg: 165
The Republicans Single Greatest Problem as a Party
Posted: 4/8/2011 4:52:46 PM

People who build actual products are often found overseas, and much of your work is outsourced.

I'm just spitballin' here... do you have any ideas?

My short answer, also spitballing here, is globalization. I think that perhaps the uber rich are in a much better position to profit from international opportunities than the lower 90-95%. Actually, these opportunities can hurt the working classes, as you alluded to with outsourcing.

A friend of mine said that his dad told him that the beginning of the end for the working class was the end of the US fair trade laws when they were ruled unconstitutional in the early 70's. Higher tariffs may not be a viable solution, though, as other countries tend to impose tariffs of their own in that situation.

I also mentioned earlier that the US now has the highest corporate tax rates in the world.... do you agree with me that this has the potential to hurt your economy?

As has been said, our tax rate cannot really be taken at simple face value with all the legal maneuverings that are possible. And I have heard that Ireland has been known for being very business friendly, yet it has recently turned down the offer of a bailout from England, I believe.
 FrankNStein902
Joined: 12/26/2009
Msg: 166
The Republicans Single Greatest Problem as a Party
Posted: 4/11/2011 8:12:06 AM

As has been said, our tax rate cannot really be taken at simple face value with all the legal maneuverings that are possible.

as shown here:

How to Pay No Taxes
Eleven shelters, dodges, and rolls—all perfectly legal—used by America's wealthiest people
By Jesse Drucker


For the well-off, this could be the best tax day since the early 1930s: Top tax rates on ordinary income, dividends, estates, and gifts will remain at or near historically low levels for at least the next two years. That's thanks in part to legislation passed in December 2010 by the 111th Congress and signed by President Barack Obama.

"This is clearly far and away the most generous tax situation that's existed," says Gregory D. Singer, a national managing director of the wealth management group at AllianceBernstein (AB) in New York. "It's a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity."

For the 400 U.S. taxpayers with the highest adjusted gross income, the effective federal income tax rate—what they actually pay—fell from almost 30 percent in 1995 to just under 17 percent in 2007, according to the IRS. And for the approximately 1.4 million people who make up the top 1 percent of taxpayers, the effective federal income tax rate dropped from 29 percent to 23 percent in 2008. It may seem too fantastic to be true, but the top 400 end up paying a lower rate than the next 1,399,600 or so.

That's not just good luck. It's often the result of hard work, as suggested by some of the strategies in the following pages. Much of the top 400's income is from dividends and capital gains, generated by everything from appreciated real estate—yes, there is some left—to stocks and the sale of family businesses. As Warren Buffett likes to point out, since most of his income is from dividends, his tax rate is less than that of the people who clean his office.

The true effective rate for multimillionaires is actually far lower than that indicated by official government statistics. That's because those figures fail to include the additional income that's generated by many sophisticated tax-avoidance strategies. Several of those techniques involve some variation of complicated borrowings that never get repaid, netting the beneficiaries hundreds of millions in tax-free cash. From 2003 to 2008, for example, Los Angeles Dodgers owner and real estate developer Frank H. McCourt Jr. paid no federal or state regular income taxes, as stated in court records dug up by the Los Angeles Times. Developers such as McCourt, according to a declaration in his divorce proceeding, "typically fund their lifestyle through lines of credit and loan proceeds secured by their assets while paying little or no personal income taxes." A spokesman for McCourt said he availed himself of a tax code provision at the time that permitted purchasers of sports franchises to defer income taxes.

For those who can afford a shrewd accountant or attorney, our era is rife with opportunity to avoid, or at least defer, tax bills, according to tax specialists and public records. It's limited only by the boundaries of taste, creativity, and the ability to understand some very complex shelters


http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/11_16/b4224045265660.htm?chan=magazine+channel_11_16+-+how+to+pay+no+taxes_11_16+-+how+to+pay+no+taxes
 laxref41
Joined: 7/20/2008
Msg: 167
The Republicans Single Greatest Problem as a Party
Posted: 9/1/2011 6:50:33 AM
"The single greatest problem of BOTH parties is that they spend far too much energy trying to block and defeat each other and far too little energy trying to actually do some good for the country."

what did you expect? They're all LAWYERS ! They were educated and trained to fight each other!

How many of our founding fathers were lawyers?
 Bladesmith81801
Joined: 10/30/2010
Msg: 168
The Republicans Single Greatest Problem as a Party
Posted: 9/1/2011 9:04:53 AM
^^I love it when liberals/left leaners and Democrats suggest who Republicans/right leaning voters should put forward. Would liberals pay any attention to which Democrats the Republicans suggest the Dems run?.....


I'm a Republican. And I'm not the only one who feels that way.

Whoops!

Hoist, meet petard.
 Bladesmith81801
Joined: 10/30/2010
Msg: 169
The Republicans Single Greatest Problem as a Party
Posted: 9/1/2011 9:10:40 AM
427cammer said: "I also mentioned earlier that the US now has the highest corporate tax rates in the world.... do you agree with me that this has the potential to hurt your economy?"

Problem is, those taxes aren't being PAID. The corporations have the money sitting offshore, while the Corps try and negotiate another tax holiday that will allow them to pay 5% instead of the amount they actually owe. If the president and esp. the republicans, allow such a thing to happen it shows that none of them are serious about the deficit. You don't balance the budget or pay the bills by letting people who owe you money not pay it.

One fact that cannot be denied. The best times in this country were when the rich and the corporations had higher taxes and PAID THEM. Regulations pretty much required them to re invest their money into this country and it's workers, instead of shipping it and hiding it overseas.
 itechman63
Joined: 7/7/2005
Msg: 170
view profile
History
The Republicans Single Greatest Problem as a Party
Posted: 9/1/2011 5:38:19 PM


^^I love it when liberals/left leaners and Democrats suggest who Republicans/right leaning voters should put forward. Would liberals pay any attention to which Democrats the Republicans suggest the Dems run?.....



I'm a Republican. And I'm not the only one who feels that way.


Trinity, you're right because I too am a moderate Conservative that wants nothing to do with today's vitriolic extremist movements.

We see all these facts and figures trotted out every day that tells us regulation is evil and holding the economy back and it sounds logical. The problem with that is that the truth is in front of our faces... this economy is still reeling from the effects of a Wall Street allowed to run amok by deregulation like Gramm-Leach-Bliley and regulation preventing legislation such as the CFMA 2000 which still drains everyone's spending power by allowing speculators to continue to have fuel prices overinflated in turn running up the costs of every necessity we purchase.

And the entire history of those damning pieces of legislation cannot be excused as anything other than willful and intentional crime. There is nothing about either of them that truly ever were intended to be for the good of the economy nor the American people.

What are regulations anyway? They are non arbitrary learned responses to abuses and failings... keeping with the evil theme... they are necessary evils because greed trumps all.

Sure we have bubbles fueled by deregulations that briefly provide the semblance of prosperity but why are they called bubbles? Because bubbles burst and when they do, they take everything down with them so that's why recessions are as common as a cold. The goal is a steady sustainable economy that doesn't have the word 'correction' as an inevitablity. That has never and will never happen in a completely deregulated economy. And the Republican candidates are telling us that the way to fix this economy is to do even more of what destroyed it. No thanks.
 .dej
Joined: 11/6/2007
Msg: 171
view profile
History
The Republicans Single Greatest Problem as a Party
Posted: 9/1/2011 5:42:07 PM
The religious right is the Republican's biggest problem. And it isn't even a close running.

The Tea Party actually showed promise to bring the Republicans back to paleo-conservative roots, but when they got popular, they got hijacked and it turned into an ultra-right wing movement that's just come to be known as nutty.

If a Republican candidate could come forward that espoused limited government and fiscal discipline and didn't go off ranting about gays, evolution conspiracies, or the liberal atheist conspiracy, it'd be a landslide election.

But they won't. And it'll be an election I'll have to hold my breath and vote for someone I don't like, or do like I did last time and abstain, while mocking everyone that did vote for such trash, whichever party it is.
 HalftimeDad
Joined: 5/29/2005
Msg: 172
The Republicans Single Greatest Problem as a Party
Posted: 9/1/2011 6:25:00 PM
The problem is that those are the issues which mobilize the base. In order to win the nomination, a candidate has to pander to those people. Actually, that's not even the problem. McCain pandered, but you always felt he was more reasonable in reality. Now there are tons of candidates who actually, truly hold those beliefs.
 flyguy51
Joined: 8/11/2005
Msg: 173
The Republicans Single Greatest Problem as a Party
Posted: 9/1/2011 7:12:29 PM
If a Republican candidate could come forward that espoused limited government and fiscal discipline and didn't go off ranting about gays, evolution conspiracies, or the liberal atheist conspiracy, it'd be a landslide election.

You mean like Ron Paul? He has never come close to a victory as a presidential candidate. Policies and integrity are one thing; charisma and electability are another. Many of his ideas are pretty radical and extreme. He has few political allies, and the corporate media certainly doesn't want to give him too much of a voice.

Paul is a well-meaning politician with integrity-- a rare description. But he is not really "electable." He doesn't even want the office that badly. He'd rather that his ideas get implemented than actually become president.

The Republican's problem is that they NEED the fervor of the religious right to get the majority vote, as halftime said. The loyal Republicans who do not hold an evangelical Christian worldview are in a very small minority.
 unYOUsual
Joined: 8/11/2011
Msg: 174
The Republicans Single Greatest Problem as a Party
Posted: 9/2/2011 5:27:40 AM

they're going to go back to blocking anything that might be good for America, because they care more about politics than they do for the country.
That might be good? That's the problem everything that Obama has done was supposed to be good for the country, guess what it wasn't...Stimulus plan, failed...Cash for clunkers, failed, mortgage restructuring, bailout..failed..Obamacare in line to Fail...these are things that were not blocked..none of them had any long term positive effect..yet they added billions/trillion to the deficit...

The Only reason he is giving a speech is because that is all that he does halfway decent...3 years into the Presidency and now he acts like he wants to get serious about the Economy?Think it has something to do with the 2012 election? HMMMMMM

Unemployment over 9%, really much higher, they fudge the numbers to make them look lower..
GDP 1%
Gas prices close to $4.00 for a long time now
Inflation rate rising
2 Wars ongoing, guess what they still cost us money, funny to see how the Libs ignore the cost of the ongoing wars now that Obama is President..
Military presence in two other conflicts
 vlad dracul
Joined: 4/30/2009
Msg: 175
view profile
History
The Republicans Single Greatest Problem as a Party
Posted: 9/3/2011 1:06:27 AM
msg 6

thatcher was/is indeed hated. to use one of her own phrases much of
the uk will 'rejoice' when her last breath is taken.

blair is a fake. phony tony bliar. john smith was the architect of the
labour revival until he died and the odious bliar took over.

what then happened? new labour forgot about their core voters. the working
class areas of the uk. they socially engineered mass immigration and undertook
a massive bloated public sector. spend spend spend all on good new labour voters for the future.

but the working man and woman abandoned them. how much hand wringing was
shown after their election defeat? how many weasel apologies were uttered?

yes blair lurched new labour nearer to what the torys stand for, out torying the torys sometimes and all the time living in a land of make believe

i think this talk in the states of the republicans chasing their tails is nonsense. the amount of
good publicity obama got world wide before being elected if he had lost the election it would needed to have been a stewards enquiry.

not so the next election though, with mad 'butch' hilary snapping at his heels as well as the world in meltdown i think the republicans will do well
Show ALL Forums  > Politics  > The Republicans Single Greatest Problem as a Party