The SuperHeroHype Forums  

Go Back   The SuperHeroHype Forums > SHH Community > Politics

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-14-2013, 02:28 AM   #51
Thundercrack85
Side-Kick
 
Thundercrack85's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 13,279
Default Re: Discussion: The DEMOCRATIC Party III

I was reading about Texas in the last election, and it got me wondering.

Granted, Texas going blue is a Democrat's pipe dream. But, the state could be turning purple in as little as a decade. Especially with this upcoming amnesty thing.

But even that aside, Romney won Texas with 57 percent. In part because Obama spent zero time, zero money, and zero resources there. One has to wonder how much of a difference time, money, people, and resources could have made.

He certainly wouldn't win it, but it would be interesting to see how big of a difference it would have made.

What do you folks think?

Thundercrack85 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2013, 03:45 AM   #52
SV Fan
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 5,084
Default Re: Discussion: The DEMOCRATIC Party III

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thundercrack85 View Post
What do you folks think?
I think a very moderate Democrat might win Senate races soon enough, especially if you have a Tea Party guy up against them. If I am the DNC this is where I start going after(and a few Potential House seats as well) before I think I could win at the President level.

In terms of President Elections I am guessing that is at least 2 election cycles away(if ever), but nothing would be a bigger insult to the Republicans if Texas starts going purple(and the Republicans have to start playing defense there and putting money into the state)

All that being said I still think Arizona will become more winnable then Texas sooner(last election it was 54-45)


Last edited by SV Fan; 04-14-2013 at 03:59 AM.
SV Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2013, 09:29 AM   #53
Kelly
Hoity Toity Administrator
SHH! Administrator
 
Kelly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 58,068
Default Re: Discussion: The DEMOCRATIC Party III

Quote:
Originally Posted by SV Fan View Post
I think a very moderate Democrat might win Senate races soon enough, especially if you have a Tea Party guy up against them. If I am the DNC this is where I start going after(and a few Potential House seats as well) before I think I could win at the President level.

In terms of President Elections I am guessing that is at least 2 election cycles away(if ever), but nothing would be a bigger insult to the Republicans if Texas starts going purple(and the Republicans have to start playing defense there and putting money into the state)

All that being said I still think Arizona will become more winnable then Texas sooner(last election it was 54-45)
If the DNC will support them.....they have shown in the last 2 elections that they aren't...they don't want blue dogs in the Senate or House....

Obama was hoping that even if he lost the "gun control" battle and didn't get all that he wanted....he would have a win because it would end up going against the GOP in the mid-term elections....I have a feeling that has backfired on him, we shall see....

Most Independents and moderates that I know what Obama to shut the hell up, get back to Washington and get serious about jobs and the economy...they are sick of his lip service, which can very well hit the Dems hard in the midterms because those I's and Moderates that might vote for a blue dog will simply stay at home....

__________________
'Listen to yourself and in that quietude you might hear the voice of God' Maya Angelou

Last edited by Kelly; 04-14-2013 at 09:33 AM.
Kelly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2013, 12:13 PM   #54
SV Fan
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 5,084
Default Re: Discussion: The DEMOCRATIC Party III

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelly View Post
If the DNC will support them.....they have shown in the last 2 elections that they aren't...they don't want blue dogs in the Senate or House....
The DNC has put money behind people they think have a good shot to win. I wouldn't consider the Senators out of North Dakota, Virginia and Indiana bleeding heart liberals yet they got support and won. They also put a little cash into Arizona(although he lost)

Given all the races they have to win in 2014 I don't think they will try make an effort in Texas for Cornyn but I can see them make a big push to get Ted Cruz out in 2018. It seems like they grooming the Castro twins for Texas elections in the Future

Quote:
Obama was hoping that even if he lost the "gun control" battle and didn't get all that he wanted....he would have a win because it would end up going against the GOP in the mid-term elections....I have a feeling that has backfired on him, we shall see....
It takes 3 to tango in US politics, some people will blame Obama and some will blame both the House and Senate unwillingness to compromise


Last edited by SV Fan; 04-14-2013 at 12:22 PM.
SV Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2013, 01:57 PM   #55
Kelly
Hoity Toity Administrator
SHH! Administrator
 
Kelly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 58,068
Default Re: Discussion: The DEMOCRATIC Party III

Quote:
Originally Posted by SV Fan View Post
The DNC has put money behind people they think have a good shot to win. I wouldn't consider the Senators out of North Dakota, Virginia and Indiana bleeding heart liberals yet they got support and won. They also put a little cash into Arizona(although he lost)

Given all the races they have to win in 2014 I don't think they will try make an effort in Texas for Cornyn but I can see them make a big push to get Ted Cruz out in 2018. It seems like they grooming the Castro twins for Texas elections in the Future

It takes 3 to tango in US politics, some people will blame Obama and some will blame both the House and Senate unwillingness to compromise
The problem with the gun control issue SV is not the GOP, its his own party....they are the ones balking. Everyone already knew the GOP would, that's not a surprise at all....but some of his own party in the Senate could possibly close that deal and not the way the President wants....

__________________
'Listen to yourself and in that quietude you might hear the voice of God' Maya Angelou
Kelly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2013, 02:05 PM   #56
SV Fan
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 5,084
Default Re: Discussion: The DEMOCRATIC Party III

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelly View Post
The problem with the gun control issue SV is not the GOP, its his own party....they are the ones balking. Everyone already knew the GOP would, that's not a surprise at all....but some of his own party in the Senate could possibly close that deal and not the way the President wants....
The Democrats only have 55 senators(or 53 + 2 independents), all the Republicans have to do is filibuster the vote(so you need 60 votes) and it doesn't happen. Beyond that if it does get out of the Senate the Republican house will most likely put a kibosh on it(it should be pointed out even though the Demcorats got 1M more votes in House elections they have 40 less seats due to gerrymandering which shows the house is not the will of the majority but political games)

Now if the Republicans didn't try an obstruct everything and they can't get 51 votes on a issue then you could blame Democrat Senators.

All that being said I have no issues with Senators voting to what will make them win the state. They should be their to vote for the people in their state not a particular party, I do think the Democrat party is a bit more lenient in that regard knowing how many house and Senate seats they wouldn't win by having a bleeding heart liberal run. I also thinking allow people to disagree with the majority opinion of the party also makes the party look more open to different points of view. I can see if the Democrats ever gain to much power in the next 5-20 years we will see a reverse of what's happening to the Republicans though, were the hard core lefties start voting in primaries and voting for unelectable people who are to far from center in States that are more conservative

To quote Ronald Reagan: “The person who agrees with you 80 percent of the time is a friend and an ally — not a 20 percent traitor,”

I think this quote sums up the Republicans

Jim DeMint: “I’d rather have 30 Marco Rubios than 60 Arlen Specters"

Call me funny but 60 of anything in the Senate is filibuster proof(and yes I know who Arlen Specter is, but running guys like that out of the party who might disagree 20% of the time will give you a numbers disadvantage)

In terms of the guns issue, i do think Blue Dogs are at least willing to debate the issue although you won't be able to get them to budge far(the only 2 who didn't vote for a debate are in Red States and up for re-election in 2014 and if they were int he Republicans party they would be threatened with a tough primary challenge, I am fairly certain liberals will look at the states they in and leave them alone for the most part when it comes to primaries)


Last edited by SV Fan; 04-14-2013 at 02:26 PM.
SV Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2013, 02:56 PM   #57
Kelly
Hoity Toity Administrator
SHH! Administrator
 
Kelly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 58,068
Default Re: Discussion: The DEMOCRATIC Party III

They d not think they are going to have to filibuster...right now the dems don't have the votes

__________________
'Listen to yourself and in that quietude you might hear the voice of God' Maya Angelou
Kelly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2013, 03:00 PM   #58
SV Fan
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 5,084
Default Re: Discussion: The DEMOCRATIC Party III

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelly View Post
They d not think they are going to have to filibuster...right now the dems don't have the votes
Just for future reference when arguing stuff, are you saying the Democrats do have a more open point of view on issues and will more likely disagree with other Democrats and the party in General(as opposed to being one uniform voting block that strictly follow party lines)?

SV Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2013, 05:33 PM   #59
Kelly
Hoity Toity Administrator
SHH! Administrator
 
Kelly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 58,068
Default Re: Discussion: The DEMOCRATIC Party III

For future reference, when the Dems don't have the votes for something, but think they may can talk some into it....they want to debate it on the floor of the senate....which is what is going to happen with the gun control issue, good....all for that. The problem is, when they don't have the votes and no one is budging, the legislation never sees the light of day.....I find that to be a problem....

So yes, they enjoy debating with each other, just no one else.... : )

__________________
'Listen to yourself and in that quietude you might hear the voice of God' Maya Angelou

Last edited by Kelly; 04-14-2013 at 05:42 PM.
Kelly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2013, 05:43 PM   #60
Kelly
Hoity Toity Administrator
SHH! Administrator
 
Kelly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 58,068
Default Re: Discussion: The DEMOCRATIC Party III

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thundercrack85 View Post
I was reading about Texas in the last election, and it got me wondering.

Granted, Texas going blue is a Democrat's pipe dream. But, the state could be turning purple in as little as a decade. Especially with this upcoming amnesty thing.

But even that aside, Romney won Texas with 57 percent. In part because Obama spent zero time, zero money, and zero resources there. One has to wonder how much of a difference time, money, people, and resources could have made.

He certainly wouldn't win it, but it would be interesting to see how big of a difference it would have made.

What do you folks think?
I would have agreed with you on this until the news that Obamacare will cost double what it was said to cost, and the gun control issues....now I wouldn't see purple as a sure thing anytime soon. But, as amnesty has inched up the Democrat vote over the past 30 years, if it happens again...then there is definitely a better shot at it becoming purple.

As far as the last Presidential election.....Republicans in Texas did not trust OR like Romney.

If you put a Rubio out there, or a Christie and the Republicans will come out in droves.....if you put a Rand Paul out there, the colleges in Texas will go crazy....lol

__________________
'Listen to yourself and in that quietude you might hear the voice of God' Maya Angelou

Last edited by Kelly; 04-14-2013 at 05:46 PM.
Kelly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2013, 11:39 PM   #61
chaseter
Bland User
 
chaseter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Denver
Posts: 43,004
Default Re: Discussion: The DEMOCRATIC Party III

Oh look, Obama and the left talk about 'fair share' and increasing taxes for the rich and what do they all do including Obama? Well...Obama only paid 18% in federal income taxes this year. Bunch of hypocrites.

How are all of your raised taxes doing? Does it feel better that your pay check decreased Jan. 1 and that Obama, a millionaire, pays 18%?

__________________
"You can leave a penny, you can't take a penny. You can leave a penny anytime. You have to spend $10 to take a penny. Store policy."
"Since when has this been store policy?"
"Uh, since my boss made up the policy. You gonna pay? You're holding up my line of one other person. You can't afford your milk, step aside. What, daddy didn't give you enough milk money? Little baby gonna cry about it? Just step aside."
And that is how Uncle Ben dies.
chaseter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2013, 11:44 PM   #62
SV Fan
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 5,084
Default Re: Discussion: The DEMOCRATIC Party III

Quote:
Originally Posted by chaseter View Post
How are all of your raised taxes doing? Does it feel better that your pay check decreased Jan. 1 and that Obama, a millionaire, pays 18%?
Well Since I don't make more then 400k my taxes weren't increased

In the case of Obama I say put his money where his mouth is and give him a bill that will increase his taxes to at least 25% and see if he signs it, I dare both the House and Senate to pass that(it should be pointed out he made about 600k and gave a 1/4 of that to charity so he doesn't get taxed on that which would have been in the high 39.6% rate)


Last edited by SV Fan; 04-15-2013 at 11:56 PM.
SV Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2013, 11:44 PM   #63
Thundercrack85
Side-Kick
 
Thundercrack85's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 13,279
Default Re: Discussion: The DEMOCRATIC Party III

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelly View Post
I would have agreed with you on this until the news that Obamacare will cost double what it was said to cost, and the gun control issues....now I wouldn't see purple as a sure thing anytime soon. But, as amnesty has inched up the Democrat vote over the past 30 years, if it happens again...then there is definitely a better shot at it becoming purple.

As far as the last Presidential election.....Republicans in Texas did not trust OR like Romney.

If you put a Rubio out there, or a Christie and the Republicans will come out in droves.....if you put a Rand Paul out there, the colleges in Texas will go crazy....lol
Yeah, Romney didn't get a lot of love. But I think Texas Republicans' hatred of Obama probably balanced out their ambivalence towards Romney. So, on the one hand, Romney is a New England RINO, but Obama is the Muslim atheist Kenyan-born anti-christ.

Again, I don't think any Democrat could take Texas now (or in 2016), but it would be very interesting to see how many votes they could actually garner if they tried (been a long time since they have).

It might be quite surprising.

Thundercrack85 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2013, 12:52 AM   #64
chaseter
Bland User
 
chaseter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Denver
Posts: 43,004
Default Re: Discussion: The DEMOCRATIC Party III

Quote:
Originally Posted by SV Fan View Post
Well Since I don't make more then 400k my taxes weren't increased

In the case of Obama I say put his money where his mouth is and give him a bill that will increase his taxes to at least 25% and see if he signs it, I dare both the House and Senate to pass that(it should be pointed out he made about 600k and gave a 1/4 of that to charity so he doesn't get taxed on that which would have been in the high 39.6% rate)
Your taxes went up or otherwise you don't have a job. Everyone is getting a smaller paycheck.

I love it. I love the excuses for this man. He could be the champion for not kicking puppies and his excuse to continue to kick puppies is that there isn't a bill that says he shouldn't kick puppies.

If you want to cite giving to charity, why did Obama blast Mitt Romney for his tax rate of 14 something %? That man gave more than Obama does in a decade.

Hope for change.

__________________
"You can leave a penny, you can't take a penny. You can leave a penny anytime. You have to spend $10 to take a penny. Store policy."
"Since when has this been store policy?"
"Uh, since my boss made up the policy. You gonna pay? You're holding up my line of one other person. You can't afford your milk, step aside. What, daddy didn't give you enough milk money? Little baby gonna cry about it? Just step aside."
And that is how Uncle Ben dies.
chaseter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2013, 12:54 AM   #65
chaseter
Bland User
 
chaseter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Denver
Posts: 43,004
Default Re: Discussion: The DEMOCRATIC Party III

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thundercrack85 View Post
Yeah, Romney didn't get a lot of love. But I think Texas Republicans' hatred of Obama probably balanced out their ambivalence towards Romney. So, on the one hand, Romney is a New England RINO, but Obama is the Muslim atheist Kenyan-born anti-christ.

Again, I don't think any Democrat could take Texas now (or in 2016), but it would be very interesting to see how many votes they could actually garner if they tried (been a long time since they have).

It might be quite surprising.
I like how you just equated all of Texas Republicans to being xenophobic racist religious extremists.

__________________
"You can leave a penny, you can't take a penny. You can leave a penny anytime. You have to spend $10 to take a penny. Store policy."
"Since when has this been store policy?"
"Uh, since my boss made up the policy. You gonna pay? You're holding up my line of one other person. You can't afford your milk, step aside. What, daddy didn't give you enough milk money? Little baby gonna cry about it? Just step aside."
And that is how Uncle Ben dies.
chaseter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2013, 12:58 AM   #66
SV Fan
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 5,084
Default Re: Discussion: The DEMOCRATIC Party III

Quote:
Originally Posted by chaseter View Post
Your taxes went up or otherwise you don't have a job. Everyone is getting a smaller paycheck.
The payroll taxcut was short term stimulus. I personally don't think it should be cut in the first place since that is what pays for social security but that is another topic. If you want to blame Obama for that, Blame the Republicans who did absolutely nothing to keep it as well(not even lip service to renew it, although they had absolutely no problem fighting for every cent over 250K). It should also be pointed out the Bush Tax cuts were originally created to be temporary as well, so it's more a case Obama renewed those for the first 400K for everybody when they expired instead of increased them for any money over 400K

Just out of curiosity since you *****ing about the payroll tax cut(stimulus) not being extended, do you feel it should have been?

Quote:
Originally Posted by chaseter View Post
I love it. I love the excuses for this man. He could be the champion for not kicking puppies and his excuse to continue to kick puppies is that there isn't a bill that says he shouldn't kick puppies.

If you want to cite giving to charity, why did Obama blast Mitt Romney for his tax rate of 14 something %? That man gave more than Obama does in a decade.
Romney's taxes was largely due to capital gains tax break(which should be abolished or lowered). Even when factoring in Obama's 25% given to charity I do think 18% is way to low and they should find ways to increase it(if you factor out the 150k he gave to charity Obama is still paying under 25% on the rest of the cash he made). I can only hope the House and Senate can create a Bill to do that and Obama puts his money where his mouth is an signs it(I don't see how I am defending him saying that)

Now if the House created a bill that cuts loopholes that benefit Obama and he doesn't sign it I would definitely call him a hypocrite


Last edited by SV Fan; 04-16-2013 at 01:11 AM.
SV Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2013, 01:05 AM   #67
Thundercrack85
Side-Kick
 
Thundercrack85's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 13,279
Default Re: Discussion: The DEMOCRATIC Party III

Quote:
Originally Posted by chaseter View Post
I like how you just equated all of Texas Republicans to being xenophobic racist religious extremists.
Okay, you're right. After all only half believe he's a secret foreign-born Muslim. And only a quarter think he's the anti-christ. But I was trying to be humorous.

Thundercrack85 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2013, 01:08 AM   #68
chaseter
Bland User
 
chaseter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Denver
Posts: 43,004
Default Re: Discussion: The DEMOCRATIC Party III

I love the misdirection. Think of all the hungry children Obama's taxes could have fed. Instead, these hypocrites like Obama and Buffet don't lead by example but don't mind preaching from the pulpit. It's like the adultering preacher. Also, tax rates went up on the wealthy and tax holidays on the poor expired. Now the poor on Obama's watch get less each week while unemployment sits where it was when he took over 4 years ago. But yes let's blame Republicans when the Senate did nothing on what you describe. Enjoy your smaller paycheck. Lets applaud Obama for his 18% tax rate! It's all the Republicans fault for Obama's awful 18% rate. If only he had legislation passed into law to enforce his convictions.

__________________
"You can leave a penny, you can't take a penny. You can leave a penny anytime. You have to spend $10 to take a penny. Store policy."
"Since when has this been store policy?"
"Uh, since my boss made up the policy. You gonna pay? You're holding up my line of one other person. You can't afford your milk, step aside. What, daddy didn't give you enough milk money? Little baby gonna cry about it? Just step aside."
And that is how Uncle Ben dies.
chaseter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2013, 01:10 AM   #69
chaseter
Bland User
 
chaseter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Denver
Posts: 43,004
Default Re: Discussion: The DEMOCRATIC Party III

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thundercrack85 View Post
But I was trying to be humorous.
It didn't work out.

__________________
"You can leave a penny, you can't take a penny. You can leave a penny anytime. You have to spend $10 to take a penny. Store policy."
"Since when has this been store policy?"
"Uh, since my boss made up the policy. You gonna pay? You're holding up my line of one other person. You can't afford your milk, step aside. What, daddy didn't give you enough milk money? Little baby gonna cry about it? Just step aside."
And that is how Uncle Ben dies.
chaseter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2013, 01:13 AM   #70
Thundercrack85
Side-Kick
 
Thundercrack85's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 13,279
Default Re: Discussion: The DEMOCRATIC Party III

Oh don't be like that.

The point stands though, I think their hatred for Obama evened out their ambivalence towards Romney.

I find Republicans' hatred for Obama rather disturbing, as I've seen it first hand. I mean, they hated Clinton. But that seems downright impersonal compared to their feelings towards Obama.

Thundercrack85 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2013, 01:16 AM   #71
SV Fan
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 5,084
Default Re: Discussion: The DEMOCRATIC Party III

Quote:
Originally Posted by chaseter View Post
I love the misdirection. Think of all the hungry children Obama's taxes could have fed. Instead, these hypocrites like Obama and Buffet don't lead by example but don't mind preaching from the pulpit. It's like the adultering preacher. Also, tax rates went up on the wealthy and tax holidays on the poor expired. Now the poor on Obama's watch get less each week while unemployment sits where it was when he took over 4 years ago. But yes let's blame Republicans when the Senate did nothing on what you describe. Enjoy your smaller paycheck. Lets applaud Obama for his 18% tax rate! It's all the Republicans fault for Obama's awful 18% rate. If only he had legislation passed into law to enforce his convictions.
I can easily say you are misdirecting as well. You don't answer any question I give you and just go on the attack on Obama.

Simple fact is the tax Laws need to be changed and Obama SHOULD sign the bill when it comes to his desk, even if it effects his bottom line. And if he doesn't I would be more then happy to call him a hypocrite. As for being the Republicans fault, I blame the people who don't even want to go to the table to discuss tax reform which in General is the Republicans, Obama basically can't sign a bill that doesn't get handed to him and it seems like anytime he wants to discuss anything, the second you increase taxes 1 cent the Republicans put their fingers in their ears and go la la la la la la. Don't even try to claim the Republicans voted to lower the Bush tax cuts(since I am guessing this will be your argument), simple fact is those tax cuts EXPIRED and they waited till the day after they expired to create a new set of tax cuts that mimicked the first 400k of those tax cuts(they couldn't even save us the hassle voting for those say on Dec 15 to avoid the hassle of waiting till the last minute in fear of it looking like they gave in to reducing taxes).

Also do you think they Government should have kept the payroll taxcut(even though that is the money we use for Social Security)? You do realize that was part of the Stimulus and was always ment to be a temporary thing? Also why did the Republicans who complain about any sort of tax increase not fight to keep it or say 1 word about it expiring(honestly I would love to get a Republican to answer this one, hell even Grover "I hate anything that looks like a tax increase and will give you my opinion on it" Norquist had nothing to say about this))?

I should add about the payroll taxcut I think it was a very stupid thing to do. Obama basically took money from the Social Security system to give people tax breaks and I think that is irresponsible and short sited. if they were going to give people some sort of break or tax break they should have found other ways to do it. Beyond that in the case of BOTH the payroll tax cut and Bush tax Cuts, both were temporary, which means they served a temporary purpose and had an expiry date. I don't get how temporary things running out somehow equals a tax increase(as you state it was), it just means a temporary tax decrease ran it's coarse. It's basically a case if I made a deal to give you a lollipop for 10 days straight then on the 11th day when that deal ended I stopped, would you complain I took away your lollipop on the 11th day?


Last edited by SV Fan; 04-16-2013 at 02:02 AM.
SV Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2013, 12:52 PM   #72
hippie_hunter
The King is Back!
SHH! Global Moderator
 
hippie_hunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Titanium Groceries
Posts: 51,558
Default Re: Discussion: The DEMOCRATIC Party III

I gotta go with chase on this one. I find it absolutely appalling how Obama went after Romney for his 13% tax rate and when time came for Obama to put his actions where his mouth is, he only pays a 5% higher rate than Romney. Yeah, he gives to charity which gives him a lower rate in the end, but guess what? Romney gave far more to charity than Obama ever has. There's nothing stopping Obama from paying more and for all the **** that Obama gave Romney, it turns out he's just as bad as Romney. As a matter in fact, I would say he's worse than Romney because at least Romney didn't go off acting like a complete and total hypocrite in regards to the tax issue.

This is nothing but hypocrisy at its worse and there is absolutely nothing defensible about it.

__________________
Titanium Groceries!!!
hippie_hunter is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2013, 01:12 PM   #73
Kelly
Hoity Toity Administrator
SHH! Administrator
 
Kelly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 58,068
Default Re: Discussion: The DEMOCRATIC Party III

Quote:
Originally Posted by hippie_hunter View Post
I gotta go with chase on this one. I find it absolutely appalling how Obama went after Romney for his 13% tax rate and when time came for Obama to put his actions where his mouth is, he only pays a 5% higher rate than Romney. Yeah, he gives to charity which gives him a lower rate in the end, but guess what? Romney gave far more to charity than Obama ever has. There's nothing stopping Obama from paying more and for all the **** that Obama gave Romney, it turns out he's just as bad as Romney. As a matter in fact, I would say he's worse than Romney because at least Romney didn't go off acting like a complete and total hypocrite in regards to the tax issue.

This is nothing but hypocrisy at its worse and there is absolutely nothing defensible about it.
I think this is where I have built this great dislike (moreso than I have had for a President, except for maybe Bush 41, but that hate started as governor of Texas....), and growing lack of respect for Obama....I actually agree with a lot of his policies as far as guns, hell even uping the taxes to at least the Reagan or Clinton years, and I still have totally passed judgment on Obamacare yet....but he has become in my eyes, one of the most hypocritical Presidents in my 4 decades of studying Presidents....and as much education as he has, his ability to put into practice anything of substance is appalling. I have to honestly in discussions outside of here, just keep my mouth shut with friends because it would end up in a knock down drag out because I have absolutely no patience left for this man. At all......and it sickens me when people apologize for him, and blame ANYTHING AND EVERYTHING besides where the main portion of the blame should be put....

__________________
'Listen to yourself and in that quietude you might hear the voice of God' Maya Angelou
Kelly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2013, 01:21 PM   #74
SV Fan
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 5,084
Default Re: Discussion: The DEMOCRATIC Party III

Quote:
Originally Posted by hippie_hunter View Post
I gotta go with chase on this one. I find it absolutely appalling how Obama went after Romney for his 13% tax rate and when time came for Obama to put his actions where his mouth is, he only pays a 5% higher rate than Romney. Yeah, he gives to charity which gives him a lower rate in the end, but guess what? Romney gave far more to charity than Obama ever has. There's nothing stopping Obama from paying more and for all the **** that Obama gave Romney, it turns out he's just as bad as Romney. As a matter in fact, I would say he's worse than Romney because at least Romney didn't go off acting like a complete and total hypocrite in regards to the tax issue.

This is nothing but hypocrisy at its worse and there is absolutely nothing defensible about it.
Personally I would love to see what exactly Obama wrote off besides the 150k to charity. By my quick calculations after the charity he should have paid close to 23% of his cash(~152 when he only paid 112) to Federal taxes. I am guessing their is many things in that 40k that he was able to write off that he shouldn't have and the government needs to look into stopping that

As for the case for Romney he paid 3M out of 20M for charity, which sure is more cash but a much smaller percentage. Taking that out of his taxes he still should have paid an effective rate of close to 29%(so how he went from 29% to 14% should be looked at reducing)


Last edited by SV Fan; 04-16-2013 at 01:25 PM.
SV Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2013, 02:50 PM   #75
hippie_hunter
The King is Back!
SHH! Global Moderator
 
hippie_hunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Titanium Groceries
Posts: 51,558
Default Re: Discussion: The DEMOCRATIC Party III

Quote:
Originally Posted by SV Fan View Post
Personally I would love to see what exactly Obama wrote off besides the 150k to charity. By my quick calculations after the charity he should have paid close to 23% of his cash(~152 when he only paid 112) to Federal taxes. I am guessing their is many things in that 40k that he was able to write off that he shouldn't have and the government needs to look into stopping that

As for the case for Romney he paid 3M out of 20M for charity, which sure is more cash but a much smaller percentage. Taking that out of his taxes he still should have paid an effective rate of close to 29%(so how he went from 29% to 14% should be looked at reducing)
In 2011, Romney had an income of $14 million and gave $4 million to charity, about 29% of his income. And over the past 20 years, the Romneys have given more than $50 million in charity. And they could have deducted so much more but chose not to.

But overall, this really isn't about the Romneys. This is more about Obama not practicing what he preaches.

__________________
Titanium Groceries!!!
hippie_hunter is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:10 PM.

monitoring_string = "dee460792f24517621e3ca080805de7e"
Contact Us - Mobile - SuperHeroHype - ComingSoon.net - Shock Till You Drop - Lost Password - Clear Cookies - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Top - AdChoices


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SuperHeroHype.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.