Quote:
Originally Posted by lustylad
Originally Posted by ExNYer  No. SOME people who oppose the GOP establishment are tea party sympathizers. Other opponents of the GOP establishment have a working brain.
Your snark doesn't work since I'm a tea party sympathizer with a working brain.
And just what does "Tea Party" mean at this point? .... They don't have a real coherent platform.
Well, you could start with the TAXED ENOUGH ALREADY part - that's pretty coherent in its opposition to what the tax-and-spend libtards keep shoveling out. |
Thanks for demonstrating my point about Tea Party sympathizers not having a working brain and NO coherent platform.
As a plain point of FACT, taxes are not particularly high compared to historical averages or to other countries around the world. The Grover Norquist assholes think that no matter what the current tax rate is, it MUST be reduced in order to grow the economy and raise even MORE revenue from the lower rate. Following their argument to its logical conclusion, even if the tax rate was 1%, you should cut it to 0% and the economy would grow so much that the lower 0% tax rate would raise even more revenue than the 1 % rate. Clearly NOT.
There is a time to cut taxes and there is a time to raise taxes, depending on how the economy is doing. If the economy is in a slump and the tax rate is 65%, then you should cut it to 40-45% (and cut capital gains rate too) to get the economy moving again. When you are in a boom, you should raise rates and cut spending and pay down debt. When you are in a slump, you should cut rates and borrow to stimulate the economy.
But the Democrats LOVE to spend and the GOP has NOT been able to make a dent in the entitlement mentality in this country. If the GOP cannot get a majority to support big spending cuts, then they have to live with a higher tax rate and go for smaller spending cuts or at least let spending grow slower than inflation and revenue increases.
Instead, we BORROW and spend. All the time, NOT just during recessions. Which is why the national debt always goes up and the interest on the debt is becoming crippling. There is NOTHING conservative or fiscally responsible about that. Or coherent. But yet, that is what one group within the Tea Party advocates. Cut those taxes! And eliminate waste! As if "waste" represents anything more than a rounding error in the budget.
We spend far too much on entitlements and the military. And nobody can sell to the public the idea that we have to cut both to get our fiscal house in order.
We are borrowing for retirement. Which of course you cannot do.
Young people now are being burdened with crippling debt from the current generation of people 45 (or 40) and above. It is absolutely immoral what we are doing.
But TP people think we can cut taxes and still balance the budget by eliminating the minuscule amounts of money we spend on foreign aid.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lustylad
Originally Posted by ExNYer And voting for Obama - as opposed to staying home - drives home the point by increasing the size of the Obama margin of victory. A slim loss because of people staying home would send entirely the wrong message to the GOP establishment. They would think they just needed to tweak their campaign strategies instead of rethinking their platform entirely.
Ok, lemme see if I can figure out this deluded line of thinking. You hated the GOP establishment because in 2012 they served up Romney who wasn't conservative enough for you. So you cast your vote instead for the guy who is diametrically opposed to ALL conservative principles - an arrogant lawless libtarded free-spending Alinsky socialist ideologue. And you say you did this just to spite the GOP establishment so they will wake up and nominate the perfect conservative candidate next time? How the fuck does inflating Odumbo's margin of victory (with its message that the country is too liberal for a Romney) convince the GOP it needs to put up a more conservative candidate to win? A sane person would conclude just the opposite. |
I've got news for you, I didn't vote for McCain either. Not after he demonstrated his incompetence by picking Sarah Palin as a running mate. I voted for the Libertarian candidate that time - Bob Barr. But that accomplished nothing either.
An ass kicking at the polls will lead you to start picking candidates based on principles, not persona. Name Romney's principles and win valuable prizes. He was a tone deaf empty suit who was - once again - spouting the "cut taxes and watch it trickle down" economic line. Which would have meant more spending and borrowing. We got that from Obama, but I expect that from the Democrats. But the debt bomb would have been worse if we had cut taxes. Tell me this - what entitlement cuts and military cuts do you think Romney would have made? The honest answer is NONE. And the rollup in debt would have been the GOPs fault, not Obama's.
I think we are heading back into another recession and THIS time there will be NO doubt whose fault it is. The "recovery" under Obama has been pathetic and we borrowed so much money that we cannot borrow more without becoming another Greece. In other words, we have no economic tools left to fight an economic slump. Since borrowing will become prohibitively expensive when interests rates increase, we will FINALLY have a day of economic reckoning that will force us to make REAL spending cuts.
The Democrats and Obama will get the blame - not Romney or the GOP.
THEN the GOP will be able to nominate a REAL fiscal conservative and will get my vote back.
And the GOP will finally be able to rid itself of the Bible Thumpers and rednecks who think we can solve all of America's problems by getting rid of gay marriage and kicking all them minorities off welfare.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lustylad
Originally Posted by ExNYer
You just committed the classical error of thinking "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" ... Trump is worse than the GOP establishment. No thanks.
I didn't say Trump had to be your candidate or your friend, only that his anti-GOP-establishment attitude should resonate with you. If you think this is outweighed by his admitted flaws and weaknesses elsewhere, then you could elaborate. Otherwise I will just assume the Donald either outsmarted you in a real estate deal or fired you on The Apprentice back when you still lived in New York. Which is it? |
It doesn't matter if his anti-GOP establishment resonates with me if EVERYTHING ELSE ABOUT HIM IS REVOLTING. He will accomplish NOTHING if he gains office. People how know him say pretty much everything you have seen in the debates is a SHOW he is putting on. Do you really think he is going to put his money in a blind trust for a minimum of four years just to go engage in the day-to-day horse trading of governance?
And you don't have to deal with Trump in either real estate or his television show to not like him, mope. Watching his bullshit circus act since the late 1970s is enough turn anyone's stomach.
Does anyone remember the USFL and his anti-trust lawsuit against the NFL that netted him THREE DOLLARS in damages?
His Marla Maples shenanigans?
His Atlantic City casino bankruptcies? How the fuck do you lose money on a casino? His decision to build a big casino off the Strip in Vegas - for which he NEVER received a gambling license?
He managed to borrow enough money to buy some good properties in Manhattan in the 1970s and 1980s and he rode the NY real estate market up - just like every other big landlord in NY. Except the other landlord have the decency (or smarts) to shut up and stay in the shadows.
Trump is nothing special as a businessman. He started out very rich and became fabulously rich by keeping good real estate advisers on staff.
His ventures outside real estate? Not so good.
THE BOTTOM LINE? The GOP can do much better with a conviction politician, like Reagan or Goldwater, who stands for something - rather than another pleasant mealy-mouthed suit like Romney or a big government machine politician like McCain. Even if the GOP loses in 2016, they will be vindicated and win in 2020.
But not if they run Trump. A conviction politician he is not.
*Government Uni-Party
