patrick.net

95% of the those who vote Republican do not realize whattheir own best interests are.

HIGH FIVE SISTA!!

So nice to see someone else that gets it. Those freaking stupid jerk republicans are like so totally stupid. If only they all voted for the politicians that are democrats, it would be like heaven on Earth!! Everyone that is smart knows that paul krugman knows everything there is to know about economics, and democrat politicians have everyone elses best interests in mind, only, all the time!! They are like, such total altruisic saints.

errc says

Everyone that is smart knows that paul krugman knows everything there is to know about economics

Safe to say he knows more the authors of every one of the Austrian economic blogs, pick any. And every single Republican currently behind or supporting the Romney/Ryan tax plans.

But these are the guys that will argue with him. And look retarded doing so.

He knows me than me. And I suspect you as well.

Call it Crazy says

david1 says

He knows me than me. And I suspect you as well.

What??? Is that English???

more than me.

Still no takers?

In the past 20 years, what legislation (at the national level) has been initiated, supported, and passed by Republicans that exclusively benefits the poor or middle class (the 98%), with no tangible benefit to the top 2%?

Vote against my own interest?

The Corporation for Public Broadcasting effectively pays my salary. I plan to vote for Mitt Romney. It may cost me my job.

The end.

rfsanders says

Vote against my own interest?

The Corporation for Public Broadcasting effectively pays my salary. I plan to vote for Mitt Romney. It may cost me my job.

The end.

No.. you will do fine... call it a spin off ! a few commercials and cable deals will bring in higher $$ royalties and you may well prosper. Fact is spin offs do much better than normal start up IPO since they have long history with customers which will continue. A new beginning!

david1 says

errc says

Everyone that is smart knows that paul krugman knows everything there is to know about economics

Safe to say he knows more the authors of every one of the Austrian economic blogs, pick any. And every single Republican currently behind or supporting the Romney/Ryan tax plans.

But these are the guys that will argue with him. And look retarded doing so.

He knows me than me. And I suspect you as well.

Well, since you seem to feel that you know better than I, what my best interests are, can you vote for me?

Lemme guess, just vote for the democrat. Because they are democrats, and everyone that is smart knows that democrats have my best interests as a priority.

errc says

Lemme guess, just vote for the democrat. Because they are democrats, and everyone that is smart knows that democrats have my best interests as a priority.

And don't forget Dummies shouldn't vote.

I don't intend to vote. And I'm dumb as rocks

I just can't seem to bring myself to wait in line to pull the lever for any of the cretins mired in their neo-classical economic farce, nor their hard-on for the police state and torturing "drug" users. I mean, unless its a big pharma approved highly profitable drug

If it was your best interest,,,to vote against the candidate that supports giving themselves the ability to illegaly detain and torture any citizen at any time, indefinitely, for no particular reason whatsoever,,,than who do you vote for?

errc says

Lemme guess, just vote for the democrat. Because they are democrats, and everyone that is smart knows that democrats have my best interests as a priority.

Not at all. In every election, you should only chose the candidate, regardless of party, that lays out policies that will serve your best interests.

What I am saying to you here is in this case, unless you make over 500k per year, voting for Obama is in your best interest. I simply cannot think of any other reason of voting for Romney.

Provided Romney is elected, and he does what he has campaigned on: lowering tax rates by 20%, reducing or eliminating deductions, increasing military spending, and decreasing domestic spending, these policies will destroy our weak economy.

Tax cuts do NOT spur economic growth. They never have, they never will. GWB tried it, the economy did not respond. Reagan lowered taxes and GDP grew 63% in 8 years, but Reagan also increased goverment spending 57%, (from $679B to $1,067B) Keynesians like Krugman would argue thatthe Reagan boom is due increased goverment spending. I tend to agree with him.

As such, here is the data by President:
Obama: GDP +12%, expenditures +8.8% (09-12), taxes flat
GWB: GDP +40%, expenditures +60% (01-08), taxes down
Clinton: GDP +49%, expenditures +27% (93-00), taxes up
GHWB: GDP +16%, expenditures +21% (89-92), taxes flat
Reagan: GDP +63%. expenditures +57% (81-88), taxes down
Carter: GDP +38%, expenditures +45% (77-80), taxes flat
Nixon/Ford: GDP +83%, expenditures +102% (69-76), taxes flat

So what this tells me is this: if you are a single issue voter, and that issue is the economy, and the ideas that one guy has for helping the economy are lowering taxes and cutting spending, and the data shows that lowering taxes has never helped the economy, and the data also shows that increasing government spending HELPS the economy, why would I vote for that guy?

On the other hand, the other guy wants to raise taxes and make investments in areas like infrastructure and education. Policies like these have historically helped the economy.

I also believe the primary problem with our economy is income inequality - and Obama's policies attempt to address this while Romney only wants to enact policies that would exascerbate the problem.

To me the choice is clear.

zzyzzx says

Reagan raised taxes 11 times and mushroomed the national debt. So I guess Reagan was bad for tax payers.

Bush's illegal and corrupt wars drained our treasury. Bush was bad for tax payers, too.

You know who was awesome for tax payers? Bill Clinton. He kept us out of war and the economy was orgasmic under him. Adjusting for inflation, he's the only one to actually lower the national debt, albeit barely since he kept taxes so low. So let's give Bill Clinton a third term.

Or just put Gore in office. His policies are similar and he won the year 2000 election. Had he been in office, Obama would never have been. See, it's a win-win. Had the Republicans committing election fraud not stolen the 2000 election, they wouldn't have to "endure" the Obama socialist regime. Payback's a bitch.

Stock market is also historically much better under Democrats. Romney win's, then better to just cash out the old 401k. Wait for the implosion of our economy, then get back in again when the next Dem is elected in 2016.

gbenson says

Stock market is also historically much better under Democrats. Romney win's, then better to just cash out the old 401k. Wait for the implosion of our economy, then get back in again when the next Dem is elected in 2016.

Blue states have MUCH higher cost of living as well

As a working poor person that's not dumb enough to get duped into participating, how exactly does much higher cost of living and higher stock market, benefit me?

The party of the poor ROTFLMAO

I'm just glad there's people like you, that know better then me, what my own best interests are

And the blue states have higher incomes per capita, along with paying for EVERY perk that the red states hand out to their citizens that they don't, and won't, pay for themselves.

You red-staters want to be treated like adults and "have some say over your own destiny" and what best for you, YOU START PAYING FOR IT THEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

nice idea..

Dan8267 says

2. A choice of "no confidence" in which no one gets to be president and another election must be started one year later

so then...why are you jealous of yourself?

gbenson says

Actually I am pretty close to the 2% mark (tons of deductions to get the AGI down on the rentals so not sure exactly where I'd fall but probably around top 3-4% after deductions), and work harder than you, so shut your yap and answer the question you avoided.

IDDQD says

... or like California.

Keep in mind that California is mostly a Red State. Its only the population centers that are blue, and thus tip the balance.

Overlay the two maps below (political leaning vs unemployment) Cause and effect maybe?

gbenson says

Keep in mind that California is mostly a Red State. Its only the population centers that are blue, and thus tip the balance

......so, basically it's the vast number of people that just vote blue or the opposite, that make CA blue. Genious. Brilliant. It was a red state right up until it wasn't.

What else would you expect from a jealous 2%'er...??

upisdown says

gbenson says

Keep in mind that California is mostly a Red State. Its only the population centers that are blue, and thus tip the balance

......so, basically it's the vast number of people that just vote blue or the opposite, that make CA blue. Genious. Brilliant. It was a red state right up until it wasn't.

SoftShell says

What else would you expect from a jealous 2%'er...??

Jealous? No, that wasn't my first thought, wishful thinking yes, but not jealousy. That reminds me of: they are exactly the same except............

Righties bash California as a bunch of liberals that are bankrupting the state. The reality is that the vast majority of CA's real estate is painted red, not blue. It's the red portions of the state that are draining all the resources and have brutally high unemployment.

If the deep-blue San Francisco Bay area was a state, it would have a GDP of $500 billion.

Hey Gbenson, check out:

http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/results/president/map.html

and drag the little slidebar to contrast the whole country's voting patterns over the last few cycles. Not exactly on-topic, but I thought interested parties might like it.

I like to use that for the exit polls as well, and to show how every single religious and ethnic minority is moving toward the Dems.

gbenson says

The reality is that the vast majority of CA's real estate is painted red, not blue. It's the red portions of the state that are draining all the resources and have brutally high unemployment.

I wasn't trying to bust your chops, it's like that in every blue state. The farther that you get away from the population density, the lower the IQ and the higher the unemployment/welfare participation. The 98% of a samll community struggling to just put $5 worth of gas in a car while utilizing EVERY known type of assistance to pay their power bill and buy food. To add insult to injury, the millionaire farmers are either getting money directly(mostly phased out) to free insurance and generous tax breaks. Then both groups pretend that it's inner-city blacks that use 100% of all the previously mentioned assistance.

Upisdown. Thanks for the explanation, and if I insinuated you were a Republican, my most sincere apologies. No excuse on my part for leveling such an insult at someone like that! :)

CL says

Hey Gbenson, check out:

http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/results/president/map.html

Sweetness, thanks! How come wherever there are educated people its blue, and wherever there's hillbillies its red?

upisdown says

I wasn't trying to bust your chops, it's like that in every blue state. The farther that you get away from the population density, the lower the IQ and the higher the unemployment/welfare participation

What do you mean? I thought that wineries in Lodi region were frequented by "real americans" while the wineries in napa/sonoma are attended by liberals who want to turn us into france?

dublin hillz says

What do you mean? I thought that wineries in Lodi region were frequented by "real americans" while the wineries in napa/sonoma are attended by liberals who want to turn us into france?

There's 2 categories of Americans?

upisdown says

dublin hillz says

What do you mean? I thought that wineries in Lodi region were frequented by "real americans" while the wineries in napa/sonoma are attended by liberals who want to turn us into france?

There's 2 categories of Americans?

Yes, according to elites, only 2 just like there are dems and reps and everyone else is irrelevant

gbenson says

Sweetness, thanks! How come wherever there are educated people its blue, and wherever there's hillbillies its red?

Well, Liberals have long cornered the "smart vote", which caused the Right to deride higher education, and those that pursue it to be called "eggheads" and "elite".

HTH!