patrick.net

Why would you assume Romney gets the nomination?

It seems increasingly likely to me that Romney will lose. For many of my relatives a Mormon is about as suspect as the Muslim Pretender occupying the Oval Office. They never outright say that, but somehow Newt or Santorum are better choices for them.

Vicente says

For many of my relatives a Mormon is about as suspect as the Muslim Pretender occupying the Oval Office.

My feeling is there will never be a Mormon Republican President. A Mormon might be able to get the nomination but enough evangelicals wont vote for any Mormon to cause him/her to loose in the general. In this election if Romney gets the nod Obama wont get their vote either, they will go third party or just not vote. It does seem the Republicans are pretty well screwed, at least at the moment.

What I find weird is that the evangelicals don't seem to care about voting for a Catholic (both Newt and Santorum are Catholics). It is unheard of that they would go for a papist. I mean, we already have six on the supreme court now along with Vice President Biden...how much more power do you want to give to the pope?

The Republicans? The Liberal media is more in charge over who people are considering than Republicans.

A Blackberry phone could run against Obama and win at this point.
The only people that are actually going to show up to vote Obama, are the people that identify them selves as Democrats, and still find it in their hearts to defend Obama. I mean just look around, that fool is growing even more scarce on Patnet.

I find this whole situation so ridiculous its almost hysterical and in some ways sad. I'm not really much of a Newt Fan ( nor a fan of any of the Republican candidates for that matter) but I've gotta' hand it to Newt for basically not answering questions and whenever convenient- blame the "elitist" media ( I'm sure he meant that to indicate the "liberal" media), which of course brought cheers from the crowds whom might also believe in the BS that any media that doesn't mesh with what they believe must be a conspiracy. Meanwhile they go home and switch on their cable news channels- owned by some of the largest media conglomerates in the world. But nevertheless it seems that Newt knows how to use the media quite well.

I also have absolutely zero problems saying that yes- I support Obama, I will vote for him, and so too will a great deal of others.

Donkey,

Keep telling yourself that Obama won't be re-elected. Whoever the sacrificial lamb that the GOP puts up is going to lose Mondale style.

1. The Stock market will be anywhere from 50-60% higher than when he took office.
2. Unemployment will be anywhere from .5-1% lower.
3. Taxes (in the form of the 2% reduction in the SS tax) will be lower for every working American.
4. The war in Iraq is over.
5. We will have had no domestic terrorist attacks.
6. Inflation will remain low.
7. The economy will have grown, albeit slowly, for 13 consecutive quarters.
8. Universal health care will exist for the first time in American history.
9. Osama bin Laden is dead.
10. Taxes will be higher for no one.

Kevin says

suspect that the anti-big government group will team up with the ultra religious group to drive the party so far to the right that whoever they field in 2016 is going to make this year's crowd look like a bunch of atheist commies.

That's if the party doesn't split along those lines. The only thing keeping the Money Conservatives and Social Conservatives together is their mutual enemy, the Democrats.

Of course, there's a fairly deep split in the Democrat party too. There's a big difference between a Blue Collar "Pittsburgh" Democrat and a Cutural "San Francisco/New York" Democrat.

I've wondered that too---a floor fight?

Now, the rumor is that Jeb will win at the convention, but will that remind the voters that Bush I and II both sucked the big one?

This nation is finally on the path to return to its greatness of the 1800s when men of stature and merit selected the President in a smoke filled back room. Since those rooms do not allow entry to Papists, Cultists, Midgets, Negroes, or Broads, the clear winner of the 2012 Republican National Convention will be Teddy Roosevelt.

Bush Sr is eligible to run.

Just sayin'.

You know, seriously at the end of the day does it really matter who gets elected? Seeing as how congress seems to be in the mood to basically disagree with each other no matter what nothing really gets done.

Secondly- and this goes for both parties- whenever you hear politicians talk to "the people" on the campaign trail, almost everything they say is so totally dumbed-down because they can't fathom saying anything remotely out of character with their party's narrow definitions.

david1 says

3. Taxes (in the form of the 2% reduction in the SS tax) will be lower for every working American.

Is that why I owe 3K this year?
When I've always gotten at least 2K back.

The GOP says

david1 says

3. Taxes (in the form of the 2% reduction in the SS tax) will be lower for every working American.

Is that why I owe 3K this year?

When I've always gotten at least 2K back.

William E Baughb

Have you considered learning how the tax code works?

The GOP says

Is that why I owe 3K this year?
When I've always gotten at least 2K back.

*Please do not take this as tax advice...

Perhaps you prepared your taxes incorrectly. Or perhaps you have not calculated your quarterly payments correctly. Or perhaps you changed your withholding status (if you are a w-2 employee). Maybe your income increased significantly. Perhaps you had some capital gains last year that you have to pay the taxes for. Maybe you sold your house and are renting, and no longer have enough deductions to itemize. Maybe one of the few thousand combinations of the above or something else changed...

Point is, the amount you "got back" in previous years vs. the amount you "owe" this year has nothing to do with the rate that you pay in taxes.

You see, there are a few facts on my side here. All things being equal, since:
1. Federal Rates have not changed.
2. SS taxes have been lowered.
3. No significant changes have been made to allowable deductions or credits vs. 2010.

A taxpayer will pay a lower rate in 2011 than he did in 2008.

You personally, well, if you were smart enough to figure out the rate that you will pay this year vs. previous years, that rate may be higher or lower based upon a multitude of factors, examples of which I gave above, and certainly which are not all things being equal.

Based upon your quoted statement, I am doubtful that you are able to accurately calculate your average tax rate, so further discussion on this matter really is a waste of my time.

david1 says

You see, there are a few facts on my side here. All things being equal, since:
1. Federal Rates have not changed.
2. SS taxes have been lowered.
3. No significant changes have been made to allowable deductions or credits vs. 2010.

The only difference is, this year I worked the full year, vs previous years. Why give payroll deductions, if people are going to have to owe money at the end of the year?
Since everyone here loves inflation adjustment so damn much, 100K is not 100K from 2007.

All I know is I end up paying 25% in tax, ss, and medicaid deductions. Yet, now by working the extra 2 months consistently this year over previous years, the deductions my employer takes out for the tax portion, isn't enough to cover the spread. Why doesn't this slide on its own?

It might or might not be any policy by this administration.
But after three long years of the Socialist idiots screaming for greater taxation on those that paid their dues and now make enough money they don't have ride the Peanut Butter and Jelly express, are feeling a greater pinch.

Who do you think we're going to blame, come November?
Newt Gingrich is worst possible person I could ever imagine being president. That was my thought in 96, when he was haunting the house.

Now Obama is that person, and Newt though not square with the house, he's no Obama.

shrekgrinch says

At GOP conventions the fights are all conducted in the smoke-filled rooms off the conventions floor and off-camera.

Not anymore. In today's world, if there is a fight in a backroom, I guarantee you someone will catch it on their cell phone cam and upload it to YouTube. There is no such thing anymore as "off camera."

shrekgrinch says

Why did they do this? After watching the Big Fight between Hillary and Obama in '08. The GOP Establishment also did this so they could more easily rig a brokered convention their way.

But the Democrats did not have a brokered convention in 2008. Obama was the nominee before the convention ever started.

shrekgrinch says

One can seriously argue that we tended to pick better presidents back then, too. Just sayin'.

Really? Like Grant, arguably one of the most corrupt presidents in US history?

funny thing is that "smoke-filled room" dates from the 1920 selection of Harding as the Republican Party's candidate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoke-filled_room