| Author | Message | ||
     Dave Citizen Username: Dave Post Number: 8071 Registered: 4-1998  |
The Kerry crew needs a James Carville | ||
| Madden 11 Citizen Username: Madden_11 Post Number: 132 Registered: 12-2003 |
You skipped a bit: Kerry has vowed that he would follow strict rules mandating that any new tax cut or spending plan be offset by revenue increases or equivalent spending cuts, said Gene Sperling, a Kerry economic adviser. If savings cannot be found, programs will have to be jettisoned, Sperling said. "This is the first time I've ever seen a candidate say, 'Even my top priorities will be constrained by fiscal discipline.' " Kerry is making a lot of promises, but has also made it clear that he won't spend money we don't have, unlike Bush has done. How is that going to add to the red ink? | ||
| cjc Citizen Username: Cjc Post Number: 2305 Registered: 8-2003 |
You have to believe two things for that. 1) that Kerry will be the first Democrat at the national level in 40 years to allow any tax cut (remember the middle class tax cut Clinton promised? HA!)and 2) that democrats would cut domestic spending as they didn't do even in the deficit laden 80s. The only spending Kerry has voted to measureably cut is the military that I can see. The only people that would rein in domestic spending if they ever got their cajones back would be republicans. | ||
| singlemalt Citizen Username: Singlemalt Post Number: 267 Registered: 12-2001 |
>>Kerry is making a lot of promises, but has also made it clear that he won't spend money we don't have, unlike Bush has done. How is that going to add to the red ink?<< Kerry made that clear when he refused to provide the necessary money for our armed forces in harms way. | ||
| singlemalt Citizen Username: Singlemalt Post Number: 268 Registered: 12-2001 |
These latest poll results should not be a surprise to anyone.... Bush: 49% Kerry: 45% Sounds like the Kerry campaign is starting to get engaged so this may be a temporary bump. http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Presidential_Tracking_Poll.htm | ||
| Dave Citizen Username: Dave Post Number: 8074 Registered: 4-1998 |
Among likely voters, Kerry's three points up, according to Zogby. At this point, I'm pretty confident Kerry will win. His lead can only grow when Nader jumps ship. | ||
| singlemalt Citizen Username: Singlemalt Post Number: 269 Registered: 12-2001 |
Can you share the link? I can't find your data on the Zogby site. Thanks. | ||
| tulip Citizen Username: Braveheart Post Number: 1169 Registered: 3-2004 |
This isn't Zogby, but it's everyone else (almost.) Shows that it's still close. http://www.pollingreport.com/wh04gen.htm | ||
| tulip Citizen Username: Braveheart Post Number: 1170 Registered: 3-2004 |
and cjc, How do you feel about the August employment numbers? They will be coming out tomorrow, and I hear they're a bit on the low side. | ||
| Mustt_mustt Citizen Username: Mustt_mustt Post Number: 36 Registered: 8-2003 |
REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE CONVENTION SCHEDULE September 30, 2004, New York, New York 6:00 PM - Opening Prayer led by the Reverend Jerry Falwell 6:30 PM - Pledge of Allegiance 6:46 PM - Seminar #1: Katherine Harris on "Are Elections Really Necessary?" 7:30 PM - Announcement: Lincoln Memorial Renamed for Ronald Reagan 7:40 PM - EPA Address #1: "Mercury: It's What's for Dinner" 8:00 PM - Vote on which country to invade next 8:15 PM - John Ashcroft Lecture: "The Homos Are After Your Children" 8:30 PM - Round-table discussion on reproductive rights (Men Only) 8:50 PM - Seminar #2: "Corporations: The Government of the Future" 9:00 PM - Condi Rice sings "Can't Help Lovin' Dat Man" 9:30 PM - Break for secret meetings 10:40 PM - John Ashcroft Demonstration: New Mandatory Kevlar Chastity Belt 10:45 PM - GOP's Tribute to Tokenism, featuring Colin Powell and Condi Rice 10:46 PM - Ann Coulter's Tribute to "Joe McCarthy, American Patriot" 10:50 PM - Seminar #3: "Education: A Drain on Our Nation's Economy" 11:10 PM - Hilary Clinton Piņata Party 11:20 PM - John Ashcroft Lecture: "Evolutionists: A Dangerous New Cult" 11:35 PM - Blame Clinton 11:40 PM - Newt Gingrich speaks on "The Sanctity of Marriage" 11:41 PM - Announcement: Ronald Reagan to be added to Mt. Rushmore 11:50 PM - Closing Prayer led by Jesus Himself 12:00 Midnight - Nomination of George W. Bush as Holy Supreme Planetary Overlord | ||
| Kramer Citizen Username: Kramer Post Number: 67 Registered: 9-2002 |
Intro of John Kerry by Zell Miller: http://miller.senate.gov/speeches/030101jjdinner.htm ZELLEPHANT GONE WILD!!! http://www.democrats.org/news/200409020007.html GOP Can Do Bitter http://www.democrats.org/news/200409020014.html | ||
| singlemalt Citizen Username: Singlemalt Post Number: 270 Registered: 12-2001 |
Tulip, It must be horrible wanting bad economic data to come out tomorrow. What a horrible situation to be in. Since you apparently fell victim to the recession Bush inherited from the Clinton administration by losing your own employment, you should show compassion and hope the employment numbers look better. You don't really hope the economy stays bad just to get Kerry elected? It appears Wall Street (which usually knows better than anyone) has already priced good news (or nothing that is considered bad) into the market. http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/040902/wall_street_19.html | ||
| tulip Citizen Username: Braveheart Post Number: 1172 Registered: 3-2004 |
Singlemalt, look at my posting under "Jobs" and stop trying to guess how I feel about it. I think you know how I feel about joblessness. I wouldn't wish it on you. Bush has been in office for over three years since 9/11, and four years since Clinton, and the numbers are still showing no sign of improvement. You obviously haven't walked down Springfield Ave, or any street for that matter in recent months to see how many people are unemployed. Are you telling me the economy is booming? PS I don't have to wish for it. It's here. | ||
| Madden 11 Citizen Username: Madden_11 Post Number: 134 Registered: 12-2003 |
You have to believe two things for that. 1) that Kerry will be the first Democrat at the national level in 40 years to allow any tax cut (remember the middle class tax cut Clinton promised? HA!) Oh, I see. You know what Kerry will do because of what Clinton did. Perfectly logical. Also very telling that you don't see a problem with the government giving away money they don't have. Tax cuts for all! What's that? Huge deficits...uh...more tax cuts! Only a Republican could believe that you can increase revenue by giving your money away. and 2) that democrats would cut domestic spending as they didn't do even in the deficit laden 80s. We're not talking about who's cutting domestic spending, we're talking about whether Kerry's proposals will add to the deficit. He's said he won't add spending without cutting it somewhere else. If they can't cut somewhere else, he won't add new spending. It's a fairly elementary principle, which I guess is why the right can't seem to grasp it. They're doing a bangup job cutting spending, though. Those thrifty Republicans. How much was that Medicare drug benefit again? I'd ask the Medicare actuary, but they threatened to fire him if he told the truth. Big pharma's not complaining though, you can be sure of that. | ||
| lumpynose Citizen Username: Lumpyhead Post Number: 1048 Registered: 3-2002  |
Kerry is going to lose and there will be a lot of whining on MOL. They should have picked a better and stronger candidate. | ||
| cjc Citizen Username: Cjc Post Number: 2307 Registered: 8-2003 |
Madden, I've obviously gotten youon whatever point you make on deficits and "money you don't have." First of all, tax cuts don't give away money the government 'doesn't have.' To assume so means that all money belongs to the government in the first place -- quite telling if you ask me and a real winner of Kerry proclaims as much on the stump. Tax cuts don't mean less revenues to the Treasury. See Reagan doubling revenue to the Treasury and the Laffer Curve. Secondly, Kerry promising expansion of existing domestic programs and new ones on top of that point to the same level of deficits you rail about with Bush. Since we're talking about records here, has Kerry ever voted to cut spending in domestic programs when we were running deficits (aside from intelligence and national security)? I think not. To believe Kerry is to think he's a born again deficit hawk, and no one on the Left believes that (except you) and certainly no rational person believes that from his record. You're the big guy on his record. Put it up. Lastly, your point about republicans just as wussy about cutting domestic spending -- I'm agreeing with you. Find someone that disagrees to fight. Love the energy though. Tulip -- "numbers show NO signs of improvement"? Don't overreach. I can make your arguments sanely even though I don't even agree with them. You're not helping your cause. | ||
| tulip Citizen Username: Braveheart Post Number: 1173 Registered: 3-2004 |
There you go with that laughable laffer curve again. Is that a girly girl laffer curve? I hope you guys win. I need a good laugh. Folks, the laffer curve shows that you can lower taxes and keep the deficit down, because it doesn't stress spending. Questions? Oh, don't ask cjc. He just loves that laffer curve. | ||
| cjc Citizen Username: Cjc Post Number: 2310 Registered: 8-2003 |
Lord, tulip. In a perfect world, Kerry would have you speak at his convention. Especially about the economy. | ||
| tulip Citizen Username: Braveheart Post Number: 1174 Registered: 3-2004 |
Lord, cjc. You really ought to see about an internship with the Zellephant! | ||
| Madden 11 Citizen Username: Madden_11 Post Number: 138 Registered: 12-2003 |
Madden, I've obviously gotten youon whatever point you make on deficits and "money you don't have." Yes, "the government shouldn't need money to run" is a very convincing argument. I'll be here on planet Earth when you're ready to return. First of all, tax cuts don't give away money the government 'doesn't have.' To assume so means that all money belongs to the government in the first place No, it doesn't. I've never heard anyone say that, and neither have you. What it does mean is that government requires money to function. Have you ever sent 100% of your income to the government? No? Then burn, strawman, burn! Having said that, SOME money DOES belong to the government. Just like after you eat in a restaurant, some of your money belongs to the restaurant. Living and working in this country is not free. You want clean water? You want safe medicine? You want police and firemen? You want mass transit? You want a car with a seatbelt or an airbag in it, and paved highways to drive it on? Sure you do. But you don't think you should have to pay for it. If you don't like paying taxes--seriously--get the hell out. Tax cuts don't mean less revenues to the Treasury. See Reagan doubling revenue to the Treasury and the Laffer Curve. Good ol' voodoo economics. Funny how those Reagan tax cut lovers get that convenient amnesia when it comes to the subsequent Reagan tax increases: KRUGMAN: The first Reagan tax increase came in 1982. By then it was clear that the budget projections used to justify the 1981 tax cut were wildly optimistic. In response, Mr. Reagan agreed to a sharp rollback of corporate tax cuts, and a smaller rollback of individual income tax cuts. http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh060804.shtml And that's not even counting his hike in payroll taxes in '83. By the way, how were deficits during those glorious Reagan years? Pretty low? Secondly, Kerry promising expansion of existing domestic programs and new ones on top of that point to the same level of deficits you rail about with Bush. I don't know else to explain this to you. Kerry has said no new spending without equal spending cuts. It's so utterly simple. Since we're talking about records here, has Kerry ever voted to cut spending in domestic programs when we were running deficits (aside from intelligence and national security)? I think not. To believe Kerry is to think he's a born again deficit hawk, and no one on the Left believes that (except you) and certainly no rational person believes that from his record. You're the big guy on his record. Put it up. Oh, no. I've got my candidate's statement. You're trying to disprove it, so you do the research. I have a quote. You have a hunch. Until you provide something else, I win. I'm not going to trudge through 20 years of voting records to see if you've got a point or not. Lastly, your point about republicans just as wussy about cutting domestic spending -- I'm agreeing with you. Find someone that disagrees to fight. Nah...it's enough work trying to set you straight. Love the energy though. Really? Even though it doesn't come from burning fossil fuels? Are you sure you're a Republican?  |
