A really good reason to vote for Romney!

SheHateMe

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2012
7,251
20
81
Hes a man of mystery!!!!!!!!!

r-MITT-ROMMEY-PAUL-RYAN-TAX-LOOPHOLE-huge.jpg



Mitt Romney's campaign continued its trend Monday of refusing to specify which tax loopholes he and running mate Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) would close if elected, on the same day the campaign vowed to "reinforce more specifics" regarding what a Romney presidency would look like.

But the specifics stop short when it comes to answering the looming tax loophole question, based on a new interview with Ryan released late Sunday night and a Romney campaign conference call held Monday morning to discuss the state of the race.

Romney and Ryan have repeatedly stated that they would offset tax cuts for the wealthy by closing tax loopholes, without identifying which particular loopholes they would close.


You'll have to wait and see! Vote for me!


I thought this top comment summed it up correctly:

Voter: I'd like to buy a car
R/R: Well we got one just for YOU. It's great! It's a fantastic value! For every gallon of gas you put in, it creates two gallons back, you'll never have to fuel up again!
Voter: Sounds incredible. Where is it?
R/R: Never mind that. The money you pay up front? You will get it all back on the gas YOU can sell. Plus it's in Read More...
Voter: Cool, can I see it?
R/R: Never mind that - just sign this contract, no money down, financing through BAIN Capitol.
Voter: Look I can't buy a car without seeing it or test driving it. You make fantastic claims I would like to believe, but I don't want to commit myself to years of payments without seeing this car and driving it and see if it's right for me!
R/R: TRUST US
 

xj0hnx

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2007
9,262
3
76
You got to elect him to see what in him ...sounds familiar, why does Pelosi come to mind?
 

SheHateMe

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2012
7,251
20
81
Is it such a bad thing that people just want to know what his plan is? Why is he avoiding going into specifics.

That is what scares me...that people are still willing to vote for him knowing that he will not tell you what he is planning to do. It all just seems so sketchy.
 

xj0hnx

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2007
9,262
3
76
Who cares? I mean seriously, has there EVER been a president that actually did what he said he was going to do while on the campaign trail? Do people just want to hear a good plan whether it happens or not?
 

SheHateMe

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2012
7,251
20
81
Who cares? I mean seriously, has there EVER been a president that actually did what he said he was going to do while on the campaign trail? Do people just want to hear a good plan whether it happens or not?

I care and it seems like a lot of other people care too. There is nothing wrong with asking a candidate to tell us his plan, regardless if he plans on doing it or not..atleast we have something to look forward to.

Refusing to tell anything at all is sketchy!
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
174
106
I think the point in a campaign is to make clear your position that some loopholes should be closed. Getting into specifics is counter-productive; the whole conversation just gets dragged down in details etc. Heck, then there's the whole 'politics' of it. Every loophole has been put into tax law by Congress because it benefited some industry group. Call for its elimination and he'd have some group all over his azz. Stupid move politically.

Besides, no matter what he proposes if elected, it's up to Congress to decide which loopholes to eliminate or modify. I've never heard of a President vetoing a tax overhaul bill because of a loophole or two. The fight with industry groups/constituents belongs in Congress; that's where it is always fought.

Fern
 
Jan 25, 2011
17,015
9,458
146
I think the point in a campaign is to make clear your position that some loopholes should be closed. Getting into specifics is counter-productive; the whole conversation just gets dragged down in details etc. Heck, then there's the whole 'politics' of it. Every loophole has been put into tax law by Congress because it benefited some industry group. Call for its elimination and he'd have some group all over his azz. Stupid move politically.

Besides, no matter what he proposes if elected, it's up to Congress to decide which loopholes to eliminate or modify. I've never heard of a President vetoing a tax overhaul bill because of a loophole or two. The fight with industry groups/constituents belongs in Congress; that's where it is always fought.

Fern

But how can you keep offering specific results without that type of detail?
 

SheHateMe

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2012
7,251
20
81
Fern, I understand your point..but don't promise to be more specific and then refuse to be more specific..THAT is counter-productive!
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,503
6,696
126
You got to elect him to see what in him ...sounds familiar, why does Pelosi come to mind?

Because you are a dishonest immoral fuck, who, when shown his toady face, immediately focuses his attention of the warts of somebody else.

The simple fact is that if Romney gave the details they would be seen first off not to work, and secondly have no chance at all to pass congress, and thirdly, they fuck too many people whose votes he needs to get elected.

On the other hand, Obama's plan, while is is more fleshed out, actually won't work either. He is promising more that taxing the rich will provide.

The rich need to pay a lot more and everybody else a bit more too.
 
Feb 4, 2009
35,862
17,402
136
I'm with you, give us something to know. I really would like to ask politicians & business guys who have new great ideas the same question id get at work (caps). So the pipeline from Canada should generate 50k jobs and lower the price of oil correct? WHAT IS THE CONSEQUENCE TO YOU IF THOSE NUMBERS ARE NOT MET.
When you have to answer a question like that you need to be damn sure you're right if you're putting a job on the line.
 
Last edited:

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
174
106
But how can you keep offering specific results without that type of detail?

When you say "specific results" are you referring to budget/deficit numbers?

If so, the specific numbers become the objective and the elimination of loopholes and spending adjustments become the means to achieve it.

There are so many variables, so many combinations of closing loopholes and spending adjustments that I think trying to promote one specific set is a fool's errand. Congress, with the help of CBO estimates etc, will come up with the specifics. IMO, a President can only hope that Congress approximates the objective (budget/deficit) using loopholes/spending adjustments (s)he can both somewhat agree with and tolerate politically.

When big tax bills hit Congress it creates a tremendous amount of pressure, which is why we generally see one only every 25 years or so. All the different businesses/lobbying groups will come out in full force.

Fern
 

cybrsage

Lifer
Nov 17, 2011
13,021
0
0
You got to elect him to see what in him ...sounds familiar, why does Pelosi come to mind?

You would think the dems, brainwashed as they are to like that line of thought, would be lining up in droves to vote for him...support him, etc.
 

cybrsage

Lifer
Nov 17, 2011
13,021
0
0
Because you are a dishonest immoral fuck, who, when shown his toady face, immediately focuses his attention of the warts of somebody else.

Good think no one believed your lies about you being tolerant, open minded, etc, eh? I wonder if you are finally noticing you are standing in a deep darkness of your own creation and are getting angry about it...so you lash out at others. That will only last for a bit, then you will realize the only way to feel better is to enter the light and leave your self imposed prison.

I have hope for you!
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
You got to elect him to see what in him ...sounds familiar, why does Pelosi come to mind?
:D I was thinking the same thing. The same people who demand to know during the election what loopholes Romney would close are fine with Congresscritters voting on massive bills they can't possibly have even skimmed, let along studied.