Will the Democrats have a party after obama?

[fskimospy]

I vote third party because I vote for real change. If the people want change, they will have to vote for someone besides the big 2.

If you go to a restaurant R, and the service is lousy, do you go back? Some people do.

You get tired of the lousy service at restaurant R, so you decide to try restaurant D. Its the same terrible service.

Do I go to restaurant L to try and get restaurants R & D to change? No, I go to restaurant L because I like the service I go there.

There is a local mexican restaurant that I go to maybe 2 times a year - and they are terrible every time. So I go to the restaurant that provides good food and service.

The restaurant comparison is the way I look at political parties. The big 2 have not upheld their political promises, so I can not vote for them.

You are definitely missing the point.

Say you love the service at restaurant L, you think the service at restaurant R is bad, and you totally hate restaurant D. This is probably a fair representation, as the libertarian party and the Republicans have more in common at this point than the L's and Democrats.

What that means is that a fair portion of Libertarian votes are from people who would have voted Republican otherwise. (some others wouldn't have voted at all I'm sure) Say you have a district where the Republicans would have won 55-45 over the Democrats. If the Libertarians take enough Republican votes away, maybe you end up with a 45% Democrat, 40% Republican, 15% Libertarian split... and the Democrat wins.

So perversely by voting for the party that represents you best, you end up being governed by the party that represents you the worst. This is why winner take all, first past the post systems rationally trend towards being 2 party systems. Perhaps some people hate both parties exactly equally and so this doesn't matter, but that represents a very small percentage of voters. Almost all of them have a preference, and that's why third parties will never arise. (or if one does it will swiftly be co-opted by one of the big 2 or it will replace one)

 

[Ausm]

Mandated health care

Bank bailouts

And now, 1.5 trillion in new taxes - http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/obama-offer-debt-reduction-package-14546545

How much is enough? How long can this go on before the name of the Democrat party is tainted?

During the next elections every party running for office will be using the bank bailouts and these new tax proposals as fuel for the fire.

I usually vote straight line Libertarian party, but I will sometimes vote for a republican or democrat.

After what obama has done, I doubt I will vote democrat for at least a couple of decades. I can not brubg myself to vote for a party that gives a blank check to wall street, mandates the public buy a product, and proposes new taxes.

I see any new tax revenue going to a savings account where its waits for some bank to need a blank check.

We have homeless people on the streets, people who want to go to college but can not afford it, and the banks get all the money they need. How does that work out?

mandated healthcare- a republican Idea

Bank Bailouts- Started by GWB

Increased taxes due to letting the Bush tax cuts expire which added a Trillion+ dollars to the deficit...

Time to move on.

 

[woolfe9999]

I get a kick out of the "buffet tax" which is a ridiculous fraud. Buffet "earns" about 100k per year. He makes his money like most of the ultra rich which is through capital gains. This allows Obama to make political hay while keeping his rich friends happy, which include as many democrats as reps.

The "Buffet rule" he proposes includes capital gains. It imposes a minimum flat tax rate on people making a million a year or more and that includes capital gains. This is what Buffett proposed in his op-ed piece and it is largely the whole point of it. You can disagree with this, but I don't understand why you think it's a "fraud."

- wolf

 

[spidey07]

I think Obama has done a good job of really exposing what they want to do and as such are being flatly rejected all over this country. So yes, he's the death of the current party and they'll have to stop being honest about their destruction.

 

[Siddhartha]

Mandated health care

Bank bailouts

And now, 1.5 trillion in new taxes - http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/obama-offer-debt-reduction-package-14546545

How much is enough? How long can this go on before the name of the Democrat party is tainted?

During the next elections every party running for office will be using the bank bailouts and these new tax proposals as fuel for the fire.

I usually vote straight line Libertarian party, but I will sometimes vote for a republican or democrat.

After what obama has done, I doubt I will vote democrat for at least a couple of decades. I can not brubg myself to vote for a party that gives a blank check to wall street, mandates the public buy a product, and proposes new taxes.

I see any new tax revenue going to a savings account where its waits for some bank to need a blank check.

We have homeless people on the streets, people who want to go to college but can not afford it, and the banks get all the money they need. How does that work out?

Your statements, for example bank bailouts, have been addressed in other posts. But as long as the GOP is the party of Ms Bachmann, Mr Perry, Ms Palin, The Tea Partiers, etc there will be an alive and vibrant Democratic Party.

 

[mizzou]

I like how the someone like Buffet gets to speak for anybody other than himself when it comes to taxing the rich. Those making even 1million a year would have to save every penny they made considering no taxes for 50,000 years before equaling his net worth.

And yet Buffet can speak for those making 1mil income...

Buffet only, and has for years, said the tax breaks are unnecessary and in the end do nothing to deter financial investments. Ex., a $480/hour employee will not quit his job and work as a walmart greeter when confronted with having to pay middle-class level taxes.

Hell, I can guarantee anyone making that much has a damn clue what their tax expenses are anyway.

Do you hate the middle class? Or is 1mil "upper" middle class nowadays

 

[kage69]

I don't see why they wouldn't. Obama's time in office hasn't been anywhere near as horrible as Cheney's, and the progressive movement within the Dem party is a poor comparison to the astroturf fail of the tea party.

 

[werepossum]

The "Buffet rule" he proposes includes capital gains. It imposes a minimum flat tax rate on people making a million a year or more and that includes capital gains. This is what Buffett proposed in his op-ed piece and it is largely the whole point of it. You can disagree with this, but I don't understand why you think it's a "fraud."

- wolf

It's a fraud only in that the man who claims to want to be taxed more has spent years fighting to avoid paying the taxes he already owes.

I think Obama has done a good job of really exposing what they want to do and as such are being flatly rejected all over this country. So yes, he's the death of the current party and they'll have to stop being honest about their destruction.

There's some truth in this. Obama's very success in seizing federal control of health care from the states hurt him. His stated intentions also hurt him even when not yet carried through, things like asserting that he would implement cap-&-tax through the EPA.

 

[tydas]

Listen, none of us are the true power brokers of the world so think and vote how you like, it will not make a difference aside from the few 'social issues' tidbits that are thrown to the starving animals..

http://www.udel.edu/htr/Psc105/Texts/power.html

and this is even cooler...

http://www.theyrule.net/

 

[Ausm]

The "Buffet rule" he proposes includes capital gains. It imposes a minimum flat tax rate on people making a million a year or more and that includes capital gains. This is what Buffett proposed in his op-ed piece and it is largely the whole point of it. You can disagree with this, but I don't understand why you think it's a "fraud."

- wolf

Because the Democrats are doing it would be my guess

 

[woolfe9999]

Because the Democrats are doing it would be my guess

In his case, it's probably because any politician is doing it. Nonetheless, the facts must be gotten right before opinions ensue.

 

[woolfe9999]

It's a fraud only in that the man who claims to want to be taxed more has spent years fighting to avoid paying the taxes he already owes.

My understanding of Hyabusa's "fraud" remark is that he seems to believe that Obama's proposal preserves the ability to pay a lower tax rate when the bulk of your income is capital gains, when in fact the proposal is to end that (for millionaires). What it amounts to, really, is treating capital gains like income but only for the extreme high end. Middle and middle-high income people would still enjoy the lower cap gains rate.

 

[sm625]

Both parties are for big government boondoggle health care (see Medicare Part D)

Both parties are for endless unjust wars that get even more unjust and despicable than the last.

Both parties are for banker bailouts.

Both parties are the same... so obviously the democratic party will survive obama. Because their is no alternative, except to follow the advice of the founders. But this generation is still too spoiled and gutless to ever do the right thing.

 

[JEDIYoda]

I vote third party because I vote for real change. If the people want change, they will have to vote for someone besides the big 2.

You are truly delusional to believe that just because you voted for a 3rd party candidate that your vote represented a positive real honest change!!

Change for change sake is NOT necessarily good!!

 

[werepossum]

My understanding of Hyabusa's "fraud" remark is that he seems to believe that Obama's proposal preserves the ability to pay a lower tax rate when the bulk of your income is capital gains, when in fact the proposal is to end that (for millionaires). What it amounts to, really, is treating capital gains like income but only for the extreme high end. Middle and middle-high income people would still enjoy the lower cap gains rate.

Possibly - I'll let him answer. But I have a really hard time believing someone actually wants to pay more taxes when he's fighting to not pay his taxes now. And personally I'm all for ending corporate taxes entirely and taxing all capital gains as wage income. Morally I see no acceptable reason why someone working for himself should be taxed at a higher rate than someone able to have his money work for him.

 

[senseamp]

Mandated health care

Bank bailouts

And now, 1.5 trillion in new taxes - http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/obama-offer-debt-reduction-package-14546545

How much is enough? How long can this go on before the name of the Democrat party is tainted?

During the next elections every party running for office will be using the bank bailouts and these new tax proposals as fuel for the fire.

I usually vote straight line Libertarian party, but I will sometimes vote for a republican or democrat.

After what obama has done, I doubt I will vote democrat for at least a couple of decades. I can not brubg myself to vote for a party that gives a blank check to wall street, mandates the public buy a product, and proposes new taxes.

I see any new tax revenue going to a savings account where its waits for some bank to need a blank check.

We have homeless people on the streets, people who want to go to college but can not afford it, and the banks get all the money they need. How does that work out?

Mandated Health Care - long overdue.
Bank Bailouts - started by Bush
$1.5T in new taxes - beats $1.5T in spending cuts in the middle of a recession.

 

[woolfe9999]

Possibly - I'll let him answer. But I have a really hard time believing someone actually wants to pay more taxes when he's fighting to not pay his taxes now. And personally I'm all for ending corporate taxes entirely and taxing all capital gains as wage income. Morally I see no acceptable reason why someone working for himself should be taxed at a higher rate than someone able to have his money work for him.

Well Hyabusa was saying Obama's plan is a fraud, not that Buffett is a fraud. In any case, I don't see the inconsistency you see. You're foolish if you pay more taxes than the law allows. Buffett is just saying that the law shouldn't permit him or others similarly situated to pay so little in taxes.

 

[werepossum]

Well Hyabusa was saying Obama's plan is a fraud, not that Buffett is a fraud. In any case, I don't see the inconsistency you see. You're foolish if you pay more taxes than the law allows. Buffett is just saying that the law shouldn't permit him or others similarly situated to pay so little in taxes.

You don't see the inconsistency between him saying that the law shouldn't permit him to pay so little in taxes and him NOT paying even that "so little"? Seriously? How could he be any less consistent? He's saying that someone like himself should pay X + Y while insisting that he personally should pay X - Z. Buffet is no different from anyone else saying that others should pay more taxes but I should pay less, except that he's doing so while sitting on a stash so big that he's halfway to collecting the X prize before even trying.

Don't get me wrong, I don't begrudge him his billions. But I give him no credit for saying he wants to pay more taxes when he is actually trying to pay less taxes. Talk is cheap.

 

[fskimospy]

You don't see the inconsistency between him saying that the law shouldn't permit him to pay so little in taxes and him NOT paying even that "so little"? Seriously? How could he be any less consistent? He's saying that someone like himself should pay X + Y while insisting that he personally should pay X - Z. Buffet is no different from anyone else saying that others should pay more taxes but I should pay less, except that he's doing so while sitting on a stash so big that he's halfway to collecting the X prize before even trying.

Don't get me wrong, I don't begrudge him his billions. But I give him no credit for saying he wants to pay more taxes when he is actually trying to pay less taxes. Talk is cheap.

How is he doing that in any way? I am unaware of him ever saying that people should not pay the least possible amount in taxes possible so long as it is legal. He is advocating that the minimum amount that you can legally pay should be higher.

 

[KlokWyze]

OP shows how disconnected the GOP is from reality. A reality that they helped create.

I just sold my car to a Republican, literally 3 hours ago. He gave me a ride home and the discussion turned to politics. I hear him recite every single Fox News sound byte he could muster up in that short time. He mentioned he hates 9/11 inside job whackos, the top 55% pay 97% of the taxes, all politicians are socialists, he supported McCarthyism(seriously), etc. Just repeats random bits of info that he heard recently.

I actually agreed with him on a few points, but I couldn't take him seriously on political opinion. One thing I thought was funny, was that we agreed was that Ron Paul is the only politician that could truly be called "conservative". I kept saying that both parties are failures, but he couldn't concede that one. I brought up Obama's recent tax increase/entitlement cutting plan and he just instantly reacted with every single factoid he could to defend the rich from being taxed more.

Why is defending the rich from paying taxes the #1 talking point of the Republican party?

 

[Ausm]

Why is defending the rich from paying taxes the #1 talking point of the Republican party?

Payoff for all their monetary contributions. Send that dude that link in my sig maybe that will help educate him that's if he isn't to far gone yet

 

[spidey07]

OP shows how disconnected the GOP is from reality. A reality that they helped create.

I just sold my car to a Republican, literally 3 hours ago. He gave me a ride home and the discussion turned to politics. I hear him recite every single Fox News sound byte he could muster up in that short time. He mentioned he hates 9/11 inside job whackos, the top 55% pay 97% of the taxes, all politicians are socialists, he supported McCarthyism(seriously), etc. Just repeats random bits of info that he heard recently.

I actually agreed with him on a few points, but I couldn't take him seriously on political opinion. One thing I thought was funny, was that we agreed was that Ron Paul is the only politician that could truly be called "conservative". I kept saying that both parties are failures, but he couldn't concede that one. I brought up Obama's recent tax increase/entitlement cutting plan and he just instantly reacted with every single factoid he could to defend the rich from being taxed more.

Why is defending the rich from paying taxes the #1 talking point of the Republican party?

Because it's nothing more than class warfare bullshit, and Obama has been using it before the election. It's the move of a marxist, it's all they have. Little does he know the country is on to him and his policies, it's not going to work on The People. It will work on stupid libtards, as you can see their mind in action in this very thread, but not on most tax paying Americans.

A large percentage of tax payers Obama is going after aren't rich, simply a two income professional family.

And LOL at libtards defending his AMT 2.0. Why is the only thing out of libtards and Obama's mouth is "it's not fair, they need to pay fair share" (and conveniently forget they pay almost all the taxes). Nothing more than a campaign speech today, no real solutions, just blaming and finger pointing and pandering to his base. Fucking disgusting this president is.

 

[KlokWyze]

Because it's nothing more than class warfare bullshit, and Obama has been using it before the election. It's the move of a marxist, it's all they have. Little does he know the country is on to him and his policies, it's not going to work on The People. It will work on stupid libtards, as you can see their mind in action in this very thread, but not on most tax paying Americans.

A large percentage of tax payers Obama is going after aren't rich, simply a two income professional family.

And LOL at libtards defending his AMT 2.0.

Boom. You start off with a sound byte.

I'm not absolutely familiar with his most recent proposal, but I'm sure I'll have problems with it. Healthcare reform was a failure... needed to be done, but he didn't fight for the single payer option.

I'm telling you the rich get no sympathy and even if they are taxed more, I'm sure they'll be able to live the way they always have. And the Rich DO get advantages with the money they inherit. Not the same as Americans born well below the poverty line. It's just fail/fail to defend the rich so vehemently, it makes the GOP look worse than they already do.

Please remember that Bush certainly helped get us in this mess. You understand that right?

 

[dank69]

You don't see the inconsistency between him saying that the law shouldn't permit him to pay so little in taxes and him NOT paying even that "so little"? Seriously? How could he be any less consistent? He's saying that someone like himself should pay X + Y while insisting that he personally should pay X - Z. Buffet is no different from anyone else saying that others should pay more taxes but I should pay less, except that he's doing so while sitting on a stash so big that he's halfway to collecting the X prize before even trying.

Don't get me wrong, I don't begrudge him his billions. But I give him no credit for saying he wants to pay more taxes when he is actually trying to pay less taxes. Talk is cheap.

Buffett donating his entire lifetime fortune wouldn't make a dent in our deficit. Raising the amount that all people (including himself) earning $1mill+ a year pay in taxes will make a dent in our deficit.

Using the 'if he thinks we should pay more taxes he should send a check to the IRS' argument is so full of fail it is difficult to put into words.

 

[JSt0rm]

you are all pathetic.