The Politics Thread

[GoldenDogs]

WASHINGTON (CBSDC) — A new report put out by the Pew Research Center finds that the median income is worse now than it was during the Great Recession. According to Pew, the Census Bureau showed that the median income for American households in 2009 – the official end of the Great Recession – was $52,195 (in 2011 dollars), while the median income dipped to $50,054 last year, falling 4.1 percent over two years.

“The decrease in household income from 2009 to 2011 almost exactly equaled the decrease in income in the two years of the recession,” the Pew report stated.

And in other economic news...

Nearly 15 percent of Americans now use SNAP benefits, formerly called food stamps, a program administered by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). This translates to more than one in 7 Americans currently using SNAP benefits, a record non-emergency high.

--Manhattan Institute for Policy Research

[alphanguy74]

Since you brought up oil... here's what I would do. The republicans keep saying that we have more oil than the Saudi's, that all we need to do is get to it. So I would say let them drill to their heart's content, build their effing pipeline, on the provisor that end gas prices would NEVER rise above 2.50$ per gallon, EVER. They say that's the solution to make it cheaper, so I'd make them put their money where their mouth is.

Hell... 50K a year? I'd be rich. That would be a dream come true.

[DRW50]

http://www.tnr.com/blog/plank/107453/romney-fundraising-dinner-47-percent-moocher-taker-entitlement-medicare

[GoldenDogs]

I'm confused, Carl... You earlier referenced Media Matters as "mainstream press", then just said they're not press.

Which is it?

Reporters wouldn't have to interrupt and yell questions if they President would occasionally answer one from even the established media. Access Hollywood... Entertainment Tonight? Really? Not Mr. Obama's best moments, frankly. And a sitting President appearing on a late-night talk show? Hmmm. If the dude spent half as much time dealing seriously with foreign and domestic affairs as he does yucking it up on entertainment programs, maybe little issues like the debt or murdered ambassadors could be handled in a more competent manner.

Two word for you, Redd: Huffington Post.

[GoldenDogs]

What is this supposed to tell me, though? That these states are "red" states means nothing. Without knowing WHO these people truly are, the map and the notion of a "Republican" state versus a "Democratic" state means nothing. I'm a registered Republican living in California, by the way. Because my state is a "blue" state, does that mean I am for redistributing the wealth, as our President is? Of course not.

Romney's statement about the 47%, which Jane's research indicates is absolutely true - we all know it's true, or at least that percentage is pretty damn close - does not reference "blue states" in particular. There are people who vote for Obama living in red states, right?

And doesn't it stand to reason that a person who fears losing government benefits as a result of a Romney victory... would NOT vote for Romney?? Who would those people vote for? Ron Paul?

Anyway... reaction to Romney's comments are ridiculously overblown by the liberal mainstream press. When two weeks of the news cycle are dedicated to Romney statements that aren't particularly outrageous or incorrect... rather than a discussion on the President's foreign policy failures, including his indecision over whether or not Egypt is an ally, indicates a bias in the press the likes we've never seen before.

Yeah, there is a lot riding on this election... this is made particularly clear by the way the mainstream press is so willingly sacraficing what was left of their integrity and objectivity.

Edited September 19, 2012 by GoldenDogs

[JaneAusten]

I think the only thing that wasn't factual that Romney said was that the 47percent of the population that don't pay federal income tax are Obama supporters and that in not paying federal income tax, they are in some sense considered to be receiving handouts from the government.

The 47 percent is made up of

1. 52 percent are folks who are employed that make 50,000 dollars a year or less.

2. 32 percent are folks who are on social security or disability

3. 16 percent are folks that are actually folks who are unemployed

so I guess forget the blue and red states, he's assuming that the list of folks above will not vote for him period

And yes I do believe more is being made out of this than should but I do think it's just another indication that he appears to be out of touch. But then consider the people he was addressing and then put his statement in the proper context, right or wrong.

Edited September 19, 2012 by JaneAusten

[Wales2004]

I think the statement depends on what people see as federal taxes which apparently don't refer to personal payroll taxes. If personal payroll taxes are considered then that number is reduced. The bottom line though is that he inaccurately refers to them as those who would vote for Barack Obama when they in fact include people who are likely to vote for him.

What matters is that he is dismissing a segment of the population as people he will never reach when they include people that are likely to support him and whose support he needs. That's not a very smart move on his part. Some of these may even be independents.

But this almost seems like nothing compared to the rest of the stupid things he said on that video.

[ReddFoxx]

It shows which states have the most non-taxpayers and they are mostly Republican states, governed by Republicans for the most part. Republicans are supposed to create jobs, yet they haven't improved the jobs situation in the poorest states that they run. Plenty of those non-taxpayers vote Republican, because poor white Southerners break heavily toward the Republican party.It's not a black and white situation.

Again, Obama won middle class counties all over the country, it's highly unlikely that most of his voters aren't paying any taxes. And for the record, there is such a thing as the working poor, many of these people pay zero taxes because they don't make enough to pay taxes, but yet take no federal subsidy. Again, it's not a black and white situation.

At the end of the day, Romney is accountable for what he says, no one forced him to make these particular comments and people are entitled not to like them. You can't broad brush people with a total disregard for facts.

Edited September 19, 2012 by ReddFoxx

[JaneAusten]

In all fairness to Romney, his comments were geared to the audience he was addressing and who knew they'd get out. And I do think some of its taken out of context. On the flip side, in today's world with social media and such, nothing is a secret or kept mum so you need to be careful what you say to anyone.

Those numbers don't include payroll taxes and if you listen to Romney, his opinion is that social security and Medicare are not taxes as Americans receive both contributions back in later years as retirement benefits

[Ann_SS]

It is this negative spin that the Republicans and some others offer (not saying you) I will never accept. The government is We the People. It is our taxes that fund the government programs. On what planet, can anyone's participation in a government program at any point of their lives be considered a handout? Student loans and programs help put uneducated young people through college, but then they enter the workplace and pay their share of taxes. People work hard, retire, and get their share of what they paid into Social security/Medicare/Medicaid. Maybe you go through a period of unemployment and have to rely on unemployment benefits for a period of time. A middle or working class family has a child with Down's Syndrome or other health serious problems, Medicaid provides coverage. Of course there are people who put in less than others, but this is the price of living in a society that does not discard the least among us. The only other option is that we leave our sick children, elderly and disabled to suffer and die in a corner .

Edited September 19, 2012 by Ann_SS

[JaneAusten]

Well when you have a mentality that health insurance is some sort of gift and it's ok when 28 percent of the population is not insured what do you expect.

The government also provides grants to businesses, how about that grant that Prospect Park supposedly got from the federal government to help fund the startup of an Internet channel. They provide grants to help incent entrepreneurs to venture into areas that are viewed to be potential growth areas or underserved. Green technology and business startups are also entitled to government grants as another example.

And when did we become a country not willing to help their own. All these folks who want to cut benefits to our own citizen ship, seem to have no issue continuing to send troops overseas, increase our defense budget, and continue to send billions of dollars to Israel, Pakistan, India, etc.

[Wales2004]

It would be different if he said things that have been totally misconstrued. I think he meant what he said and he said what he meant. I don't know how you take out of context someone saying that he doesn't need to do anything if elected president because the economy will essentially fix itself at that point. Or some of the other things he said. He cannot have "misspoken" throughout that entire video ore else he's just plain dumb and shouldn't be in charge of much of anything.

[JaneAusten]

Frankly I don't know what he was trying to say other than pander to the elitists and millionaires he was speaking to. And he did go back and sort of quantify what he meant by the tax statement. It doesn't mean he explained it well or what he said made sense or was even correct. This is a guy who's stuck his foot in his mouth multiple times. I guess I've just become immune to his hiccups because he's done it so much it's just almost in one ear out the other.

[Wales2004]

The best part I've heard so far is when he tells his benefactors that he received a call from a former Secretary of State who he didn't want to name and that individual told him there was prospect for peace between the Israels and the Palestinians and he said "really" and left it at that explaining that he didn't delve into it. I don't think his mouth is in his foot on this one. I think he believes just about everything he said with the exception of possibly embellishing family stories.

Now there's concern that a French cartoonists depiction of a naked Mohammed might cause some demonstrations targeted at France.

[Money]

Democrats are quick to say that we've finally seen the "real" Romney and I'm still waiting since I have no idea what the hell this guy really believes in. I don't believe his comments were taken out of context but he was pontificating to that audience he felt needed to hear what he was spewing. Maybe he actually meant it but it really doesn't matter because the guy has proven he'll say whatever he feels he has to to different audiences because he's a political opportunist. All I know is that his main goal is to keep the tax cuts for the rich at the expense of everyone else and he has said nothing to refute that belief. He knows his comments were damaging but he knew there would be hell to pay by super pacs which wasn't a luxury he could afford. I don't know why any American would give their vote to this guy.

Edited September 19, 2012 by Money