• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Talk of Wealth Gap Prods the G.O.P. to Refocus

JANFU

Land by the Gulf Stream
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 27, 2014
Messages
59,042
Reaction score
38,585
Location
Best Coast Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
The wealth gap- Romney & J Bush on board- it is a problem. Thoughts are?
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/22/b...-inequality-prods-republicans-to-refocus.html

Mitt Romney, vowing a campaign to “end the scourge of poverty” if he runs for president a third time, has backed raising the minimum wage over the wishes of congressional leaders.

Similarly, Jeb Bush’s new “super PAC,” announced with the fanfare of a presidential declaration, proclaimed, “While the last eight years have been pretty good ones for top earners, they’ve been a lost decade for the rest of America.”
 
They'll lose the primary to tea party nutters and hand the presidency to Hillary Clinton on a silver platter.
 
Similarly, Jeb Bush’s new “super PAC,” announced with the fanfare of a presidential declaration, proclaimed, “While the last eight years have been pretty good ones for top earners, they’ve been a lost decade for the rest of America.”

... Uh... I thought the wealth was supposed to trickle down from the top earners... Aren't top earners the job creators? The people who make sure we have enough to feed our families? Aren't they the people we should all be grateful to for you know... our economic existence? :lol:
 
Good, Lord, "the scourge of poverty" sounds like another 47% comment with a dash of "gonna put you people back in chains" on top. ;)

Mitt needs to hire better message people. Too many poor people will hear that as "poor people are the scourge of society".
 
Some of the money people are backing away from a third Romney run

Yeah. I haven't seen any of the conservative "thinkers / speakers" come out in favor of it, either. Even Coulter, who was a big Romney fan last time, says he shouldn't run.
 
Good, Lord, "the scourge of poverty" sounds like another 47% comment with a dash of "gonna put you people back in chains" on top. ;)

Mitt needs to hire better message people. Too many poor people will hear that as "poor people are the scourge of society".

Some reading for you
 
The wealth gap- Romney & J Bush on board- it is a problem. Thoughts are?
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/22/b...-inequality-prods-republicans-to-refocus.html

Mitt Romney, vowing a campaign to “end the scourge of poverty” if he runs for president a third time, has backed raising the minimum wage over the wishes of congressional leaders.

Similarly, Jeb Bush’s new “super PAC,” announced with the fanfare of a presidential declaration, proclaimed, “While the last eight years have been pretty good ones for top earners, they’ve been a lost decade for the rest of America.”

Another illustration of just how little difference there is between the current GOP front runners, and the Dims.
 
They'll lose the primary to tea party nutters and hand the presidency to Hillary Clinton on a silver platter.

History has shown this opinion to be wrong. When was the last time the GOP nominated a conservative?
 
They'll lose the primary to tea party nutters and hand the presidency to Hillary Clinton on a silver platter.

It's unavoidable, it's your destiny.
 
Good, Lord, "the scourge of poverty" sounds like another 47% comment with a dash of "gonna put you people back in chains" on top. ;)

Mitt needs to hire better message people. Too many poor people will hear that as "poor people are the scourge of society".

I... don't think they will hear it that way, no.
 
History has shown this opinion to be wrong. When was the last time the GOP nominated a conservative?

When has Hillary Clinton ran against a tea party nutter?
 
When has Hillary Clinton ran against a tea party nutter?

When you get in touch with reality, let me know. I will waste no more energy on you.
 
When you get in touch with reality, let me know. I will waste no more energy on you.

"I'm right neener neener I win."

Amazing debate, have a good day.
 
"I'm right neener neener I win."

Amazing debate, have a good day.

It's not that I'm right, it's that you cannot be serious, ever. All you do is **** with people. Your response had nothing whatsoever to do with my comment, and you know it full well.
 
It's not that I'm right, it's that you cannot be serious, ever. All you do is **** with people. Your response had nothing whatsoever to do with my comment, and you know it full well.

Incorrect.

These are specific candidates I am comparing. I do not believe Romney or Bush can win the primary, especially by running to the left.

And I believe Hillary Clinton will wipe the floor with any far-right candidate that comes up.

What's your historical precedent for this?
 
I... don't think they will hear it that way, no.

well if Mitt Romney really runs, you can better bet they will hear it that way. He has a bit of a history in this regard....
 
well if Mitt Romney really runs, you can better bet they will hear it that way. He has a bit of a history in this regard....

The 47% comment was not misunderstood. Right-wingers invented a second meaning to try and make it sound better.
 
The 47% comment was not misunderstood. Right-wingers invented a second meaning to try and make it sound better.

It was a crap gotcha moment and it was sleezy for the DNC to play it up. democratic politicians do the same double talk depending on the audience too.
 
It was a crap gotcha moment and it was sleezy for the DNC to play it up. democratic politicians do the same double talk depending on the audience too.

No. Romney was making a very specific reference. Just prior to that dinner, some statistics had come out showing that 47% of Americans had paid no Federal income taxes in the year being referenced. And then he immediately followed referring to 47% with "these are people who pay no income taxes." Yes, this is exactly the group he was talking about. Also, these people "can't be convinced to take responsibility for themselves."
 
No. Romney was making a very specific reference. Just prior to that dinner, some statistics had come out showing that 47% of Americans had paid no Federal income taxes in the year being referenced. And then he immediately followed referring to 47% with "these are people who pay no income taxes." Yes, this is exactly the group he was talking about. Also, these people "can't be convinced to take responsibility for themselves."

Doesn't make it any less a gotcha sleezy moment for the DNC.
 
Doesn't make it any less a gotcha sleezy moment for the DNC.

It's not "sleezy." Romney was at a dinner full of wealthy donors and was badmouthing low income people.

And doing it badly, too. Because implying that 47% of the population is a bunch of lazy leeches because that number doesn't pay federal income taxes is pretty ridiculous.
 
Back
Top Bottom