ZWICK 4 PREZ;1291322 wrote:I agree but Clinton already served two terms. We can elect the guy he endorses though.

That was back when Bush was President. Nice try though.

sleeper;1291328 wrote:That was back when Bush was President. Nice try though.

And Clinton.. Nice try though.

ZWICK 4 PREZ;1291330 wrote:And Clinton.. Nice try though.

Interesting. Must be nice for Clinton to not have to deal with 9/11 or the dotcom bubble busting. His policies have perfect timing.

sleeper;1291332 wrote:Interesting. Must be nice for Clinton to not have to deal with 9/11 or the dotcom bubble busting. His policies have perfect timing.

Or Bush's policies had terrible timing?

ZWICK 4 PREZ;1291336 wrote:Or Bush's policies had terrible timing?

Thankfully this election is between Gary Johnson, Mitt Romney, and Barack Obama; not Bush or Clinton. It must be nice for Obama to avoid talking about his failed policies and just blame previous administrations.

ZWICK 4 PREZ;1291243 wrote:No Rosen said it was possible with "robust economic growth". However, only you and Mitt can seem to predict the future and know there's going to be a plethora of jobs being added. :/

No no no....Read what Rosen is saying recently, specifically addressing the cherry-picked scenarios (of multiple scenarios) the Dems are pushing as fact. Maybe the rate is 17%, or maybe you can't repeal the estate tax. There are multiple scenarios that can make this plan work. It's a good plan with plenty of merit. But the Dems never pass-up an opportunity to play the class warfare card. They do it because they think their base is stupid, and in large part they are probably right.

The Dems have seized on one scenario where taxes are raised on the middle class, because that's what plays. Reality is there's a lot of ways to skin a cat and no one is saying that is the likely or necessary scenario. But the play works with the ignorant.

Alternatively the Dems could instead focus on why their plan is better. But they don't have a plan. They don't really even know how to effectively attack and debate Romney's plan. I'm sure their are people who know how to, but Obama/Biden aren't capable of doing it on the stump because they'd get slaughtered trying to regurgitate misunderstood facts by people that grossly outclass them on the subject.

gut;1291350 wrote:No no no....Read what Rosen is saying recently, specifically addressing the cherry-picked scenarios (of multiple scenarios) the Dems are pushing as fact. Maybe the rate is 17%, or maybe you can't repeal the estate tax. There are multiple scenarios that can make this plan work. It's a good plan with plenty of merit. But the Dems never pass-up an opportunity to play the class warfare card. They do it because they think their base is stupid, and in large part they are probably right.

The Dems have seized on one scenario where taxes are raised on the middle class, because that's what plays. Reality is there's a lot of ways to skin a cat and no one is saying that is the likely or necessary scenario. But the play works with the ignorant.

Alternatively the Dems could instead focus on why their plan is better. But they don't have a plan. They don't really even know how to effectively attack and debate Romney's plan. I'm sure their are people who know how to, but Obama/Biden aren't capable of doing it on the stump because they'd get slaughtered trying to regurgitate misunderstood facts by people that grossly outclass them on the subject.

He better not keep the Estate Tax. Most people who fund his campaign are funding solely for him to get rid of the Estate Tax lol