Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
Keith Olbermann 'Special Comment' on Romney
Rotterdam NY...the people's voice    Rotterdam's Virtual Internet Community     Chit Chat About Anything  ›  Keith Olbermann 'Special Comment' on Romney Moderators: Admin
Users Browsing Forum
No Members and 72 Guests

Keith Olbermann 'Special Comment' on Romney   This thread currently has 1,325 views. |
2 Pages « 1 2 Recommend Thread
55tbird
September 18, 2012, 11:37am Report to Moderator
Hero Member
Posts
3,211
Reputation
91.67%
Reputation Score
+11 / -1
Time Online
209 days 13 hours 13 minutes
Quoted from Box A Rox
Mitt is "done"... stick a fork in him.  I don't remember a worse campaign, especially a campaign against an opponent
in such difficult economic times.  Remember a few weeks ago... Posters on this board were confident that the
"economy" was the deciding factor against Obama.  If unemployment were still above 8%, Obama was toast.

Romney has deftly grabbed defeat from the jaws of victory!  At this point, Romney couldn't win a one horse Race.


I remember one...AL Gore, except he had the advantage of a great economy and couldn't seal the deal....it should have NEVER been that close.

and another; John Kerry... Two wars we had grown tired of, and 9/11...

In reality not many incumbents have lost in the past 50 years...LBJ decided not to run, Nixon won even with Vietnam..Ford wasn't a true elected Incumbent, Carter lost, Reagan won, Bush I lost, Clinton served two and Bush served two. So, really in 50 plus years, one pub, one dem lose a re-election bid.

Obama SHOULD get 60% of the popular vote, but when (IMHO) he gets 55% or less, it will speak volumes that America has chosen the lesser loser.


"Arguing with liberals is like playing chess with a pigeon; no matter how good I am at chess, the pigeon is just going to knock out the pieces, crap on the board, and strut around like it is victorious." - Author Unknown
Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 15 - 22
Shadow
September 18, 2012, 11:55am Report to Moderator
Hero Member
Posts
11,107
Reputation
70.83%
Reputation Score
+17 / -7
Time Online
448 days 17 minutes
The Data Behind Romney’s 47% Comments
    Republican presidential candidate, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney campaigns at Van Dyck Park in Fairfax, Va., Thursday, Sept. 13, 2012. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak) Published Credit: Associated Press

By Damian Paletta and John D. McKinnon

In his comments to fundraisers captured on video, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney said 47% of Americans would almost automatically vote for President Barack Obama because they were “dependent” on the government, in part because they received government benefits and paid no federal income taxes.

In a press conference late Monday, Mr. Romney said his comments were “not elegantly stated” while at the same time reiterating the main point. Our translation: If you don’t pay federal income taxes, you may not be swayed by a candidate that wants to cut them.

Here’s a rundown of the data behind Mr. Romney’s argument, some of which he correctly stated and other parts of which don’t hold up so well.

Entitlements:

According to the Census Bureau, 49% of Americans in the second quarter of 2011 lived in a household where at least one member received a government benefit. (The total population at the time was 305 million).

That’s up from 30% in the 1980s and 44.4% in the third quarter of 2008, a recent growth in part attributable to the bad economy of President Obama’s first term.

The Census Bureau broke the data down like this:

    26.4% of U.S. households had someone enrolled in Medicaid (the health-care program for low-income Americans)
    16.2% of households had at least one member receiving Social Security.
    15.8% lived in a household receiving food stamps
    14.9% had a member with Medicare benefits
    4.5% of households received assistance with their rent
    1.7% had a member receiving unemployment benefits.

The large majority of Medicare and Social Security recipients have paid payroll taxes in many cases for decades to qualify for those benefits.
More In 2012

    Twitter Reactions: Debating Romney's Comments
    Romney Videos Top Two Million Views
    Obama Campaign Video Attacks Romney Over Gaffe
    WSJ/NBC Poll: Voters Split on 'Better or Worse Off?'
    Political Wisdom: Reactions to Romney’s ‘47%’ Gaffe

There can be a lot of overlap in which programs benefit certain households. For example, millions of people receiving Social Security benefits also receive Medicare health benefits. Many Americans covered by Medicaid are also receiving food stamp benefits.

Mr. Romney implied that anyone receiving government benefits wouldn’t likely be one of his voters. But there’s no clear partisan split among beneficiaries, especially for broad-based federal retirement and health-care programs.

Taxes:
Mr. Romney correctly noted that nearly half of Americans pay no federal income tax. Who are all these people? And how did we get here?

Here’s a quick answer. Roughly half of U.S. households that pay no federal income tax are exempted because of basic provisions such as limitations on tax for low-income earners, according to a 2011 study by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center. The other half benefit from targeted breaks (known to tax geeks as “tax expenditures”), such as assistance for the working poor and for children in moderate-income families. Seniors also benefit from some of these targeted breaks.

To analyze which breaks are most important in moving people off the income-tax rolls, the TPC study arranged these tax expenditures into eight categories:

    Elderly tax benefits (the extra standard deduction for the elderly, the exclusion of a portion of Social Security benefits, and the credit for the elderly);
    Credits for children and the working poor (the child tax credit, the child and dependent care tax credit, and the Earned Income Tax Credit);
    Exclusion of other cash transfers (such as welfare and disability payments);
    Tax-exempt interest and some other deductions, such as for retirement savings;
    Itemized deductions;
    Education credits;
    Other credits; and
    Reduced rates on capital gains and dividends (zero rate on gains and dividends that would otherwise be taxed at 10% or 15%, 15% rate combined with credits).

The TPC found that of the 38 million households that are made nontaxable by tax expenditures, “44% are moved off the tax rolls by elderly tax benefits and another 30% by credits for children and the working poor.”

So how did we get to the point where almost half of American households pay no income tax? Since the 1970s, Congress and successive presidents have begun creating more and more tax breaks to benefit broad swaths of the population (and some very narrow gauges too). Democrats generally have been more supportive of the particular breaks that push people off the income-tax rolls, but Republicans have supported a few too, and they also have pushed breaks that benefit higher-income people.   http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/09/18/the-data-behind-romneys-47-comments/ GALLUP: OBAMA 47% ROMNEY 46%
Logged
Private Message Reply: 16 - 22
Libertarian4life
September 18, 2012, 1:18pm Report to Moderator

Hero Member
Posts
7,356
Reputation
50.00%
Reputation Score
+12 / -12
Time Online
119 days 21 hours 10 minutes
Quoted from Shadow
The Data Behind Romney’s 47% Comments

Entitlements:

    26.4% of U.S. households had someone enrolled in Medicaid (the health-care program for low-income Americans)
    16.2% of households had at least one member receiving Social Security.
    15.8% lived in a household receiving food stamps
    14.9% had a member with Medicare benefits
    4.5% of households received assistance with their rent
    1.7% had a member receiving unemployment benefits.

    
Mr. Romney implied that anyone receiving government benefits wouldn’t likely be one of his voters. But there’s no clear partisan split among beneficiaries, especially for broad-based federal retirement and health-care programs.

Taxes:
Mr. Romney correctly noted that nearly half of Americans pay no federal income tax. Who are all these people? And how did we get here?

Here’s a quick answer. Roughly half of U.S. households that pay no federal income tax are exempted because of basic provisions such as limitations on tax for low-income earners, according to a 2011 study by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center. The other half benefit from targeted breaks (known to tax geeks as “tax expenditures”), such as assistance for the working poor and for children in moderate-income families. Seniors also benefit from some of these targeted breaks.

To analyze which breaks are most important in moving people off the income-tax rolls, the TPC study arranged these tax expenditures into eight categories:

    Elderly tax benefits (the extra standard deduction for the elderly, the exclusion of a portion of Social Security benefits, and the credit for the elderly);
    Credits for children and the working poor (the child tax credit, the child and dependent care tax credit, and the Earned Income Tax Credit);
    Exclusion of other cash transfers (such as welfare and disability payments);
    Tax-exempt interest and some other deductions, such as for retirement savings;
    Itemized deductions;
    Education credits;
    Other credits; and
    Reduced rates on capital gains and dividends (zero rate on gains and dividends that would otherwise be taxed at 10% or 15%, 15% rate combined with credits).

The TPC found that of the 38 million households that are made nontaxable by tax expenditures, “44% are moved off the tax rolls by elderly tax benefits and another 30% by credits for children and the working poor.”

So how did we get to the point where almost half of American households pay no income tax? ...


From 1998 to 2005, approximately 55 percent of large FREELOADER corporations paid no corporate income tax.


Logged
Private Message Reply: 17 - 22
Box A Rox
September 18, 2012, 1:20pm Report to Moderator

Hero Member
Posts
25,926
Reputation
58.62%
Reputation Score
+17 / -12
Time Online
514 days 11 hours 54 minutes
Quoted from 55tbird


I remember one...AL Gore, except he had the advantage of a great economy and couldn't seal the deal....it should have NEVER been that close.

and another; John Kerry... Two wars we had grown tired of, and 9/11...

In reality not many incumbents have lost in the past 50 years...LBJ decided not to run, Nixon won even with Vietnam..Ford wasn't a true elected Incumbent, Carter lost, Reagan won, Bush I lost, Clinton served two and Bush served two. So, really in 50 plus years, one pub, one dem lose a re-election bid.

Obama SHOULD get 60% of the popular vote, but when (IMHO) he gets 55% or less, it will speak volumes that America has chosen the lesser loser.


Sounds like tbird is already admitting defeat.  


The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral
philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.

John Kenneth Galbraith

Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 18 - 22
Libertarian4life
September 18, 2012, 1:32pm Report to Moderator

Hero Member
Posts
7,356
Reputation
50.00%
Reputation Score
+12 / -12
Time Online
119 days 21 hours 10 minutes
Quoted from Box A Rox


Sounds like tbird is already admitting defeat.  


Romney is self destructing regularly.

It's hard to support a suicide mission.
Logged
Private Message Reply: 19 - 22
55tbird
September 18, 2012, 2:06pm Report to Moderator
Hero Member
Posts
3,211
Reputation
91.67%
Reputation Score
+11 / -1
Time Online
209 days 13 hours 13 minutes
Quoted from Box A Rox


Sounds like tbird is already admitting defeat.  


You assume I have a horse in this race.. I don't..
I have said before the only thing that COULD doom Obama is a bad jobs report or market crash just before the election. I didn't imagine Romney would start the "scratch your head comment a week" bit.

My horse , John Huntsman, left the gate late carrying 50 extra pounds...
Too bad we have two "kick the can down the road" candidates to choose from


"Arguing with liberals is like playing chess with a pigeon; no matter how good I am at chess, the pigeon is just going to knock out the pieces, crap on the board, and strut around like it is victorious." - Author Unknown
Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 20 - 22
Box A Rox
September 18, 2012, 2:12pm Report to Moderator

Hero Member
Posts
25,926
Reputation
58.62%
Reputation Score
+17 / -12
Time Online
514 days 11 hours 54 minutes
Quoted from 55tbird


You assume I have a horse in this race.. I don't..
I have said before the only thing that COULD doom Obama is a bad jobs report or market crash just before the election. I didn't imagine Romney would start the "scratch your head comment a week" bit.

My horse , John Huntsman, left the gate late carrying 50 extra pounds...
Too bad we have two "kick the can down the road" candidates to choose from


I'm not a fan of Huntsman but he was by far a much better candidate to run against Obama.


The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral
philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.

John Kenneth Galbraith

Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 21 - 22
Tommy
September 18, 2012, 3:36pm Report to Moderator

Hero Member
Posts
1,660
Reputation
56.25%
Reputation Score
+9 / -7
Time Online
62 days 22 hours 29 minutes
Quoted from Shadow
MSM is going to die a slow death as people keep turning them off and ratings keep dropping, useful idiots.




Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 22 - 22
2 Pages « 1 2 Recommend Thread
|

Rotterdam NY...the people's voice    Rotterdam's Virtual Internet Community     Chit Chat About Anything  ›  Keith Olbermann 'Special Comment' on Romney

Thread Rating
There is currently no rating for this thread