The Obama camp had been pushing hard the message that this is a choice election bettween the two campaigns, whereas the Romney camp had been pushing this election as a referendum on the President. With making this shore-up-the-base pick the Romney campaign had to give up on that. As of this weekend both Romney and now Ryan are using the choice election terminology. I think that makes independents less likely to go automatically with throw the bums out, and more likely to consider the choice. But any time you go for a base rallying pick this late in the game, that isn't great for your standing with the middle.

[Edited on August 12, 2012 at 4:26 PM. Reason : .]

8/12/2012 4:26:16 PM

Of course Ryan tells someone with a Pell Grant to work 3 jobs and take out loans. What does he do? Goes to school on death benefits from his father's Social Security.

8/12/2012 6:16:46 PM

Paul Ryan wants to murder your grandmother so the rich get richer. Didn't you hear?

8/12/2012 6:18:52 PM

^^ It's worse than the college kids who get mad at people for using welfare without realizing 70% of their education is paid for by government money and donations.

8/12/2012 6:51:14 PM

^ Just like the republicans bitching about how ~50% of the population doesn't pay income tax without realizing that they're probably one of those people.

8/12/2012 7:06:26 PM

Ehhh, I think that most of the Republicans who bitch about that are not part of that 50%. The Republicans who don't pay income tax are probably largely not even aware of that statistic and are Republicans on account of social issues.

8/12/2012 7:09:33 PM

Not saying they all are, but most of the ones I've seen making a big deal about that stat ARE part of that 50%. I love reading the blog posts from those people who unwittingly give away info that shows it's highly unlikely that they pay income tax. ie. I'm working three jobs just to make it through college. Well, so long as you're not completely brain dead, you probably actually have NIT and get more in refunds than you even pay.

but I'm sure d7223243 is going to come say that's more of a reflection of who I know than anything. And yes, I know plenty of people who make shitloads...they just don't go around bitching about people not paying taxes.

[Edited on August 12, 2012 at 7:23 PM. Reason : ]

8/12/2012 7:18:58 PM

Of course the big problem with bitching that about half of Americans pay no net individual income tax is that it's the result of "tax expenditures" that in a more rational system would be part of the regular social safety net and count as "spending"; it also ignores the payroll tax (which is a bigger burden than the individual income tax for everyone up to the upper-middle class), state and local income taxes (which are flat), and excise and sales taxes (which are regressive).

8/12/2012 8:17:18 PM

Quote :

"(which is a bigger burden than the individual income tax for everyone up to the upper-middle class)"

haha, well duh, nobody else pays income taxes.

...and in the long run, with Social Security being a progressive tax, everyone under upper middle class makes out good on that "burden".

8/12/2012 11:10:23 PM

Wait, what? You don't pay any SS tax after about $110k, right? Correct me if I'm wrong.

8/12/2012 11:16:47 PM

We need to stop the rich robbing the poor! OBAMA 2012 all the way baby!

8/12/2012 11:16:54 PM

Tax expenditures serve as inefficient jerry-rigging of the tax code to benefit powerful special interests. It is a process rife with corruption, particularly on the corporate side where the tax code has been rigged to benefit multinational corporations. Ryan and Romney rightly propose to scrap these tax expenditures and lower rates, similar to the Bowles-Simpson plan.

Where Ryan errs is his avocation of removing all capital gains, dividends and inheritance taxes.

8/12/2012 11:24:01 PM

^^^^
^^^
Yeah, my understanding is that the Social Security cap is regressive.

[Edited on August 12, 2012 at 11:40 PM. Reason : ]

8/12/2012 11:39:14 PM

Quote :

"haha, well duh, nobody else pays income taxes."

"Everybody up to the upper-middle class" includes many people who do pay individual income taxes, just not as much in individual income taxes as in payroll taxes.

To get an idea of what I'm talking about, remember that the individual income tax is subject to the standard deduction and personal (and possibly dependent) exemptions, followed by a 10% bracket, followed by a 15% bracket and a 25% bracket (beyond which you're clearly in the upper-middle class), along with a few refundable and non-refundable credits that many people qualify for, so that the individual income tax is gradually phased in (note that generally everyone who benefits from itemization instead of the standard deduction is rich); meanwhile, the payroll tax is subject to none of these phase-in effects and rather is assessed at a flat rate on gross income.
The income level at which you're likely to pay more in individual income tax than in payroll taxes (roughly "upper-middle class") is quite a bit higher than the level at which you're likely to pay positive individual income tax (roughly "working class").

N.B.: I have a notion of "middle class" that's based on being able to live a certain lifestyle, and therefore does not strictly lie within the middle quintile but rather is placed so that the number whose incomes are above "middle class" is much smaller than the number whose incomes are below; in particular, I do not believe that the "middle class" ought to continue receiving the Bush tax cuts...in fact, maybe only the poor should IMO.

8/13/2012 12:27:09 AM

Quote :

"As for Ryan's social conservative voting record, it doesn't matter. Independents won't give a shit, just as long as he's not Santorum ranting about abortion."

I'm independent and I give a shit about it. I think either party has about equal chances of fixing the economy so "not fucking everything else up while you're at it" is at the top of my list. Not saying Obama doesn't or won't fuck anything up. It's an aggregate comparison of "fucking shit up."

Still probably voting for Gary Johnson myself but picking Ryan made me less likely to consider Romney, if such a thing was possible.

[Edited on August 13, 2012 at 8:50 AM. Reason : .]

8/13/2012 8:50:10 AM

Quote :

"Our rights come from nature and God, not from government."

I understand that this is a controversial statement, but it's sad that it is.

I think Paul Ryan was a good pick, all things considered. It brings some legitimacy Romney's campaign; should convince many of the "Tea Party" and conservative grassroots that they're at least semi-serious about the budget. As someone else mentioned, I don't think "social issues" are going to play nearly as much of a role in this election as the big issues like entitlements.

Unfortunately, Paul Ryan toes the party line in almost all areas. That's to be expected, I guess. If he didn't conform to some basic GOP establishment requirements, they wouldn't let him anywhere near the White House.

[Edited on August 13, 2012 at 9:53 AM. Reason : ]

8/13/2012 9:52:32 AM

I do love the people who are saying things like, "this is politically dangerous because Ryan wants to address growing entitlement spending" and "he's vulnerable on medicare/medicaid." Yup, having a plan opens you up to attack. Sticking your head in the sand and ignoring growing unfunded liabilities is not a viable option anymore. I feel like politicians today are too much like the mayor from Jaws.

I'm not a fan of everything in the Ryan plan. It doesn't balance the budget, but it does at least set a course for an eventual balanced budget and a reduction in government size vs. GDP. We have reached a state of financial affairs that forces us to address our major expenditures, military and entitlements. Unless we are willing to discuss those we are completely and utterly fucked. It would be nice if we could at least talk about that in this election cycle.

8/13/2012 10:11:59 AM

^ that is all mostly true, but there is the practical discussion of why skewering the middle class to save the rich would do during a fragile recovery.

You do have to balance spending cuts and safety net programs with the state of the economic recovery.

8/13/2012 10:30:45 AM

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/13/the-ryan-role/?smid=tw-NytimesKrugman&seid=auto

Finally someone calling out Ryan on his budget. I do give the man credit for actually putting something down on paper rather than just saying, "I have a plan and it's going to work, but you just have to trust me" (ahem, Romney).

Text for those that can't link:

Quote :

"Mark Kleiman points us to a lamentable but revealing column by William Saletan, which illustrates perfectly how the essentially ludicrous Paul Ryan has gotten so far – namely, by playing to the gullibility of self-proclaimed centrists, who want to show their “balance” by finding a conservative to praise. Saletan writes: Ryan is a real fiscal conservative. He isn’t just another Tea-Party ideologue spouting dogma about less government and the magic of free enterprise. He has actually crunched the numbers and laid out long-term budget proposals. OK, what? Where is that coming from? Did Saletan miss the whole discussion when the Ryan plan came out? Did he miss the point where even Jacob Weisberg apologized for his initial praise, admitting that I reacted too quickly and didn’t sort out just how laughable Ryan’s long-term spending projections were. His plan projects an absurd future, according to the Congressional Budget Office, in which all discretionary spending, now around 12 percent of GDP, shrinks to 3 percent of GDP by 2050. Defense spending alone was 4.7 percent of GDP in 2009. With numbers like that, Ryan is more an anarchist-libertarian than honest conservative. Look, Ryan hasn’t “crunched the numbers”; he has just scribbled some stuff down, without checking at all to see if it makes sense. He asserts that he can cut taxes without net loss of revenue by closing unspecified loopholes; he asserts that he can cut discretionary spending to levels not seen since Calvin Coolidge, without saying how; he asserts that he can convert Medicare to a voucher system, with much lower spending than now projected, without even a hint of how this is supposed to work. This is just a fantasy, not a serious policy proposal. So why does Saletan believe otherwise? Has he crunched the numbers himself? Of course not. What he’s doing – and what the whole Beltway media crowd has done – is to slot Ryan into a role someone is supposed to be playing in their political play, that of the thoughtful, serious conservative wonk. In reality, Ryan is nothing like that; he’s a hard-core conservative, with a voting record as far right as Michelle Bachman’s, who has shown no competence at all on the numbers thing. What Ryan is good at is exploiting the willful gullibility of the Beltway media, using a soft-focus style to play into their desire to have a conservative wonk they can say nice things about. And apparently the trick still works."

8/13/2012 10:59:28 AM

Quote :

"Ryan is a great pick for Romney because it focuses the discussion on the economy, which is Obama's biggest problem and the one area where independents may favor Romney."

This

8/13/2012 11:08:10 AM

Paul Ryan's got it all figured out, we'll just close the loopholes for unicorn leashes and leprechaun traps.

Seriously though, Krugman said it best when he said Ryan was "a stupid person's idea of what a smart person sounds like."

8/13/2012 11:12:30 AM

^ LOL

Krugman never fails to bring the lulz

[Edited on August 13, 2012 at 11:39 AM. Reason : ]

8/13/2012 11:38:37 AM

Agreed.

8/13/2012 11:55:34 AM

LOL, we can all agree on that one

8/13/2012 12:23:18 PM

It was a shitty pick. Neither Romney nor Ryan have ANY foreign policy experience. McCain-Palin was a better ticket than Romney-Ryan.

8/13/2012 12:30:10 PM

It is amazing to me how Conservatives brush off bigoted policy and/or leaders as just an attempt to "rally the base".

Just own up to it.

8/13/2012 12:30:18 PM

It is amazing to me how Liberals brush off bigoted policy and/or leaders as just an attempt to "rally the base."

Just own up to it.

8/13/2012 1:15:37 PM

meet janna ryan

8/13/2012 1:18:25 PM

Aren't you the one constantly calling for a mature Soapbox?

8/13/2012 1:21:03 PM

What's not mature about that? The fact that I openly illustrated that she makes me want to throw up in my mouth?

8/13/2012 1:31:04 PM

What does a VP's wife have to do with anything? More specifically, her appearance?

Chit Chat?

8/13/2012 1:47:11 PM

What? You haven't heard?

It's literally front page news.


http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/janna-ryan-sports-thrifty-kohl-dress-campaign-trail-153106314.html

8/13/2012 1:50:17 PM

Do you have a point?

You probably shop at Kohl's, so what?

A VP's wife isn't important at all, although I would be interested in the same dress on Ann Romney.

Even then it's just them taking a shot at Michelle Obama's extravagance, which isn't of any interest to me either.

How about focusing on actual substance?

8/13/2012 1:54:41 PM

I was just answering your question "What does a VP's wife have to do with anything?"

8/13/2012 1:55:44 PM

If a troll trolls a troll, then who's doing the trolling?

8/13/2012 2:10:31 PM

Quote :

"It is amazing to me how Liberals brush off bigoted policy and/or leaders as just an attempt to "rally the base." Just own up to it."

Give me one example of a lib saying the equivalent of "He's just anti gay to get the voters to the poll: He doesn't really mean it."

(birds chirping)

8/13/2012 2:12:47 PM

In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory,[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as a forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[3] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.

Quote :

"meet janna ryan "

Inflammatory

Quote :

"If a troll trolls a troll, then who's doing the trolling?"

Inflammatory







But in all fairness I don't really know what his [Geniusboy's] point was. I'm pretty much the only person who ever takes up for him.

Quote :

"Give me one example of a lib saying the equivalent of "He's just anti gay to get the voters to the poll: He doesn't really mean it.""

I can think of a few black leaders... *shrug*

8/13/2012 2:16:42 PM

^ Nope not close.

Dude just own up to it.

8/13/2012 3:10:13 PM

Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson don't do something just a teenie bit similar?

8/13/2012 3:15:45 PM

8/13/2012 3:26:30 PM

They've passed budgets all 3 of the past prior years, they just did so by continuing resolutions of the prior years' budgets, rather than drafting new ones. I'm surprised to see this Sean Hannity talking point made it into an image on facebook.

[Edited on August 13, 2012 at 3:32 PM. Reason : .]

8/13/2012 3:31:37 PM

Well now that's somewhat lazy isn't it?

Wouldn't you say the delicate state of the economy right now is such that a rubber-stamp budget might not be the best possible one to ram through?

A little attention to detail needed perhaps?

8/13/2012 3:59:48 PM

Quote :

"Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson don't do something just a teenie bit similar?"

No, your failing to see my point. Sharpton and Jackson don't have any power or authority to rally the base, they are derelict politicians that are largely ignored because of the crazy shit that they say.

Now, this is the opposite for the conservatives. The ones saying the crazy bigoted talk are the ones celebrated and cheered.

8/13/2012 4:02:24 PM

^^just kicking it down the road.

[/quote]It was a shitty pick. Neither Romney nor Ryan have ANY foreign policy experience. McCain-Palin was a better ticket than Romney-Ryan.[quote]

Oh yeah, I forgot that foreign policy is one of Obama's strong points....

[Edited on August 13, 2012 at 4:05 PM. Reason : ^]

8/13/2012 4:04:46 PM

He has 4 years more of it than his opponents right?

8/13/2012 4:14:10 PM

Bernie Sanders
Ryan Budget Facts:

The House budget drawn up by Rep. Paul Ryan would end Medicare as we know it, according to Sen. Bernie Sanders. It also would cut spending on virtually everything but the Pentagon while still spending more than the Treasury takes in by providing $1 trillion in tax breaks for the wealthy and profitable corporations, according to Sanders, a member of the Senate Budget Committee who has monitored and analyzed the Ryan plan.

Read the list of budget facts here: http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/news/?id=5091EF55-8985-4FE2-A3EE-812AE1166E7B

8/13/2012 4:27:23 PM

^ Lol, Bernie Sanders. That guy loves to spin stuff for political brownie points.

8/13/2012 4:58:56 PM

^You have some brown on your lips. You keep spitting bullshit without any proof of spinning.

Whether you like it or not, the man is on the Senate Budget Committee AND he's on the people's side. Whether he's spinning or not, he has more education about Ryan Budget than you ever will.

If you'd like to debate Bernie's facts with your superior knowledge, please do so right now.


Btw.... for the record maddow was right again.

Quote :

"The Rachel Maddow Show March 22, 2012: "MADDOW: I think it's even possible that Mitt Romney could pick Paul Ryan to be his vice-presidential choice although I don't have much company in thinking that." http://on.msnbc.com/PeV7zD"

[Edited on August 13, 2012 at 5:59 PM. Reason : .]

8/13/2012 5:57:47 PM

Quote :

"As for Ryan's social conservative voting record, it doesn't matter. Independents won't give a shit"

I think that is underestimating independents in this election.

Quote :

"I'm independent and I give a shit about it. I think either party has about equal chances of fixing the economy so "not fucking everything else up while you're at it" is at the top of my list. "

Thank you.

Quote :

"..."He's just anti gay to get the voters to the poll: He doesn't really mean it.""

I don't that anyone is claiming he doesn't really mean it. There are certainly republicans who do use it just for turnout, but I think after more than a decade in Washington and a long record of it, then it starts to seem like he does really mean it. And he's keeping company with some of NC's anti-gay politicians too:

8/13/2012 5:59:07 PM

I mean when you delve into the math of the Ryan budget a lot of it is laughable, I'm pretty sure it depends on 3% employment in 2020, ultra low inflation, and other such optimistic details.

Don't get me wrong, I realize that both sides have this sorta shady math involved in their budget "projections."

But can we all stop acting like the numbers contained in these people's budgets is "Serious" or in Ryan's case takes some political balls to put forward. At best we can depend on how they plan to achieve those goals and the overall ideaology behind them, but to me thats it.

8/13/2012 6:11:58 PM