capricorn Posted January 21, 2012 Report Share Posted January 21, 2012 An ARG poll puts Newt at 40% support and Mitt at 26% in SC. http://www.ketv.com/politics/30267822/detail.html Support for Newt among women appears strong. It's looking like the pundits who predicted that women would turn away from Newt over the ex-wife's "open marriage" revelation were wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Derek L Posted January 22, 2012 Report Share Posted January 22, 2012 WOW........FNS calling Newt the winner in South Carolina Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted January 22, 2012 Report Share Posted January 22, 2012 (edited) WOW........FNS calling Newt the winner in South Carolina They were talking about this on CNN. During the exit polls they asked people whether a candidate's religious beliefs mattered to them. If those beliefs mattered a lot, they voted for Gingrich. If the candidate's religious beliefs mattered somewhat, they still voted Gingrich, but less so. If the candidate's religious beliefs didn't matter, they voted overwhelmingly for Romney. Romney is a Mormon. The Christers of the south don't like Mormons. I wonder if this is an indication of a major reason for the general lack of enthusiasm Republicans are showing for Romney. They don't want a Mormon president. Edited January 22, 2012 by Scotty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharkman Posted January 22, 2012 Report Share Posted January 22, 2012 This could be a long race. Newt's got the momentum and the anybody-but-Romney vote, while Romney's got the cash. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted January 22, 2012 Report Share Posted January 22, 2012 Big surprise there. This is bad for the GOP. Newt still can't really win but it makes Romney look vulnerable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted January 22, 2012 Report Share Posted January 22, 2012 Big surprise there. This is bad for the GOP. Newt still can't really win but it makes Romney look vulnerable. Romney is vulnerable that is the problem, guy couldn't even give Mccain a run for his money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted January 22, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 22, 2012 Big surprise there. This is bad for the GOP. Newt still can't really win but it makes Romney look vulnerable. I disagree. Newt could win. And Romney is vulnerable because of his self-inflicted problems. By the second debate, he should have had more than enough time to table a coherent and sensible plan via his tax returns. Although none of the candidates could have done anything to prevent the media from serving up back to back hanging curveballs to Newt in each of the debates. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted January 22, 2012 Report Share Posted January 22, 2012 I disagree. Newt could win. And Romney is vulnerable because of his self-inflicted problems. By the second debate, he should have had more than enough time to table a coherent and sensible plan via his tax returns. Although none of the candidates could have done anything to prevent the media from serving up back to back hanging curveballs to Newt in each of the debates. Shady what if his Tax returns are a big problem though? Bain was a huge problem with a large slice of South Carolina Republican Electorate. So why shouldn't tax returns that show he pays less then them in taxes even though he is very wealthy, or that he keeps money off shore, or that he has huge investments in this or that. Seriously he might not have wanted to release his tax returns because he wants to dump them let the story get old and run like it never happened. If he dumps some of them (people are still going to be waiting for 2000-2009 like Obama) and the narrative until super Tuesday is about all the information in it he could be done. There might not be enough time between now and super Tuesday for the story to die. It might not be a self inflicted problem at all, it might just be that he can't be the nominee because of how he has handled himself as a business man. The "how dare you attack" success argument didn't help with Bain it might not work here either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted January 22, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 22, 2012 Shady what if his Tax returns are a big problem though? In what sense? Bain was a huge problem with a large slice of South Carolina Republican Electorate. No it wasn't. So why shouldn't tax returns that show he pays less then them in taxes even though he is very wealthy He's following the law. The capital gains tax rate is 15%. That's the law. That's what he's required to pay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted January 22, 2012 Report Share Posted January 22, 2012 (edited) In what sense? No it wasn't. Shady the ABC exit Polls say that of High school graduates Bain was the biggest issue for some 50% of them. How is that not a huge problem you think that in a REPUBLICAN primary that if 50% of people from one of the Largest sub groups in American saying that is an issue to vote against Romney it isn't a problem? Give me a break. Also you look at the polling remember when Romney's lead stopped growing? Nope? it was the day after the Bain adds went up. It is a problem even if you ignore it. He's following the law. The capital gains tax rate is 15%. That's the law. That's what he's required to pay. So what? Then the election becomes about that law doesn't? You think the middle class (the biggest group in America) is going to say that law is great? Seriously that might a great talking point for Mitt doesn't change the fact that working people aren't going to like it. The Rich would be smart to tank Romney because right now they get tax loopholes like Romney does because it isn't the focus but now there is a Rich face to that problem. Seriously the polling shows none of those arguments works. Edited January 22, 2012 by punked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted January 22, 2012 Report Share Posted January 22, 2012 Shady the ABC exit Polls say that of High school graduates Bain was the biggest issue for some 50% of them. How is that not a huge problem you think that in a REPUBLICAN primary that if 50% of people from one of the Largest sub groups in American saying that is an issue to vote against Romney it isn't a problem? Give me a break. Also you look at the polling remember when Romney's lead stopped growing? Nope? it was the day after the Bain adds went up. It is a problem even if you ignore it. So what? Then the election becomes about that law doesn't? You think the middle class (the biggest group in America) is going to say that law is great? Seriously that might a great talking point for Mitt doesn't change the fact that working people aren't going to like it. The Rich would be smart to tank Romney because right now they get tax loopholes like Romney does because it isn't the focus but now there is a Rich face to that problem. Seriously the polling shows none of those arguments works. Precisely... It goes to the fallacy that Romney is there for the common man and he knows what it's like to get fired and his other "man of the people" drivel... In fact,he seems to look weak and fearful of being questioned on this,noting his diversionary tactic of claimng to be attacked because he's successful... 15% on Investment income....Things like dividends...How much capital has he invested to get more than a quarter million dollars a year on investment income??? And how does this jive with his "Man of the People" shtick? In fact,it does'nt...I do enjoy watching the vanguards of the "free market",namely the economic whiz kids in the Republican Party,questioning the ethical nature of tax gifts (exceedingly low tax rates)for the extremely wealthy,however... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted January 22, 2012 Report Share Posted January 22, 2012 (edited) Precisely... It goes to the fallacy that Romney is there for the common man and he knows what it's like to get fired and his other "man of the people" drivel... In fact,he seems to look weak and fearful of being questioned on this,noting his diversionary tactic of claimng to be attacked because he's successful... 15% on Investment income....Things like dividends...How much capital has he invested to get more than a quarter million dollars a year on investment income??? And how does this jive with his "Man of the People" shtick? In fact,it does'nt...I do enjoy watching the vanguards of the "free market",namely the economic whiz kids in the Republican Party,questioning the ethical nature of tax gifts (exceedingly low tax rates)for the extremely wealthy,however... A quarter million HAHAHAHA don't make me laugh. The guys is worth 300-500 Million even if he was invested in a common bank account he would be making 3-5 million a year and he isn't invested in that that is for commoners. Romney is making 10-20 million easy, and I am willing to bet a lot of it isn't taxed at all, which is why he isn't releasing before last years. I have heard some speculating the last campaign Mitt ran he wrote off meaning that his tax rebate paid for that campaign I am sure the American people will love to know they paid for some Rich guy's run at the white house so he could tell them what to do. Seriously it is an issue and it wont go away until he releases till at least 2004 but probably the same number as Obama back to 2000. Edited January 22, 2012 by punked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted January 22, 2012 Report Share Posted January 22, 2012 He's following the law. The capital gains tax rate is 15%. That's the law. That's what he's required to pay. He's following the law he wrote. You expect people to be complacent about that? People are growing more angry over people like Romney, the cutthroat, every-man-for-himself uber capitalist rolling in the dough and buying politicians to ensure he doesn't have to pay taxes. He's the poster boy for the wall street types who threw the economy into the toilet with their outrageous game playing. Mind you, Gingrich is no better, crooked weasel who took more than a million dollars from one of the principals involved in the big mortgage mess - for services rendered. And anyone who thinks those services were talking about history and giving advice is a complete idiot. Clearly this was payback for protecting them in congress. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted January 22, 2012 Report Share Posted January 22, 2012 Precisely... It goes to the fallacy that Romney is there for the common man and he knows what it's like to get fired and his other "man of the people" drivel... I like how they asked him about speaking fees and he said it was really not much at all. How many ordinary men dismiss $350,000 as not much at all? The mean income in the US is about $26,000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Manny Posted January 22, 2012 Report Share Posted January 22, 2012 He's following the law. The capital gains tax rate is 15%. That's the law. That's what he's required to pay. True. But as George Bush would say, "There's doing what's legal, and there's what's RIGHT." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted January 22, 2012 Report Share Posted January 22, 2012 True. But as George Bush would say, "There's doing what's legal, and there's what's RIGHT." Why would he pay more taxes than required?? Paying the required 15% IS doing "what's right." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Manny Posted January 22, 2012 Report Share Posted January 22, 2012 Why would he pay more taxes than required?? Paying the required 15% IS doing "what's right." If the things he did to put himself in that position (paying the lowest tax rate) are hurtful to the American people. That's what I mean, that's what would not be "right" about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted January 22, 2012 Report Share Posted January 22, 2012 (edited) Why would he pay more taxes than required?? Paying the required 15% IS doing "what's right." Yah is he required to move his money off shore, and American Jobs with it? Again was that the right thing? Seriously it is going to be an issue. We are in the Citizen's united era and if Americans think the Rich are trying to buy an election there is going to be backlash. I just don't see it playing. Again we wont know what happened in the last 10 years with the tax law the way it is there are years Romney may have gotten money back. You might think that is right and that is fine but there are Americans who will see it as wrong and wont see Romney as the one who will change those laws. Also at least in the Republican field a hole was dug a long long time ago by the Tea party. They shouted and called and yelled all about transparency and the Obama Birth certificate. Now it is just fine for their nominee not to be transparent? That will be the Hill Mitt dies with the hard line Republicans or he dies on the Hill of having a fight over fair tax rates with Democrats. He is getting the big squeeze from left and right on this one. Edited January 22, 2012 by punked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted January 22, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 22, 2012 Shady the ABC exit Polls say that of High school graduates Bain was the biggest issue for some 50% of them. Wow, half of highschool graduates. We're not talking about the sharpest tools in the shed anyways. But yeah, it was such a good issue for Newt that he decided to back away from it because it was completely backfiring on him. So what? Then the election becomes about that law doesn't? You think the middle class (the biggest group in America) is going to say that law is great? Yes, I think they will say that law is great. Because it applies to them as well. You know, pension funds, RSPs, etc. The reason why capital gains is taxed lower is because it's double taxation. He's following the law he wrote. Complete nonsense. Capital gains tax rates should be lower, to avoid double taxation on money already taxed at the regular income tax rate before it gets invested. As an economy, we want to encourage investment. If the things he did to put himself in that position (paying the lowest tax rate There is no lower rate. There's just THE rate. There isn't a higher captial gains rate or a lower captial gains rate. There's just a capital gains tax rate. Which he pays as stated by the law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted January 22, 2012 Report Share Posted January 22, 2012 Wow, half of highschool graduates. We're not talking about the sharpest tools in the shed anyways. But yeah, it was such a good issue for Newt that he decided to back away from it because it was completely backfiring on him. Yah Shady it backfired so much that Newt stopped Mitts lead from growing and then went on to win the Primary. Seriously what world do you live in. This a Republican Primary where 50% of the people think the issue matters what about Independents and Democrats. High school and some high school (the people this issue seemed to matter with) are 40% of the population. He loses that big and considering that the upper educated go democrat and you are looking at a Landslid for Obama Shady. Seriously are you going to pretend the numbers some how add up? Yes, I think they will say that law is great. Because it applies to them as well. You know, pension funds, RSPs, etc. The reason why capital gains is taxed lower is because it's double taxation. It isn't double taxation Shady. It is taxation on new money made from investments, and often (in case I think you will see with Romney) the top people will get paid instead of in dollars in stocks so they don't have to pay like you and me. Don't believe me look at all the polls that say people think these loop holes should be closed. Sorry that argument was lost a long time ago for your guys. Complete nonsense. Capital gains tax rates should be lower, to avoid double taxation on money already taxed at the regular income tax rate before it gets invested. As an economy, we want to encourage investment. It still isn't double taxation. No matter how many times your guys try to say it is, if it becomes the focus of the election that argument isn't going to fly with anyone under 200,000 dollars in year income. The sub population numbers that will play in the general is to small. There is no lower rate. There's just THE rate. There isn't a higher captial gains rate or a lower captial gains rate. There's just a capital gains tax rate. Which he pays as stated by the law. There will be a higher rate if Romney is the nominee it just wont play out another way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 22, 2012 Report Share Posted January 22, 2012 Yah is he required to move his money off shore, and American Jobs with it? Again was that the right thing? Seriously it is going to be an issue. We are in the Citizen's united era and if Americans think the Rich are trying to buy an election there is going to be backlash..... Yes...it was the right thing, and frankly, I am more suspicious about Canadians worried about American jobs than Mitt's financial portfolio! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimmy Posted January 22, 2012 Report Share Posted January 22, 2012 I wasn't aware that Newt Gingrich was the "family values candidate" in the race. I'm pretty sure that's Santorum if anyone. But it seems people are looking for solutions to economic problems. Social issues take a back seat. Shouldn't some of you be applauding that? Whether Newt is talking about his social issues platform or not, it doesn't change the stuff he's already said in this campaign and done in the past. Aside from saying he can only trust religious people, as mentioned earlier in this thread, he's taken other positions to suck up to "values-voters". He's signed pledges from groups like Family Leader to fight gays and reproductive rights to try to get the religious-right on board his campaign. And he has proposed to make judges uphold Christian values by calling "activist" judges before congress and abolishing circuits and judgeships of judges that make decisions he disagrees with. He and Callista run a company that makes books and movies about the importance of Christian values in America. So while the debate for the moment is focused on economic issues, Gingrich is what he is. -k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted January 22, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 22, 2012 Whether Newt is talking about his social issues platform or not, it doesn't change the stuff he's already said in this campaign and done in the past. It's not whether or not he's talking about it, it's that he isn't. But I disagree with your characterization of him stating that judges uphold so-called Christian values. However, definitely to uphold the constitution and not to make new law. I guess we can agree to disagree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 “Speaker Gingrich has also been a leader,” the former Massachusetts governor said. “He was a leader for four years as speaker of the House. And at the end of four years, it was proven that he was a failed leader and he had to resign in disgrace. I don’t know whether you knew that, he actually resigned after four years, in disgrace.Romney continued: “He was investigated over an ethics panel and had to make a payment associated with that and then his fellow Republicans, 88 percent of his Republicans voted to reprimand Speaker Gingrich. He has not had a record of successful leadership.” Then Romney got into Gingrich’s post-congressional career. “Over the last 15 years since he left the House, he talks about great bold movements and ideas,” he told the crowd of several hundred people gathered at a building materials company here. “Well, what’s he been doing for 15 years? He’s been working as a lobbyist, yeah, he’s been working as a lobbyist and selling influence around Washington.” Politico: Mitt Romney: Newt Gingrich is a ‘failed leader,’ ‘disgrace’ Now THAT is some "fire in the belly". Rom is still the nom, but he'll have to battle with Newt a little more. In the world-tilting scenario where Newt wins, we'll have a replay of Johnson/Goldwater 1964... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharkman Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 Romney needs to up his game. Newt is actually starting to inspire and impress with his sound bites, while Mitt tends to be kind of boring. Talk is cheap, and Newt has a long way to go, but he is pretty sharp. Mitt? He doesn't come across that way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.