DEM Primaries/Candidates thread

[kapkomet]

Politico

Yea, and that's not rhetoric at all - you know - the spirit of cooperation she promises and all.

[Balta1701]

Yea, and that's not rhetoric at all - you know - the spirit of cooperation she promises and all.

Does the U.S. have a policy about negotiating with Sith lords?

[Texsox]

Does the U.S. have a policy about negotiating with Sith lords?

 

Nice.

[mr_genius]

Another innocent victim of the vast right win conspiracy

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070922/ap_on_...c_fundraiser_45

[Balta1701]

Bayh endorses Hillarity...

[NorthSideSox72]

Bayh endorses Hillarity...

I believe that SS2K5 called this - and Bayh being her VP pick.

 

[southsider2k5]

I believe that SS2K5 called this - and Bayh being her VP pick.

 

I can't remember if it was Kap or I that said it, but let me just say that they deserve each other. Hill has to get someone on the ballot who can pick up some either midwest or deep south traditional republician states. Bayh on the ballot might be enough to carry Indiana for Hill.

[kapkomet]

I can't remember if it was Kap or I that said it, but let me just say that they deserve each other. Hill has to get someone on the ballot who can pick up some either midwest or deep south traditional republician states. Bayh on the ballot might be enough to carry Indiana for Hill.

I did. And I still think it happens.

 

It was pretty "interesting" that Bayh was going to run, her and Evan go to Iraq together, in two days after that, Bayh says "nah, I'll pass on the run" . . . and I'll guarantee you that the "deal" was made at that time.

 

[Balta1701]

I did. And I still think it happens.

 

It was pretty "interesting" that Bayh was going to run, her and Evan go to Iraq together, in two days after that, Bayh says "nah, I'll pass on the run" . . . and I'll guarantee you that the "deal" was made at that time.

What happens in Baghdad...

[kapkomet]

What happens in Baghdad...

 

 

[Texsox]

I can't remember if it was Kap or I that said it,

 

is there a difference?

[sox4lifeinPA]

What happens in Baghdad...

 

stays in Baghdad?

[southsider2k5]

Well Barack has already talked about raising taxes on the $250K + crowd... Now he is onto the $97K+ crowd.

 

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3638710&page=1

 

Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., is considering a major tax hike on the rich to shore up the nation's Social Security system.

 

"If we kept the payroll tax rate exactly the same but applied it to all earnings and not just the first $97,000," Obama wrote this week in an Iowa newspaper, "we could eliminate the entire Social Security shortfall."

 

Obama's idea, which he described on the op-ed page of Friday's Quad City Times as being "one possible option" and not a formal plan, would raise more than $1 trillion over 10 years by subjecting income of more than $97,000 to a 12.4 percent tax. Half of the tax would be paid by employees and half would be paid by employers.

 

Obama is floating the idea of a tax hike on the rich as a way of assuring lower- and middle-income voters that he sees an option for ensuring Social Security's solvency that would not burden them. Obama has been indirectly criticized by Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., for suggesting on ABC News' "This Week with George Stephanopoulos" that a higher retirement age should be "on the table."

 

By suggesting the elimination of the Social Security tax cap, Obama has distinguished himself as the presidential candidate most willing to touch the "third rail" of American politics. No other major candidate has come close to offering a specific idea with the potential of generating as much revenue.

 

Obama's idea, however, also carries considerable political risk.

 

Eliminating the Social Security tax cap without changing the benefit formula could undermine support for the program among the roughly five percent of Americans who earn more than $97,000 per year.

 

"It would be a radical change in how the program has been designed," said Robert Bixby, executive director of the Concord Coalition, a non-partisan group that advocates a balanced budget. "It would end the contributory idea of Social Security, where you get back something for what you put in."

 

Obama's consideration of a tax hike is under fire from Republicans for its sheer size.

 

"It's not shocking that Sen. Obama would think a huge tax increase is a good idea," said Republican National Committee spokesman Brian Walton. "Sen. Obama would probably tax the air we breathe if that were possible, so it comes as no surprise that he would consider yet another attempt to raise taxes on the American people."

 

Former Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C., has also talked about raising the Social Security tax cap. But he would do so in a more limited way than suggested by Obama.

 

While Obama has suggested imposing the 12.4 percent tax on all income above $97,000 per year, Edwards would only impose it on those making more than $200,000 per year. Income between $97,000 and $200,000 would continue to be exempt from Social Security taxes under the Edwards proposal.

 

"I do think we need to have a bubble above $97,000, probably up to about $200,000 so we don't raise taxes on middle-class families," Edwards said at Thursday's AARP forum. "But, above the $200,000, these millionaires on Wall Street ought to be paying their Social Security taxes."

 

The scope of the Obama proposal was not lost on a leading anti-tax group.

 

"With their proposals to raise Social Security taxes, it appears that John Edwards and Barack Obama are engaged in competition to see who can wreak more havoc on the economy," said Club for Growth spokeswoman Nachama Soloveichik. "Obama comes out the winner with his proposal to raise Social Security taxes on more Americans than Edwards proposed in his plan. But make no mistake: While Obama's plan is worse, both plans would significantly increase America's tax burden; devastate the economy, and turn Social Security into a full-fledged welfare program."

 

For her part, Clinton opposes both the Obama idea of imposing new taxes on those making $97,000 per year and the Edwards proposal to tax those making $200,000 per year

 

Thus far in her presidential campaign, the former first lady has resisted all specific revenue-generating proposals for Social Security. While invoking her husband's record as president, Clinton said at Thursday's AARP forum that her focus would be on getting back to fiscal discipline in the non-Social Security portion of the budget. She argues that this will have the effect of extending the life of the Social Security trust fund as it did in the 1990s.

 

But she is no stranger to the tax equity argument that one billionaire investor has made in advocating changes to the cap.

 

"Middle class and working families are paying a much higher percentage of their income [than wealthier Americans] -- that was Warren Buffet's position," said Clinton at a June 29 PBS debate, "When you cut off the contribution at $90,000, $95,000, that's a lot of money between $95,000 and the $46 million that Warren Buffet made last year. And he's honest enough to say, 'Look, tax me because I'm a patriotic American and I want to make sure our country stays strong and is fair.'"

 

ABC News' Jonathan Greenberger and Jacqueline Klingebiel contributed to this report.

 

 

 

[NorthSideSox72]

Well Barack has already talked about raising taxes on the $250K + crowd... Now he is onto the $97K+ crowd.

 

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3638710&page=1

This is a tax increase I would actually support. The 97k SS cap is a regressive tax as it stands now - I would be more than OK with applying the SAME RATE (not a higher rate) to money made beyond that point as well, given the need to stabilize the SS fund and hopefully stop Congress from borrowing from it.

 

[southsider2k5]

This is a tax increase I would actually support. The 97k SS cap is a regressive tax as it stands now - I would be more than OK with applying the SAME RATE (not a higher rate) to money made beyond that point as well, given the need to stabilize the SS fund and hopefully stop Congress from borrowing from it.

 

Eh, I hate the social security program. All it is, is a large scale pyramid program. As less people work, and more people retire, it is going to suck out more and more money, for benefits most of us will never see.

 

And just for clarification sake, the government isn't borrowing SS dollars at anypoint. They are borrowing against SS dollars. There is a difference.

[Balta1701]

This is a tax increase I would actually support. The 97k SS cap is a regressive tax as it stands now - I would be more than OK with applying the SAME RATE (not a higher rate) to money made beyond that point as well, given the need to stabilize the SS fund and hopefully stop Congress from borrowing from it.

Congress WILL NOT STOP borrowing from it. We had a candidate who ran with that idea as a huge part of his campaign in 2000, and he was lampooned mercilously for it and beaten by a person who pledged to make up for that $ by giving tax cuts.

[NorthSideSox72]

Eh, I hate the social security program. All it is, is a large scale pyramid program. As less people work, and more people retire, it is going to suck out more and more money, for benefits most of us will never see.

 

And just for clarification sake, the government isn't borrowing SS dollars at anypoint. They are borrowing against SS dollars. There is a difference.

Oh if you want to phase it out completely, I might support that. But meanwhile, for people currently in the program, you still have an obligation. And I think that the 97k cap being released would go a long way towards meeting that.

 

Your clarification makes a differentiation that, to me, doesn't exist. They are taking money out that would be theoretically paid back in later, either way, and that to me is a huge risk I would not be willing to take.

 

[BigSqwert]

And the Winner Is...

No spin after the first online debate; viewers pick their favorite.

 

By KEVIN SITES, MON SEP 24, 5:35 AM PDT

 

Every time a Presidential debate ends it seems the real contest begins, as candidates elbow their way to the nearest television camera to spin their own performance into a tale of triumph.

 

But in Yahoo's Democratic Candidate Mashup — the first "online only" debate — it was the viewers who made the call, just like they would in a real election.

 

And who did they decide mastered the mashup? By a 4% margin they picked Illinois Senator Barack Obama, who edged out New York Senator Hillary Clinton with 35% of the vote to her 31%.

 

Full Article

[mr_genius]

Did you guys watch any of Hillary's interviews on the Sunday morning news shows? thoughts?

[southsider2k5]

Oh if you want to phase it out completely, I might support that. But meanwhile, for people currently in the program, you still have an obligation. And I think that the 97k cap being released would go a long way towards meeting that.

 

Your clarification makes a differentiation that, to me, doesn't exist. They are taking money out that would be theoretically paid back in later, either way, and that to me is a huge risk I would not be willing to take.

 

I'd love to see SS phased out. There is no way it happens, so there is no real point in even dreaming about it. Its on my list of government programs I could do without.

 

Also it would basically take a collapse of the US government before SS wouldn't get paid out. It isn't really much of a risk in reality.

[Texsox]

I'd love to see SS phased out. There is no way it happens, so there is no real point in even dreaming about it. Its on my list of government programs I could do without.

 

Also it would basically take a collapse of the US government before SS wouldn't get paid out. It isn't really much of a risk in reality.

 

SS replaced the previous rock solid retirement plans. Pensions from companies like GM. Pensions from Unions.

[kapkomet]

SS replaced the previous rock solid retirement plans. Pensions from companies like GM. Pensions from Unions.

OMG. Please stop it. You are not that uneducated.

 

 

[Texsox]

OMG. Please stop it. You are not that uneducated.

 

A couple generations ago people counted on their company pensions. Who has one now?? Does anyone here have a company pension? My Dad is retired on two of them. My grandmother retired with her Sears benefits. Do you think Sears still has a pension plan?

[kapkomet]

What the hell happened to personal responsibility in this country? Seriously. I can ask that question on about every subject that the Democrats want to "take care of us" on.

 

 

[Texsox]

What the hell happened to personal responsibility in this country? Seriously. I can ask that question on about every subject that the Democrats want to "take care of us" on.

 

When did we ever have personal responsibility for our retirement? We had company pensions and retirement benefits and people worked for these companies all their lives. You certainly are old enough to remember your grandparent's careers.

 

And how many Enrons are out there? People who invested for their retirement and then found the companies had not financed the plans properly? But conservatives like to ignore that stuff.

 

I'm all for personal responsibility in this, but conservatives like to think every investment is beautiful and pure. Some HS degreed service industry employee will suddenly become Warren Buffett with their retirements. Of course with all the old money republican companies on Wall Street looking to make a killing, it's the GOP saying, we'll take care of you, for a fee