HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » If Sanders supporters don...

Fri Nov 20, 2015, 10:46 PM

 

If Sanders supporters don't want a tax cut on the middle class does that mean they want a tax hike?

Talk about cognitive dissonance.

Sanders is the one proposing a tax increase on the middle class.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/11/13/clinton-and-sanders-are-divided-over-a-big-obama-promise-not-raising-taxes-on-the-middle-class/

Sanders, meanwhile, already has proposed at least one small tax increase that would hit all taxpayers — an increase in the payroll tax to fund a guaranteed paid leave benefit. Analysts say he will almost certainly need to propose others in order to finance his plan to offer government-funded health care to every American.

71 replies, 3532 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 71 replies Author Time Post
Reply If Sanders supporters don't want a tax cut on the middle class does that mean they want a tax hike? (Original post)
hill2016 Nov 2015 OP
bravenak Nov 2015 #1
HerbChestnut Nov 2015 #37
bravenak Nov 2015 #47
HerbChestnut Nov 2015 #48
bravenak Nov 2015 #49
arcane1 Nov 2015 #51
bravenak Nov 2015 #53
arcane1 Nov 2015 #59
bravenak Nov 2015 #61
Doctor_J Nov 2015 #2
JaneyVee Nov 2015 #10
Kentonio Nov 2015 #11
JaneyVee Nov 2015 #13
Kentonio Nov 2015 #15
JaneyVee Nov 2015 #18
Kentonio Nov 2015 #20
Jarqui Nov 2015 #26
TM99 Nov 2015 #29
Doctor_J Nov 2015 #32
Duckhunter935 Nov 2015 #54
ruffburr Nov 2015 #62
Thinkingabout Nov 2015 #3
bobbobbins01 Nov 2015 #8
Thinkingabout Nov 2015 #22
earthside Nov 2015 #28
Thinkingabout Nov 2015 #31
restorefreedom Nov 2015 #46
Thinkingabout Nov 2015 #66
restorefreedom Nov 2015 #69
Thinkingabout Nov 2015 #70
restorefreedom Nov 2015 #71
Doctor_J Nov 2015 #33
Thinkingabout Nov 2015 #38
bobbobbins01 Nov 2015 #40
Thinkingabout Nov 2015 #42
bobbobbins01 Nov 2015 #44
Thinkingabout Nov 2015 #68
Doctor_J Nov 2015 #50
bobbobbins01 Nov 2015 #39
bobbobbins01 Nov 2015 #36
Thinkingabout Nov 2015 #41
bobbobbins01 Nov 2015 #43
yeoman6987 Nov 2015 #58
Duckhunter935 Nov 2015 #56
arcane1 Nov 2015 #60
aikoaiko Nov 2015 #4
DJ13 Nov 2015 #5
JaneyVee Nov 2015 #12
Doctor_J Nov 2015 #34
joshcryer Nov 2015 #6
angrychair Nov 2015 #7
Bluenorthwest Nov 2015 #9
JaneyVee Nov 2015 #14
Bluenorthwest Nov 2015 #17
Autumn Nov 2015 #23
reformist2 Nov 2015 #16
Bluenorthwest Nov 2015 #19
Capt. Obvious Nov 2015 #21
backscatter712 Nov 2015 #24
Warren Stupidity Nov 2015 #25
cantbeserious Nov 2015 #27
BlueCaliDem Nov 2015 #30
guillaumeb Nov 2015 #57
tularetom Nov 2015 #67
LWolf Nov 2015 #35
EndElectoral Nov 2015 #45
AgingAmerican Nov 2015 #52
guillaumeb Nov 2015 #55
Doctor_J Nov 2015 #63
Kalidurga Nov 2015 #64
Eric J in MN Nov 2015 #65

Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Fri Nov 20, 2015, 10:47 PM

1. Why raise middle class taxes? This plan is no good!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bravenak (Reply #1)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 01:02 PM

37. If it means lowering the cost of healthcare so that people end up paying less overall

 

Then it's a no brainer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Reply #37)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 02:58 PM

47. No thanks. I do not want to pay for the healthcare of trustfunders.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bravenak (Reply #47)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 03:22 PM

48. Well by that logic

 

We should stop funding libraries and high schools and public roads. Rich people use those too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Reply #48)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 03:36 PM

49. They usually buy book as I do. And I am POOR.

 



They also go to private school. And I like sharing the roads that they help pay for with them. Rich folks are fine by me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bravenak (Reply #47)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 03:47 PM

51. Especially those latte liberals

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arcane1 (Reply #51)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 03:50 PM

53. Damn straight! They barely consider me a person.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bravenak (Reply #53)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 03:59 PM

59. Well, they would if they exist.

 

But after all, many things we think are true, aren't

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arcane1 (Reply #59)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 04:03 PM

61. I see hundreds. Maybe they cannot see how bad they look?

 

Maybe they think they are the oppressed. Some are blind. I laugh too. Then show it to as many black folks as I can to help Hillary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Fri Nov 20, 2015, 10:50 PM

2. no, that meams that instead of a piddling tax cut, they want people to have healthcare, forever

 

I have to believe the hillarians are being deliberately stupid on these issues. You spew the republicans talking points verbatim.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doctor_J (Reply #2)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 08:37 AM

10. Ok. I think you have completely forgotten who...

 

Was the first to fight for single payer. Hint: They called it HillaryCare.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #10)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 08:38 AM

11. Creating the ironic system we find ourselves in today

 

Where the champion for single payer is now trying to convince people that single payer just means a tax rise.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kentonio (Reply #11)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 08:41 AM

13. It does mean a tax raise.

 

Which is why it failed. But it also means expending a lot of political capital that is again most likely to end in failure.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #13)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 08:47 AM

15. It means a small tax raise on people who would at the same time be receiving a higher wage

 

And no longer have to pay any contributions towards health insurance. As for expending political capital, any Dem who isn't behind it deserves to be publicly shamed and all future election support withdrawn by the party. If the party runs on strong progressive ideas like this, there will be a lot more Dems in congress next time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kentonio (Reply #15)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 08:52 AM

18. Even Medicaid and Medicare require payments.

 

And if you believe expending that political capital is a noble effort then why doesn't Hillary get any credit from the anti-Hillary crowd? We have a rabidly hostile congress. You and I both know single payer is currently not a reality. MOST people get their healthcare through employers. We should focus on expanding Medicaid.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #18)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 09:27 AM

20. They require payments at the moment, that doesn't mean they should or will continue to.

 

As for giving Hillary credit, I've always given her immense credit for how much she moved the conversation on single payer forward. She failed back then because people weren't ready for it, and it was no negative on her whatsoever. If it wasn't for Hillary we probably wouldn't be in a position where it should have already happened under Obama and now might still happen under Sanders.

What I will never forgive her for is what she did at the last debate, trying to frame something she has spent so long fighting passionately for as suddenly a negative that people should be scared of. In a single moment she sold single payer down the river for a moment of political expediency, despite her already commanding lead in the polls. I can't forgive that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #10)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 10:54 AM

26. Hillarycare was not single payer system

http://www.pnhp.org/news/2008/march/hillary_clinton_on_s.php
From a transcript of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s interview with Kevin Sack of The New York Times about health care.

The New York Times
March 27, 2008

MRS. CLINTON: You know, I have thought about this, as you might guess, for 15 years and I never seriously considered a single payer system. ....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #10)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 11:06 AM

29. HillaryCare was NEVER single payer.

 

What a load of horseshit.

It was an insurance mandate just like HeritageCare before and RomneyCare/Obamacare after.

Sorry you don't get to rewrite history for your candidate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #10)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 11:28 AM

32. which she's now abandoned in favor of making our worst system in the world even worse

 

Sanders wants everyone to have healthcare. Hillary does not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #10)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 03:53 PM

54. Well that is just not true

 

She was not for single payer. Would you please correct or delete that misinformation please. Bernie has been the only one for single payer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doctor_J (Reply #2)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 04:11 PM

62. Couldn't have said it better myself-

Thank you

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Fri Nov 20, 2015, 10:57 PM

3. And if a person chooses not to work for reportable wages they do not pay the tax, are they still

Entitled to health care at the others who are paying taxes? There should be a premium paid by those who do not file taxes and are paid under the table.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #3)

Fri Nov 20, 2015, 11:52 PM

8. People do that now...

And they still get the benefit of things our tax dollars pay for. This is a republican/libertarian trick used to argue against unions as well. So would you like to get rid of them too?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bobbobbins01 (Reply #8)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 10:22 AM

22. I cover my health insurance, why is it required of me to pay for others insurance? Maybe we should

use the same thinking to get others to pay all of our bills, that would be a deal, huh.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #22)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 11:01 AM

28. That is one of the most Republican things I've seen here.

This is what the Clinton candidacy is doing to 'liberals' ... in their reaction to anything Sanders says.

Really?

I've got mine, you go pull yourself up by you bootstraps if you want what I have.

Besides, the whole 'insurance' concept is about healthful people paying for the health care of the unhealthful.

Single-payer takes the whole insurance industry middle-man out of the equation meaning billions and billions of dollars going directly to health care and not insurance corporations' profits.

Yes, I would gladly see an increase in my taxes as a payment for health care than what we had before ObamaCare and as a replacement for ObamaCare that still sends billions of dollars to the insurance industry as profit.

What is becoming of the Democratic Party if it retreats into Reagan-style conservatism?
"I cover my health insurance, why is it required of me to pay for others insurance? Maybe we should use the same thinking to get others to pay all of our bills, that would be a deal, huh."

This is Hillaryism?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to earthside (Reply #28)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 11:17 AM

31. I would really like to see a link to where my response was republican, I doubt it would ever be said

by a republican. Yes, I would like to see everyone have health insurance, I work to cover my bills, I don't like working to provide for those who are not interested in working to provide their needs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #31)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 02:00 PM

46. "not interested in working?" is this even Du?

people are out of the workforce for a variety of reasons, including having physical and emotional illnesses and of course unemployment, underemployment and crappy wages. one of the things a civilized country does imo is provide healthcare to all.

a means test or "how many hours are you working" test goes against the very core argument of health care for all.

and as for your quote, here it is

"Republican gubernatorial candidate Tom Corbett on Friday accused some jobless Pennsylvanians of choosing to collect unemployment checks rather than going back to work, prompting swift criticism from his Democratic opponent and one of the state's top labor leaders.

"The jobs are there. But if we keep extending unemployment, people are just going to sit there," Corbett told Harrisburg radio station WITF at a campaign stop in Elizabethtown. "I've literally had construction companies tell me, 'I can't get people to come back to work until . . . they say, "I'll come back to work when unemployment runs out." ' "

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_07/024674.php

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to restorefreedom (Reply #46)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 04:51 PM

66. I work in a low wage job, there is a lot of turnover, hours are not the best but I make more money

Than I do sitting home. Why do I say there are those who are not interested in working, I say this because I know people who simply do not want to work. Crappy wages, I know about this also and my company hires all of the time because employees quit. I also know people who work long enough to draw unemployment and this has been a life cycle. Dont cry me a river but also dont ask me to pay taxes so the unwilling people has health insurance. If they made a system where the unwilling pay a premium then this would be ok. If everyone was unwilling who would pick up the tab.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #66)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 07:05 PM

69. i am not against people paying some kind of copay that is not prohibitive

but even under obamacare, some are saying thst they can't afford the payments. and i do hear your frustration there will always be some who want to lollygag around, but i hope most do not. i also think there might have to be some distictions. for example, i believe that all people should get free/nearly free preventive care becusee we all benefit from living in a healthier society and in financial ways as well. its a tough situation because there is a (hopefully small) percentage of genuine shirkers but we also don't want to deny care to anyone who slips through the cracks. i guess i would want to err on the side of giving care to people who may be riding the wave rather than risk someone not getting it who needs it. but then i tend towards more socialist models anyway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to restorefreedom (Reply #69)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 07:08 PM

70. It is not free, medical people and facilities needs money to survive, the free deal is not what

Happens.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #70)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 07:14 PM

71. getting rid of loopholes and closing tax shelters

will support the facilities and professionals who deliver health care


http://usuncut.com/politics/top-economist-says-bernies-plan-will-actually-save-the-us-5-trillion/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to earthside (Reply #28)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 11:31 AM

33. They have gone into full republican mode

 

Straight from Fox news

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doctor_J (Reply #33)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 01:02 PM

38. Oh, really, WRONG.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #38)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 01:04 PM

40. Thats your answer?

Please explain how essentially cutting and pasting talking points from the libertarian manifesto is upholding the ideals of the Democratic party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bobbobbins01 (Reply #40)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 01:06 PM

42. You must have responded to the wrong poster.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #42)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 01:08 PM

44. No, I'm talking to you.

You are cribbing Ron Pauls stump speech and saying that is what you stand for. I'm asking you to defend that stance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bobbobbins01 (Reply #44)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 05:03 PM

68. Bye, go talk to a libertarian who understands what you are saying.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #38)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 03:47 PM

50. have to pay for others healthcare, don't want to work

 

This is daily hate radio patter, and now du.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to earthside (Reply #28)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 01:03 PM

39. We're through the looking glass.

Up is down, black is white, republicans are democrats and Bernie Sanders is a blight on humanity for suggesting every American has a right to adequate healthcare.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #22)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 01:01 PM

36. Because we live in a society? Are you sure you're not republican?

Seriously...this is libertarianism you're talking about. You pay for other people's roads don't you? Other peoples access to police and fire services as well. Are you opposed to that? Why would you draw the line at healthcare when it is so important to every American?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bobbobbins01 (Reply #36)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 01:04 PM

41. You must be republican, I expect people should work to pay their bills, I do, nothing wrong with

working, makes one appreciate life more.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #41)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 01:06 PM

43. You didn't answer my question.

You've basically come out against every social program, so please explain how your thinking would apply to police and fire services, roads, social security, food stamps, etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bobbobbins01 (Reply #36)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 03:58 PM

58. The way roads are going now adays, a lot are toll roads especially on the northeast.

 

So we are paying double for road usage in many areas.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #22)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 03:54 PM

56. Wow, I am speechless

 

Just unbelievable

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Duckhunter935 (Reply #56)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 04:01 PM

60. One thing that's important to remember: it's all an act n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Fri Nov 20, 2015, 11:01 PM

4. I'm middle class and willing to pay more taxes if the rich pay proportionally more taxes

And it goes to funding infrastructure and public services for all US residents instead of asinine wars.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Fri Nov 20, 2015, 11:05 PM

5. Would you rather have a tax cut on low wages?

Or higher wages while paying the current rates?

I think we know why Hillary would rather promote tax cuts, but Bernie is after the second option.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DJ13 (Reply #5)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 08:38 AM

12. How about higher wages + a tax cut?

 

That's what Hillary is proposing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #12)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 11:45 AM

34. And more expensive healthcare. do you honestly think that a tax cut for someone making

 

$12/hr would be worth more than healthcare for their entire family?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Fri Nov 20, 2015, 11:16 PM

6. Clinton's middle class is not the same as Sanders.

Her middle class bracket makes two to three times what the actual middle makes. If Clinton gets the nod and faces Trump he will almost certainly win on this point if it comes up in the debate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Fri Nov 20, 2015, 11:49 PM

7. Be realistic

Most will not incur this tax. You do realize that 51% of wage earners earn less than $30,000 a year? That 53% of the total value of all wages earned in America are owned by .08% (point zero eight percent) of Americans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 08:35 AM

9. You know Sanders did not propose the Family Leave Act, Senator Gillibrand did. There are serveral

 

Democratic co-sponsors, the first being Brian Shatz who signed on in December of 2013.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/senate-bill/1810/cosponsors

The family leave legislation that Sanders has embraced was introduced by Kristen Gillibrand, Clinton's successor in the Senate from New York. Sanders said Sunday that the legislation has widespread support from progressives in both chambers of Congress.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/11/15/sanders-pushes-family-leave-plan-says-workers-can-afford-1-39-a-week-tax-increase-to-pay-for-it/


http://www.gillibrand.senate.gov/issues/paid-family-medical-leave


So this is an ongoing Democratic legislative initiative, not a Sanders proposal. It's odd to me that Bernie's critics frequently can not recognize Democratic ideas when they see them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 08:43 AM

14. I would pay this small tax increase.

 

But he should release a plan.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #14)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 08:47 AM

17. Good God, it is not his bill, it's Kirsten Gillibrand's. She introduced it two years ago.

 

It has several Democratic co-sponsors. Bernie is one of the co-sponsors. The 'plan' is not his, but it has been available to read for two (2) years.

Gillibrand's page about the bill:
http://www.gillibrand.senate.gov/issues/paid-family-medical-leave

So questions about it should go to the Senator who drafted and introduced it.....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #17)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 10:23 AM

23. That has been pointed out every time it's posted.

And every time that inconvenient little fact is ignored by the very same people .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 08:47 AM

16. I think most Dems realize what Bernie is trying to do. Why is Hillary using a Repug scare tactic???

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 08:58 AM

19. Usually people clammoring for lower taxes and recoiling from Democratic legislation are Republicans

 

It is amazing to me that so few people on either side of the argument seem to know the actual history of this legislation. It's been in the Senate since 2013. My own Senator Merkley is a co-sponsor as is Cory Booker, Maize Hirono, Tom Harkin....and Bernie. So many on DU see 'Bernie' and they shout 'bad law' and pretend Bernie wrote it and introduced it, that he is acting alone on it rather than just being one of many supporter's of Gillibrand's bill.
Low information voters? Conservatives posturing as liberals? Hard to say but they clearly don't know Democratic politics when it bites them on the ass.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 09:44 AM

21. Just Asking Questions

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 10:26 AM

24. Bernie's right - we need to make our "progressive" income tax progressive again.

And I mean progressive in the economics sense, in that the rich are supposed to be paying a higher tax rate than the poor, rather than pulling a Mitt Romney.

That's what his policy is, in a nutshell. Put the tax burden on those with the means to carry it. If that means a few members of the middle class, which would mean the upper-middle class in this case, have to pay a little more in taxes, well, if it makes the entire tax system more fair and more equitable, then I'm for it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 10:47 AM

25. It's fabulous to arrive at a total bullshit op

 

like this and have nothing to add to the discussion because the horseshit has been completely exposed by other DUers already.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 10:56 AM

27. Strawman Argument Form An HRC Supporter

eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 11:08 AM

30. I really could care less what Sanders proposes in domestic policy. He ain't gonna get any of it

through Congress, so his "$15 dollar wages! Medicare-for-All! Raise taxes on the millionaires and billionaires!" is nothing but cotton candy - looks great, tastes sweet, but it's nothing but spun sugar and, in the end, is bad for you.

My main reason (and I have others, but this is my main reason) for not supporting Sanders is that, in my opinion, he won't get anything done through Congress. He simply doesn't have enough clout; enough friends there who will help champion his wonderful ideas through to his desk in the Oval Office despite having been in Congress 24+ years.

The result will be, a lame-duck president wearing the Democratic Party moniker, who has never been a Democrat, has never warmed up to the Democratic Party, and who can, therefore, clap his hands and walk away when the American people, seeing there's no progress with a President Sanders, will not vote to re-elect him (and I doubt he cares). Due to being a lame-duck, the Democratic Party (and Democratic voters) will be vilified in the U.S. press as "weak". That label that President Obama has worked so hard to clean up, will follow each and every Democratic candidate from president on down to the local level for decades to come until we get another Obama-like Democrat into the White House.

This presidential election is just too important to experiment with Sanders. Four (some say even five) SCOTUS seats hangs in the balance. We can't afford to have another Republican in the White House choosing the successors of Justices Ruth Bader-Ginsberg, Stephen Breyer, Scalia, and Kennedy who are set to retire in the next decade (or keel over in their seats, whichever comes first).

I don't want to see another (S)Election 2000.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueCaliDem (Reply #30)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 03:56 PM

57. Your main reason:

stated as:

My main reason (and I have others, but this is my main reason) for not supporting Sanders is that, in my opinion, he won't get anything done through Congress. He simply doesn't have enough clout; enough friends there who will help champion his wonderful ideas through to his desk in the Oval Office despite having been in Congress 24+ years.


could have been used by many as a reason to not support Barack Obama in 2012.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueCaliDem (Reply #30)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 05:02 PM

67. Are you confident that Clinton will not appoint the same kind of corporate friendly justices

that the SCOTUS is already full of?

I'm not. The Supreme Court argument is bullshit as far as I'm concerned because she won't appoint anybody who will vote to repeal things like Citizens United, after she has benefited so much from it.

She's much closer ideologically, on socio-economic matters and on foreign policy, to the republican candidates, than she is to Bernie Sanders and the public at large.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 12:11 PM

35. Cognitive dissonance is

assuming that it has to be one or the other.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 01:08 PM

45. How can you ask for a tax cut at the same time you're asking for a major escalation in the war?

Last edited Sat Nov 21, 2015, 01:47 PM - Edit history (1)

Who pays for it? It is pandering for political reasons asserting one can pay for a major escalation in a war while at the same time cut people's taxes. GW did this and the debt skyrocketed.

It's irresponsible and self serving. In other words it's Republican.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 03:49 PM

52. Republican talking points

 

My how far they have fallen since the last debate. It's like her 'I protected Wall Street on 9/11' gaffe opened the right wing floodgates. Her supporters have gone full Monte on the Republican policies. They aren't trying to obfuscate them any longer.

Basically the clothes came off the emperor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 03:53 PM

55. This could easily be posted at Free Republic with the identical

talking points.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guillaumeb (Reply #55)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 04:33 PM

63. a lot of that here the last week or so

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 04:36 PM

64. You just can't help yourself can you.

Keep protecting the interests of the 1%. It's not like if you tried to hide it you would be able to anyway. Lovely status quo you got there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Sat Nov 21, 2015, 04:40 PM

65. The avg worker paying $1.38/week more and getting paid Family and Medical Leave

...would be a good deal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread