The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
We now return to our regularly scheduled PA Forums. Please let me (Hahnsoo1) know if something isn't working. The Holiday Forum will remain up until January 10, 2025.

American Presidency: McCain picks Palin

1356759

Posts

  • kildykildy Registered User regular
    edited August 2008
    KevinNash wrote: »
    Zephyr wrote: »
    hey can someone post that image that shows how obama will lower taxes for the middle class again?

    Bam

    Is that for households? I noticed the $115k figure shows a tax increase of 8% if I'm reading that right.

    Where I'm from households who make that much can't afford a tax increase because those households can't even afford a house.

    You read it wrong. It's an 8% increase for the 600,000+ bracket. Brackets are far left, numbers next to the percents are average dollar increase/decrease.

    kildy on
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited August 2008
    KevinNash wrote: »
    Zephyr wrote: »
    hey can someone post that image that shows how obama will lower taxes for the middle class again?

    Bam

    Is that for households? I noticed the $115k figure shows a tax increase of 8% if I'm reading that right.

    Where I'm from households who make that much can't afford a tax increase because those households can't even afford a house.
    You are reading incorrectly. The $657,000 figure shows a tax increase of 8%.

    The $111,000-$160,000 shows a tax decrease of 2.1%.

    Thanatos on
  • PotatoNinjaPotatoNinja Fake Gamer Goat Registered User regular
    edited August 2008
    Oboro wrote: »
    KevinNash wrote: »
    Zephyr wrote: »
    hey can someone post that image that shows how obama will lower taxes for the middle class again?

    Bam

    Is that for households? I noticed the $115k figure shows a tax increase of 8% if I'm reading that right.

    Where I'm from households who make that much can't afford a tax increase because those households can't even afford a house.
    You're not, that's for $600,000+

    I still want to know if that accounts for the health care coverage tax change. I assume it does not.

    PotatoNinja on
    Two goats enter, one car leaves
  • ElkiElki get busy Moderator, ClubPA Mod Emeritus
    edited August 2008
    Pretty good pick. Woman, conservative, and young. Nice roll of the dice.

    Elki on
    smCQ5WE.jpg
  • AstraphobiaAstraphobia Lightning Bolt! Lightning Bolt! Root! Sleep! Death!Registered User regular
    edited August 2008
    Astraphobia on
  • PeekingDuckPeekingDuck __BANNED USERS regular
    edited August 2008
    Oboro wrote: »
    KevinNash wrote: »
    Zephyr wrote: »
    hey can someone post that image that shows how obama will lower taxes for the middle class again?

    Bam

    Is that for households? I noticed the $115k figure shows a tax increase of 8% if I'm reading that right.

    Where I'm from households who make that much can't afford a tax increase because those households can't even afford a house.
    You're not, that's for $600,000+

    The thing with both of those tax graphs is that neither really take into account payment for social policies. For the most part, they are what you'd expect, but no one has quite figured out where Obama is getting the money for his utopia.

    PeekingDuck on
  • KevinNashKevinNash Registered User regular
    edited August 2008
    Thanatos wrote: »
    KevinNash wrote: »
    Zephyr wrote: »
    hey can someone post that image that shows how obama will lower taxes for the middle class again?

    Bam

    Is that for households? I noticed the $115k figure shows a tax increase of 8% if I'm reading that right.

    Where I'm from households who make that much can't afford a tax increase because those households can't even afford a house.
    You are reading incorrectly. The $657,000 figure shows a tax increase of 8%.

    The $111,000-$160,000 shows a tax decrease of 2.1%.

    Noted.

    KevinNash on
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited August 2008
    Zephyr wrote: »
    SyphonBrue wrote: »
    Once onstage, together with Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano, Palin talked about what women expect from women leaders; how she took charge in Alaska during a political scandal that threatened to unseat the state's entire Republican power structure, and her feelings about Sen. Hillary Clinton. (She said she felt kind of bad she couldn't support a woman, but she didn't like Clinton's "whining.")

    OH SHI-

    ohhhhhhhhhhhh

    Cat fight!

    There goes the Hillary supporter vote.

    Couscous on
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited August 2008
    SyphonBrue wrote: »
    Once onstage, together with Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano, Palin talked about what women expect from women leaders; how she took charge in Alaska during a political scandal that threatened to unseat the state's entire Republican power structure, and her feelings about Sen. Hillary Clinton. (She said she felt kind of bad she couldn't support a woman, but she didn't like Clinton's "whining.")

    OH SHI-

    Yeah, Clinton, Pelosi, and McCaskill are going to try and beat her bloody.

    Still, McCain/:winky: '08 is better than McCain/Jindal

    moniker on
  • PotatoNinjaPotatoNinja Fake Gamer Goat Registered User regular
    edited August 2008
    Oboro wrote: »
    KevinNash wrote: »
    Zephyr wrote: »
    hey can someone post that image that shows how obama will lower taxes for the middle class again?

    Bam

    Is that for households? I noticed the $115k figure shows a tax increase of 8% if I'm reading that right.

    Where I'm from households who make that much can't afford a tax increase because those households can't even afford a house.
    You're not, that's for $600,000+

    The thing with both of those tax graphs is that neither really take into account payment for social policies. For the most part, they are what you'd expect, but no one has quite figured out where Obama is getting the money for his utopia.

    Where is McCain going to get his money for Iraq?

    PotatoNinja on
    Two goats enter, one car leaves
  • ZoolanderZoolander Registered User regular
    edited August 2008
    galenblade wrote: »
    IN NON-PALIN NEWS:
    Nielsen Media Research said more people watched Obama speak than watched the Olympics opening ceremony in Beijing, the final "American Idol" or the Academy Awards this year. Obama talked before a live audience of 80,000 people in Denver.

    Holy shit.

    Zoolander on
  • JragghenJragghen Registered User regular
    edited August 2008
    KevinNash wrote: »
    Zephyr wrote: »
    hey can someone post that image that shows how obama will lower taxes for the middle class again?

    Bam

    Is that for households? I noticed the $115k figure shows a tax increase of 8% if I'm reading that right.

    Where I'm from households who make that much can't afford a tax increase because those households can't even afford a house.

    It is indeed for households, but you're not reading it right if you're seeing 8% for 115k. What you're seeing is an average of an 8% increase, which would GIVE $115k per household, for people making ~$600k-$2.8 million. Obviously, that's an average, so it'd be a much smaller increase for the lower numbers and a larger increase for the higher ones.

    A household making $115k would have a tax cut of roughly $2200 under Obama and roughly $2600 under McCain. Actual numbers are slightly higher for Obama and slightly lower for mcCain (once more due to ranging averages), so $115k households are roughly the point where Obama's cuts more than McCain's.

    Jragghen on
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited August 2008
    "Will all due respect again to Governor Kaine, he's been a governor for three years," Rove told Bob Schieffer. "He's been able but undistinguished. I don't think people could really name a big, important thing that he's done."

    Rove even dragged Richmond into his sights. "[Kaine] was mayor of the 105th largest city in America," Rove said. "And again, with all due respect to Richmond, Virginia, it's smaller than Chula Vista, California; Aurora, Colorado; Mesa, or Gilbert, Arizona; North Las Vegas, or Henderson, Nevada. It's not a big town."

    Also, Romney and Pawlenty are pissed.

    enlightenedbum on
    The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
  • PantsBPantsB Fake Thomas Jefferson Registered User regular
    edited August 2008
    DeShadowC wrote: »
    Please tell me she wasn't just chosen due to her being female in hopes to grab the, "OMFG you didn't nominate Clinton I'm voting for McCain" idiots right?

    When you consider there being more qualified females in the Republican Party, it seems more like she was picked for being female AND attractive, which is much, much worse.
    No Y chromosome. Its not like the GOPers have a lot of choices in that area. There's Murkowski in Alaska, Kay Bailey Hutchison in Texas, the two RINOs in Maine, and Elizabeth Dole in the Senate, Jodi Rell in as Gov in CT, Lingle (never heard of her) in Hawaii, Condi Rice....

    Oh, I didn't know there were only a handful. Are they all worse than Palin, or can it still be claimed that Palin is one of the least qualified women?

    Mainers, Rell, and Lingle=Pro Choice.
    Elizabeth Dole = older than McCain by a month + Bob Dole factor.
    Hutchinson would have made sense probably but Texas doesn't help probably
    Murkowski is mixed up in the Alaska corruption right now...
    Rice is a Bushie...

    GOPers only elect white dudes.

    PantsB on
    11793-1.png
    day9gosu.png
    QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
  • ZephyrZephyr Registered User regular
    edited August 2008
    hey syphonblue what link is that quote from

    Zephyr on
    16kakxt.jpg
  • Lord YodLord Yod Registered User regular
    edited August 2008
    Oboro wrote: »
    KevinNash wrote: »
    Zephyr wrote: »
    hey can someone post that image that shows how obama will lower taxes for the middle class again?

    Bam

    Is that for households? I noticed the $115k figure shows a tax increase of 8% if I'm reading that right.

    Where I'm from households who make that much can't afford a tax increase because those households can't even afford a house.
    You're not, that's for $600,000+

    The thing with both of those tax graphs is that neither really take into account payment for social policies. For the most part, they are what you'd expect, but no one has quite figured out where Obama is getting the money for his utopia.

    What parts of the utopia do you need accounting for?

    Lord Yod on
    steam_sig.png
  • PeekingDuckPeekingDuck __BANNED USERS regular
    edited August 2008
    Where is McCain going to get his money for Iraq?

    Obama and McCain will both leave Iraq at about the same time. The rest is just rhetoric. We don't get to just pull out anymore, even though the invasion was a horrible idea.

    PeekingDuck on
  • sdrawkcaB emaNsdrawkcaB emaN regular
    edited August 2008
    Zephyr wrote: »
    galenblade wrote: »
    IN NON-PALIN NEWS:
    Obama's speech seen by 38 million viewers

    NEW YORK (AP) — Barack Obama's acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention was seen by more than 38 million people.

    Nielsen Media Research said more people watched Obama speak than watched the Olympics opening ceremony in Beijing, the final "American Idol" or the Academy Awards this year. Obama talked before a live audience of 80,000 people in Denver.

    His TV audience nearly doubled the amount of people who watched John Kerry accept the Democratic nomination to run against President Bush four years ago. Kerry's speech was seen by just over 20 million people.

    Obama's audience might be higher, since Nielsen didn't have an estimate for how many people watched Obama on PBS or C-SPAN Thursday night.

    so like 40 million

    christ

    good god

    that's like 20% of all registered voters.

    fucking

    insane

    sdrawkcaB emaN on
  • kildykildy Registered User regular
    edited August 2008
    Oboro wrote: »
    KevinNash wrote: »
    Zephyr wrote: »
    hey can someone post that image that shows how obama will lower taxes for the middle class again?

    Bam

    Is that for households? I noticed the $115k figure shows a tax increase of 8% if I'm reading that right.

    Where I'm from households who make that much can't afford a tax increase because those households can't even afford a house.
    You're not, that's for $600,000+

    The thing with both of those tax graphs is that neither really take into account payment for social policies. For the most part, they are what you'd expect, but no one has quite figured out where Obama is getting the money for his utopia.

    That's a completely different set of graphs, this one's just taxes. The overall "if you both implemented all your policies and tax plans" thing shows them both short cash, but Obama winds up shorter by about half as much due to the tax increases on the high end. Basically, McCain wants to add less, but wants to cut income across the board as well. He winds up with a bigger debt.

    kildy on
  • JragghenJragghen Registered User regular
    edited August 2008
    Oboro wrote: »
    KevinNash wrote: »
    Zephyr wrote: »
    hey can someone post that image that shows how obama will lower taxes for the middle class again?

    Bam

    Is that for households? I noticed the $115k figure shows a tax increase of 8% if I'm reading that right.

    Where I'm from households who make that much can't afford a tax increase because those households can't even afford a house.
    You're not, that's for $600,000+

    The thing with both of those tax graphs is that neither really take into account payment for social policies. For the most part, they are what you'd expect, but no one has quite figured out where Obama is getting the money for his utopia.

    According to Obama, leaving Iraq would vastly reduce our expenditures. This is true for all cases. However, you are accurate that most tax studies state that with all of the plans that Obama wants to implement, there would still be a deficit. The same studies also point out that McCain has a deficit over $300 billion larger due to his continuing Iraq and reduced revenues from cutting taxes across the board.

    Jragghen on
  • TheMarshalTheMarshal Registered User regular
    edited August 2008
    Oboro wrote: »
    KevinNash wrote: »
    Zephyr wrote: »
    hey can someone post that image that shows how obama will lower taxes for the middle class again?

    Bam

    Is that for households? I noticed the $115k figure shows a tax increase of 8% if I'm reading that right.

    Where I'm from households who make that much can't afford a tax increase because those households can't even afford a house.
    You're not, that's for $600,000+

    The thing with both of those tax graphs is that neither really take into account payment for social policies. For the most part, they are what you'd expect, but no one has quite figured out where Obama is getting the money for his utopia.

    He's said on numerous occasions that he'd close tax loopholes that give breaks to corporations who send jobs overseas. I'm not sure how he'd do that, or how much money that'd bring in, but it seems to be a key point of his pay-go plan.

    TheMarshal on
  • wwtMaskwwtMask Registered User regular
    edited August 2008
    I'm eagerly awaiting the VP debate. Unless she's got some debating jiu-jitsu that no one's seen before, that debate is going to be rough.

    wwtMask on
    When he dies, I hope they write "Worst Affirmative Action Hire, EVER" on his grave. His corpse should be trolled.
    Twitter - @liberaltruths | Google+ - http://gplus.to/wwtMask | Occupy Tallahassee
  • Eat it You Nasty Pig.Eat it You Nasty Pig. tell homeland security 'we are the bomb'Registered User regular
    edited August 2008
    KalTorak wrote: »
    moniker wrote: »
    Zephyr wrote: »
    galenblade wrote: »
    IN NON-PALIN NEWS:
    Obama's speech seen by 38 million viewers

    NEW YORK (AP) — Barack Obama's acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention was seen by more than 38 million people.

    Nielsen Media Research said more people watched Obama speak than watched the Olympics opening ceremony in Beijing, the final "American Idol" or the Academy Awards this year. Obama talked before a live audience of 80,000 people in Denver.

    His TV audience nearly doubled the amount of people who watched John Kerry accept the Democratic nomination to run against President Bush four years ago. Kerry's speech was seen by just over 20 million people.

    Obama's audience might be higher, since Nielsen didn't have an estimate for how many people watched Obama on PBS or C-SPAN Thursday night.

    so like 40 million

    christ

    Nielsen doesn't count PBS homes? Then how the hell do they know how many people watch Sesame Street or whatever?

    What do you think The Count does when he's not on camera?

    winner!

    Eat it You Nasty Pig. on
    hold your head high soldier, it ain't over yet
    that's why we call it the struggle, you're supposed to sweat
  • WonderMinkWonderMink Adventure! Candy IslandRegistered User regular
    edited August 2008
    Elki wrote: »
    Pretty good pick. Woman, conservative, and young. Nice roll of the dice.

    Couldn't they come out the losers because of the ethics investigation? The ethics investigation that is run by a democrat and could put some of the blame on her, not just on Ted Stevens?

    WonderMink on
    and I wonder about my neighbors even though I don't have them
    but they're listening to every word I say
  • PeekingDuckPeekingDuck __BANNED USERS regular
    edited August 2008
    kildy wrote: »

    That's a completely different set of graphs, this one's just taxes. The overall "if you both implemented all your policies and tax plans" thing shows them both short cash, but Obama winds up shorter by about half as much due to the tax increases on the high end. Basically, McCain wants to add less, but wants to cut income across the board as well. He winds up with a bigger debt.

    They should play up that graph more because it speaks to more people. I'd like to see it, actually.

    PeekingDuck on
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited August 2008
    Oboro wrote: »
    KevinNash wrote: »
    Zephyr wrote: »
    hey can someone post that image that shows how obama will lower taxes for the middle class again?

    Bam

    Is that for households? I noticed the $115k figure shows a tax increase of 8% if I'm reading that right.

    Where I'm from households who make that much can't afford a tax increase because those households can't even afford a house.
    You're not, that's for $600,000+

    The thing with both of those tax graphs is that neither really take into account payment for social policies. For the most part, they are what you'd expect, but no one has quite figured out where Obama is getting the money for his utopia.

    Obama's proposals have $300b less of deficit spending than McCain's.

    moniker on
  • SyphonBrueSyphonBrue Registered User regular
    edited August 2008
    Zephyr wrote: »
    hey syphonblue what link is that quote from

    http://www.newsweek.com/id/156190

    SyphonBrue on
  • SyphonBrueSyphonBrue Registered User regular
    edited August 2008
    moniker wrote: »
    SyphonBrue wrote: »
    Once onstage, together with Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano, Palin talked about what women expect from women leaders; how she took charge in Alaska during a political scandal that threatened to unseat the state's entire Republican power structure, and her feelings about Sen. Hillary Clinton. (She said she felt kind of bad she couldn't support a woman, but she didn't like Clinton's "whining.")

    OH SHI-

    Yeah, Clinton, Pelosi, and McCaskill are going to try and beat her bloody.

    Still, McCain/:winky: '08 is better than McCain/Jindal

    I want a McCain/:winky: bumper sticker

    SyphonBrue on
  • kildykildy Registered User regular
    edited August 2008
    kildy wrote: »

    That's a completely different set of graphs, this one's just taxes. The overall "if you both implemented all your policies and tax plans" thing shows them both short cash, but Obama winds up shorter by about half as much due to the tax increases on the high end. Basically, McCain wants to add less, but wants to cut income across the board as well. He winds up with a bigger debt.

    They should play up that graph more because it speaks to more people. I'd like to see it, actually.

    Lemme find, it's Loooooooong.

    kildy on
  • edited August 2008
    This content has been removed.

  • ElkiElki get busy Moderator, ClubPA Mod Emeritus
    edited August 2008
    JebusUD wrote: »
    Elki wrote: »
    Pretty good pick. Woman, conservative, and young. Nice roll of the dice.

    Couldn't they come out the losers because of the ethics investigation? The ethics investigation that is run by a democrat and could put some of the blame on her, not just on Ted Stevens?

    I know nothing of it, so.. maybe?

    Elki on
    smCQ5WE.jpg
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited August 2008
    moniker wrote: »
    Oboro wrote: »
    KevinNash wrote: »
    Zephyr wrote: »
    hey can someone post that image that shows how obama will lower taxes for the middle class again?
    Bam

    Is that for households? I noticed the $115k figure shows a tax increase of 8% if I'm reading that right.

    Where I'm from households who make that much can't afford a tax increase because those households can't even afford a house.
    You're not, that's for $600,000+
    The thing with both of those tax graphs is that neither really take into account payment for social policies. For the most part, they are what you'd expect, but no one has quite figured out where Obama is getting the money for his utopia.
    Obama's proposals have $300b less of deficit spending than McCain's.
    This is to say nothing of the increased revenue from businesses that no longer have to pay for people's healthcare.

    Thanatos on
  • PantsBPantsB Fake Thomas Jefferson Registered User regular
    edited August 2008
    Jragghen wrote: »
    According to Obama, leaving Iraq would vastly reduce our expenditures. This is true for all cases. However, you are accurate that most tax studies state that with all of the plans that Obama wants to implement, there would still be a deficit. The same studies also point out that McCain has a deficit over $300 billion larger due to his continuing Iraq and reduced revenues from cutting taxes across the board.
    I'm actually OK with a deficit short term as long as the money is being spent intelligently and the tax code is progressive. Once the economy gets better, we can go for a surplus to pay off our ridiculous debts.

    PantsB on
    11793-1.png
    day9gosu.png
    QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
  • PeekingDuckPeekingDuck __BANNED USERS regular
    edited August 2008
    SyphonBrue wrote: »

    I want a McCain/:winky: bumper sticker

    They need to plaster her face up everywhere. With American flags, barbie dolls, and guns.

    PeekingDuck on
  • ElkiElki get busy Moderator, ClubPA Mod Emeritus
    edited August 2008
    I really think she gave Hillary a softball. If I was her speech writer I'd be furiously typing up some vicious screed whilst masturbating and thanking God for this wonderful opportunity.

    Elki on
    smCQ5WE.jpg
  • ZoolanderZoolander Registered User regular
    edited August 2008
    "I know Hillary Clinton, and Sarah Palin is no Hillary Clinton," Debbie Wasserman Schultz said in a phone interview with NBC.
    :D

    Zoolander on
  • edited August 2008
    This content has been removed.

  • WonderMinkWonderMink Adventure! Candy IslandRegistered User regular
    edited August 2008
    Elki wrote: »
    JebusUD wrote: »
    Elki wrote: »
    Pretty good pick. Woman, conservative, and young. Nice roll of the dice.

    Couldn't they come out the losers because of the ethics investigation? The ethics investigation that is run by a democrat and could put some of the blame on her, not just on Ted Stevens?

    I know nothing of it, so.. maybe?

    I dont know alot about it either, but they were just talking about it on NPR. Apparently alaskans like her, just like they like stevens though.

    But I guess it could be a concern. Maybe they counted getting more hillary women then they would lose from people knowing about the ethics thing.

    edit: apparently in alaska she is known as someone who "fights corruption" so maybe nothing bad will come down on her.

    WonderMink on
    and I wonder about my neighbors even though I don't have them
    but they're listening to every word I say
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited August 2008
    Where is McCain going to get his money for Iraq?

    Obama and McCain will both leave Iraq at about the same time. The rest is just rhetoric. We don't get to just pull out anymore, even though the invasion was a horrible idea.

    McCain wants permanent bases from Kuwait to Turkey in order to stifle Iranian aggression. That costs money. Even moreso since we'll have to bribe the Iraqi's and fight the people constantly mortaring the positions in the first place.

    moniker on
  • SyphonBrueSyphonBrue Registered User regular
    edited August 2008
    Zoolander wrote: »
    "I know Hillary Clinton, and Sarah Palin is no Hillary Clinton," Debbie Wasserman Schultz said in a phone interview with NBC.
    :D

    YES

    It begins.

    SyphonBrue on
This discussion has been closed.