Sunday, December 24, 2017

An example of a great misinformation campaign...

30. Do you approve or disapprove of the Republican tax plan?
                                                             
                     Tot    Rep    Dem    Ind    Men    Wom    
 
Approve              25%    60%     4%    20%    30%    20%    
Disapprove           52     15     81     54     49     55    
DK/NA                23     26     15     26     21     25    


31. Do you think the Republican tax plan will increase your taxes, reduce your taxes, or will it not have much impact either way?
                                                              
                     Tot    Rep    Dem    Ind    Men    Wom   
 
Increase taxes       35%    16%    54%    33%    31%    40%    
Reduce taxes         16     33      8     13     20     13     
Not much impact      36     43     27     41     39     33    
DK/NA                12      9     11     13     10     14     


This polling question is taken from the Quinnipiac poll that (along with others) made some headlines. 

Now I read an article the other day by a University of Minnesota psychologist, who had a whole slew of reasons why people might not like a tax cut (or specifically the GOP tax cut). He went into these psychological concepts about envy, suggesting that people are against the plan because someone else might benefit more than they do. He went into the concept that people inherently care more about fairness, than they do about personal gain. The argument being they would gladly give up any potential benefit to themselves, if they believed that others would not be so lucky. He had several little psychological explanations that by themselves, might otherwise make sense.

But  overall, the viewpoint was overly complicated, and generally didn't do the two things that I believe would have given it more credibility. The first would have been to explain why these psychological phenomenons have never undercut support for previous tax cuts. Certainly the human psychology hasn't changed dramatically over the past couple of decades. The second would have been to take a little bit of time to acknowledge the overwhelming influence of partisan politics, as well as the seething contempt felt for Donald Trump by most everyone left of center.




I would offer that the main reason why most polling showed that people didn't like the tax cuts was self explanatory based on these two specific questions from Quinnipiac. Democrats, along with their echo chamber of MSM, told the American public that the Trump/GOP tax cuts were actually income redistribution to the rich. Democrats like Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi specifically told their faithful that the middle class would see a tax increase, and that the only people benefiting would be corporations and the rich. The MSM reported the Schumer Pelosi rhetoric as the truth, and abracadabra, you have convinced 80% of the Democrats and 74% of Independents that they will not see a tax cut. Moreover you convinced more than half of Democrats and more than a third of Independents that they would be paying more taxes, apparently in order to fund tax breaks for corporations and the rich.

Quite obviously, it would be a difficult proposition to convince people who are not seeing any personal benefit, or even paying more... that a tax cut for other people would be good.

But the truth is that every single independent tax agency that has studied the tax bill suggested that as many as 80% of taxpayers would get a tax break. The objective determination is that among the middle class, the average tax cut should be somewhere between $1000-2000. Now, since the bill has passed, you see more and more acknowledgement of this.

I would argue that a fair, thorough, and honest media, covering this tax bill fight as an objective observer, willing to provide the facts (rather than political propaganda disguised as facts) would done wonders for the support of the tax bill from the general public. In fact, and objective news reporting of this bill probably would have put support fairly close to that of other tax bills.

While there is some inherent truth that many on the left will simply oppose anything Trump or Republican as a knee jerk response, I hold the belief that the broader electorate is still willing to be swayed at least a little bit by the facts of the debate. The real reason why this tax bill has so much less support than previous bills, has nothing to do with the merits of the law, or new found psychological reasons. The real reason deals primarily with the fact that most of our country was duped by a heavily coordinated disinformation campaign between the Democratic Party and their echo chamber in the MSM.


72 comments:

commie said...

CH postulated.....

that the broader electorate is still willing to be swayed at least a little bit by the facts of the debate. The real reason why this tax bill

And I offer the real reason is that the electorate is not as dumb as you think, and realized the middle class is getting the shaft while the elites and corporations get the lions share of the benefits. I remember how excited you were to get 100 bucks from busch and will probably be thrilled with 50 bucks from trump... Me on the other hand could care less even on fixed income, it will not make a RCH difference to my life, which my guess is the same as you....But keep dancing the victory of the rich over you again....LOL And of course again the giant intellect of the omnipotent CH questions the questions and the response they got that he does not like. Suggest you hire yourself out to a poll service since you appear so much smarter than the pros. Nothing new there....

James said...

Trump Tells Friends They ‘All Got a Lot Richer’

December 24, 2017
President Trump kicked off his holiday weekend at Mar-a-Lago at a dinner where he told friends, “You all just got a lot richer,” referencing the sweeping tax overhaul he signed into law hours, CBS News reports.

“Mr. Trump directed those comments to friends dining nearby at the exclusive club — including to two friends at a table near the president’s who described the remark to CBS News — as he began his final days of his first year in office in what has become known as the Winter White House.”

james said...

Republicans Hope for More Bipartisanship Next Year

December 22, 2017 at 7:29 pm ESTBy Taegan Goddard507 Comments
A growing number of Republicans say a course correction is needed to prevent their party from losing the House, Senate or both chambers given strong political headwinds that one veteran lawmaker likened to a political “hurricane,” The Hill reports.

GOP calls to work more with Democrats next year are becoming more common as Republicans look for ways to win over swing voters.

Said Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY): “We’re going to be looking for areas of bipartisan agreement because that’s the way the Senate is.

Coldheartedtruth Teller said...

It's not popular because it violates every campaign promises he made

Coldheartedtruth Teller said...

This is another reason.

Trump's Credibility Is So Low That Americans Don’t Believe They’re Getting A Tax Cut

Commonsense said...

When people's bigger paychecks start coming in February it won't be Trump's credibility that will be question.

Anonymous said...

Exactly. Bigger checks for HB thanks to the Trump Cut.

"GIVE IT BACK"

Let's see IF any anti-bigger pay day check Liberal keeps paying higher taxes to the Federal Gov't.

Raise your hand
oPie?, Jane will you?, how about you HB? Or small government WP come on you will right?

Anonymous said...

I pay quarterly taxes to the Federal Government, I am scheduling smaller payment.

The fundamental question is who is better with your labor and the wealth it creates?

Answers
A, Sen Schumer and Rep Nancy Polosi
B, Your Spouse and You

commie said...

I guess you idiots can be bought for 25 bucks a week.....Since you control the budget and think running up the deficit by another 2 trillion or so is a good thing.....tell me how schumer or pelosi are responsible for the republican spending spree????? And I always thought the right hated deficits! Especially you, goat breeder.....

commie said...

Liberal keeps paying higher taxes to the Federal Gov't.

And why don't you pay for trumps fair share since you think everyone wants to overpay taxes....Stupidity is your strong suit goat since you have been using that line for years......Why do you want your kids to be on the hook for your cuts?????

Anonymous said...

HB established that the middle income earner will see a $60 per week reduction in Federal Tax.

Anonymous said...

*** Confirmed***

oPie's will take the tax cut, but, will bitch about it. K.

commie said...

will take the tax cut, but, will bitch about it. K.

And you continue to act like a juvenile with stupid tenets like that. I love it when you dribble down your leg... BTW ....Keep the X in X-mas....

Anonymous said...

You are going to take the tax cuts, which is fine, but damn, you could stop bitch ing about it.

commie said...

kd the dolt posted...

but damn, you could stop bitch ing about it.

Sure as soon as you grow up.....LOLOLOL

Anonymous said...

oPie, you said I want you, hb, jane and Wp to pay more in taxes, you could not be more wrong.

commie said...

Thank goodness for those trump bonus's

AT&T will layoff and fire more than a thousand workers starting early next year, according to local reports.

Across the Midwest, an estimated 600 workers were notified they were being laid off by the company on December 16, a week before AT&T announced it was doling out $1,000 bonuses to 200,000 of its employees in celebration of the Republican Party's tax overhaul.

commie said...

want you, hb, jane and Wp to pay more in taxes, you could not be more wrong.

Go do your pig wife...you make less sense after every drink......idiot..

Anonymous said...

Ever Democrat in the house and Senate voted for you to pay more.

Anonymous said...

Opie, stop drinking.

wphamilton said...

Speaking of misinformation, there are three things about this tax package that you've overlooked.

1) Eliminating the health care subsidies paid due to eliminating mandate will cause our premiums to rise. It's not "taxes" but it's money out of their pockets, and that's the bottom line for a lot of people.

2) Our tax cuts have an expiration date, after which we'll pay for the debt rung up by the vastly more tax cuts at the high end. Yes, our taxes will go up - that's the intent of this bill from the start. It's written into it.

3) The budget cuts going along with the tax cuts affect the lower range of the taxpayers far more than it will the higher end. One way or the other, working wage earners are paying for the rich guy's tax breaks.

Probably these three reasons (and perhaps a few I haven't listed) are are more likely the basis of opposition and poll responses than your idea that they're all simply ignorant. I might go so far as to say that the 35% responding that they expect a tax increase demonstrate more knowledge of the facts than do the rest of the respondents.

wphamilton said...

And BTW, all three reasons illustrate the ways this tax package is a redistribution of wealth to the already wealthy.

commie said...

KD the grinch posted

KD said...
Ever Democrat in the house

Ever democrat???? I don't drink. Unlike you ....

Commonsense said...

And BTW, all three reasons illustrate the ways this tax package is a redistribution of wealth to the already wealthy.

I'm sure the bigger and fatter those paychecks get the more envious and resentful people will be and vote Democrat.

Not!!!

Loretta said...

I'm surprised WP chose today, of all days, to lie about the tax cuts.

Anonymous said...

Merry Christmas. Hope you all appreciate what you have and who you have in your life.

Anonymous said...

Every Democrat in th US House and US Senate voted to keep your money over you keeping more of it.

A fact that now spinning is going to change.
The end of the mandate reduces my families premium $2,300 a year, according to my Independent Insurance Broker.

For those that hhhhaaaatttteeee the tax cut, give it all to charity. Feel better?

Anonymous said...

I got a YUGE Laugh @ WP.

I for got to that him, so I will now. THANK YOU.

you belive in small government, lol. Good one.

commie said...


A fact that now spinning is going to change.

Shitty X=MAS in kansas evidence by the goat breeder thinking he is smarter than the average idiot....Too bad evert R in the house voted for screwing the next generation with your problems and debt...yep that sure is a lot better, sticking your head in trumps ass is the place to be....LOLOLOL As to your claim of savings, again you are just full of crap, as usual....idiot keep posting, the entertainment value is priceless.

I'm sure the bigger and fatter those paychecks

And I am sure your optimism is overstated, just like trumps fat ass....

Commonsense said...

I'm surprised WP chose today, of all days, to lie about the tax cuts.

The only wealth redistribution Democrats approves of is wealth from the people in the heartland to the elite government political class in Washington DC.

And if you don't believe it, just answer this question.

Which five countries became the wealthiest in the United States under Barack Obama?

Hint: Two of them are in Maryland and the other three are in Virginia.

Loretta said...

Exactly, CS.

Coldheartedtruth Teller said...

Obfuscation?

63 percent of voters told Quinnipiac University that the economy is good or excellent. That’s a record high since Quinnipiac first asked that question in 2001.
Most Americans, 73 percent, believe the world will be a less peaceful place in 2018, per Quinnipiac.

A majority of Americans, 60 percent, say Trump’s election to the presidency has made race relations in America worse, according to the Pew Research Center. Only 13 percent felt that way about Obama’s election at this point in his term.

The Republicans demand that the American people remain uninformed about the structure of the tax reform legislation. The MSM aka FAKE NEWS is fulfilling their duty under the First Amendment, to tell the truth about this immense redistribution to the top one percent.

Commonsense said...

Wealth redistribution happens when the government heavily taxes the people for the support of bureaucratic parasites.

The wealth is being redistributed from the productive citizenry to the bureaucratic political class in Washington.

Reducing taxes have the opposite effect. By letting people actually keep more of their money you are actually reducing wealth redistribution.

Nothing at all is being redistributed to the top one percent. They already have it and they are not getting anymore from the government because of it.

This is just another perversion of the English language by the Democrats.

Coldheartedtruth Teller said...

bureaucratic parasites.

The people who guarantee product safety.

The people who guarantee that verify that chemical plants are following safety precautions.

The same people who guarantee that worker safety precautions are followed.

Etc etc etc and etc

You speak in generations that have no relationship with reality.

Coldheartedtruth Teller said...

The food you buy at the store.

The bureaucratic parasites who guarantee that our air is safe to breath. I have lived in Southern California for almost 40 years. Stage three smog alerts were common. It was recommended to not go outside and breathe the air.

Bureaucratic parasites who guarantee that our rivers and streams are not garbage dumps.

Coldheartedtruth Teller said...

This is just another perversion of the English language by the Democrats.

You obviously failed English when you got your GED.

Coldheartedtruth Teller said...

Seriously


Reducing taxes have the opposite effect. By letting people actually keep more of their money you are actually reducing wealth redistribution.

The "trickle down" theory.

Read the Fake News and become educated as to the reality of the theory.

Commonsense said...

Again, where are those five richest counties in the United States?

Government redistributes wealth like a black hole redistributes light and matter.

And if you are confused as to what a black hole really is, this "GED graduate" will be glad to explain it to you.

commie said...

Again, where are those five richest counties in the United States?

Government redistributes wealth like a black hole redistributes light and matter.

So those counties have the highest median income! They are also centers for technology and have major industrial headquarters located there. IOW,to you that means the government is redistrubing wealth to industry and food services? You really need to look at the demographics before you make a complete fool out of yourself....The funny thing I notice is red states have limited representation in the top 25...Wonder why that is????? Bet you a buck you heard this on some right wing nut job rant.....

https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/richest-counties-in-the-united-states.html

wphamilton said...

Which part do you disbelieve? As far as I know, it's all the brutal truth.

wphamilton said...

Do you think that the wage-earner tax cuts are not temporary?

Do you think that mandate subsidies will not be reduced?

Do you think that their is no impact on government function and services?

Do you think that the wealthy do not get a much higher portion of the tax breaks?

I am perplexed at what you folks disbelieve from that, and I'm surprised that you'd pick this day to lie about someone.

commie said...

Which part do you disbelieve?

He believes obama redistributed his income to those that live in 5 richest counties in Va and Md and GW is a hoax....that should answer your question...

Coldheartedtruth Teller said...

Former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates is defending the FBI in response to President Trump's attacks on the law enforcement agency - and specifically Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.

Yates in a tweet on Sunday said the Secret Service should be on the look out for three ghosts in Mar-a-Lago given Trump's tweet earlier in the day targeting McCabe.

Anonymous said...

Breathless little Lilly white Lynn goes full blown bat shit in a epic meltdown. Wrapped in a bow of dumbass.

Anonymous said...

Since the oath of Office was given to our President. 1.3 million Americans no longer need food stamps.

Anonymous said...

I am perplexed at what you folks disbelieve from that, and I'm surprised that you'd pick this day to lie about someone.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


so the fact that those who pay the most in taxes are poised to received the biggest tax break is alarming to you?

huh.

well wp, i can tell you that you have plenty of company. there are countless liberal forums out there where i've witnessed folks expressing shock and indignation that those who pay no taxes are not receiving a tax cut. these are the same folks who tend to advocate for a universal basic income, but that's a topic for another day.

it's tough for me to understand what your basic gripe is because i've never been one to suffer from wealth envy. and it appears to me that that's a prerequisite to understand where you're coming from.

Commonsense said...

All of WP's objections are based on wealth envy and a negative view that most Americans share his envious attitude.

wphamilton said...

Where do you see "alarming" in that? I'm just explaining the facts. You still didn't answer, do you dispute any one of the points I listed? First "lie" and now "alarming" and "envy". Is there anyone here who can address the facts instead of trotting out insulting crap? It's boring.

Regressive tax policy is foolish, and that old saw about "wealth envy" of "those who pay more" has never justified it and never will. It isn't about envy, rrb. Take the super-rich completely out of the picture, make the cuts go somewhere else that nobody cares about, give a much smaller cut for 8 years to the wage earners, and it would still be bad economic policy. It would still be wrong.

Commonsense said...

Here are the winners and losers of the new tax law

Key points:

1. 143 million taxpayers will get a tax break as oppose to 5.8 million who will have to pay more.
2. By far the the most people who have to pay more are those making over $1,000,000 a year (which is why Rosie O'Donnald told Paul Ryan to "go to hell").
3. Largest tax break actually went to those making $500,000 to $1,000,000. The reason for this was the elinination of the Alternative Minimun Tax for all but the very rich. This change also mitigates the elimination of the SALT deduction for this income group.

The Democrats and News Media (I know it's redundant) keep pushing the canard that these tax benefits will end in 10 years. But I challenge any Democrat now to pledge that they will vote to eliminate the tax break and not renew it.

Anonymous said...

Wp, remember is for "smaller government" and more "Idividual freedom".
Yet, fails in every way to see how less money going to the goverment, more kept in the hands of labor produced it, is smaller government and more freedom.

To answer WP's questions.
1, no
2, yes
3, no

Anonymous said...

4, YES, a big fat Bigly yes.

Wp, your names calling, that you hate , yet are guilty of doing yourself .

Anonymous said...

I'm just explaining the facts. You still didn't answer, do you dispute any one of the points I listed?
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

i don't need you to explain any of this to me. and no, i don't dispute the points because there's nothing there that troubles me. next you'll be "explaining" that water is wet, the sun rises in the east, and we're all going to die someday.

wp, the only problems that i have with this tax bill is that it didn't go far enough, and that it didn't include the wholesale destruction of multiple government agencies.

Anonymous said...

CS , is right, History is on the side of lower tax rates.
Prez * , when given a chance to end the lower Bush tax rates, didn't.

WP, your opinion is this tax bill across the board is bad.

Give us three things you would do for "good tax policies"

To me this tax law is just the first step.
I have 4 policies for hope n change , change n hope. We can believe in, forward.

C.H. Truth said...

The bureaucratic parasites who guarantee that our air is safe to breath. I have lived in Southern California for almost 40 years. Stage three smog alerts were common. It was recommended to not go outside and breathe the air.

Yet, no state has been ruled by liberal voices and have more liberal policies in place? With that good old fashioned natural breeze off the ocean, you would think such a liberal state with all those liberal regulations would have the best air, the best water, and the best natural foods.

So should the rest of the country follow the California lead, and see if they too cannot see a bunch of smog alerts, and other air problems too?

Anonymous said...

you would think such a liberal state with all those liberal regulations would have the best air, the best water, and the best natural foods.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


they certainly have the best wildfires.


Anonymous said...

CH, I looked, of the top ten worse air quality cities, 7 are in California AND the top 5 are all CA.

What was HB's point?

Anonymous said...

What was HB's point?
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


his "point," if he's honest, is that government bureaucracy exists for one reason and one reason only -

as a jobs program for democrats.

C.H. Truth said...

1) Eliminating the health care subsidies paid due to eliminating mandate will cause our premiums to rise. It's not "taxes" but it's money out of their pockets, and that's the bottom line for a lot of people.

WP... the price of insurance has skyrocketed since Obamacare became law, largely because we have federal bureaucrats who feel that they know better than Insurance actuaries as to what insurance people need or should be forced to pay for. Decades of market and insurance analysis was tossed out the door, so the Obama could appoint some people to determine what everyone needed.

Anyone who defends Obamacare (at this point) really doesn't have in intellectually sound justification to complain about the cost of insurance.

2) Our tax cuts have an expiration date, after which we'll pay for the debt rung up by the vastly more tax cuts at the high end. Yes, our taxes will go up - that's the intent of this bill from the start. It's written into it.

So did the Bush tax cuts. We eventually made them permanent... as we always do. No reason to believe that these will not be extended either.

3) The budget cuts going along with the tax cuts affect the lower range of the taxpayers far more than it will the higher end. One way or the other, working wage earners are paying for the rich guy's tax breaks.

Which budget cuts?

Anonymous said...

Look how Liberals get when they loss elections.
The 4 Liberal Stooges of CHT are perfect poster children.

100 plus liberals that said they were leaving, IF Trump won, still here.

commie said...

the price of insurance has skyrocketed since Obamacare became law,

Really, and I thought that the rise in rates became somewhat under control with the ACA However, the dire predictions for 2017 came true mainly based on trump and the congress doing its best to destroy the system.....Lots of data here:

https://www.snopes.com/health-insurance-under-the-affordable-care-act-costs-hundreds-or-thousands-per-month/


I guess your position is that it is okay to take millions of people off insurance. Well since you are not christian, why should that bother a great thinker like yourself????

Commonsense said...

I'm for people having a choice of not paying outrageous premiums for shame coverage.

How about you?

commie said...

I'm for people having a choice of not paying outrageous premiums for shame coverage.

I think every American deserves coverage....since that is already in place when it comes to emergency care.....

wphamilton said...

i don't need you to explain any of this to me. and no, i don't dispute the points because there's nothing there that troubles me.

YOU aren't within the context of those points. It's the 35% of the respondents having the opinion that their taxes will rise as a result of the tax bill.

Those respondents are CORRECT, or at least rational, in that their out of pocket will rise, if not immediately then in a few years. Whether or not you find that troubling is irrelevant to that question.

It IS relevant when those people are going to vote, having the choice between candidates sharing your view that money out of their pockets is not troubling, and candidates who do care about it. But that's a different question.

wphamilton said...

Anyone who defends Obamacare (at this point) really doesn't have in intellectually sound justification to complain about the cost of insurance.

Trying to sidetrack the point that the tax bill will cause our premiums to rise?

So did the Bush tax cuts. We eventually made them permanent... as we always do

Because Obama and the Democrats forced it through, over the extreme objections of the Republicans. So history shows how that's going to go.

Which budget cuts?

Don't pretend that the GOP intends to rack up debt without cutting the budget.

Everything from farm subsidies to student loans. We'll most likely see a Defense budget increase and cross-the-board cuts in everything else. Certainly whatever you consider "entitlement" spending will be cut.

wphamilton said...

And by the way, the problem with the Bush cuts was the solemn GOP promise, to justify the lopsided cuts for the very wealthy, that the top end cuts were temporary and only included for a short term economic stimulus. As it turned out, that was a lie.

Making those top end cuts permanent isn't something that helps your case here. It's only one more bit of proof that the GOP only cared about their wealthy constituents, and that's how it's going to go when the wage-earners' cuts expire.

Anonymous said...

Trying to sidetrack the point that the tax bill will cause our premiums to rise?
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

now that's funny.

premiums have been rising since the law was passed, wp. and for a variety of reasons. if you think the repeal of the individual mandate is going to create huge problems then you might not have been paying attention. ask any 80 year old woman that you know if they'll benefit from postpartum care. and that's just one example. the law's flaws are legion, and not allowing people to buy what they wanted was a major problem with it.

i would defer to cali on this point, but i would be interested to see the percentage increases caused by the tax bill vs. all of the other asinine complexities of the law.





wphamilton said...

My premiums hadn't risen that much, maybe 30% from the start of ACA. The promise was that they'd go down however, so I call that a fail.

If you'd been paying attention, I've been opposed to the Mandate since before the ACA was passed. Passed with the vehement insistence of Congressional Republicans btw, and our own industry rep Cali. Since you evidently missed that I'll take the opportunity again to say, "I told you so."

The problem is not JUST the repeal of the mandate - it's the destabilizing reduction of premium subsidies that's going along with it.

Anonymous said...

The problem is not JUST the repeal of the mandate - it's the destabilizing reduction of premium subsidies that's going along with it.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


oh well.

bho chose an unconstitutional means to prop that up. he was even sued for it. you pass something in the dark of night on christmas eve using sleight of hand, and THEN you fail to install a legal funding mechanism, you STILL don't get to blame the tax bill for the continuance of problems.

and you can pat yourself on the back with all the 'i told you so's' you want, it doesn't change the fact that the ACA was already too far gone to blame the tax bill.



wphamilton said...

bho chose an unconstitutional means to prop that up. he was even sued for it. you pass something in the dark of night on christmas eve using sleight of hand, and THEN you fail to install a legal funding mechanism, you STILL don't get to blame the tax bill for the continuance of problems.

Passing the ACA was about the least stealthy process that you can imagine. Highly public, debated for months. But however you feel about how it was passed eight years ago, that's the hand we're dealt now. What matters is how you play the hand.

and you can pat yourself on the back with all the 'i told you so's' you want, it doesn't change the fact that the ACA was already too far gone to blame the tax bill.

Naw, it just needs changes made in an orderly, rational fashion. Along with medical care and pharma reforms. You're just upset that what I said eight years ago, which was ridiculed in the Republican Congress (and here) is suddenly an urgent emergency for this Republican Congress.

Anonymous said...

Student Loans" wp

Really?

How was it cut?

C.H. Truth said...

Because Obama and the Democrats forced it through, over the extreme objections of the Republicans. So history shows how that's going to go.

They were extended permanently by the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010

The Bill passed

Senate:
Democrats 43-13
GOP 37-5
Ind 1-1

House:
Democrats 139-112
Republicans 138-36


You are factually wrong more than anyone who consistently comments here.

wphamilton said...

Yeh I was thinking of the middle class provisions, the afterthought on the original package.

The Bush tax cut extension was opposed by Obama, myself, and anyone else with any sense because that extension applied to the enormous tax cuts Bush had gifted to the wealthy, sold on the promise that "of course" they were temporary, "obviously" they'd be allowed to expire when the time came.

It hardly helps your case that the meager middle-class tax cuts will be renewed. The consistent strategy is to give the rich as much as possible, and just enough relief for the working man to convince the more gullible of us to go along with it.

"You are factually wrong more than anyone who consistently comments here."

I am factually right that hardly anyone cares about your gratuitous bad-mouthing. If it takes the sting out though, feel free.