CNN GOP DEBATE **discussion thread**

reply to post by TheWalkingFox


You want to make assumptions, cool.

Here is a ticker for the individual donors and donation amount for the current moneybomb taking place:

www.whoshouldisupport.com...

Those are REAL people making REAL donations. I just donated myself.

Here's the highlights from the debate:

2:45 EST and he's at 225,ooo in donations

Sorry that was an old poll, saw it on twitter tonight. Went, and thought it was funny that Huntsman was winning, though he wasn't IN the debate. Still, the way most of the 'frontrunners' acted, I figured folks were just being funny voting for the guy not there. lol

That really cracks me up (my own thinking) now thinking about it-
But now RP is winning, so I guess better late than never. lol
Sorry about that.

Still, felt good to be able to vote for him...somehow. I was robbed in 2008 because he dropped out b/c it got to my state. Any chance I get, lol, that's ok.

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
reply to post by moonzoo7

 

Well, maybe not exactly true on hte jobs thing. it's true that the President doesn't create jobs. But congress can have an impact.

cut taxes on the bottom 40% of Americans. Increase taxes on top 15%. Expand "Welfare" programs at the bottom 10%.

What you've just done is drastically increase the buying power of the majority of Americans. They'll buy more, demand goes up, jobs (hopefully) expand.

The cause of these economic contractions is, after all, people not engaging in the economy. so the obvious way out of a contraction is to provide the means and incentive for the bulk of the populace to get back to business.

Unfortunately? Our Congress is bought and paid for, and will continue pretending that jobs are created by hte top 5% of wealthholders - after all, that's who bribes them so luxuriously.

America's primary interest needs to be in keeping Americans employed, housed, and well, not on ensuring gigantic profits for the narrowest sector of the populace.

Well, I don't think it is the Top 5% that bribes them. That is to say 1 out of 20 people. It's not even the Top 1%. It is the Top 0.001% (at most) that has any sway.

The Top 0.001 can provide big money however it's bottom HALF that is mobilized to get the vote volume needed. The bottom half (48%) are net tax recipients who profit from our current tax system. The rest PAY for their freeloading. But as long as people can vote themselves a raise the system will never change.

I disagree on another point: It is reasonable to state that the Top 5% create most of the jobs because these are the small business owners, physicians, lawyers, restauranteurs, architects, and on and on. These are job creators. And you don't need to be a millionaire to be in the top 5% of income... remember, 5% is 1 out of 20 people. These people quiet literally drive our economy, so I think it is not prudent to punish them with additional tax burdens. (I've never been hired by a poor person, by the way.)

What would benefit EVERYONE is an across-the-board tax reduction. Perhaps something like the Fair Tax or a flat tax of some sort. This would allow everyone to purchase more, and allow business owners to re-invest more into new assets and new hires.

Also, the idea of a "weathholder" is a myth. Money is employed, not stashed. Rich people utilize their money to create more wealth through investing, and this provides the capital necessary for business of all sizes to run and grow.

Thinking back in the debates, I think it is good trait to see Ron Paul always with a pen in his hands taking notes during debates. This tells us he likes to know the details and record what happens so he can improve on his performance in the future.

How often do you see the other candidates taking notes during a debate? A good leader is always willing to learn and do his own work.

reply to post by eLPresidente


I was puzzled as to why the numbers hadn't changed in the last ten minutes, and why the same five names kept repeating. Have to click on hte donate button to see the actual results on Ron Paul's site, is why Dunno if direct linking to a campaign contribution website is against ATS policy or whatever, but was hard to make sense of because of that

And I'm not saying that nobody's giving the guy money. I'm saying that his big support group is a relatively narrow segment of the overall voting population, which is why, when it comes to polls outside the easily-crashed internet polls, he doesn't do well. And then all of you pretend that the results were doctored or altered or otherwise falsified because "they" won't let him win.

Frankly my feeling is that if Ron Paul actually did well in polls, ATS posters would abandon him in droves. Maybe i'm wrong, but it seems like there's a lot of hipster mentality there.

reply to post by TheWalkingFox


I just saw that link and thought it was worth sharing, didn't think it would cycle without needing a link renewal.

Nobody is going to deny that Ron Paul doesn't have the most support, that is a given. What I think is a good sign is that once Ron Paul gets a vote, he secures it and chances are VERY slim that he will lose that vote, this is why you see him steadily rise in polls and not drop like the 'flavors of the month'. His supporters are working hard in Iowa and NH to secure wins, the campaign is also hitting hard with the television ads. If he does win IA and come in second in NH, he could get enough momentum to get enough delegates to win the GOP convention while Cain and Romney fight for the rest of the establishment votes. At this point, nothing is set in stone as the people aren't sure about Cain, especially now that his 9-9-9 plan is being exposed left and right.

Originally posted by spaznational
Well, I don't think it is the Top 5% that bribes them. That is to say 1 out of 20 people. It's not even the Top 1%. It is the Top 0.001% (at most) that has any sway.

Fair enough.

The Top 0.001 can provide big money however it's bottom HALF that is mobilized to get the vote volume needed. The bottom half (48%) are net tax recipients who profit from our current tax system. The rest PAY for their freeloading. But as long as people can vote themselves a raise the system will never change.

And there's actually a reason for this. Because otherwise the system would #ing collapse. That bottom 48%? They're hte ones buying all the crap that makes it possible for that miniscule fraction at the top to exist. Reduce their buying ability, and what happens? Well, what happens when you cut the bottom of a tree?

I disagree on another point: It is reasonable to state that the Top 5% create most of the jobs because these are the small business owners, physicians, lawyers, restauranteurs, architects, and on and on. These are job creators. And you don't need to be a millionaire to be in the top 5% of income... remember, 5% is 1 out of 20 people.

And this lie is the most vile, stupid, wrong-headed piece-of-# argument existing in modern America. Congratulations. No, the wealthy do not "create jobs." Demand creates jobs. Do you understand the basics of economics, chief? if a business is booming, THAT creates jobs. if a business is contracting, THAT reduces jobs. Daddy Warbucks isn't out waving his cane and making employment appear, it's the people buying things and seeking services that do that.

Who makes up the bulk of demand? It's certainly not the 5% you're rushing to the defense of. They respond to the demand, if they are in a position to do so.

These people quiet literally drive our economy, so I think it is not prudent to punish them with additional tax burdens. (I've never been hired by a poor person, by the way.)

Wrong. Our economy is driven by the people who consume, the bulk of whom are logically on the "bottom." They stop consuming, the top percentile stops making money. The opposite is not true - you could tax the top percentiles 110% and it would not affect the engine of our economy.

What would benefit EVERYONE is an across-the-board tax reduction. Perhaps something like the Fair Tax or a flat tax of some sort. This would allow everyone to purchase more, and allow business owners to re-invest more into new assets and new hires.

It would not, in fact. All proposed "flat" or "fair" taxes are actually large tax hikes at the bottom and massive tax reductions at the top - regressive taxation, and just another scheme for short-term plunder.

Also, the idea of a "weathholder" is a myth. Money is employed, not stashed. Rich people utilize their money to create more wealth through investing, and this provides the capital necessary for business of all sizes to run and grow.

No, they don't, in fact. AIG execs do not invest in mom and pop stores. They invest in other Fortune 500's, who in turn invest back into AIG. it all stays there at the top. These guys then do not go to Wal Mart for clothes, they don't eat at mcDonalds.

We've been following trickle-down economics for over thirty years. it hasn't worked. it never WILL work, because it ignores pretty much every basic law of economics and instead tries to be a moral system, whereby we operate purely on faith that the people with their hands in the treasury will be nice and return that money to the corner pharmacies, independent banks, and hotdog stands of hte nation.

reply to post by eLPresidente


This is why the President might get re-elected,, Children, Children,School yard no thinking on sujects

reply to post by bone13


Actually, he WILL get reelected. Sorry man, I know he's not your cup of tea, but... well, the Republicans aren't exactly graced with an all-star team here. Ron Paul really is the best... and he's not that good. I know, it's blasphemy around here, but it's true.

Ron Paul takes the stage, says "My plan is to fire hundreds of thousands of people, privatize several chunks of the public service sector at a 75% loss, and then do absolutely nothing except collect a taxpayer-paid salary for the next four years, enjoy your weed." and you think he'll win?

reply to post by eLPresidente


I was actually surprised to see that Doc. Paul actually got some time in the debate. It seemed like he was given a LITTLE more attention than usual. GO RON PAUL!!!!!

reply to post by pianopraze

Thanks for the video
I agree with almost everything Ron Paul said but I have a question regarding the point @ 8:57 (topic: defense spending).

He says "why do we subsidies Germany while they subsidies their socialised System over there... we paid for it?".

Is he implying that because the US keeps troops in Germany, Germany doesn't have to spend so much for defense and thus can afford said "socialised" System?

If not, what is he talking about?

Santorum says to Paul "hey you didn't get a chance to answer that one."
Paul to Santorum "I know and my answer was the best."

stupid debates..

go Paul

Originally posted by TheWalkingFoxAnd this lie is the most vile, stupid, wrong-headed piece-of-# argument existing in modern America. Congratulations. No, the wealthy do not "create jobs." Demand creates jobs. Do you understand the basics of economics, chief? if a business is booming, THAT creates jobs. if a business is contracting, THAT reduces jobs. Daddy Warbucks isn't out waving his cane and making employment appear, it's the people buying things and seeking services that do that.

While I don't necessarily agree with your stance on Paul, I have to absolutely thank you for the smartest post I have read on here in a while.

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
reply to post by bone13

 

Actually, he WILL get reelected. Sorry man, I know he's not your cup of tea, but... well, the Republicans aren't exactly graced with an all-star team here. Ron Paul really is the best... and he's not that good. I know, it's blasphemy around here, but it's true.

Ron Paul takes the stage, says "My plan is to fire hundreds of thousands of people, privatize several chunks of the public service sector at a 75% loss, and then do absolutely nothing except collect a taxpayer-paid salary for the next four years, enjoy your weed." and you think he'll win?

Could I have next weeks NC lottery numbers?

And This Morning CNN has Avoided any mentions of Ron Paul Now just either Cain,Romney,Rick Perry even though he is a falling star now.

reply to post by Agent_USA_Supporter

Well, I know that I am not going to let the MSM railroad me into another NWO puppet. They seem to have no idea how significant everyone's access to internet is. Like they got stuck at some point in the past. I guess thats bound to happen, carrying around those gargantuen too-big-to-fail egos.

For Your Information prospective Voters,
Be Advised: Wall Street WANTS Romney to "win".
www.opensecrets.org...

Wednesday, October 19, 2011

FYI just now, FOX cable news had Ron Paul on for a one-on-one 10 minute segment. He makes so much sense.

Paul also said he liked last night's debate, due to him getting more time to speak.

I'll look for a video of interview to post in a bit.