Paul Ryan, like Romney, will only release two years of tax returns

[Frank M 181]

Not true. There are actually people in the middle who could go either way. Him being an unlikeable pr!ck hurts him with those people. Those people decide elections. HTH

 

 

I'm not so sure that this is true. I read an article in the paper this morning (hence no link) that said that only 3-5% of the electorate are true "independents" who will vote either way based on the issues. Most people who identify as independent still reliably vote for one party overwhelmingly over the other. I think elections are really about getting your party to the polls. That's why a guy like me, who would like another option than Obama, is having a hard time looking at voting for Romney because he really is not trying to speak to independents, he's trying to get the base to the polls.

[MDC 7,590]

Well at least we agree then. This whole 'release more tax records' is akin to the whole 'release your birth certificate' nonsense. We had birthers, now we have taxers.

 

It's been common policy for years for presidential candidates to release ten years or more of tax returns. To my knowledge no modern president other than Obummer has had to release his long form birth certificate.

 

The other difference is, Obummer actually DID release his birth certificate and it confirmed what we all knew in the first place. Romney still won't release more than his last two years and insists that there's nothing to see there.

 

hth

[phillybear 366]

I'm not so sure that this is true. I read an article in the paper this morning (hence no link) that said that only 3-5% of the electorate are true "independents" who will vote either way based on the issues. Most people who identify as independent still reliably vote for one party overwhelmingly over the other. I think elections are really about getting your party to the polls. That's why a guy like me, who would like another option than Obama, is having a hard time looking at voting for Romney because he really is not trying to speak to independents, he's trying to get the base to the polls.

 

I would almost guarantee that the most popular political party in this country would feature a fiscal conservative and socially liberal platform. That is what the majority of voters would favor, based on the combinations available and survey/polling results.

 

Yet, inexplicably, the Libertarian party can't get traction. It's mystifying and frustrating.

[KSB2424 3,148]

I'm not so sure that this is true. I read an article in the paper this morning (hence no link) that said that only 3-5% of the electorate are true "independents" who will vote either way based on the issues. Most people who identify as independent still reliably vote for one party overwhelmingly over the other. I think elections are really about getting your party to the polls. That's why a guy like me, who would like another option than Obama, is having a hard time looking at voting for Romney because he really is not trying to speak to independents, he's trying to get the base to the polls.

Exactly. Look, I didn't want Romney on the GOP ticket and was not even replying to political threads that much until Paul Ryan was nominated as VP because to be honest, I didn't care between picking Romney over Obama. I wasn't even going to vote. And I did push for Ron Paul over the others. But that doesn't mean I call myself an "Independent". I vote republican 80+ percent of the time. Sometimes I might not based on a myriad of factors, but that is the exceptions. And I sure as hell don't agree with everything on the GOP platform. I'm for stricter gun control afterall, but I find myself agreeing on the majority of the rights issues so thats how I roll.

 

Most of these so called 'Independents' I meet are focking hogwash. They just want to sound like they are above it all and open minded. Wigger please. Just be focking honest.

[Frank M 181]

Well at least we agree then. This whole 'release more tax records' is akin to the whole 'release your birth certificate' nonsense. We had birthers, now we have taxers.

 

I think the tax issue is stupid. The boy's rich. Rich people use all kinds of loopholes to save $$$. For me, his tax records won't convince me of anything. I already know he's out of touch with the common man and it doesn't bother me in the slightest. I don't need to feel like my President is the kind of guy I could be buddies with. I just want him to be smarter than me and have some good ideas about running the country. That's where Romney lacks for me. I'm sure he's smarter than me, but he hasn't convinced me with his repackaged trickle down theory.

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

You guys remind me of a co-worker. He is always stating how he is an Independent!@#! Yet on 95% of the issues he leans left. He went to an Obama rally. He mocks every republican he sees. He doesn' t like guys like Ron Paul all that much either and constantly picks out flaws.

 

Yet he's a independent, because one time back in 1996 he voted for a Libertarian congressman in his district.

 

Some of you folks would make fine politicians.

 

I voted for McCain in the primary last time and was all set to vote for him in the general election until he focked up by tabbing Palin as his running mate. If his first decision was her, then it was enough to sway me over to Obama.

 

I will be voting for Scott Brown, who is Republican for Senator. I will probably also vote for a Dem or 2 here in MA because we have no many of them.

 

Again, you think that life is black-and-white. I am sorry that you don't see shades or colors. Must be tough.

[kutulu 1,688]

Not a fan of Mitt, but at least he's American.

[kutulu 1,688]

I would almost guarantee that the most popular political party in this country would feature a fiscal conservative and socially liberal platform. That is what the majority of voters would favor, based on the combinations available and survey/polling results.

 

Yet, inexplicably, the Libertarian party can't get traction. It's mystifying and frustrating.

 

I blame Howard Stern

[KSB2424 3,148]

I voted for McCain in the primary last time and was all set to vote for him in the general election until he focked up by tabbing Palin as his running mate. If his first decision was her, then it was enough to sway me over to Obama.

 

I will be voting for Scott Brown, who is Republican for Senator. I will probably also vote for a Dem or 2 here in MA because we have no many of them.

 

Again, you think that life is black-and-white. I am sorry that you don't see shades or colors. Must be tough.

1. Its a message board, we can't drill down to every single person when typing. You have to 'gerealize' a bit. If you really are part of the 1% - 2% of actual Independents then good for you.

 

2. Everything is not always black and white, but I don't sweat the small stuff. I try not to get caught up in the talking points and spin. I try to keep it as simple as possible because if you don't to a certain degree then you find yourself in the middle of the politcial windstorm and your perception does become your reality (even when untrue). I stick to the issues. You act as if seperating the important things from the mumbo jumbo talking points is a bad thing. Don't sweat the small stuff. Keep It Simple Stupid. Ther've been some good little books written about keeping things black and white.

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

1. Its a message board, we can't drill down to every single person when typing. You have to 'gerealize' a bit. If you really are part of the 1% - 2% of actual Independents then good for you.

 

2. Everything is not always black and white, but I don't sweat the small stuff. I try not to get caught up in the talking points and spin. I try to keep it as simple as possible because if you don't to a certain degree then you find yourself in the middle of the politcial windstorm and your perception does become your reality (even when untrue). I stick to the issues. You act as if seperating the important things from the mumbo jumbo talking points is a bad thing. Don't seat the small stuff. Keep It Simple Stupid. Ther've been some good little books written about keeping things black and white.

 

Ahh, yes, the reason that "XXXXXXX for Dummies" have been so popular with the masses.

[mobb_deep 920]

I voted for McCain in the primary last time and was all set to vote for him in the general election until he focked up by tabbing Palin as his running mate. If his first decision was her, then it was enough to sway me over to Obama.

 

I will be voting for Scott Brown, who is Republican for Senator. I will probably also vote for a Dem or 2 here in MA because we have no many of them.

 

Again, you think that life is black-and-white. I am sorry that you don't see shades or colors. Must be tough.

 

+1

 

I voted Perot in 92 (the first year I could vote), Clinton 96, Harry Browne in 2000, didn't vote in 04 (don't like Kerry or W), and Obama in 08.

[IGotWorms 4,060]

What I'm saying is if he released two more years tax records as long as he was within the tax code then who the fock cares how much money he made, how much he saved or how much he gave. If he was circumventing the tax code (illegal) then we have an issue.

 

Every single person on this bored and 99.9% of Americans pay as little taxes as they have to. If it is legal to claim your house payment interest, you do. You take advantage of pre tax savings (401k) items I'm sure. You are simply taking advantage of the tax laws. We all do it, we all pay as little taxes as we HAVE to. So on and so forth.

 

If Mitt Romney was committing some kind of fraud (illegal) then yes that is a character issue. If not, then he was just doing what every single mutherfocker in the USA does with his taxes.

 

So yes, unless he was doing somethign illegal then I don't see how this is somehow some HUGE character issue that would decide if he is the best canidate for the job over Obama. That should be decided on the real, actual, issues.

 

There's a few issues with this.

 

The first is that mega-wealthy guys like Mitt Romney play by a different set of rules. They get all kinds of tax breaks and loopholes for capital gains and whatnot. Then you have the whole "deferred compensation" thing from his time with Bain. Those sorts of advantages are not available to the common man who wasn't born with hundreds of millions of dollars. Take me for example: there is absolutely no way that I could EVER pay anything like 13% taxes. Not unless I lost my job and didn't have one red cent to my name. Now how in the fock is that fair? How is it fair that a guy like me who goes to work and toils away for his money every damn day pays a much higher percentage of taxes than a guy whose wealth just sits there accumulating?

 

So that's the first issue: guys like Romney play by a different set of rules. When we're in this huge economic mess and it's a question of who's going to end up shouldering the burden for cleaning it up, I'd like to know that the head guy in charge thinks that the rich have some sort of duty to the country and won't just take every advantage they have to fock over the middle class. But you know what? It hardly even matters that Mitt is rich and doesn't live like the rest of us: we already know that. SO WHY DOES MITT CONTINUE TO WITTHOLD HIS RETURNS? It has to be more than just that he's rich, right?

 

The second issue is that Romney is running for PRESIDENT of the United States. He wants to lead the entire country! Shouldn't he be held to a higher standard than just your average rich businessman? Sure the CEOs don't care if they end up paying damn near nothing in taxes, it won't come back to hurt them at all. But a guy like Romney, who knows he wants to run for the highest office in the land, who knows things like his personal finances will come under scrutiny, ought to set a better example and handle his finances in an ethical manner for at least a few years preceding his presidential run.

 

The fact that Romney would have rather saved money on taxes even if that hurt his bid for presidency indicates that he is even greedier than your standard rich guy.

 

The final issue isn't really about his tax returns at all: it's about transparency. This is something presidential candidates usually do to show the people that they are on the level with them. They release their tax returns and say "here, I want to be the leader of the free world so I know it's important that you know these things about me." Mitt Romney is arrogantly thumbing his nose at that. He doesn't think we ought to know anything more about him than he wants to tell us. Even when it has been standard for decades that presidential candidates release a lot more information than he has been willing to give.

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

+1

 

I voted Perot in 92 (the first year I could vote), Clinton 96, Harry Browne in 2000, didn't vote in 04 (don't like Kerry or W), and Obama in 08.

 

I did not even mention that I voted for Romney to be Gubner here in MA. I believed his rhetoric back then.

 

Call me cynical, but unless we get term limits, elections are going to be a sh!tfest to see who can be the least sh!ttiest of the sh!theads.

[IGotWorms 4,060]

trying their hardest to keep this in the news!. Here's an open letter from Obama's campaign manager to Romney's.

 

 

 

My link

 

Are they this desperate to avoid the issues? This is pathetic.

 

You think it's pathetic (you've made that clear). I bet you a majority of Americans think it is a a real issue. Romney is losing face every day that he refuses to release those returns.

 

And he's going to get absolutely slaughtered with it in the debates. Not once has Romney come up with an actual, defensible reason for not releasing those returns. So when he's on the national stage with Obama, and Obama says "Mitt, how come you don't think the American people deserve to know about your finances?", what in the hell is Romney going to say to that?

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

You think it's pathetic (you've made that clear). I bet you a majority of Americans think it is a a real issue. Romney is losing face every day that he refuses to release those returns.

 

And he's going to get absolutely slaughtered with it in the debates. Not once has Romney come up with an actual, defensible reason for not releasing those returns. So when he's on the national stage with Obama, and Obama says "Mitt, how come you don't think the American people deserve to know about your finances?", what in the hell is Romney going to say to that?

 

If he comes up with:

- How come you can't release your application to college?

- How come you cannot release your long-form birth certificate?

 

I will laugh my ass off.

[KSB2424 3,148]

there is absolutely no way that I could EVER pay anything like 13% taxes.

Take your gross pay for 2012. Add in any pre tax deferrals you have like 401(k) and IRA. Then take ALL the deductions you may have. Mortgage interest, kids, being married, owning a 'green' car, busieness expenses, donations ect. By the time YOU, IGotWorms really drilled down and found out your effective tax rate, I'm betting its alot closer to 13% than you think it is.

[IGotWorms 4,060]

If he comes up with:

- How come you can't release your application to college?

- How come you cannot release your long-form birth certificate?

 

I will laugh my ass off.

 

And that's just about all I've heard from the Romney supporters defending Romney's failure to release his tax returns. I haven't heard one good explanation at all.

 

Did you see Ann Romney's interview on Brian Williams' program last night? She said they shouldn't have to release their tax returns because the returns "will be used against them". She basically admitted that there's some very damaging stuff in there!!

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

And that's just about all I've heard from the Romney supporters defending Romney's failure to release his tax returns. I haven't heard one good explanation at all.

 

Did you see Ann Romney's interview on Brian Williams' program last night? She said they shouldn't have to release their tax returns because the returns "will be used against them". She basically admitted that there's some very damaging stuff in there!!

I think that Ann Romney is as dumb as a stump. I think that works in Mitt's favor, though. He has to have a lot of patience to not beat a twat as dumb as that.

[parrot 789]

Some of you folks would make fine politicians.

 

You seem to be suggesting that being like a politician is a bad thing. Aren't politicians the same people that you are saying we should just take at their word in regard to what they think on important issues and vote accordingly? There seems to be some disconnect there.

[IGotWorms 4,060]

Take your gross pay for 2012. Add in any pre tax deferrals you have like 401(k) and IRA. Then take ALL the deductions you may have. Mortgage interest, kids, being married, owning a 'green' car, busieness expenses, donations ect. By the time YOU, IGotWorms really drilled down and found out your effective tax rate, I'm betting its alot closer to 13% than you think it is.

 

Nope. I pay a substantially greater rate of taxes than Mitt Romney, and that's with an accountant going over all my stuff. You know why? Because I don't hide money in offshore accounts, I don't and can't claim all my wages as "deferred compensation", and I don't have an obscene amount of capital gains that get taxed as something different than income. Oh, also I have a cap on how much money I can contribute to tax free programs like an IRA, whereas Willard has somehow amassed $100 million in his account.

 

But you know what? That's hardly even the issue. We know that Mitt Romney is obscenely wealthy and we know that he takes advantage of every loophole available. So if that's all that's in those tax returns, why not release them?

[KSB2424 3,148]

And that's just about all I've heard from the Romney supporters defending Romney's failure to release his tax returns. I haven't heard one good explanation at all.

 

Did you see Ann Romney's interview on Brian Williams' program last night? She said they shouldn't have to release their tax returns because the returns "will be used against them". She basically admitted that there's some very damaging stuff in there!!

It doesn't matter whats in there as the politcal spin machine will make sure to make it damaging no matter what. That's what she probably meant. And she's right.

[phillybear 366]

I blame Howard Stern

 

Grandma Stern has a wig that is even worse than the old guy from National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation, is photo shopping the thousands of wrinkles and dangling flesh out of his turkey neck before sending them out to the public while judging American's Got Talent during a stretch of it's lowest ratings in history. Yeah, he ran for governor of New York as a Libertarian, but that was so long ago that his radio show was still funny.

 

On the other hand, Opie & Anthony got Rep. Anthony Weiner run out of Congress.

[KSB2424 3,148]

You seem to be suggesting that being like a politician is a bad thing. Aren't politicians the same people that you are saying we should just take at their word in regard to what they think on important issues and vote accordingly? There seems to be some disconnect there.

No there isn't because both canidates are politicians. So that part cancels each other out. News Flash: Both Mitt Romney and Obama are going to say things to garner votes they know they will not pass as President. Neither is the eptiome of a moral compass.

 

So since that cancels each other out, then I stick to the issues at hand.

 

It's really not a hard concept to grasp.

[IGotWorms 4,060]

It doesn't matter whats in there as the politcal spin machine will make sure to make it damaging no matter what. That's what she probably meant. And she's right.

 

That's asinine. There wouldn't be much to spin against Romney if his tax returns didn't have some inordinately damaging information. Do you think the average person would give a sh!t if Obama ran campaign ads pointing out that Romney is very rich and that he has a ton of accountants making sure he gets every deduction possible? Everybody already assumes that.

[KSB2424 3,148]

That's asinine. There wouldn't be much to spin against Romney if his tax returns didn't have some inordinately damaging information. Do you think the average person would give a sh!t if Obama ran campaign ads pointing out that Romney is very rich and that he has a ton of accountants making sure he gets every deduction possible? Everybody already assumes that.

You're a very naive person.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

There's a few issues with this.

 

The first is that mega-wealthy guys like Mitt Romney play by a different set of rules. They get all kinds of tax breaks and loopholes for capital gains and whatnot. Then you have the whole "deferred compensation" thing from his time with Bain. Those sorts of advantages are not available to the common man who wasn't born with hundreds of millions of dollars.

 

 

 

Romney wasn't born with hundreds of millions. His dad left him an inheritance of $1 million and he donated 100% of that to charity. He made his money on his own. He didn't inherit it from his rum-running, mob connected dad like the Kennedy clan. He didn't marry into it like John Kerry, twice.

 

You are clueless, a lying sack, or both. My vote is the last option.

[drobeski 3,061]

TAX-ERRRRRS

[IGotWorms 4,060]

You're a very naive person.

 

 

You believe that there's absolutely nothing untoward in the tax returns that Mitt Romney refuses to release, even though he is paying a political price for not following the practice of transparency pioneered by his own father, and I'm the one who is naive?

[IGotWorms 4,060]

Romney wasn't born with hundreds of millions. His dad left him an inheritance of $1 million and he donated 100% of that to charity. He made his money on his own. He didn't inherit it from his rum-running, mob connected dad like the Kennedy clan. He didn't marry into it like John Kerry, twice.

 

You are clueless, a lying sack, or both. My vote is the last option.

 

Yeah, I am sure Mitt Romney received absolutely no leg up from being born to a father who was the president of American Motor Companies and the governor of Michigan, and a real heavy hitter in the republican party.

 

[drobeski 3,061]

Worms do you feel the same way about Obamas college transcripts?

[Recliner Pilot 61]

Yeah, I am sure Mitt Romney received absolutely no leg up from being born to a father who was the president of American Motor Companies and the governor of Michigan, and a real heavy hitter in the republican party.

 

You said he takes advantage of tax loopholes only available to people born with hundreds of millions of dollars.

 

That is a lie.

[KSB2424 3,148]

Nope. I pay a substantially greater rate of taxes than Mitt Romney, and that's with an accountant going over all my stuff. You know why? Because I don't hide money in offshore accounts, I don't and can't claim all my wages as "deferred compensation", and I don't have an obscene amount of capital gains that get taxed as something different than income. Oh, also I have a cap on how much money I can contribute to tax free programs like an IRA, whereas Willard has somehow amassed $100 million in his account.

 

But you know what? That's hardly even the issue. We know that Mitt Romney is obscenely wealthy and we know that he takes advantage of every loophole available. So if that's all that's in those tax returns, why not release them?

You sir, either are 1. a liar, 2. have a stupid accountant, or 3. ignorant about taxes. Maybe its a combination?

 

Fact Check

 

Tax Foundation

 

CNN

 

I could go on, but I'm tired of posting links.

[MDC 7,590]

Can we quit calling Romney's donations to the LDS "charity"? It's no more charity than Tom Cruise donating $$$ to the Church of Scientology.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

Can we quit calling Romney's donations to the LDS "charity"? It's no more charity than Tom Cruise donating $$$ to the Church of Scientology.

Fortunately, some libtardo loser on a FFB messageboard doesn't get to determine what constitutes a charitable donation in the USA.

[IGotWorms 4,060]

You sir, either are 1. a liar, 2. have a stupid accountant, or 3. ignorant about taxes. Maybe its a combination?

 

Nope, I assure you that I don't have money in offshore accounts or 100 million in an IRA or many of the other neat little accounting tricks Mitt Romney has employed.

[MDC 7,590]

Fortunately, some libtardo loser on a FFB messageboard doesn't get to determine what constitutes a charitable donation in the USA.

 

I think most real Americans would agree that giving millions to a moonbat cult so they can build another witchcraft castle doesn't qualify as "charity."

[IGotWorms 4,060]

Just read that according to a CNN/ORC poll, 63% of all voters and 67% of independents think Romney should release more tax returns.

 

On my phone so, sorry, can't link to it.

[titans&bucs&bearsohmy! 2,745]

 

I think the common misconception here is that those of us who question Romney are Obama ###### gobbling lefties.

 

This annoys me as well.

 

You think Romney is better than Obama? Fine, I don't agree, but I understand that it is a turd sniffing contest, and tastes may differ. No problem.

 

But you wanna tell me that Romney is great, and you are enthused to vote for him? I call bullshiot. This is the same guy who couldn't win the nomination against a weak field last time, and barely won it against an even weaker field this time. Nobody likes this guy. I bet his own wife will sigh and say "well, he's the lesser of two evils" when she casts her vote.

 

Face it... we have two of the sh!ttiest candidates since I have been alive (that would cover Reagan's second election to now). Hating one does not equal loving the other. Nobody loves either of these clowns.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

I think most real Americans would agree that giving millions to a moonbat cult so they can build another witchcraft castle doesn't qualify as "charity."

Fortunately, what you think doesn't matter and isn't based on reality.

[titans&bucs&bearsohmy! 2,745]

I would almost guarantee that the most popular political party in this country would feature a fiscal conservative and socially liberal platform. That is what the majority of voters would favor, based on the combinations available and survey/polling results.

 

Yet, inexplicably, the Libertarian party can't get traction. It's mystifying and frustrating.

 

One reason for that is that they always seem to stress the absolute farthest out wackjob part of libertarianism, like "Heroin should be legal" or "I shouldn't have to wear a seatbelt."