2012 Tuesday: The long GOP veepstakes begins
The Republican primary resumes today, but it doesn’t matter. When Rick Santorum dropped out of the race a couple of weeks ago, any remaining suspense dissipated. The only question tonight will be Mitt Romney’s margins of victory. (Yes, I realize Newt Gingrich is playing up his chances of winning in Delaware. I also realize that, well, it’s Delaware.)
The conversation quickly moved on to the question of Romney’s running mate, which is a little bit silly. Four months remain before the Republican National Convention, and in my view it would be foolish to name a running mate this far out. If Romney continues to run neck-and-neck with President Obama in the polls or even opens up a sizable lead, he will want to play it safer with his choice than if, say, he falls behind significantly (think Sarah Palin in 2008). It’s too early.
I think the next couple of months will feature more scenes like the one we saw yesterday, with Romney campaigning alongside potential running mates. Yesterday was Marco Rubio, the freshman U.S. senator from Florida, and the pair’s appearance together rekindled the veep speculation that Rubio has sought to tamp down. Look for more of the same given that a couple of Romney’s possible choices hail from the swing states in which he’ll be campaigning a lot: U.S. Sen. Rob Portman (Ohio) and Gov. Bob McDonnell (Virginia).
That said, here are a couple of points to keep in mind:
1. Geography — but not in the way you expect. There’s little evidence in recent history that the running mate adds to a ticket’s ability to win his/her home state. Since Ronald Reagan’s landslide 1984 victory, which reset the map, the Republicans have won the vice presidential candidate’s home state six times out of seven and the Democrats four out of seven. Now, 10 out of 14 might sound pretty good, but consider that seven of those victories (five for the GOP, two for Democrats) came in “safe states” — which I define as states that party had won in each of the previous two presidential elections.
So, it wasn’t surprising that the Republicans won Alaska in 2008 (Palin), because they had a track record of winning that state in presidential elections. Ditto for Wyoming in 2004 and 2000 (Dick Cheney), and Indiana in 1992 and 1988 (Dan Quayle) — and, for the Democrats, Delaware in 2008 (Joe Biden) and Connecticut in 2000 (Joe Lieberman).
In the “not safe” states, however, the track record since 1984 is pretty mixed. The GOP has split its efforts, winning Texas in 1984 (George H.W. Bush) after losing it in 1976, but failing in New York in 1996 (Jack Kemp) after losing it the previous two cycles. The Democrats have fared a little worse: Tennessee in 1996 and 1992 (Al Gore) was a hit. But North Carolina in 2004 (John Edwards), Texas in 1988 (Lloyd Bentsen) and New York in 1984 (Geraldine Ferraro) were misses.
So, I’m not convinced Romney will sew up Florida should he pick Rubio, Ohio if he chooses Portman, or Virginia if he selects McDonnell — much less New Jersey if Chris Christie were his running mate. And it wouldn’t be a surprise at all if he won, say, Louisiana with Bobby Jindal on the ticket.
2. Experience. By GOP-nominee standards, Romney is wet behind the ears. He will be the first Republican nominee since Gerald Ford not to have won at least two statewide or national elections, and the first since Dwight Eisenhower not to have won at least two elections of any kind. (The two least experienced Democrats to win the presidency were Obama and Jimmy Carter, each of whom had won just one statewide election before entering the White House.)
Ike, of course, had never won any elections before winning the presidency — and, like Ike, Romney is running largely on his experience outside government. If I were Romney, I’d want a running mate with more experience both in government and winning elections. Jindal and McDonnell, each of whom has won statewide office twice and served in other public positions (both elected and appointed) beyond that, would fit the bill. Rubio, Portman and Christie, however, would not.
Now for a side note about Rubio: It might sound like I’m trying to play him down as a candidate. I’m not. However, I don’t think it’s an absolute necessity, for him or the GOP, to put him on the ticket this year. Here’s what I mean:
Let’s assume Romney wins this election and is re-elected in 2016. And then let’s assume his vice president wins in 2020 and 2024. By the time 2028 rolls around, Rubio would have had time either to serve two full terms in the U.S. Senate and be in the middle of his second term as governor of Florida, or to finish this term and serve two full terms as governor; either way, he’d be much more prepared to be president than he is today, or would be in the next four to eight years. And he’d still be just 57 years old in 2028. Now, he would have to worry about voter fatigue with Republicans if they were to hold the presidency for 16 straight years — but then, given that no party has held the presidency that long since FDR and Truman from 1933 to 1953, he probably doesn’t have to worry about that happening.
Bottom line: Rubio has a very bright future, and no need to be impatient for it to arrive.
What do y’all think? Should Romney wait? Who would make a good running mate for him?
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
156 comments Add your comment
@@
April 24th, 2012
6:21 pm
whose futures are at risk.
IHB
td
April 24th, 2012
6:27 pm
Steve
April 24th, 2012
2:37 pm
“td – spouting more lies? Do you realize that gas prices were down due to an economic collapse at that time?”
“Do you know the real data of the continued job growth since the Great Bush recession?” There is currently 1 million less jobs in the country today then the day Obama took office. That is a fact.
“What do you think caused the great Bush recession anyhow?”
Community reinvestment act and the combination of when the Bush Treasury Sec went in 2006 before congress and warned them something must be done Frank and Dodd accused him of being a racist
Deregulation of the mortgage industry and greed. And our debt? Starved govt via the lowest taxes in our lifetimes along with incredible spending, which includes the bloated military industrial complex (big govt).
Do you wingnuts only know lies?
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
April 24th, 2012
6:32 pm
Starved government…low taxes…incredible spending…bloated military…
You’d think that a real messiah could have done something about one or two of those in three-plus years.
Obozo: Fail.
MarkV
April 24th, 2012
6:32 pm
“Oblamer inflation of printing money..”
Inflation rates 2012: Jan 2.93%; Feb: 2.87%; March: 2.65%
2008 AVG: 3.85%
md
April 24th, 2012
6:36 pm
“Because contrary to wingnut beliefs, a progressive income tax, universal healthcare, responsible regulation, consumer protection laws, environmental protection etc are not “far left” ideas. ”
Last I checked, we have always had a “progresive” tax……yet now, the left wants to make it more progressive. We ALL got tax cuts, but the folks on the left have somehow managed to overlook that little diddy.
Consumer protection…..Ha. The recent credit card bill as an example, only protected the ones that weren’t paying their bills…….I hope you’ve noticed that everybody’s rates are now higher. I’ll do without that kind of protection thank you very much.
Healthcare subsidies for folks making a paltry 88k a year…..need I say more??
Those items in moderation may be tolerable, when pushed to the extreme like the left has done, it becomes dangerous.
tiberius your lightning rod of hate!
April 24th, 2012
6:40 pm
I love it when people like JDW post poll information, and when told how useless it is (as I pointed out in my points 3 and 4 to him), he still splutters ” but, but, but. . . We’re still winning!”
Winning in a meaningless poll that won’t have any meaning for 6 months is like proclaiming you’re the tallest of the midgets – neither gets you into the pros.
md
April 24th, 2012
6:44 pm
“Winning in a meaningless poll that won’t have any meaning for 6 months is like proclaiming you’re the tallest of the midgets – neither gets you into the pros.”
Spud Webb may disagree with that comparison
Tiberius - Banned by Bookman and proud of it!
April 24th, 2012
6:49 pm
Butch it up, libs. You’re embarrassing yourselves today.
Rafe Hollister
April 24th, 2012
7:32 pm
MarkV
If only those inflation rates were actually true! Have you been to the grocery store lately or maybe the gas station. Oh, I believe I read that food and gas were eliminated from the consumer price index because they were too volatile. It is like the unemployment rate, another bogus number.
If there is no inflation causing tuition to rise, then the universities and colleges are greedy. Why has the Great Equalizer not taken them to task for their “windfall profit”. He has done nothing to control tuition, has not even asked the schools to hold it down. Professors salaries continue to rise, while the average person struggles to keep their job. Is that fair? All the while, he panders for the student vote, by trying to play Santa Claus with taxpayer money. If he was honest, he would point out that many of them are running up a great deal of debt and probably have a poor chance of getting a job that will allow them to pay back the debt.
Tiberius - Banned by Bookman and proud of it!
April 24th, 2012
7:40 pm
Rafe, maybe that liberal icon Elizabeth Warren could tell us how she feels about earning a 6 figure part-time teaching salary and how that helps all those shiny young faces pay for the college education.
Oh yeah. It’s bad to be in the 1%, unless it’s you. : roll:
@@
April 24th, 2012
7:40 pm
More universities charging more tuition for harder majors
A growing number of public universities are charging higher tuition for math, science and business programs, which they argue cost more to teach — and can earn grads higher-paying jobs.–USAToday
Aren’t we supposed to be encouraging math and science majors? Seems like higher tuition would serve to discourage.
Why should potential salaries dictate tuition costs?
Rafe Hollister
April 24th, 2012
7:42 pm
From New York Post
Fortunately, the folks at the American Institute of Economic Research have resurrected the idea. Their Everyday Price Index (EPI) strips away the cost of big-ticket items, like homes and cars, and looks at the cost of things that consumers encounter on a daily or monthly basis, such as groceries, prescription medicine, and telephone and cable bills. By that measure, the Everyday Price Index shows inflation galloping ahead at an 8.1 percent annual rate, a reading that would put the current Misery Index at a Carter-like 16.4 percent — not a good recipe for re-election.
Averaging the CPI and the EPI gives us a rate of 5.6 percent, a number most New Yorkers, and probably most Americans, would consider on the mark.
By that estimate, the Obama Misery Index comes in at 13.9 percent, higher than that of any president up for re-election since Carter in 1980, but not too far above the 12.4 percent misery reading when Ronald Reagan ran in 1984.
Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/price_clubbed_in_jRGGyS9wKfAKjxAs0bkVnO#ixzz1t0JpiGLp
Learned something here, home prices are included in the Consumer Price Index. They way they are falling I am surprised that the government inflation index is above zero.
Rafe Hollister
April 24th, 2012
7:50 pm
Tiberius
Elizabeth Warren, is one of the leading faces of “progressivism” in America today. Just like in the old Soviet Union, the party members, are not expected to live by the same rules as the proletarians. Proletarians of the world unite! (and work for the benefit of the party leaders)
md
April 24th, 2012
7:55 pm
As I said yesterday, matters not if the student loan rate is 3.4 or 6.8……what the kids should be looking at is the Fed funds rate and the bonds rates. Cost to borrow is around .25 percent…..which means our own gov’t is making money off the kids. And they gleefully pay it back like they are getting a good deal. In reality, we are raising a bunch of clueless individuals that have no idea how the system works.
Kind of like Mary the other day…….not paying attention to the fact that the private sector must make enough money to sustain itself and enough money to sustain the parasitic gov’t…….
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
April 24th, 2012
7:57 pm
“It’s still about the economy …and we’re not stupid,” Romney will say.
He must not be speaking on behalf of any libs, just sayin…
@@
April 24th, 2012
8:18 pm
Most Californians would be surprised to learn that 100 percent of education’s share of the tax increase proposed by Governor Jerry Brown will go to pensions instead of classrooms. But that would be no surprise to longtime observers of the California State Teachers’ Retirement System, which administers teacher pensions.–Bloomberg
MarkV
April 24th, 2012
8:38 pm
Isn’t it wonderful, when you can make up an index that shows what you want to show, rather than using what has been used for years?
Tiberius - Banned by Bookman and proud of it!
April 24th, 2012
8:41 pm
MarkV, the Misery Index has been around for years, regardless of who resides in the White House. Sorry to burst your uninformed bubble.
Michael H. Smith
April 24th, 2012
8:46 pm
“While I’m here: how come Cubans have a no return policy when they reach shore but Haitians don’t?”
The policy is now known as “wet foot” “dry foot”. Essentially a carry over from the cold war period the Cuban Adjustment Act of 1966 was an offer of political asylum to Cuban who fled Cuba.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wet_feet,_dry_feet_policy
The U.S. never had a national security interest to protect or political reason to pursue in offering fleeing Haitians such an asylum is the only tangible policy difference between Cuba and Haiti.
Michael H. Smith
April 24th, 2012
8:54 pm
Isn’t it wonderful, when you can make up an index that shows what you want to show, rather than using what has been used for years?
Yeah, I kinda(sic) noticed that myself, since the obumer administration departed from assessing the unemployment rate as it has always been done in the past FOR YEARS, just to “cook the books” and present the more favorable numbers the obumer administration wants reported!
I look the U6 numbers for accounting purposes and Obumer’s numbers for the propaganda.
Michael H. Smith
April 24th, 2012
9:00 pm
Gas prices are down again. I guess you wingnuts can now praise Obama for that since you blamed him for them going up last month?
Yeah and I did thank and advise obumer to continue to read Kyle’s blog for more instructions now that odumbo did what I said he should do back when he was telling us that their was nothing he could do!
Michael H. Smith
April 24th, 2012
9:11 pm
As I said yesterday, matters not if the student loan rate is 3.4 or 6.8……what the kids should be looking at is the Fed funds rate and the bonds rates.
As I said yesterday and the days before what everyone and these kids should look at are those Professors salaries and the tuition costs that have risen exponentially.
Why Does College Cost So Much?
At this time of year many rising high school seniors are visiting college campuses, trying to determine which schools interest them. Their parents are busy figuring out what they will have to pay.
Here are three salient facts about tuition and fees. Over the last 30 years, the average sticker price at public and private American universities has accelerated upward. Since 1981 the list price level of tuition and fees has risen sixfold while the consumer price index has only increased two-and-a-half times. This fact is well-known, and it fuels much of the talk about a crisis in higher education.
The other two facts are less well known. The average family bill for a college education has been increasing faster than the overall inflation rate for much of the past century, so rising inflation-adjusted college tuition is not a new issue. And lastly, higher education is not alone. There is a set of important industries with price behavior that is remarkably similar to what college students and their families have experienced.
http://www.forbes.com/2010/08/01/rising-cost-education-opinions-best-colleges-10-feldman-archibald.html
Michael H. Smith
April 24th, 2012
9:13 pm
Too many soft ball from the leftwingers tonight.
Good evening to all.
moonbat betty
April 24th, 2012
9:33 pm
Rubio or Rice works.
moonbat betty
April 24th, 2012
9:35 pm
Hi @@
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QBWDHyAct4w
@@
April 24th, 2012
10:15 pm
moonbat betty:
Are you hitting on me with that video?
J/K
Hello and goodnight.
JDW
April 24th, 2012
10:26 pm
@Tiberius…”I love it when people like JDW post poll information, and when told how useless it is (as I pointed out in my points 3 and 4 to him), he still splutters ” but, but, but.. . We’re still winning!””
Following the time honored tradition of Republican’s everywhere I see…when one can’t follow the conversation take it out of context and attack with irrelevant drivel. Try reading the whole thread and see if you can actually process the point.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
April 24th, 2012
11:01 pm
JDW, if you still wish to point out how your Messiah s “winning” in a series of meaningless polls, all of which show a race defined by the very essence of “neck-and-neck”, then if that’ll make you happy, son, by all means continue your nonsense.
But it IS a neck-and-neck race, the polls ARE meaningless, you haven’t got a clue how to read them, and no one is winning with the current Disaster-in-Chief in the White House.
Real Athens
April 24th, 2012
11:29 pm
Did someone mention Huntsman as a “classic” VP pic? He’s seen the light.
http://news.yahoo.com/why-jon-huntsman-is-leaving-the-gop–not-because-they’re-communists-.html
MarkV
April 24th, 2012
11:35 pm
Rafe,
My point was that you wrote about printing money and inflation, and if we are to make judgments about the effect of some policy on inflation, we should use the accepted metric for inflation, rather than cherry picking data that fit our argument, such as the “Misery Index”. (I also never wrote that this was a new invention, but some people – not meaning you – cannot read). Some other organization may come up with still another index, showing things differently.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
April 24th, 2012
11:45 pm
No, MarkV, you just used the rather specific words “rather than using what has been used for years”, meaning in English, “as opposed to something which HAS been used for years”, which of course, is the Misery Index.
For someone who won’t engage others in debate until all the “T”s are crossed and the “I”s are dotted, you might wish to be a bit more precise in your use of our native language here in the United States.
And in case you haven’t figured it out yet, YOU don’t get to set the terms for debating others. If you don’t like what they are using, Bookman’s is available to you right next door. They’ll just love you over there.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
April 24th, 2012
11:56 pm
Real Athens, Huntsman was always a more moderate choice for President than he was conservative, however, that wasn’t the reason he didn’t go far in the 2012 campaign (and if Jeff Greenfield wasn’t in the tank for Democrats he’d know this).
Jon Huntsman was 100% boring to listen to, and a thoroughly uninspiring candidate. His level of excitement makes Mitt Romney look like Richard Simmons.
He’d make a good U.N Ambassador to a President Romney, or maybe even Secretary of State, but his ability to inspire people to follow his leadership is on par with PeeWee Herman’s.
Sr. Ella
April 25th, 2012
1:24 am
Kyle Wingfield
April 24th, 2012
2:34 pm
atlmom: McCain’s downfall started when he rushed back to Washington to try to deal with the financial crisis, in an attempt to look presidential, but he looked ineffective (at best — weak at worst) and never recovered.
But but but it was all Obama’s fault! How could the financial crisis happen when Obama wasn’t even president? schnirt
Joel Edge
April 25th, 2012
7:16 am
” and in my view it would be foolish to name a running mate this far out.”
That’s just silly. Research takes time, Kyle. The Democrats need time to drag out every offended person and claim to injury before the election. Not to mention knowing which state the VP candidate will be from, gives ample time commit funds for more voter fraud.
How unreasonable of you.
JDW
April 25th, 2012
7:28 am
@Tiberius…”no one is winning with the current Disaster-in-Chief in the White House.”
Many would beg to differ. Just compare now to when he took office…
Economic Growth then -6% now +2%
Job Growth then -700K a month now +150K a month
Stock Market then Dow 7900 now Dow 13,000
Looks like progress to me.
@@
April 25th, 2012
7:47 am
I saw Huntsman as more “in touch” with China than America. Besides, he’s as wealthy as Romney. Democrats won’t stand for such nonsense.
SCHNIRT!
Just saying..
April 25th, 2012
8:32 am
Are not poll favorites Donald, Herman, Rick Perry, Michelle ready to be President?
But Rubio would be fine. It’s always lovely when the nation likes a candidate better than the people in his home state. A near Sarah in waiting.
Progressive Humanist
April 25th, 2012
8:45 am
McDonnell wants it, as he’s term limited, will be out of a job soon, and knows the VP is the highest profile job he’ll ever have a chance at. The rest of the field would be very hesitant about accepting the slot; they don’t want to be the next Sarah Palin. They all know that the odds are that Obama will be reelected, and they feel they’ll be in better shape in 2016, maybe even with a shot to be on top of the ticket then, which probably won’t happen if they’re the VP candidate on the losing side this time around.
And btw, Kyle’s portrayal of the status of the race is way off. National polls don’t mean a whole lot, not only because it’s so far out, as Kyle suggests, but because presidents are not elected via popular vote, which is what national polls measure. Romney has a large lead in red states, which evens out the popular vote and makes it look close, but the electoral college map is almost insurmountable for him at this time. Things could change drastically, but anyone who thinks this race is even now doesn’t understand the electoral map well enough.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
April 25th, 2012
8:46 am
JDW, Many would wonder just what you’re smoking . .
Dropping Out. Since Obama was sworn in about 3 million people have dropped out of the jobs market. These people are no longer even bothering to look for a job. If they were still in the market – still hopeful – the unemployment rate would be about 10.8%.
Economic Growth after Great Depression. In 1934, 35 and 36 our economy growed at 11%, 9% and 13%. Economic growth in 2010 was 3%. In 2011 it was 1.7%. This year we’re running between 2 and 3%.
Ethnic Jobless Rates. For young workers 20 to 24 the unemployment rate is 13%. For Hispanic teenagers it’s 30.5%. For black teenagers it’s 37.9%.
Private Sector Hiring. Through June of 2011 private sector hiring was 10 times slower after the passage of ObamaCare than it was in the 16 months prior to ObamaCare.
New Businesses. We need 1 million new businesses every year to sustain growth. We’re running about 400,000 right now.
Layoffs and Hiring. In the first months of 2012 layoffs have risen 18% from a year ago. Hiring plans have dropped 82%.
Oh, and the stock market hasn’t been an accurate indicator of economic health in about 30 years, so quoting that figure is as meaningless as using polls six months out from an election to determine who is “winning”.
Just saying..
April 25th, 2012
9:16 am
“Oh, and the stock market hasn’t been an accurate indicator of economic health in about 30 years, so quoting that figure is as meaningless as using polls six months out from an election to determine who is ‘winning’.”
Which provides the basis for the figures being reported on every mass media evening newscast. Because the broadcast editors and audience agree that reporting them is “meaningless”.
MarkV
April 25th, 2012
9:19 am
Tiberius @11:45 pm: “No, MarkV, you just used the rather specific words “rather than using what has been used for years”, meaning in English, “as opposed to something which HAS been used for years”, which of course, is the Misery Index.”
Tiberius,
I have never tried to “set the terms for debating others,” and it is no business of yours to tell me to go to another blog.
I was not even talking about the Misery Index when I made the comment “rather than using what has been used for years.” The “Misery index” is not only a much more recent metric than CPI, it is not even a metric for inflation. You can comment whatever you wish, but when you fail to understand the issue that is being discussed, you are again just making a fool of yourself.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
April 25th, 2012
9:33 am
“Which provides the basis for the figures being reported on every mass media evening newscast. Because the broadcast editors and audience agree that reporting them is “meaningless”.”
Just saying, there is a HUGE difference between the value of individual stocks and their collective health of the stock market vs.the health of the economy. But you should already know that.
When stocks were used as LONG-TERM investment planks, they were a far better gauge of the economic health of the nation. Since the days of rampant speculation and massive investment of retirement funds into stocks and securities, the market has become more of a Las Vegas-style gambling hall (with the associated results, btw) rewarding trading houses more than providing any real gauge of this nation’s overall economic health.
And just so you know, I’ve been saying this for over 20 years, so it has nothing to do with your precious Obama.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
April 25th, 2012
9:40 am
“I have never tried to “set the terms for debating others,” and it is no business of yours to tell me to go to another blog.”
Butch it up, MarkV. First, I don’t “tell” anyone to go over to Bookman’s; I merely suggest that those who are unwilling to engage in robust debate will find a more nurturing and accepting home over there. Kyle is the only one on this blog who can “tell” anyone to head out of here.
And of course you try to set the terms before you debate others. You won’t even engage certain people who respond to your nonsense with facts. You won’t address the gist of someone’s post if they use the term “socialist” because you feel they don’t know the precise meaning of the word.
You’ve become the epitome of the “drive-by” blogger; MarkV. Drop in, toss a bomb, and scurry out before people can engage you. You’re everything that is wrong with political discourse in 2012 America.
Just saying..
April 25th, 2012
10:00 am
Tib-
I agree that today’s US stock market is craps with loaded dice.
President Obama is not precious to me. I look at him the same way so many GOP voters look at Mitt: with caution.
My point is not about the actual value of stock market indexes or how long you’ve held a certain view about them. My point is the figures must not be “meaningless” to the majority of Americans.
And obviously, that would not be the only instance where people put great stock in indicators that are really meaningless. Hence politics. And Sarah. And now, Marco.
MarkV
April 25th, 2012
10:02 am
Tiberius @9:40 am
It is none of your business even to suggest to anybody to go to another blog. It is entirely up to everybody whether to engage in a debate with somebody else, and especially not to engage with somebody who is an arrogant bully. Considering what you have been doing here, what you call a “robust debate” is just trading of insults.
There is no point debating people who use labels such as “socialist, Marxist and communist” instead of arguments. I could not care less if you disagree with that.
Joe the Prophet
April 25th, 2012
10:02 am
So the Ryan budget cuts taxes on the wealthy AND raises the deficit to do so…….It counts on “GROWTH”……So what happens if “GROWTH” doesn’t occur….!?!?!? SOCIALISM….that’s what happens….!!!!
Joe the Prophet
April 25th, 2012
10:06 am
The fundamental mistake here is that low-taxes lead. That has only happened in 10 years out of the last 100….from 1980 to 1990…..The rest of the time, higher taxes have led to growth and low taxes have led to recession and depression……
Despite your love of millionares and Miltion Friedman…if the low-tax/growth experiment fails….we are headed to Socialism….
Joe the Prophet
April 25th, 2012
10:07 am
The fundamental mistake here is that low taxes lead to growth….
Joe the Prophet
April 25th, 2012
10:08 am
and it’s 15 years out of the last 100….1975-1990…..
Joe the Prophet
April 25th, 2012
10:10 am
Romney/Ryan…..the “all in” ticket on trickle down economics…….but if it don’t work we’re in BIG trouble…..!!!!!