Yesterday was supposed to be the day for talk about jobs and economy, so it was no surprise that all the speakers talked about something else. When it comes to crime and terrorism, there are Republicans with actual ideas, so Trump and the other speakers could have found something substantive to talk about if they had wanted to. But no Republicans in America have anything meaningful to say about jobs and the economy. We have performed a 35-year experiment on the effect of the main Republican economic policy, cutting taxes on the rich, and I think we have conclusively shown that it makes the rich richer and does little for the rest of us. To Trump's credit he seems to have little interest in tax cuts, although he did offer a plan for a gigantic one when he thought it would help his campaign.
So instead we had another night of attacks on Hillary, culminating in Chris Christie's mock trial and repeated chants of "lock her up." Well, that will do a lot of good for ordinary Americans.
Matt Yglesias:
There’s been a lot of talk over the past few months about the relative weight of economic anxieties versus pure bigotry in driving support for Trump. What we saw Tuesday night is that if anyone is out there feeling anxious about the economy, Trump has no answer for you. Republicans are offering a full-employment plan for congressional staffers on special investigative committees but have basically nothing to say about middle-class paychecks or middle-class problems.
5 comments:
I'm half convinced the average Trump supporter would tolerate any degree of incompetance from him, so long as he could somehow arrange for Clinton to be literally thrown to actual lions to be torn apart on live television.
"We have performed a 35-year experiment on the effect of the main Republican economic policy, cutting taxes on the rich, and I think we have conclusively shown that it makes the rich richer and does little for the rest of us."
-Have you ever wondered how Reagan won 49 states, or are you just going to repeat your ridiculous partisan Democrat talking points?
"I'm half convinced the average Trump supporter would tolerate any degree of incompetance from him, so long as he could somehow arrange for Clinton to be literally thrown to actual lions to be torn apart on live television."
-I'd love to see that. But even more so for Obama and Kerry.
Reagan won 49 states because his ideas were not popular, not because they were correct. He said that cutting taxes on the rich would make ordinary people richer, too. This has not happened. Instead it has caused inequality to balloon. That is not a Democratic talking point, it is a fact.
Or do you believe that the correctness of ideas can always be judged by voting? Seen a poll about evolution lately?
"He said that cutting taxes on the rich would make ordinary people richer, too. This has not happened."
-Has it happened in any first-world country in the world that clearly wasn't simply experiencing the effects of catch-up growth?
"Instead it has caused inequality to balloon."
-Got any evidence for that dubious assertion? Inequality is pretty high today, but, in the words of the Tax Foundation, "in 2013, the top 1% of taxpayers paid a higher tax rate (34%) than in the year Reagan took office (33.2%)".
http://taxfoundation.org/blog/are-rich-paying-their-fair-share-yet
Will you be happy with any tax rate on the rich below Maoism?
"Reagan won 49 states because his ideas were not popular, not because they were correct."
-LOL. I'm sure you know how ridiculous that statement is. When things go bad (e.g., under Jimmy Carter), politicians lose re-election. When they're going well (as under LBJ in 1964), politicians win re-election. People generally have a good understanding of what they directly experience. Thus, McCain's loss, despite Obama's poor, Black-centered campaign and McCain's comparatively brilliant one (note: McCain is a Communist sympathizer whom I trust less than I do Obama).
"Or do you believe that the correctness of ideas can always be judged by voting?"
-Of course not. But I trust the general will of the people in political matters far more than I do that of the filthy established elites.
If Americans don't accept human evolution, sucks for them. If elitists can't persuade Americans to accept human evolution, sucks for them, as well.
In any case, is not pointing out the crimes of Hillary Clinton a fully legitimate argument for why the Democratic nominee for President (who didn't even win the White vote this time around, which Her won overwhelmingly in 2008) should not be voted for by any sane, reasonable person?
"That is not a Democratic talking point, it is a fact."
-Then demonstrate it. You've certainly provided no evidence for it. And you can't get around the fact the average tax rate on the top 1% today is higher than in 1981.
Get out of your Democratic bubble sometime.
Post a Comment