*** Official Barack Obama FBG campaign headquarters *** (2 Viewers)

[higgins]

linky

Many economists see McCain better for stocks: poll

By Emily Kaiser 57 minutes ago

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. stock market would fare better in the first year after a victory by Republican presidential candidate John McCain than by his Democratic rival Barack Obama, according to a majority of economists at U.S. banks and research groups polled by Reuters.

But the survey of 29 firms taken alongside a regular Reuters economic poll also found that economists had mixed views on the two candidates' economic plans.

On a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being "very good," 12 economists gave McCain's proposals higher marks, while nine rated the two candidates equally and eight preferred Obama's policies, according to the poll released on Wednesday.

The economy has supplanted the Iraq war as the main issue in the November presidential election between Arizona Sen. McCain and Illinois Sen. Obama.

The troubled housing market, tightening credit conditions and rising costs of food and energy have driven U.S. consumer confidence to a 28-year low.

The survey, conducted this week, found that 21 of the economists polled thought McCain would be better for the stock market in the first year after the election, while six chose Obama and two gave no response.

The sample includes a cross-section of U.S. financial institutions, large and small, including several prominent Wall Street names.

For investors, a key concern this election year is taxes on dividends and capital gains, which Obama has pledged to increase. He also favors allowing income tax cuts enacted under President George W. Bush's administration to expire, while McCain wants them made permanent.

"Preserving the capital gains and dividend tax rate (at) 15 percent is in my view very important to investors and therefore very important to Wall Street," said Hugh Johnson, chief investment officer of Johnson Illington Advisors in Albany, New York, explaining why he thought stocks would fare better under a McCain presidency.

McCain has said the Treasury Department and Federal Reserve's steps to shore up troubled mortgage finance companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were correct and he hoped Congress would approve them.

Obama said any action to rescue Fannie and Freddie should be aimed at helping homeowners and not just shareholders, managers and investors.

Obama has called for a $50 billion economic stimulus package on top of the $152 billion plan passed earlier this year. McCain has proposed low income taxes and incentives for small businesses as ways to boost the economy.

A Reuters/Zogby poll released last week showed that just 10 percent of Americans gave the Bush administration positive marks for its handling of the economy.

The poll also found that Obama held a 7-point lead over McCain in the presidential race, and had a small edge on the question of who would best manage the economy.

 

[Orange Crush]

From Politico

Obama’s coattails could sway Mississippi

By: John Fortier

July 22, 2008 03:44 PM EST

Few Senate races could have greater impact than the matchup between appointed Mississippi Sen. Roger Wicker ® and former Gov. Ronnie Musgrove (D). If Musgrove wins, Democrats will add yet another seat to their majority. But more importantly, his victory would tell us something about Barack Obama’s effect on black-white politics and Democrats’ ability to win in the South.

It is a sign of Republican gloom that a Senate race in Mississippi appears to be highly competitive. The last time a nonincumbent Democrat was elected to the Senate from the Magnolia State was 1947, when John C. Stennis won the seat that he then held for 40 years.

The state does have vestiges of its conservative Democratic past; Democrats still control the state legislature, and both parties have held the governorship in recent years. But in most other respects, Mississippi has become a reliably Republican state. President Bush won the state by 20 percentage points in 2004, and Trent Lott and Thad Cochran easily defended their Senate seats in recent elections. Few expected that Lott’s retirement and the subsequent appointment of well-regarded Wicker, a House member for 13 years, would give Democrats much of an opening. But a combination of a good Democratic year, the recruitment of Musgrove and the wild card of Obama’s effect on black turnout have made the race too close to call.

Mississippi is 36 percent African-American, the highest percentage of any state. It also displays some of the country’s most racially polarized voting patterns. In 2004, according to exit polls, Bush won 85 percent of the white vote, while Democrat John F. Kerry took 90 percent of the black vote.

Non-Southern Democratic nominees previously have fared so poorly among white voters that they have had little chance of winning in Mississippi.

It is possible for a Mississippi Democrat to win in a statewide election, but it would likely require 30 percent of the white vote along with nearly the entire black vote. In 2003, Musgrove lost his reelection bid for governor to current Gov. Haley Barbour, a Republican. Musgrave took about 22 percent of the white vote, and lost the election 53 percent to 46 percent. In 1999, when Musgrove beat Republican gubernatorial nominee Mike Parker in one of the closest races in Mississippi history, he performed even better among white voters, running well ahead of typical Democratic performance in Northeast Mississippi, a Republican stronghold.

The formula that has sometimes worked for Mississippi Democrats is directly at odds with Obama’s strategy for putting Southern states in play. Obama and his aides have made the case that Obama could increase black turnout so substantially — by 30 percent or more — that Southern states with large African-American populations would become competitive even without much of a change in the white turnout. But the math here is much harder than the Obama campaign asserts. If you take the 2004 presidential election results, increase the black vote by 30 percent and assume that the white vote stays the same, Obama would still lose Mississippi by more than 100,000 votes. And most analysts think that a 30 percent increase in the black vote is extremely optimistic. Obama will surely draw African-Americans to the polls in record numbers, but even a 10 percent to 15 percent increase in African-American votes would be historic. Add to that Obama’s problems in attracting white Mississippi voters even in the Democratic primary, where he attracted only a quarter of white Democrats.

What Musgrove hopes is that he can have the best of both worlds. He can run as a more conservative Democrat picking up moderate white voters, just as Travis Childers did in the House special election to replace Roger Wicker. But Musgrove might also benefit from Obama energizing and turning out the black vote even while Musgrove keeps his distance from the presidential nominee.

Think about what would have happened in Musgrove’s race against Barbour in 2003 when Musgrove drew 22 percent of the white vote. If he had also had a 15 percent boost in the black vote that year, the race would have been very close, and he certainly could have won without breaking the 30 percent threshold that Democrats typically need to win statewide.

But while Musgrove might benefit from the Obama turnout effect, not all is dim for Roger Wicker. His poll numbers have been hurt by the fact that he represented only one-quarter of the state, while Musgrove has held statewide office. A May poll showed Wicker’s name recognition at 70 percent, with Musgrove’s over 90 percent. As the state gets to know Wicker, he may pick up traditional Republican voters in regions outside his congressional district, and because he hails from Northeast Mississippi, he may cut into Musgrove’s white support there.

The most likely scenario is that the race between Musgrove and Wicker will come down to the wire.

John Fortier is a research fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.

MISSISSIPPI?!?!? This is just the latest sign that 2008 is going to be a very, very bad year for Republicans.

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

The Obama camp has repeatedly their goal was an increase of 30% in black voter turnout. Not sure if they'll make or exceed that, but I've seen several projections rely upon it. In many states he had a 12 - 14% increase during the primaries, so it's possible but he's got a ways to go yet.

 

[Sulla]

Want a free Obama button? MoveOn's giving them away totally free--no strings attached (except you'll get a bunch of requests for contributions of course).

Click this link to get a free Obama button: http://pol.moveon.org/obamabuttons/?id=-3041161-pHL3mxx

 

[bigbottom]

The latest NBC/Wall Street Journal poll has Obama up by six points. But there are some other really interesting results in the survey, including some that are favorable to McCain.

13b. When it comes to your vote for (CANDIDATE CHOSEN IN Q.12), would you say that you are excited to be voting for him, you are satisfied to be voting for him, or you are voting for him as the lesser of two evils?

Excited - McCain (14%) Obama (44%)

Satisfied - McCain (42%) Obama (33%)

Lesser of two evils - McCain (43%) Obama (22%)

Not sure - McCain (1%) Obama (1%)

16. If the next election for president were held today, and John McCain were the Republican candidate, Barack Obama were the Democratic candidate, Bob Barr were the Libertarian candidate, and Ralph Nader were an independent candidate, for whom would you vote? ** +

John McCain ..........................35%

Barack Obama .......................48%

Bob Barr ................................2%

Ralph Nader ...........................5%

Depends (VOL) .......................1%

Neither/other (VOL) ................3%

Not sure .................................6%

The question above was only asked of half the respondents, so I'm guessing the results are skewed somewhat.I don't know how to post the tables, but McCain trounces Obama on the Commander-in-Chief and knowledge and experience questions. Also, the last question on the timetable for withdrawal is so ridiculously formulated as to be pretty much worthless in my opinion.

 

[Orange Crush]

Maybe this deserves its own thread, but I'm loyal to this one.

We've talked before about the tax and spending plans between McCain and Obama (and how McCain is both promising the moon and has no way of paying for it). Well the Center for Tax Policy has revised their earlier report based on what the two candidates have been saying on the campaign trail.

From hilzoy:

The short version: over ten years, the proposals McCain actually makes on the stump would cost $2.7 trillion more than the policies his campaign describes, for a total cost of nearly $7 trillion over ten years. Over the same ten years, the proposals Obama makes on the stump would cost $367 billion less than the policies his campaign describes, for a total cost of a little under $2.5 trillion. (The main difference between what Obama says on the stump and what his campaign describes is his proposal to levy Social Security taxes on income over $250,000/year.)

She's also got a chart posted at that link showing the % change in after-tax income for the American people divided by quintiles based on income.McCain's tax plan will increase the after-tax income of everyone, though just barely for the poorest while giving a HUGE 6% bump for the top 20% (with an 8% bump for the top 1% and a 9% bump for the top 0.1%). Obama's plan increases the after-tax income of every group except the top 20%, with the poorest getting the biggest increase of almost 6%. The tax increase on the top 20% is actually heavily skewed by the increase on the top 1%. There is no increase on the 80-95%, an average increase of just $799 on the top 95-99%, and then a large 11% hit on the top 1%.

Click here for the chart.

 

[adonis]

Maybe this deserves its own thread, but I'm loyal to this one.

We've talked before about the tax and spending plans between McCain and Obama (and how McCain is both promising the moon and has no way of paying for it). Well the Center for Tax Policy has revised their earlier report based on what the two candidates have been saying on the campaign trail.

From hilzoy:

The short version: over ten years, the proposals McCain actually makes on the stump would cost $2.7 trillion more than the policies his campaign describes, for a total cost of nearly $7 trillion over ten years. Over the same ten years, the proposals Obama makes on the stump would cost $367 billion less than the policies his campaign describes, for a total cost of a little under $2.5 trillion. (The main difference between what Obama says on the stump and what his campaign describes is his proposal to levy Social Security taxes on income over $250,000/year.)

She's also got a chart posted at that link showing the % change in after-tax income for the American people divided by quintiles based on income.McCain's tax plan will increase the after-tax income of everyone, though just barely for the poorest while giving a HUGE 6% bump for the top 20% (with an 8% bump for the top 1% and a 9% bump for the top 0.1%). Obama's plan increases the after-tax income of every group except the top 20%, with the poorest getting the biggest increase of almost 6%. The tax increase on the top 20% is actually heavily skewed by the increase on the top 1%. There is no increase on the 80-95%, an average increase of just $799 on the top 95-99%, and then a large 11% hit on the top 1%.

Click here for the chart.

Interesting, but sadly, people can't grasp nuances of tax policies. To them, Obama will always be "more taxes" and McCain will be "Cut taxes". It's just too bad that most people can't see that most of McCain's tax cuts will go to the rich, while Obama's tax increases will predominantly affect the very rich.

People below 250k don't need to worry all that much, either about capital gains taxes, or tax hikes, with a president Obama. And people making less than about 80k should expect to have a tax break.

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

Obama doing very well among Latinos.

LINK

By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER, Associated Press Writer

2 hours, 51 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - Democrat Barack Obama has opened a big lead among Hispanic voters, winning support from the vast majority of those who had voted for rival Hillary Rodham Clinton in the Democratic primaries, according to a poll released Thursday.

The national survey, conducted by the nonpartisan Pew Hispanic Center, showed that 66 percent of Hispanic registered voters supported Obama, compared to 23 percent for Republican John McCain. The other 11 percent were undecided.

More than three-quarters of Latinos who had voted for Clinton now say they are for Obama. Clinton carried the Hispanic vote, an important Democratic constituency, by about a 2-1 margin in the primaries.

"Hispanics seem to have seamlessly shifted from Clinton to Obama," said Susan Minushkin, deputy director of the Pew Hispanic Center, a research group based in Washington.

While Hispanics make up only about 9 percent of eligible voters, they could play an important role in four potential battleground states: Florida, Colorado, New Mexico and Nevada.

Both candidates gave speeches before national Hispanic organizations earlier this month. On Wednesday, the Obama campaign released a Spanish language radio ad that will air in the four competitive states.

Hispanics have long supported Democratic candidates, though President Bush started to make inroads, picking up about 40 percent of the Latino vote in 2004.

"We know that Hispanics believe that the Democratic Party is better for Latinos," Minushkin said. "We know that on a variety of issues, Hispanics say that Obama is better" than McCain.

Some Latino advocates argue that Republicans have alienated Hispanics by staking out tough positions against illegal immigration. McCain and Obama both support comprehensive plans to overhaul the immigration system, including a path to citizenship for the estimated 12 million immigrants in the U.S. illegally.

Education, not immigration, was the most important issue cited by Hispanic voters in the Pew survey.

The telephone survey was conducted from June 9 through July 13. The Pew Hispanic Center interviewed a nationally representative sample of 2,015 adult Hispanics, including 892 who said they were registered voters. The margin of sampling error for registered voters was plus or minus 4.4 percentage points.

 

[ffldrew]

Obama fever running wild in Berlin - look at the size of the crowd.

You always want to look Presidential in a campaign- well this is grade A material.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

Another homerun speech. Obama gives us an opportunity to restore our standing in the world.

 

[Statorama]

Obama doing very well among Latinos.

LINK

That's great news for Obama. It was thought that McCain, given his very liberal immigration stance, would be able to count on that segment of the voting population.

 

[Pooch]

Wow. That's one great speech he just gave in Berlin. There's a link to most of it on Drudge.

 

[Statorama]

People below 250k don't need to worry all that much, either about capital gains taxes, or tax hikes, with a president Obama. And people making less than about 80k should expect to have a tax break.

Obama's people have since revised that number to state that it's people below $150K. I know it doesn't make a difference for most people, but for me it suddenly moves me from being lower middle class into "evil rich".So if your household reports more than 150K of income, strap yourselves in, it's going to be a bumpy ride.

edit:

 

[Mr. Pickles]

Obama doing very well among Latinos.

LINK

By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER, Associated Press Writer

2 hours, 51 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - Democrat Barack Obama has opened a big lead among Hispanic voters, winning support from the vast majority of those who had voted for rival Hillary Rodham Clinton in the Democratic primaries, according to a poll released Thursday.

The national survey, conducted by the nonpartisan Pew Hispanic Center, showed that 66 percent of Hispanic registered voters supported Obama, compared to 23 percent for Republican John McCain. The other 11 percent were undecided.

More than three-quarters of Latinos who had voted for Clinton now say they are for Obama. Clinton carried the Hispanic vote, an important Democratic constituency, by about a 2-1 margin in the primaries.

"Hispanics seem to have seamlessly shifted from Clinton to Obama," said Susan Minushkin, deputy director of the Pew Hispanic Center, a research group based in Washington.

While Hispanics make up only about 9 percent of eligible voters, they could play an important role in four potential battleground states: Florida, Colorado, New Mexico and Nevada.

Both candidates gave speeches before national Hispanic organizations earlier this month. On Wednesday, the Obama campaign released a Spanish language radio ad that will air in the four competitive states.

Hispanics have long supported Democratic candidates, though President Bush started to make inroads, picking up about 40 percent of the Latino vote in 2004.

"We know that Hispanics believe that the Democratic Party is better for Latinos," Minushkin said. "We know that on a variety of issues, Hispanics say that Obama is better" than McCain.

Some Latino advocates argue that Republicans have alienated Hispanics by staking out tough positions against illegal immigration. McCain and Obama both support comprehensive plans to overhaul the immigration system, including a path to citizenship for the estimated 12 million immigrants in the U.S. illegally.

Education, not immigration, was the most important issue cited by Hispanic voters in the Pew survey.

The telephone survey was conducted from June 9 through July 13. The Pew Hispanic Center interviewed a nationally representative sample of 2,015 adult Hispanics, including 892 who said they were registered voters. The margin of sampling error for registered voters was plus or minus 4.4 percentage points.

Denveredge was willing to bet me that McCain would win the Latino demographic outright. No really, he said that.

 

[whoknew]

Another homerun speech. Obama gives us an opportunity to restore our standing in the world.

What about it was brilliant, do you think?

 

[Clayton Gray]

Denveredge was willing to bet me that McCain would win the Latino demographic outright. No really, he said that.

He was almost begging for the action.

 

[GSteps]

Not to be outdone, McCain counters Obama's German rally:

McCain Plays Catch-Up: Attends German Restaurant In German Village, Ohio

July 24, 2008 12:09 PM

John McCain is still playing catch up to Barack Obama.

As the Illinois Democrat speaks before the picturesque Victory Column in Berlin today, the Arizona Republican is doing a slightly less exciting form of German outreach. He is having a lunch meeting with small business leaders at a German restaurant in German Village, Columbus, Ohio.

The presidential race, it seems has boiled down to who has the greatest German appeal. McCain's appearance at Schmidts' restaurant, a "Sausage Haus" comes after the RNC launched several advertisements in towns named Berlin.

Among the items he may have ordered include: Sauerkraut-Bratwurst Balls, Hoffbrau Schnitzel, or the Bratwurst, voted the "Best Wurst" by Columbus Monthly.

 

[adonis]

Have all campaigns had this much symbolism using location names?

Unity for Obama and Hillary meeting? This german place?

 

[ffldrew]

Not to be outdone, McCain counters Obama's German rally:

McCain Plays Catch-Up: Attends German Restaurant In German Village, Ohio

July 24, 2008 12:09 PM

John McCain is still playing catch up to Barack Obama.

As the Illinois Democrat speaks before the picturesque Victory Column in Berlin today, the Arizona Republican is doing a slightly less exciting form of German outreach. He is having a lunch meeting with small business leaders at a German restaurant in German Village, Columbus, Ohio.

The presidential race, it seems has boiled down to who has the greatest German appeal. McCain's appearance at Schmidts' restaurant, a "Sausage Haus" comes after the RNC launched several advertisements in towns named Berlin.

Among the items he may have ordered include: Sauerkraut-Bratwurst Balls, Hoffbrau Schnitzel, or the Bratwurst, voted the "Best Wurst" by Columbus Monthly.

That is fricken funny

 

[Statorama]

Not to be outdone, McCain counters Obama's German rally:

McCain Plays Catch-Up: Attends German Restaurant In German Village, Ohio

July 24, 2008 12:09 PM

John McCain is still playing catch up to Barack Obama.

As the Illinois Democrat speaks before the picturesque Victory Column in Berlin today, the Arizona Republican is doing a slightly less exciting form of German outreach. He is having a lunch meeting with small business leaders at a German restaurant in German Village, Columbus, Ohio.

The presidential race, it seems has boiled down to who has the greatest German appeal. McCain's appearance at Schmidts' restaurant, a "Sausage Haus" comes after the RNC launched several advertisements in towns named Berlin.

Among the items he may have ordered include: Sauerkraut-Bratwurst Balls, Hoffbrau Schnitzel, or the Bratwurst, voted the "Best Wurst" by Columbus Monthly.

That is fricken funny

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

Another homerun speech. Obama gives us an opportunity to restore our standing in the world.

What about it was brilliant, do you think?

First, I didnt use the word brilliant. And B, I liked how he redefined what the current walls are now that need to come down etc and just the whole idea of America being a respected leader in the world rather than an arrogant joke.

 

[Spiderman]

FOX News Poll: No Bounce for Obama From Overseas Trip

The significant news coverage Barack Obama is receiving on his foreign trip has not translated into a bounce in his numbers, a just-released FOX News poll shows. Obama now holds the slimmest possible edge over John McCain, leading by just 41 percent - 40 percent in a head-to-head contest. In fact, Obama’s support is down slightly from his 45 percent - 41 percent advantage last month.

Opinion Dynamics Corp. conducted the national telephone poll of 900 registered voters for FOX News from July 22 to July 23. During that time Obama was traveling in Jordan, Israel and Palestinian territories. In the days before the poll was taken Obama had been touring Afghanistan and Iraq. The poll has a 3-point error margin.

Among independents, Obama has a narrow 2 percentage point edge: 34 percent to McCain’s 32 percent, and 34 percent undecided.

McCain has more strength of support from his party faithful. Fully 86 percent of Republicans back McCain compared to 75 percent of Democrats that back Obama.

Given that the independent vote splits about evenly, one might expect McCain’s strength in Republican support would give him an advantage overall. The reason that fails to happen is that the pool of Republican voters is smaller than the pool of Democratic voters, which means McCain’s party-based edge has less impact on the race than it might otherwise. In this poll 42 percent of voters identify as Democrat and 33 percent Republican, and that’s about where the party identification numbers have been all year.

"It seems increasingly clear that this race will come down to which candidate can better appeal to the roughly one-third of independent voters who remain undecided," says Ernie Paicopolos, a principal of Opinion Dynamics.

McCain’s support declines a little when third party candidates are included, even though Libertarian Bob Barr receives less than 1 percent and independent Ralph Nader receives only 2 percent, Obama’s advantage goes to 3 percentage points (40 percent to 37 percent). Another 17 percent are undecided.

More voters say they would be “enthusiastic” if Obama (23 percent) were to become the next president than if McCain does (13 percent). On the other hand, more also say they would be “scared” if Obama wins (19 percent) than if McCain wins (14 percent).

Overall, about equal numbers would have a positive reaction (enthusiastic or pleased) if either Obama (45 percent) or McCain (41 percent) were elected.

On the Issues

On the top issues in the election, Obama is trusted more to handle the economy (47 percent – 36 percent) and health care (51 percent – 31 percent). McCain is trusted more on the war on terrorism (52 percent – 34 percent) and the situation in Iraq (47 percent – 39 percent).

The good news for the Obama campaign is significantly more people say they will decide their vote based on economic issues (40 percent) than on national security issues (18 percent).

The candidates are essentially tied when asked which is trusted more to appoint justices to the U.S. Supreme Court (Obama 40 percent – McCain 41 percent) and hold down spending (Obama 41 percent – McCain 41 percent).

Many more voters think Obama (30 percent) has made some “serious changes” to his positions on the issues since the end of the primary than think McCain has (18 percent). Equal numbers of voters think Obama (36 percent) and McCain (37 percent) have made small changes to their positions.

Is Obama a Christian or a Muslim?

A majority thinks talk of Obama being a Muslim is just that – talk. Some 57 percent say Obama is a Christian and disregard comments about him being a Muslim as rumor. One in ten 10 percent believe Obama is a Muslim. Another 27 percent are unsure.

Majorities of Democrats (71 percent) and independents (59 percent) believe Obama is a Christian. Republicans (20 percent) are much more likely than independents (7 percent) and Democrats (5 percent) to believe Obama is secretly a Muslim.

Just under half — 49 percent — think McCain’s time in a North Vietnamese prisoner of war camp would make him a better president and 11 percent say that experience would make him a worse president. One third (33 percent) say McCain’s five years in captivity would make no difference to his ability to serve as president.

Two Likeable Guys

Both Obama and McCain are viewed positively by voters. A 58 percent majority has a favorable opinion of Obama and 33 percent unfavorable. For McCain, 54 percent view him favorably and 38 percent unfavorably.

 

[LHUCKS]

FOX News Poll: No Bounce for Obama From Overseas Trip

 

[ConstruxBoy]

People below 250k don't need to worry all that much, either about capital gains taxes, or tax hikes, with a president Obama. And people making less than about 80k should expect to have a tax break.

Obama's people have since revised that number to state that it's people below $150K. I know it doesn't make a difference for most people, but for me it suddenly moves me from being lower middle class into "evil rich".So if your household reports more than 150K of income, strap yourselves in, it's going to be a bumpy ride.

edit:

Do you have a link for that?

 

[Spiderman]

FOX News Poll: No Bounce for Obama From Overseas Trip

 

[Mr. Pickles]

Denveredge was willing to bet me that McCain would win the Latino demographic outright. No really, he said that.

He was almost begging for the action.

I shot it down out of pity.

 

[snitwitch]

FOX News Poll: No Bounce for Obama From Overseas Trip

He's still on the trip for jebis' sake!

 

[adonis]

FOX News Poll: No Bounce for Obama From Overseas Trip

Couldn't help but notice your posts of poll numbers have been kinda...absent...around here for some time. Glad to see you're paying attention after all.

 

[adonis]

People below 250k don't need to worry all that much, either about capital gains taxes, or tax hikes, with a president Obama. And people making less than about 80k should expect to have a tax break.

Obama's people have since revised that number to state that it's people below $150K. I know it doesn't make a difference for most people, but for me it suddenly moves me from being lower middle class into "evil rich".So if your household reports more than 150K of income, strap yourselves in, it's going to be a bumpy ride.

edit:

Actually, again, from the beginning he's been saying that it was below 250k or so. Sure, the people between about 100-250 are in the top 95% or so, but he's stated that he's willing to look at methods to exclude specifically people in that range from increases in cap gains taxes, and other taxes.

 

[Homer J Simpson]

FOX News Poll: No Bounce for Obama From Overseas Trip

Wouldn't the trip kinda have to be over to see if he gets a bounce?

 

[Spiderman]

FOX News Poll: No Bounce for Obama From Overseas Trip

Wouldn't the trip kinda have to be over to see if he gets a bounce?

I'd be a bit surprised if we don't something.

 

[NCCommish]

He also has a two to one lead among Jews according to polls before the overseas trip. With his performance in Isreal I would expect that to increase.

 

[adonis]

He also has a two to one lead among Jews according to polls before the overseas trip. With his performance in Isreal I would expect that to increase.

But not by as much as spiderman expects it to increase, which makes that a victory for McCain and a loss for Obama.Essentially, we should all have expectations regarding how much Obama should benefit from this trip. If you set them high, and Obama doesn't reach those heights, he fails, and McCain wins.Republican 101 - Lecture 4.

 

[NCCommish]

He also has a two to one lead among Jews according to polls before the overseas trip. With his performance in Isreal I would expect that to increase.

But not by as much as spiderman expects it to increase, which makes that a victory for McCain and a loss for Obama.Essentially, we should all have expectations regarding how much Obama should benefit from this trip. If you set them high, and Obama doesn't reach those heights, he fails, and McCain wins.Republican 101 - Lecture 4.

To be fair if McCain holds those numbers he will have done quite well in comparison to past GOP candidates. But I don't expect them to hold as the trend line is in Obamas favor.

 

[Spiderman]

He also has a two to one lead among Jews according to polls before the overseas trip. With his performance in Isreal I would expect that to increase.

But not by as much as spiderman expects it to increase, which makes that a victory for McCain and a loss for Obama.Essentially, we should all have expectations regarding how much Obama should benefit from this trip. If you set them high, and Obama doesn't reach those heights, he fails, and McCain wins.Republican 101 - Lecture 4.

I didn't conduct the polling in this latest poll, but thought Obama would receive a small bump from this trip.

 

[NCCommish]

He also has a two to one lead among Jews according to polls before the overseas trip. With his performance in Isreal I would expect that to increase.

But not by as much as spiderman expects it to increase, which makes that a victory for McCain and a loss for Obama.Essentially, we should all have expectations regarding how much Obama should benefit from this trip. If you set them high, and Obama doesn't reach those heights, he fails, and McCain wins.Republican 101 - Lecture 4.

I didn't conduct the polling in this latest poll, but thought Obama would receive a small bump from this trip.

Might want to wait until it's over then.

 

[Statorama]

People below 250k don't need to worry all that much, either about capital gains taxes, or tax hikes, with a president Obama. And people making less than about 80k should expect to have a tax break.

Obama's people have since revised that number to state that it's people below $150K. I know it doesn't make a difference for most people, but for me it suddenly moves me from being lower middle class into "evil rich".So if your household reports more than 150K of income, strap yourselves in, it's going to be a bumpy ride.

edit:

Do you have a link for that?

Got the compilation of Obama tax blurbs at this link, but it's stuff taken from CNN and elsewhere. The part that caught my eye was:

Today, Obama Claimed That A Family Making Less Than $250,000 Will Not

See Higher Taxes Under His Plan:

Obama: "If you are a family making less than $250,000, my plan will not

raise your taxes - not your income taxes, not your payroll taxes, not your

capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes."(Sen. Barack Obama, Remarks On

Taxes, Kaukauna, WI, 6/12/08) Statorama note: Reading that, I understand why Obama supporters are confused

NOTE: Earlier Today, Obama Campaign National Co-Chair Sen. Claire

McCaskill (D-MO) Contradicted Obama, Saying Americans Earning "Under

$150,000 A Year Would See No Tax Increase Of Any Kind":

Sen. McCaskill Said Americans Earning Less Than $150,000 Wouldn't See

Higher Taxes - Not The $250,000 That Obama Claims. "[sen. Claire] McCaskill

called Obama middle-class tax cut 'massive' and stressed that those making

'under $150,000 a year would see no tax increase of any kind' -- not

payroll tax, not capital gains, 'not a single tax,' [New Hampshire

Congressman Paul] Hodes said."(Domenico Montanaro, "Obama V. McCain On

Middle Class," MSNBC's "First Read" Blog, firstread.msnbc.msn.com, 6/12/08)

Obama Has Provided Varied Numbers On Who Would See Higher Tax Rates:

This Week, Obama Told Reporters He Would Raise Taxes On The Top 5

Percent Of Earners. "Speaking to reporters in St. Louis, he said he would

eliminate the capital gains tax 'for the small businesses and startups that

are the backbone of our economy.' His income tax plans, Obama said, would

cut taxes for 95 percent of U.S. workers, while rolling back the Bush

administration's tax reductions for the highest-earning 5 percent." (Matt

Apuzzo and Charles Babington, "McCain, Obama Trade Jabs On Economy, Taxes,"

The Associated Press, 6/11/08)

-- In 2005, The Cut Off For The Top 5 Percent Of Earners Began At $145,283

- Well Below Obama's $250,000. "Including all tax returns that

had a positive AGI, those taxpayers with an AGI of $145,283 or more in

2005 constituted the nation's top 5 percent of

earners."(Gerald Prante, "Summary Of Latest Federal Individual

Income Tax Data," http://www.taxfoundation.org, 10/5/07)

Obama Said Americans Earning $100,000 Or Less Don't Deserve To Pay

Higher Taxes; Implied Americans Earning More Could See Higher Taxes. Obama:

"And what I have said is, I will institute a middle-class tax cut. So, if

you're making $75,000, if you're making $50,000 a year, you will see an

extra $1,000 a year offsetting on your payroll tax." CNN's Wolf Blitzer:

"Define middle class." Obama: "Well you know I think the definitions are a

little bit rough, but let's just take it this way, if you're making

$100,000 a year or less then you're pretty solidly middle class and you

deserve relief right now as opposed to paying higher taxes. On the other

hand, if you're making more than a $100,000, and certainly if you're making

more than $200,000 or $250,000, then you're doing pretty well." (CNN's "The

Situation Room," 5/8/08)

So Obama has basically set the median for "doing pretty well" as a household making $100,000 or more a year, and households that need to have their taxes raised has been set at $150,000 per year.If you work hard and are successful, you must be punished.

 

[adonis]

So Obama has basically set the median for "doing pretty well" as a household making $100,000 or more a year, and households that need to have their taxes raised has been set at $150,000 per year.If you work hard and are successful, you must be punished.

As I said above, he's said that he's willing to work to make sure those between 150k and 250k don't see their taxes raised.It's kinda like him saying seniors who make below 50,000/year won't be taxed, and thinking it's unfair that those who make 50,001 will be taxed at a high rate. Odds are, it'll be graded, not with a sharp cutoff. So it's potentially the case that those between 150k and 250k will be increased on a sliding scale, up to the full tax increase as you approach 250k, but it's not like a cutoff between 149,999 and 150,000 will be in place.

 

[Statorama]

People below 250k don't need to worry all that much, either about capital gains taxes, or tax hikes, with a president Obama. And people making less than about 80k should expect to have a tax break.

Obama's people have since revised that number to state that it's people below $150K. I know it doesn't make a difference for most people, but for me it suddenly moves me from being lower middle class into "evil rich".So if your household reports more than 150K of income, strap yourselves in, it's going to be a bumpy ride.

edit:

Actually, again, from the beginning he's been saying that it was below 250k or so. Sure, the people between about 100-250 are in the top 95% or so, but he's stated that he's willing to look at methods to exclude specifically people in that range from increases in cap gains taxes, and other taxes.

Again, what he's been saying has been contradicted by his own campaign people.There are hundreds of legitimate reasons to vote for Obama, there's no need to push away the few legitimate reasons to vote against him. At this point, the fact that he's going to raise my taxes and not yours is pretty insignificant in the grand scheme of things. In my household however, it's going to get a little tighter.

 

[Homer J Simpson]

People below 250k don't need to worry all that much, either about capital gains taxes, or tax hikes, with a president Obama. And people making less than about 80k should expect to have a tax break.

Obama's people have since revised that number to state that it's people below $150K. I know it doesn't make a difference for most people, but for me it suddenly moves me from being lower middle class into "evil rich".So if your household reports more than 150K of income, strap yourselves in, it's going to be a bumpy ride.

edit:

Do you have a link for that?

Got the compilation of Obama tax blurbs at this link, but it's stuff taken from CNN and elsewhere. The part that caught my eye was:

Today, Obama Claimed That A Family Making Less Than $250,000 Will Not

See Higher Taxes Under His Plan:

Obama: "If you are a family making less than $250,000, my plan will not

raise your taxes - not your income taxes, not your payroll taxes, not your

capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes."(Sen. Barack Obama, Remarks On

Taxes, Kaukauna, WI, 6/12/08) Statorama note: Reading that, I understand why Obama supporters are confused

NOTE: Earlier Today, Obama Campaign National Co-Chair Sen. Claire

McCaskill (D-MO) Contradicted Obama, Saying Americans Earning "Under

$150,000 A Year Would See No Tax Increase Of Any Kind":

Sen. McCaskill Said Americans Earning Less Than $150,000 Wouldn't See

Higher Taxes - Not The $250,000 That Obama Claims. "[sen. Claire] McCaskill

called Obama middle-class tax cut 'massive' and stressed that those making

'under $150,000 a year would see no tax increase of any kind' -- not

payroll tax, not capital gains, 'not a single tax,' [New Hampshire

Congressman Paul] Hodes said."(Domenico Montanaro, "Obama V. McCain On

Middle Class," MSNBC's "First Read" Blog, firstread.msnbc.msn.com, 6/12/08)

Obama Has Provided Varied Numbers On Who Would See Higher Tax Rates:

This Week, Obama Told Reporters He Would Raise Taxes On The Top 5

Percent Of Earners. "Speaking to reporters in St. Louis, he said he would

eliminate the capital gains tax 'for the small businesses and startups that

are the backbone of our economy.' His income tax plans, Obama said, would

cut taxes for 95 percent of U.S. workers, while rolling back the Bush

administration's tax reductions for the highest-earning 5 percent." (Matt

Apuzzo and Charles Babington, "McCain, Obama Trade Jabs On Economy, Taxes,"

The Associated Press, 6/11/08)

-- In 2005, The Cut Off For The Top 5 Percent Of Earners Began At $145,283

- Well Below Obama's $250,000. "Including all tax returns that

had a positive AGI, those taxpayers with an AGI of $145,283 or more in

2005 constituted the nation's top 5 percent of

earners."(Gerald Prante, "Summary Of Latest Federal Individual

Income Tax Data," http://www.taxfoundation.org, 10/5/07)

Obama Said Americans Earning $100,000 Or Less Don't Deserve To Pay

Higher Taxes; Implied Americans Earning More Could See Higher Taxes. Obama:

"And what I have said is, I will institute a middle-class tax cut. So, if

you're making $75,000, if you're making $50,000 a year, you will see an

extra $1,000 a year offsetting on your payroll tax." CNN's Wolf Blitzer:

"Define middle class." Obama: "Well you know I think the definitions are a

little bit rough, but let's just take it this way, if you're making

$100,000 a year or less then you're pretty solidly middle class and you

deserve relief right now as opposed to paying higher taxes. On the other

hand, if you're making more than a $100,000, and certainly if you're making

more than $200,000 or $250,000, then you're doing pretty well." (CNN's "The

Situation Room," 5/8/08)

So Obama has basically set the median for "doing pretty well" as a household making $100,000 or more a year, and households that need to have their taxes raised has been set at $150,000 per year.If you work hard and are successful, you must be punished.

Paying taxes is punishment?

 

[Statorama]

So Obama has basically set the median for "doing pretty well" as a household making $100,000 or more a year, and households that need to have their taxes raised has been set at $150,000 per year.If you work hard and are successful, you must be punished.

As I said above, he's said that he's willing to work to make sure those between 150k and 250k don't see their taxes raised.It's kinda like him saying seniors who make below 50,000/year won't be taxed, and thinking it's unfair that those who make 50,001 will be taxed at a high rate. Odds are, it'll be graded, not with a sharp cutoff. So it's potentially the case that those between 150k and 250k will be increased on a sliding scale, up to the full tax increase as you approach 250k, but it's not like a cutoff between 149,999 and 150,000 will be in place.

I've got my fingers crossed that you're right. At this point, it's pretty obvious that he's going to be the next president, so I'm getting prepared for Obama's hammer to fall just in case you're wrong.

 

[Statorama]

People below 250k don't need to worry all that much, either about capital gains taxes, or tax hikes, with a president Obama. And people making less than about 80k should expect to have a tax break.

Obama's people have since revised that number to state that it's people below $150K. I know it doesn't make a difference for most people, but for me it suddenly moves me from being lower middle class into "evil rich".So if your household reports more than 150K of income, strap yourselves in, it's going to be a bumpy ride.

edit:

Do you have a link for that?

Got the compilation of Obama tax blurbs at this link, but it's stuff taken from CNN and elsewhere. The part that caught my eye was:

Today, Obama Claimed That A Family Making Less Than $250,000 Will Not

See Higher Taxes Under His Plan:

Obama: "If you are a family making less than $250,000, my plan will not

raise your taxes - not your income taxes, not your payroll taxes, not your

capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes."(Sen. Barack Obama, Remarks On

Taxes, Kaukauna, WI, 6/12/08) Statorama note: Reading that, I understand why Obama supporters are confused

NOTE: Earlier Today, Obama Campaign National Co-Chair Sen. Claire

McCaskill (D-MO) Contradicted Obama, Saying Americans Earning "Under

$150,000 A Year Would See No Tax Increase Of Any Kind":

Sen. McCaskill Said Americans Earning Less Than $150,000 Wouldn't See

Higher Taxes - Not The $250,000 That Obama Claims. "[sen. Claire] McCaskill

called Obama middle-class tax cut 'massive' and stressed that those making

'under $150,000 a year would see no tax increase of any kind' -- not

payroll tax, not capital gains, 'not a single tax,' [New Hampshire

Congressman Paul] Hodes said."(Domenico Montanaro, "Obama V. McCain On

Middle Class," MSNBC's "First Read" Blog, firstread.msnbc.msn.com, 6/12/08)

Obama Has Provided Varied Numbers On Who Would See Higher Tax Rates:

This Week, Obama Told Reporters He Would Raise Taxes On The Top 5

Percent Of Earners. "Speaking to reporters in St. Louis, he said he would

eliminate the capital gains tax 'for the small businesses and startups that

are the backbone of our economy.' His income tax plans, Obama said, would

cut taxes for 95 percent of U.S. workers, while rolling back the Bush

administration's tax reductions for the highest-earning 5 percent." (Matt

Apuzzo and Charles Babington, "McCain, Obama Trade Jabs On Economy, Taxes,"

The Associated Press, 6/11/08)

-- In 2005, The Cut Off For The Top 5 Percent Of Earners Began At $145,283

- Well Below Obama's $250,000. "Including all tax returns that

had a positive AGI, those taxpayers with an AGI of $145,283 or more in

2005 constituted the nation's top 5 percent of

earners."(Gerald Prante, "Summary Of Latest Federal Individual

Income Tax Data," http://www.taxfoundation.org, 10/5/07)

Obama Said Americans Earning $100,000 Or Less Don't Deserve To Pay

Higher Taxes; Implied Americans Earning More Could See Higher Taxes. Obama:

"And what I have said is, I will institute a middle-class tax cut. So, if

you're making $75,000, if you're making $50,000 a year, you will see an

extra $1,000 a year offsetting on your payroll tax." CNN's Wolf Blitzer:

"Define middle class." Obama: "Well you know I think the definitions are a

little bit rough, but let's just take it this way, if you're making

$100,000 a year or less then you're pretty solidly middle class and you

deserve relief right now as opposed to paying higher taxes. On the other

hand, if you're making more than a $100,000, and certainly if you're making

more than $200,000 or $250,000, then you're doing pretty well." (CNN's "The

Situation Room," 5/8/08)

So Obama has basically set the median for "doing pretty well" as a household making $100,000 or more a year, and households that need to have their taxes raised has been set at $150,000 per year.If you work hard and are successful, you must be punished.

Paying taxes is punishment?

It is when you're lumped in with "everyone making over $150,000".

 

[Homer J Simpson]

Paying taxes is punishment?

It is when you're lumped in with "everyone making over $150,000".

Well there's gotta be a cutoff somewhere.

 

[Spiderman]

He also has a two to one lead among Jews according to polls before the overseas trip. With his performance in Isreal I would expect that to increase.

But not by as much as spiderman expects it to increase, which makes that a victory for McCain and a loss for Obama.Essentially, we should all have expectations regarding how much Obama should benefit from this trip. If you set them high, and Obama doesn't reach those heights, he fails, and McCain wins.Republican 101 - Lecture 4.

I didn't conduct the polling in this latest poll, but thought Obama would receive a small bump from this trip.

Might want to wait until it's over then.

If you read one of my previous responses, that's exactly what I said.

 

[Statorama]

Paying taxes is punishment?

It is when you're lumped in with "everyone making over $150,000".

Well there's gotta be a cutoff somewhere.

Totally. It would just be awesome if it wasn't happening to me.edit to add: ...and hey, at least I can say I'm in the same tax bracket as Bill Cosby and Shaq. So I've got that going for me.

 

[The Z Machine]

Obama is going to roll to this win.

 

[adonis]

So Obama has basically set the median for "doing pretty well" as a household making $100,000 or more a year, and households that need to have their taxes raised has been set at $150,000 per year.If you work hard and are successful, you must be punished.

As I said above, he's said that he's willing to work to make sure those between 150k and 250k don't see their taxes raised.It's kinda like him saying seniors who make below 50,000/year won't be taxed, and thinking it's unfair that those who make 50,001 will be taxed at a high rate. Odds are, it'll be graded, not with a sharp cutoff. So it's potentially the case that those between 150k and 250k will be increased on a sliding scale, up to the full tax increase as you approach 250k, but it's not like a cutoff between 149,999 and 150,000 will be in place.

I've got my fingers crossed that you're right. At this point, it's pretty obvious that he's going to be the next president, so I'm getting prepared for Obama's hammer to fall just in case you're wrong.

I'm just telling you what he's said. You can believe he's not going to follow through, but I think it's incorrect to state what you've stated as his total policy. Like I said, he's expressed interest in looking out for the people in your earnings range.

 

[Mr. Pickles]

Obama is going to roll to this win.

Ghost ride?

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

So Obama has basically set the median for "doing pretty well" as a household making $100,000 or more a year, and households that need to have their taxes raised has been set at $150,000 per year.If you work hard and are successful, you must be punished.

As I said above, he's said that he's willing to work to make sure those between 150k and 250k don't see their taxes raised.It's kinda like him saying seniors who make below 50,000/year won't be taxed, and thinking it's unfair that those who make 50,001 will be taxed at a high rate. Odds are, it'll be graded, not with a sharp cutoff. So it's potentially the case that those between 150k and 250k will be increased on a sliding scale, up to the full tax increase as you approach 250k, but it's not like a cutoff between 149,999 and 150,000 will be in place.

Didnt somebody post a chart in a thread somewhere showing that people making between something like 160k to 227K will see their taxes go up by like only $12 or something?

 

[Statorama]

So Obama has basically set the median for "doing pretty well" as a household making $100,000 or more a year, and households that need to have their taxes raised has been set at $150,000 per year.If you work hard and are successful, you must be punished.

As I said above, he's said that he's willing to work to make sure those between 150k and 250k don't see their taxes raised.It's kinda like him saying seniors who make below 50,000/year won't be taxed, and thinking it's unfair that those who make 50,001 will be taxed at a high rate. Odds are, it'll be graded, not with a sharp cutoff. So it's potentially the case that those between 150k and 250k will be increased on a sliding scale, up to the full tax increase as you approach 250k, but it's not like a cutoff between 149,999 and 150,000 will be in place.

I've got my fingers crossed that you're right. At this point, it's pretty obvious that he's going to be the next president, so I'm getting prepared for Obama's hammer to fall just in case you're wrong.

I'm just telling you what he's said. You can believe he's not going to follow through, but I think it's incorrect to state what you've stated as his total policy. Like I said, he's expressed interest in looking out for the people in your earnings range.

It just seems VERY disingenuous that his campaign co-chair immediately contradicts him. Obama on the microphone says one thing, but his afterward his campaign people go "what he really meant was....".I still find it weirdly comical that I'm lumped in with the rich.Sorry for hijacking.