Newt has some of the best policies, but Romney is the supply-side candidate and the vanguard of Reaganomics.
Romney is the supply-side candidate and the vanguard of Reaganomics.
***************
With due respect, my friend- that may or may not be so. That’s the point. Because he has no core, no one knows what Romney will do.
Wrong:
"True to form, even today Romney is effectively promising not to take America back to pro-growth Reaganomics. Cowed by President Obama's class warfare rhetoric, Romney promises to eliminate taxes on capital gains, interest, and dividends, but only for middle income Americans. He says he would do that because they, not the wealthy, were the ones most hurt by the recession."
"But effective tax policy does not distribute tax cuts based on who 'needs' a tax cut the most. That is Obama neo-socialist class rhetoric. Effective tax policy enacts tax cuts that will do the most to promote economic growth and prosperity."
"That is what Reagan did in cutting tax rates across the board for everybody, including the wealthy who have the most resources to invest. That is what the middle class and working people actually need most, cutting tax rates that will promote their jobs, higher wages, and personal prosperity."
"Romney the Republican establishment businessman is telling us with his limited, crabbed policy kowtowing to Obama's class warfare rhetoric that he feels, like Bush I and Republican RINO moderates generally, that he cannot explain and defend good supply-side policy to the public. Given his background and who he is as a rich Wall Street takeover artist, he personally may be right about that. Who is going to take seriously a Wall Street millionaire calling for tax cuts for millionaires? That is why he personally is not a good vessel for carrying the Republican standard this year. He is actually a perfect caricature for the neo-Marxist class warfare arguments of Obama and the Occupy Wall Street rabble. That is one reason why Romney, in fact, is the least electable."
"Romney's understanding of economic policy as a businessman is overblown. There is no real history of those with private business experience coming to Washington and making good policy there as a result. See, for example, Bush Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson. The term that free market activists use in Washington to refer to the business reps they know from first hand experience is 'corporate pukes.'"
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/01/11/rino-romney-is-the-least-elect/print
Romney, the vanguard of Reaganomics? The guy who said he’s not trying to go back to the era of Reagan and Bush?
Romney is a liberal businessman like John Corzine and Warren Buffett. His biography fits the profile. He has no blue collar or middle class roots and was born into a political family as the son of a governor. He never actually ran a business with blood, sweat and tears, he just pushed massive sums of money around in sweetheart deals where he might not always win but the structure of the deals dictated that he COULD NEVER LOSE. He’s someone who had everything in life handed to him. Therefore he thinks everyone should have things handed to them by a socialist government.
He passed Romneycare. ‘Nuff said.
He raised fees and taxes (or as he tells it, “closed loopholes”) in Taxachusetts to the tune of about 700 million dollars in new revenue, even while job creation ranked only 47th among all states in the nation.
He had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the 20% across-the-board tax cut he’s promising, after his tax plan was described by the WSJ as “timid” and similar to Obama’s. We’ll have to see if his new plans survived the Etch-a-Sketch shake-up.
His earlier plan said he would not cut taxes for anyone making over $200,000. Obama said he would give tax cuts up to $250,000. So Romney was more liberal than Obama on tax cuts.
He said on the campaign trail that he would index the minimum wage to inflation. I think that’s a more liberal policy than Obama’s.
He refused to speak up in favor of John Kasich’s union-busting legislation when asked.
His vision for the “very poor” is for them to be permanent members of the underclass supported by the “safety net.” That is exactly what every socialist’s vision includes. They don’t believe in class mobility, they believe in class division and class warfare. And their goal is to redistribute income through the state to the lower class from everybody else.
Romney’s an economic liberal and a progressive socialist. For some strange reason most Republican voters seem to assume that being a businessman or being rich automatically makes you an “economic conservative.” One way or another, Romney has managed to pull a thin veneer of wool Republicans’ eyes on that point. They are going to have a rude awakening if this man is elected and they get to find out what his economic philosophies really are.