Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 31, 2016, 12:30:52 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Be sure to enable your "Ultimate Profile" for even more goodies on your profile page!

  Show Posts
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 507
26  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Opinion of Bernie's Income Tax Plan? on: April 02, 2016, 02:14:43 pm
There's this weird misconception (especially amongst leftist) that a vast majority of rich people inherited their wealth and grew up in rich families.

That's far from the truth. 70% of billionaires didn't inherit anything and a majority of the Forbes 400 didn't come from rich families.

This discussion is pretty tangential to the "what marginal income tax rates are optimal" question, but this is... not even close to true:

Quote
Just 35 percent of the Forbes 400 last year were raised poor or middle class, compared to 95 percent of the broader public, as (reasonably) defined by UFE. Twenty one percent inherited enough money to join the 400 without lifting a finger, what UFE calls being “born on home plate.” Another 7 percent inherited at least $50 million or a “large and prosperous company,” 12 percent inherited at least a million bucks or a decent-sized business or startup capital from a relative, and 22 percent were “born on first base,” into an upper class family or got a modest inheritance or startup capital (UFE says it was conservative in assigning people to bases, so its report understates their advantages somewhat). So, at least 62 percent did not, in fact, make their fortunes “entirely from scratch.”

Fair enough, but tax increases on billionaires is far from what we're talking about.  If we're just talking about tax increases on those at that level, I'm OK with that.  What we were talking about is $10K+ increases in total tax bills for people just breaking the six figures.  That seems to be a different story entirely.

No we aren't talking about that, a website which is including an employer based tax (without taking into consideration employer based deduction in costs) is talking about that, but it is nowhhere near reality.
27  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Opinion of Bernie's Income Tax Plan? on: April 02, 2016, 02:00:02 pm
I think it was the Upshot who had an app where you enter in your income and it tells you how your tax burden changes under each candidate.

Under Hillary's plan, I'd pay $200 more. No big deal at all. Under Bernie's plan, I'd pay over $14,000 more (?!) WTF, Bernie?!?! I'm nowhere close to being rich. I don't have an extra $14,000 laying around!

I would still vote for Bernie if he were somehow the nominee because I'm still loyal a Democrat above all and Trump is horrendous, but talk about an enthusiasm zapper...


Edit: It was Vox, not Upshot:  http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/3/25/11293258/tax-plan-calculator-2016

Vox's numbers are complete and utter bs.

OK I guess? If you have some supporting evidence, I'll take a look, but I'm going to believe a legitimate national news source over a Sanders supporter on a message board, no offense of course.

Are you including "what I'd save in health insurance costs" in your figure?

For starters the Vox Calculator included the employer portion of the healthcare tax as a cost to you.   While doing so they are also not calulcating the employer savings from no longer paying for a health care plan, and not taking into consideration the savings from you not paying for healthcare premiums anymore.


http://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/03/30/ezra-klein-and-terrible-horrible-no-good-tax-calculator


28  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Opinion of Bernie's Income Tax Plan? on: April 02, 2016, 01:44:15 pm
I think it was the Upshot who had an app where you enter in your income and it tells you how your tax burden changes under each candidate.

Under Hillary's plan, I'd pay $200 more. No big deal at all. Under Bernie's plan, I'd pay over $14,000 more (?!) WTF, Bernie?!?! I'm nowhere close to being rich. I don't have an extra $14,000 laying around!

I would still vote for Bernie if he were somehow the nominee because I'm still loyal a Democrat above all and Trump is horrendous, but talk about an enthusiasm zapper...


Edit: It was Vox, not Upshot:  http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/3/25/11293258/tax-plan-calculator-2016

Vox's numbers are complete and utter bs.
29  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: COWARD Sanders refuses ALL THREE of Clinton's proposed NY debates!! on: April 02, 2016, 01:43:10 pm
A debate in the Morning??  A NY debate the day before the Wisconsin Primary Opposite of the NCAA Championship game??  Arre they seriously picking times in which the least amount of people will be watching??

Uh, what is wrong with April 14th, a Thursday night debate?

And the morning debate would be on Good Morning America, which has a huge audience.

The only one that appears to be a remotely serious proposal is the 14th, the initial proposal was absolutely asinine.
30  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: COWARD Sanders refuses ALL THREE of Clinton's proposed NY debates!! on: April 02, 2016, 01:31:50 pm
A debate in the Morning??  A NY debate the day before the Wisconsin Primary Opposite of the NCAA Championship game??  Arre they seriously picking times in which the least amount of people will be watching??
31  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Opinion of Bernie's Income Tax Plan? on: April 02, 2016, 12:06:51 pm
The jist of Bernie's plan

1.  Federal Tax Rates for those under $250,000 will be the same as current, for those above it, they will see an increase

2.  There would no longer be employer based health insurance so those who currently have it will have a higher taxable income as their costs for health insurance would no longer be tax deductable since they no longer exist.  Those who currently have Health Insurance through exchanges or other non-employer based programs would not see a difference in taxable income due to the fact those Health Insurance costs aren't tax deductable.

3. A 2.2% Medicare for All Tax on taxable income

4.  Capital Gains rates will be the same as current for incomes below $250,000, for incomes above $250,000 they will be at the marginal tax rate

5.  Employers will have a 6.2% payroll tax to fund the Medicare for All.   This would replace the current Employer Contribution Toward Health Insurance

6.  No more Health Insurance Premium's
32  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Opinion of Bernie's Income Tax Plan? on: April 02, 2016, 10:49:41 am
The entire VOX chart is completely and utterly bogus.
33  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Clinton Strategist: No More Debates Unless Bernie Sanders Changes His Tone. on: March 30, 2016, 09:06:25 am
I love how some of the same people who called Hillary a sore loser for wanting more debates with Obama in 2008 are now trashing her for allegedly not wanting to debate Sanders, and in 2008 the primary was significantly closer than what it is now. This is just further proof that you all are using this out of politics and not principles; of course, anyone who calls you out on it is a hack/troll.

And how many more debates did we have in 2008??
34  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: DC Madame Scandal - Who Is It? on: March 29, 2016, 11:04:43 pm
Says a lot about this forum that a majority of voters have picked someone who didn't live in DC in 2007.

It isn't like the forum was picking someone who didn't spend any time in D.C
35  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Sanders aims to win 40% in NY on: March 29, 2016, 10:57:35 pm
A month from now, we'll have a better idea. People are making predictions about the future based on what has happened so far. Sanders hasn't done well enough to be looking viable to most people here.

Alright, well, sure. But just to be clear here - Your argument, at least to me, is basically that "anything can happen, so lets wait and see", which is, no offense (really) a terrible argument to make for a losing candidate in an election.

Do you at least agree that based on his performances so far, and the current delegate math, that a win seems improbable unless something big happens that drastically degrades Clinton's performance/poll numbers? It's one thing to be highly optimistic, but another to deny the raw data and reality of the situation, considering politics is not completely random and there are patterns at work.

Edit: At what point do you consider Bernie's campaign no longer viable?

Bernie should stay in until Clinton has half of the Pledged Delegates.   His chances of getting the nomination are very slim, but he shoudn't just give up because Clinton is very likely going to be the nominee.  If anything by staying around he forces Clinton away from turning back to the center, which is the last thing the Democratic Party needs.
36  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Democratic Freak States Holy Saturday results thread (1st caucuses begin @1pmET) on: March 27, 2016, 12:50:39 am
As I said earlier, it'll probably be 73-28, so +45 for Bernie.

Greenpapers is showing 74-27 when Sanders was @ 72.57.

Edit - It will 74-27. 100% in & Sanders @ 72.7%, Clinton down to 27.1%, others - 0.2%. He has got late boost from king's where his vote share from 65 odd has increased to 67.3. Pierce increased to 73.3 as well - Likely some 75% odd Bernie precincts report.

I heard 72.7% or something was the mark required for the extra delegate!

Greenpapers states it is a rough estimate because of how the county data was extrapolated to the CD level.  The 74th delegate for Sanders (which does look likely) or the 28th for Clinton looks like it will come down to CD-10, which it appears Sanders has a 5-1 advantage, but it is very close to a 4-2 split.
37  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Democratic Wild Western Tuesday results thread on: March 22, 2016, 11:58:20 pm
Hillary could get indicted & anyways would drop out when the FBI finds her guilty, indictment or not.

Either ways only 50% of the states have voted, so I don't see the big deal.

If he cares about the progressive movement, then Hillary clean needs to lose in November for a real progressive to rise - The Dem party needs to have a huge temporary setback if it needs to go the right way on the long term.

Supporting a mass murderer neo con is doing so service to the progressive wing.

I'm a strong Sanders supporter and donated to his campaign multiple times, I will be voting for him in the Primary in April here.  Clinton is too much of a moderate and way too wishy washy for my tastes.  I don't like the fact she really only takes Preogressive positions when it is the popular thing to do and really backs away from it (or doesn't embrace them) when its not the popular thing.   With that being said, when its all set and done she will very likely be the nominee, a Trump or Cruz Presidency will do far more damage  to the Progressive movement in this country than electing a moderate like Clinton ever would.
38  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Do any Bernie supporters here still think he can win? on: March 17, 2016, 08:59:43 am
Barring something major happening in the race, no.  The states that are left do favor him, but he needs to win 58% of the remaining delegates.  Some of those he isn't going to win and others. will be close, so he is going to need to average over 60% of the delegates in a bunch of states.  Getting 60% of delegates in a handful of states?  Yes, average 60% or so in 10-15 states?  Virtually no chance.  The race isn't over, but its about as close to being as over as it can possibly get unless something major happens.
39  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: 320 point Republican blowout led by Trump or Cruz - what would it take? on: March 16, 2016, 11:16:23 pm
There is basically no way Trump or Cruz could get to 320
40  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: According to this, cruz will getting more MO delegates than trump as of now on: March 16, 2016, 01:05:07 pm
That count has Cruz getting 12 delegates from winning the statewide vote.  I thought he lost the statewide vote?

The bottom portion of the page as being updated as the CD figures come in.  At the point in the count they are in on that, Cruz was still ahead.  It will wind up being 42-10 or 37-15 in favor of Trump
41  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Democratic Ides of March Tuesday results thread (first polls close at 7pm ET) on: March 15, 2016, 10:40:57 pm
Just got home so not sure if it was adressed in other posts, but what the hell happened in Orange County??  Putting aside Ohio's shocker, Sanders's overall margin in NC wasn't all that bad, but how exactly is he only winning an extremely liberal county by two points??
42  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Is Hillary over if Sanders wins North Carolina? on: March 14, 2016, 11:35:31 pm
Not at all, because Clinton would still maintain the delegate advantage. And considering that Sanders didn't do well in Virginia which has a number of liberals like North Carolina, I don't see an upset on the horizon. North Carolina is no better than any of the southern states for Sanders and has far too many black voters for him to even get close.

I certainly agree that Clinton will likely win the NC Primary, but liberals in NOVA aren't exactly the same type of liberals you have in the Triangle or Asheville.  Also I think Bernie will do fairly well with black voters in Durham, which isn't just staunchly Democratic, but is flat out liberal white and black.
43  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Is Hillary over if Sanders wins North Carolina? on: March 14, 2016, 11:19:52 pm
If Bernie somehow pulls off an upset in NC, it will completely change the dynamic of the race, especially since if he does that he is likely putting up solid margins in Ohio & Illinois.  With that being said, the chances of him wining NC are vey slim, however I do see Bernie making it a bit closer than most of the polls are suggesting.   He is going to win Asheville and the Research Triangle by a ton, which should offset Clinton's huge margin's elsewhere in the state.  Clinton is going to get DEMOLISHED in Orange County, but  it isn't going to be enough.
44  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: The Delegate Fight: 2016 on: March 13, 2016, 10:39:05 am
Another delegate question:

Illinois (R): March 15

Overview
69 Delegates (2.79% of total)
Open Primary
15 At-Large (Winner Take All)
54 District (directly elected)

Delegate Allocation and Selection

A presidential preference poll is on the ballot; the winner of this poll wins all 15 At-Large delegates.  12 of these are chosen at the State Convention on May 22.

Additionally, voters directly vote for 3 delegates running for a slot within their CD; the delegate candidates have their Presidential preference listed on the ballot.  All current candidates have a complete slate of delegates.  The top three delegate vote-getters in each CD get their ticket punched to Cleveland.  Voters are not obliged to vote for delegates who match the candidate they voted for in the preference poll.  Often, there are some personally popular delegate candidates who can get elected on the strength of their name alone (e.g. in 2008, Dennis Hastert, a Romney delegate, was elected in his CD despite a McCain win there in the preference poll).

In the 2012 results here on Atlas:

http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?year=2012&fips=17&f=1&off=0&elect=2

it says that in the 2012 GOP primary results in Illinois, there were 15 delegates "unallocated".  Is that a mistake?  Or does the delegate allocation process allow such a large number of unallocated delegates in Illinois?  (Were these district level delegates that expressed no presidential preference on the ballot?)  Would we be likely to see a repeat of that this time, or are the rules now different?



Illinois had 15 unpledged or Superdelegates in 2012. 

As per Green Papers

Quote

Illinois' 12 (10 at-large + 2 bonus) delegates are chosen by the State's Republican Party Convention will go to the Republican National Convention officially unbound.
In addition, 3 party leaders, the National Committeeman, the National Committeewoman, and the chairman of the Illinois Republican Party, will attend the convention as unbound delegates by virtue of their position
45  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Iowa Democratic County Convention Results- Where to find?? on: March 12, 2016, 10:33:29 pm
Looks like Clinton 511 County delegates to 503 for Sanders which breakss out to 115-113 state level delegates.  The state delegte equiv's appear to have been 121-105-2 on Election night.  

Wow, that's a huge change.

Trying to see if I can find county delegate data for Polk from Election Day to see if it would give any indication if the change had to do with more Bernie delegates showing up than Clinton ones, or if it would show that some Clinton delegates may have switched.

County Delegates elected from the Polk County precinct caucuses were 638 Clinton, 554 Sanders, 8 O'Malley (1200 total). Only 1040 delegates showed in Polk today. Based on the final count, Sanders lost 45 while Clinton lost 107.

So a net -62 for Hillary, certainly enough to swing the state should things hold relatively the same.

Looks like she picked up ground elsewhere, some slight changes on the CD level, but the state level is basically where we were


http://iowademocrats.org/iowa-democratic-county-convention-results/
46  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Iowa Democratic County Convention Results- Where to find?? on: March 12, 2016, 08:52:29 pm
We won't really know how the delegates are apportioned for quite some time. There were 98 other county caucuses that we don't have results for (apparently the Black Hawk County convention had problems as well) and we still have CD conventions and the statewide convention. It really is impossible to draw conclusions from the result in Polk.

True, there are still multiple stages left, the best we can do at this point is estimate and without knowing the results in the other counties it is really hard to know much of anything.
47  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Iowa Democratic County Convention Results- Where to find?? on: March 12, 2016, 08:46:44 pm
Looks like Clinton 511 County delegates to 503 for Sanders which breakss out to 115-113 state level delegates.  The state delegte equiv's appear to have been 121-105-2 on Election night. 

Wow, that's a huge change.

Trying to see if I can find county delegate data for Polk from Election Day to see if it would give any indication if the change had to do with more Bernie delegates showing up than Clinton ones, or if it would show that some Clinton delegates may have switched.

Either way it was a swing of +16 for Clinton to +2 for Clinton at state delegates, which depending on the results elsewhere in the state would be enough to flip that last delegate to Sanders.  It would not be enough to flip CD-3.
48  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Iowa Democratic County Convention Results- Where to find?? on: March 12, 2016, 08:35:39 pm
Looks like Clinton 511 County delegates to 503 for Sanders which breakss out to 115-113 state level delegates.  The state delegte equiv's appear to have been 121-105-2 on Election night. 
49  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Iowa Democratic County Convention Results- Where to find?? on: March 12, 2016, 07:26:34 pm
Looks like it was 114-114 as far as State Delegates from Polk
50  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Iowa Democratic County Convention Results- Where to find?? on: March 12, 2016, 05:49:43 pm
I saw on the Iowa Democrats website that the County Conventions time vary and the latest appears to be 7pm Cental, so I know we are unlikely to see any results until sometime after then, but does anyone know where the results wwll be avilable once they start to come in?
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 507


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines