"there are more people in the us now voting, thus your comparison to Bush totals is not valid!"
Dobro's comparison is valid because what was cited was the difference between the two vote counts, not the total count.
more people wouldn't necessarily affect the difference.. just the totals
"eliminating deductions that overwhelmingly favor the wealthy achieves the same goal AND would simplify the tax code!"
No.. that could change the effective rate of taxes paid by the very wealthy.. but only for the portion of their income that is earned income...
which in most cases is a very small percentage.
it would do nothing to change the actual tax rate.
which by the way.. does not have to be increased.
WHAT PART OF THE BUSH TAX CUTS FOR THE VERY WEALTHY WERE MEANT TO BE TEMPORARY DON'T YOU GET?
sorry... but those tax cuts did not achieve their pupose in spite of the fact that they were extended.
Those for the middle class on the other hand have achieved their purpose which was consumerism which generates jobs.
"raising the retirement age is very low hanging fruit!"
the retirement age has already been raised..
or did you not get that memo?
all we get from that is the illusion of savings. when you move those whose bodies wear out from social security to disability.. what do you save?
On top of that we are encouraging earlier transition to disability because the way the system is set up to pay out.. it really does pay to file as quickly as you can when you think you might not be able to work again...
"Clinton in his 2nd term worked with Congress and in had a very good 2nd term! Can Obama replicate this?"
is this some kind of revisionist history? I don't remember Congress working well with Clinton during his second term... unless of course attempting to impeach him is your idea of a good working relationship.
I am not thinking we should be repeating that one...