Bain attack ads working

[blacken700]

Propelled by a torrent of blistering television advertisements, President Obama is successfully invoking Mitt Romney’s career at Bain Capital to raise questions about his commitment to the middle class, strategists in both parties say, as the candidates engage in a critical summer duel to set the terms for this fall.

Despite doubts among some Democrats about the wisdom of attacking Mr. Romney’s business career, Obama commercials painting him as a ruthless executive who pursued profits at the expense of jobs are starting to make an impact on some undecided voters, according to strategists from both sides, who differ on whether they are causing any substantial damage.

While the sense of worry and alarm that has hung over the White House for weeks is dissipating, and with his supporters relieved by the Supreme Court decision on Thursday to uphold most of his health care law, Mr. Obama faces new challenges before the conventions at the end of the summer.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/01/us/politics/bain-attacks-make-inroads-for-president.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss

[MCWAY]

Propelled by a torrent of blistering television advertisements, President Obama is successfully invoking Mitt Romney’s career at Bain Capital to raise questions about his commitment to the middle class, strategists in both parties say, as the candidates engage in a critical summer duel to set the terms for this fall.

Despite doubts among some Democrats about the wisdom of attacking Mr. Romney’s business career, Obama commercials painting him as a ruthless executive who pursued profits at the expense of jobs are starting to make an impact on some undecided voters, according to strategists from both sides, who differ on whether they are causing any substantial damage.

While the sense of worry and alarm that has hung over the White House for weeks is dissipating, and with his supporters relieved by the Supreme Court decision on Thursday to uphold most of his health care law, Mr. Obama faces new challenges before the conventions at the end of the summer.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/01/us/politics/bain-attacks-make-inroads-for-president.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss

Yet, now Obama has to explain why he raised taxes on the middle class. As 333386 just posted elsewhere, three-fourths of ObamaCare's costs fall on people making under $120K.

And, now he's trying to hike costs on vets and military retirees, by jacking up TriCare

[240 is Back]

romney peaked in polls 3 weeks ago.


we're seeing the slide now.  in another couple of weeks, he'll be down by 3 to 5 points and it'll be 2008 all over again.

Repubs just didnt run the best candidates.  They chose a guy who was a straight up fcking liberal a decade ago - signing anti gun bills, writing obamacare, appointing liberal judges. 

they shouldnt be surprised when obama leads by 7 points by late summer and wins easily because there's just no confidence in romney.

[MCWAY]

romney peaked in polls 3 weeks ago.


we're seeing the slide now.  in another couple of weeks, he'll be down by 3 to 5 points and it'll be 2008 all over again.

Repubs just didnt run the best candidates.  They chose a guy who was a straight up fcking liberal a decade ago - signing anti gun bills, writing obamacare, appointing liberal judges. 

they shouldnt be surprised when obama leads by 7 points by late summer and wins easily because there's just no confidence in romney.

Not per your theory a week ago. You claimed ObamaCare had to remain for Romney to win.

[240 is Back]

Not per your theory a week ago. You claimed ObamaCare had to remain for Romney to win.

Link?

I claimed that it woudl benefit romney for obamacare to remain - a rallying cry.

Would it be enough for a win?  No.  Don't reach that conclusion.  But it'd sure help romney to have this rallying cry, to perpetuate the victimization that far-right loves to much. 

[Straw Man]

Yet, now Obama has to explain why he raised taxes on the middle class. As 333386 just posted elsewhere, three-fourths of ObamaCare's costs fall on people making under $120K.

And, now he's trying to hike costs on vets and military retirees, by jacking up TriCare

I know you Repubs will keep trying to frame it that way but no one will see it that way

[Soul Crusher]

I know you Repubs will keep trying to frame it that way but no one will see it that way

LOL.   The SC called it a tax and that is what Verilli argued in the SC to get this act of treason passed. 

[Straw Man]

LOL.   The SC called it a tax and that is what Verilli argued in the SC to get this act of treason passed. 

I'm well aware of that but the average middle class person will not see it as a tax no matter how many millions the Repubs spend trying to get them to

[MCWAY]

I know you Repubs will keep trying to frame it that way but no one will see it that way

The Supreme Court framed it that way, genius. That's the ONLY reason it still exists.

I'm well aware of that but the average middle class person will not see it as a tax no matter how many millions the Repubs spend trying to get them to

People have already seen it that way, hence the 2010 bludgeoning of the Democrats.

The Dems haven't been able to sell this garbage for over three years. Don't expect them to do so in four months.

[Soul Crusher]

I'm well aware of that but the average middle class person will not see it as a tax no matter how many millions the Repubs spend trying to get them to

Right - the medical device tax is going to cost nothing at all.   Got it. 

[Straw Man]

The Supreme Court framed it that way, genius. That's the ONLY reason it still exists.
People have already seen it that way, hence the 2010 bludgeoning of the Democrats.

The Dems haven't been able to sell this garbage for over three years. Don't expect them to do so in four months.

All I'm saying is good luck getting the average american to believe it

most only understand this stuff at the headline level at best

the headline they will remember is that the the Supreme Court upheld the healthcare legislation and that Obama won

many of them will also see it as a win for themselves, especially those who have had issue with health care or health insurance

[MCWAY]

All I'm saying is good luck getting the average american to believe it

2010 midterms....Enough said.

most only understand this stuff at the headline level at best

the headline they will remember is that the the Supreme Court upheld the healthcare legislation and that Obama won

many of them will also see it as a win for themselves, especially those who have had issue with health care or health insurance

WRONG!! They didn't see it as a win two years ago, when it got signed into law.

They didn't see it as a win, last year.

And, they don't see it as a win THIS YEAR.

The midterms proved it; Poll after poll, saying people wanted some of all of it GONE, prove it.

Poll after poll saying that the Supreme Court should scrap part or all of it prove it.

Obama's lackluster fundraising proves it. He's practically begging for money.

Obama wins; yet Romney get $4 million in less than 24 hours and has beaten Obama in fundraising the last two months.

The vets don't see it as a win, facing their rates going up nearly FOURFOLD.

When the focus shifts on what this garbage does to people who already have insurance (and why employers are reluctance to hire or start laying people off even more), the outrage will increase dramatically.

[Straw Man]

2010 midterms....Enough said.

WRONG!! They didn't see it as a win two years ago, when it got signed into law.

They didn't see it as a win, last year.

And, they don't see it as a win THIS YEAR.

The midterms proved it; Poll after poll, saying people wanted some of all of it GONE, prove it.

Poll after poll saying that the Supreme Court should scrap part or all of it prove it.

Obama's lackluster fundraising proves it. He's practically begging for money.

Obama wins; yet Romney get $4 million in less than 24 hours and has beaten Obama in fundraising the last two months.

The vets don't see it as a win, facing their rates going up nearly FOURFOLD.

When the focus shifts on what this garbage does to people who already have insurance (and why employers are reluctance to hire or start laying people off even more), the outrage will increase dramatically.

i don't recall anyone saying the the Dems lost in 2010 because the electorate saw Obamacare as a tax increase

if that is the case then you should be able to post something from the MSM (at that time) that confirms this

Hopefully the Repubs spednd lots of money trying to convince middle American that this is a tax increase

I think that would be a great thing

[MCWAY]

i don't recall anyone saying the the Dems lost in 2010 because the electorate saw Obamacare as a tax increase

if that is the case then you should be able to post something from the MSM (at that time) that confirms this

Hopefully the Repubs spednd lots of money trying to convince middle American that this is a tax increase

I think that would be a great thing

Then apparently you have amnensia. But, don't take my word for it. Even the goofies on the red-headed stepchild of cable news have admitted such:

Lawrence O'Donnell Admits: ObamaCare Will Enact Largest Tax Increase Ever

 

ObamaCare constitutes the largest tax increase in American history and shatters the previous record, admitted self-described socialist and MSNBC political analyst Lawrence O’Donnell yesterday.

When MSNBC anchor Joe Scarborough asked O’Donnell about the overhaul bill on his radio show, O’Donnell said ObamaCare raises taxes by almost $500 billion.

Obama’s historic tax increase nearly doubles the previous record-setting tax that O’Donnell helped craft as Democratic Chief of Staff to the Senate Finance Committee during the Clinton administration.

Even O’Donnell conceded that proposing the largest tax increase in American history during a painful recession and double-digit unemployment was a foolish misadventure.

“We liberal Keynesians do not raise taxes in recessions,” said O’Donnell. “We raise taxes when you’re making money. That’s when we raise taxes. And we love to do it.”

On the subject of groundbreaking admissions, remember when O’Donnell criticized the “unprecedented” use of reconciliation to pass ObamaCare.

A transcript of the exchange between Scarborough and O'Donnell, which aired yesterday and was replayed on today's "Morning Joe," can be found below:

    [Clip from Joe Scarborough’s radio interview with Lawrence O’Donnell, which aired yesterday]

    JOE SCARBOROUGH: Lawrence O’Donnell, you were part of the largest tax increase of all-time–

    LAWRENCE O’DONNELL: –The biggest.

    SCARBOROUGH: –with Bill Clinton. 250 billion dollars. You say Barack Obama’s health care bill will double that–

    O’DONNELL: –Almost

    SCARBOROUGH: –and will raise almost 500 billion dollars.
                            
    O’DONNELL: And do so–and here’s the really important economic principle that’s shocking for anyone who’s take the introductory course: they’re going to do it in a recession. You know...

    [Laughter]

    O’DONNELL: We, we, we liberal, we liberal Keynesians do not raise taxes in recessions; we raise taxes when you’re making money. That’s when we raise taxes. And we love to do it.

    [Back in the studio]

    SCARBOROUGH: And Lawrence does love to do it.

    MIKA BRZEZINSKI, co-host of “Morning Joe”: Very good point.

    SCARBOROUGH: But how fascinating, though, Lawrence, the liberal, has given Republicans a great talking point. Largest tax increase ever, in the middle of a recession, when real unemployment’s in double digits–that’s probably where the debate’s going to be and not on the slaughter rule this fall.


Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/alex-fitzsimmons/2010/03/17/self-described-socialist-msnbc-admits-obamacare-breaks-tax-record#ixzz1zQ1LW5VB

And:

NYT: Obama WH will argue ObamaCare mandate is a tax
This must have been the Friday night news dump from the White House, but if so, it’s rather stale.  The New York Times reports that the Obama administration will defend the ObamaCare mandates as part of its power to tax, despite Barack Obama’s contentious debate with George Stephanopoulos when Obama denied it was a tax at all:

    When Congress required most Americans to obtain health insurance or pay a penalty, Democrats denied that they were creating a new tax. But in court, the Obama administration and its allies now defend the requirement as an exercise of the government’s “power to lay and collect taxes.”

    And that power, they say, is even more sweeping than the federal power to regulate interstate commerce.

    Administration officials say the tax argument is a linchpin of their legal case in defense of the health care overhaul and its individual mandate, now being challenged in court by more than 20 states and several private organizations.

This qualified as breaking news … three months ago, when the Wall Street Journal first reported that Congress had attempted to quietly create a platform for such an argument.  Randy Barnett argued at the time that it wouldn’t work:

    This shift won’t work. The Supreme Court will not allow staffers and lawyers to change the statutory cards that Congress already dealt when it adopted the Senate language.

    In the 1920s, when Congress wanted to prohibit activity that was then deemed to be solely within the police power of states, it tried to penalize the activity using its tax power. In Bailey v. Drexel Furniture (1922) the Supreme Court struck down such a penalty saying, “there comes a time in the extension of the penalizing features of the so-called tax when it loses its character as such and becomes a mere penalty with the characteristics of regulation and punishment.”

That is exactly what the mandates do — regulate individual behavior in an area where the federal government has no jurisdiction and punish those who don’t exhibit favored choices, in this case buying comprehensive health insurance regardless of whether it makes sense for anyone.  This court will almost certainly take a dim view of the same attempt that the 1922 court struck down as a gross overreach by the government.

But just for fun, let’s look once again at the President insisting that the mandate couldn’t possibly be tax:


http://hotair.com/archives/2010/07/18/nyt-obama-wh-will-argue-obamacare-mandate-is-a-tax/


And, let's not forget Obama, lying his keister off to George Stephanopolus of ABC.


Why have almost NONE of the Dems, running for re-election (particularly in swing states) touted their support of ObamaCare (one of them, McCaskill, has almost gone into witness protection)?

[tu_holmes]

In regards to the simple numbers of dollars, yes it's the biggest... It is not the largest in regards to GDP though.

[MCWAY]

But, there's more:

Study: Votes in favor of healthcare reform cost Dems 5.8 points in 2010 vote

Voting for President Obama's healthcare reform law cost Democratic incumbents 5.8 percentage points of support at the polls in 2010, according to a new study in the journal American Politics Research.

The study helps explain why Democrats lost 66 House seats, significantly more than the median academic forecast of 44 to 45 seats, study co-author Brendan Nyhan of Dartmouth College writes on his blog.

Democrats in the lead-up to the elections took a number of tough votes — notably on the Wall Street bailout, the stimulus and cap-and-trade — but none was as unpopular as their support for the healthcare reform law.

"We show that the roll-call effect on vote share was driven by healthcare reform. Democratic incumbents who voted yes performed significantly worse than those who did not," Nyhan writes. "We then provide simulation evidence suggesting that Democrats would win approximately 25 more seats if those in competitive districts had voted no, which accounts for the gap between the academic forecasts and the observed outcomes."

The study doesn't offer much insight into what might happen this November, however.

"The economy is the dominant issue in the presidential race" this time around, Nyhan writes, "and most of the vulnerable Democratic incumbents in Congress lost in 2010."

http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/politics-elections/215071-study-quantifies-health-reform-votes-significant-toll-on-2010-house-democrats

[240 is Back]

that was 2010.  those number are certainly accounted for in 2012 july polling.


romney is losing in polls because he's a weak candidate who won't take a position on anything.

he's so scared of flip flopping or alienating anyone, that he's just not taking a position on the SCOTUS decision, nor the exec order on DREAM.

People see this.  They hear jeb taking positions.  They KNOW Christie would be telling us what he thinks.

Romney just sees he is lagging in polls and says "the last thing I'mma do it alienate anyone else" - but people like balls.  They'd rather have an honest, direct leader who says something they agree with - than a yes man who just agrees with everyone and refuses to take a position.


Or, just wait til novemebr and see for yourself.  Myth won't take a position on anything.

[Soul Crusher]

Obama has the brain dead, brainwashed, delusional, psychotic , ignorant , 180 type vote locked and that is all he cares about.

that was 2010.  those number are certainly accounted for in 2012 july polling.


romney is losing in polls because he's a weak candidate who won't take a position on anything.

he's so scared of flip flopping or alienating anyone, that he's just not taking a position on the SCOTUS decision, nor the exec order on DREAM.

People see this.  They hear jeb taking positions.  They KNOW Christie would be telling us what he thinks.

Romney just sees he is lagging in polls and says "the last thing I'mma do it alienate anyone else" - but people like balls.  They'd rather have an honest, direct leader who says something they agree with - than a yes man who just agrees with everyone and refuses to take a position.


Or, just wait til novemebr and see for yourself.  Myth won't take a position on anything.

[tu_holmes]

TRENDING: Rupert Murdoch's advice to Romney: Get some pros on your team
Posted by
CNN's Kevin Liptak
(CNN) – Rupert Murdoch offered presumptive GOP nominee Mitt Romney some unsolicited advice on Twitter Sunday: Lose your friends and hire professionals.

 Rupert Murdoch

@rupertmurdoch
Met Romney last week. Tough O Chicago pros will be hard to beat unless he drops old friends from team and hires some real pros. Doubtful.


1 Jul 12 ReplyRetweetFavorite

[240 is Back]

TRENDING: Rupert Murdoch's advice to Romney: Get some pros on your team
Posted by
CNN's Kevin Liptak
(CNN) – Rupert Murdoch offered presumptive GOP nominee Mitt Romney some unsolicited advice on Twitter Sunday: Lose your friends and hire professionals.

 Rupert Murdoch

@rupertmurdoch
Met Romney last week. Tough O Chicago pros will be hard to beat unless he drops old friends from team and hires some real pros. Doubtful.


1 Jul 12 ReplyRetweetFavorite

pwntage

[MCWAY]

that was 2010.  those number are certainly accounted for in 2012 july polling.


romney is losing in polls because he's a weak candidate who won't take a position on anything.

he's so scared of flip flopping or alienating anyone, that he's just not taking a position on the SCOTUS decision, nor the exec order on DREAM.

People see this.  They hear jeb taking positions.  They KNOW Christie would be telling us what he thinks.

Romney just sees he is lagging in polls and says "the last thing I'mma do it alienate anyone else" - but people like balls.  They'd rather have an honest, direct leader who says something they agree with - than a yes man who just agrees with everyone and refuses to take a position.


Or, just wait til novemebr and see for yourself.  Myth won't take a position on anything.

Why are you talking about Jeb Bush or Chris Christie? Both of them had a chance to enter the race but NEITHER of them did.

As for not taking a stand, Romney has done JUST THAT. He said he will repeal ObamaCare. He's said that from the start of his campaign and has not flinched from that one bit, even with all the attempt to tack his Mass. law with ObamaCare.

On the other hand, Obama flip-flopped on gay "marriage", flip-flopped on the executive order (claiming he didn't have the authority to do it; yet, when Romney was gaining ground and he was losing it, he completely contradicted himself).

Romney was statistically tied last month; he's statistically tied this month. However, three states Obama won handily in 2008 are not toss-up. Indiana, which Obama also won, moved to "lean Romney"

Now, he's generating more cash than Obama. And with the Supreme Court's ruling, he can now attack Obama with his own campaign promise, not to raise taxes on the middle class.

[240 is Back]

Why are you talking about Jeb Bush or Chris Christie? Both of them had a chance to enter the race but NEITHER of them did.

As for not taking a stand, Romney has done JUST THAT. He said he will repeal ObamaCare. He's said that from the start of his campaign and has not flinched from that one bit, even with all the attempt to tack his Mass. law with ObamaCare.

On the other hand, Obama flip-flopped on gay "marriage", flip-flopped on the executive order (claiming he didn't have the authority to do it; yet, when Romney was gaining ground and he was losing it, he completely contradicted himself).

Romney was statistically tied last month; he's statistically tied this month. However, three states Obama won handily in 2008 are not toss-up. Indiana, which Obama also won, moved to "lean Romney"

Now, he's generating more cash than Obama. And with the Supreme Court's ruling, he can now attack Obama with his own campaign promise, not to raise taxes on the middle class.

romney has NOT taken a stand.  He has been very careful not to agree/disagree with obama's DREAM bullshit.  He's been careful to say "i wish the states had more power, blah blah," but didn't call out John roberts for the bullshit.

he's playing it safe now.  I guess you can say i'm wrong, but the polls' trend aint looking pretty for romney.

i predict he grows a set and gets wild, or he is down 5 points in a month in most polls.  unless he's there already.

[MCWAY]

romney has NOT taken a stand.  He has been very careful not to agree/disagree with obama's DREAM bullshit.  He's been careful to say "i wish the states had more power, blah blah," but didn't call out John roberts for the bullshit.

he's playing it safe now.  I guess you can say i'm wrong, but the polls' trend aint looking pretty for romney.

i predict he grows a set and gets wild, or he is down 5 points in a month in most polls.  unless he's there already.

Calling out Roberts does him little good at this point. Yet, he took his stand with ObamaCare, saying he will repeal it, Basically, he wasn't depending on the Supreme Court to get rid of it.

The polls ain't looking pretty? It's a statistical DEAD HEAT, just as it was a month ago. Obama's up three in Gallup; it's tied in Rasmussen.

And, the economic and unemployment numbers are on the horizon.

[240 is Back]

it's a statistical dead heat?  in what world lol.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html

[Fury]

it's a statistical dead heat?  in what world lol.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html

Has MBA, doesn't understand margins of error.


America's colleges at work.