Sign Up | Log In
REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS
Americans view Romney's campaign more unfavorably than Obama's
Tuesday, August 7, 2012 8:39 AM
NIKI2
Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...
Quote:After weeks of scathing back-and-forth between President Barack Obama and his Republican challenger Mitt Romney, a plurality of the American public views the incumbent Democrat as running a more favorable campaign, according to a poll released Wednesday. The Washington Post/ABC News poll indicated 46% of Americans viewed Obama's campaign favorably, compared to only 38% who viewed Romney's. Perhaps more surprising: nearly one-in-four self-identified Republicans viewed Romney's campaign unfavorably, compared to 18% of Democrats who felt the same about Obama's effort. Similarly, 31% of conservative Republicans said they felt strongly favorable toward Romney's campaign, compared to 51% of liberal Democrats who felt the same about Obama's campaign. Democrats, as well as some Republicans, have also hit Romney for not release more of his personal income tax returns. The ABC News/Washington Post poll was taken by telephone from 1,015 adults between July 11-15. The sampling error was plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.
Tuesday, August 7, 2012 8:44 AM
Quote:Mitt Romney is extraordinarily wealthy, but that is not a justification for nondisclosure. He has made no secret of his wealth, and required campaign disclosures already hint at its magnitude. While Romney may have dissembled about when he actually left Bain Capital, he has been disassociated with the firm long enough that he cannot argue that his tax returns will reveal proprietary secrets. Nor is this just an exercise in financial titillation or gossip. Disclosure goes to the heart of the truthfulness with which a nominee engages the American people, and it assures us that he in fact has comported himself before the election with the high moral character we associate with a future president. Romney's 2010 tax return, when combined with his FEC disclosure, reveals red flags that raise serious tax compliance questions with respect to his possible tax minimization strategies in earlier years. The release in October of his 2011 return will at best act as a distraction from these questions. So, what are the issues? The first is Romney's Swiss bank account. Most presidential candidates don't think it appropriate to bet that the U.S. dollar will lose value by speculating in Swiss Francs, which is basically the rationale offered by the trustee of Romney's "blind" trust for opening this account. What's more, if you really want just to speculate on foreign currencies, you don't need a Swiss bank account to do so. The Swiss bank account raises tax compliance questions, too. The account seems to have been closed early in 2010, but was the income in fact reported on earlier tax returns? Did the Romneys timely file the required disclosure forms to the Treasury Department (so-called FBAR reports)? The IRS announced in 2009 a partial tax amnesty for unreported foreign bank accounts, in light of the Justice Department's criminal investigations involving several Swiss banks. To date, some 34,500 Americans have taken advantage of such amnesty programs. Did the Romneys avail themselves of any of these amnesty programs? One hopes that such a suggestion is preposterous, but that is what disclosure is for -- to replace speculation with truth-telling to the American people. Second, Romney's $100 million IRA is remarkable in its size. Even under the most generous assumptions, Romney would have been restricted to annual contributions of $30,000 while he worked at Bain. How does this grow to $100 million? One possibility is that a truly mighty oak sprang up virtually overnight from relatively tiny annual acorns because of the unprecedented prescience of every one of Romney's investment choices. Another, which on its face is quite plausible, is that Romney stuffed far more into his retirement plans each year than the maximum allowed by law by claiming that the stock of the Bain company deals that the retirement plan acquired had only a nominal value. He presumably would have done so by relying on a special IRS "safe harbor" rule relating to the taxation of a service partner's receipt of such interests, but that rule emphatically does not apply to an interest when sold to a retirement plan, which is supposed to be measured by its true fair market value. Third, the vast amounts in Romney's family trusts raise a parallel question: Did Romney report and pay gift tax on the funding of these trusts or did he claim similarly unreasonable valuations, which likewise would have exposed him to serious penalties if all the facts were known? Fourth, the complexity of Romney's one publicly released tax return, with all its foreign accounts, trusts, corporations and partnerships, leaves even experts (including us) scratching their heads. Disclosure of multiple years' tax returns is part of the answer here, but in this case it isn't sufficient. Romney's financial affairs are so arcane, so opaque and so tied up in his continuing income from Bain Capital that more is needed, including an explanation of the $100 million IRA. Finally, there's the puzzle of the Romneys' extraordinarily low effective tax rate. For 2010, the Romneys enjoyed a federal tax rate of only 13.9% on their adjusted gross income of roughly $22 million, which gave them a lower federal tax burden (including payroll, income and excise taxes) than the average American wage-earning family in the $40,000 to $50,000 range. The principal reason for this munificently low tax rate is that much of Romney's income, even today, comes from "carried interest," which is just the jargon used by the private equity industry for compensation received for managing other people's money. The vast majority of tax scholars and policy experts agree that awarding a super-low tax rate to this one form of labor income is completely unjustified as a policy matter. Romney has not explained how, as president, he can bring objectivity to bear on this tax loophole that is estimated as costing all of us billions of dollars every year. The U.S. presidency is a position of immense magnitude and requires a thorough vetting. What the American people deserve is a complete and honest presentation by Romney of how his wealth was accumulated, where it is now invested, what purpose is served by all the various offshore vehicles in which he has an interest and what his financial relationship with Bain Capital has been since his retirement from the company. These are all factors that go to the heart of his character and values. For a nominee to America's highest office, a clear and transparent reporting of his finances should be nothing more than routine.
Tuesday, August 7, 2012 9:22 AM
AURAPTOR
America loves a winner!
Tuesday, August 7, 2012 9:30 AM
STORYMARK
Quote:Originally posted by Niki2: Maybe that pundit I heard was right after all, in that there might be something in there which makes it safer for Romney to take the heat than actually release the returns. Hmmm...
Tuesday, August 7, 2012 9:44 AM
Quote:The Washington Post/ABC News poll indicated 46% of Americans viewed Obama's campaign favorably, compared to only 38% who viewed Romney's. Perhaps more surprising: nearly one-in-four self-identified Republicans viewed Romney's campaign unfavorably, compared to 18% of Democrats who felt the same about Obama's effort.
Tuesday, August 7, 2012 11:39 AM
JONGSSTRAW
Tuesday, August 7, 2012 12:53 PM
Quote:Originally posted by Niki2: Isn't it amazing that Raptor can write that American's DON'T view Romney's campaign more unfavorably than Obamas,
Wednesday, August 8, 2012 3:29 AM
Wednesday, August 8, 2012 7:57 AM
KWICKO
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)
Quote:Originally posted by Niki2: Yeah Mark, the more I thought about it, the more sense that made. There HAS to be something in there he's afraid of, otherwise his reluctance makes no sense at al, as it's hurtnig him so badly that other REPUBICANS are urgnig him to reveal them.... Isn't it amazing that Raptor can write that American's DON'T view Romney's campaign more unfavorably than Obamas, directly in the face of Quote:The Washington Post/ABC News poll indicated 46% of Americans viewed Obama's campaign favorably, compared to only 38% who viewed Romney's. Perhaps more surprising: nearly one-in-four self-identified Republicans viewed Romney's campaign unfavorably, compared to 18% of Democrats who felt the same about Obama's effort.I guess his definition of "more" and "unfavorably" are different from ours. In other words, 25% of Republicans view Romney's campaign unfavorably (pretty telling, considering it's REPUBLICANS!) and almost HALF of the American people view Romney's campaign unfavorably. Yet he can write what he did, with obviously no sense of reality. Weird.
YOUR OPTIONS
NEW POSTS TODAY
OTHER TOPICS
FFF.NET SOCIAL