Just for the record, if Mitch Daniels runs, he would be my pick, in both the primary (if I were a Republican) and in the general. And FWIW, I suspect he’d be great on space policy.
34 thoughts on “My Candidate”
Comments are closed.
Just for the record, if Mitch Daniels runs, he would be my pick, in both the primary (if I were a Republican) and in the general. And FWIW, I suspect he’d be great on space policy.
Comments are closed.
No thanks. Daniels wants to compromise with the Left on the debt. He’s even thrown out the possibility of a value-added tax in the USA. He personalizes the debt as the enemy, while ignoring the Leftists who are creating it in order to hasten a Cloward-Piven collapse and the subsequent “dictatorship of the proletariat.”
He’s trying to think his way out of our predicament, when we need a fighter. We need Dirty Harry, not Velma on Scooby-Doo.
i agree with ken mitchy is ghwb in a smaller size
Yep, 2012 will be 1964 all over again…
Ken, you have posted sufficiently here as to give your views very little weight among the readership.
Tom, dream on.
Ah I am with ya Rand. As I said in a previous comment last week , doubt he has the look or the charisma to win.
Yep, 2012 will be 1964 all over again…—What Thomas wants….
Yep, 2012 will be 1980 all over again…—What reality is going to give Thomas if Mitch runs.
” As I said in a previous comment last week , doubt he has the look or the charisma to win.”
As long as he remembers the advice of James Carville, Obama will be trounced.
Reading the article I don’t see much about Daniels to get excited about. If, as Ken states, he supports a VAT, that would be a deal breaker for me.
I have no problem with a VAT as long as it eliminates the income tax.
Nothing in that article is persuasive. Just like taxing the wealthy won’t fix the deficit, neither will stopping entitlement spending on the wealthy. Whether you go with higher taxes or spending cuts, the middle class has to take the hit.
I also don’t appreciate the use of the term “birther”. And I’m sure a lot of other people won’t either. Until recently it was simply a statement of fact that Obama hadn’t released his birth certificate and it was at least conceivable he had been born in Kenya. Today those questions are as answered as they’re likely to ever be; but last month they weren’t.
I also have no problem with VAT (or a sales tax) as long as it eliminates the Income Tax.
Eliminating the income tax would have the added benefits of saving billions of dollars wasted every year on accountants and tax lawyers, sweep the capital markets clean of bad investments held “for tax purposes”, and free up a lot of time and creativity to be applied to actually-productive tasks.
The VAT appears to make Republicans unhappy with him.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1010/43702.html
Mitch Daniels takes hit for tax talk
By JAMES HOHMANN | 10/16/10 4:26 PM EST
[[[“This is outside the bounds of acceptable modern Republican thought, and it is only the zone of extremely left-wing Democrats who publicly talk about those things because all Democrats pretending to be moderates wouldn’t touch it with a 10-foot poll,” Americans for Tax Reform President Grover Norquist told POLITICO. “Absent some explanation, such as large quantities of crystal meth, this is disqualifying. This is beyond the pale.”]]]
I expect the Tea Party will steam roll over him in the Republican primaries on that issue alone….
That is what makes it like 1964. The Tea Party, like the John Birchers then, will ensure that only the most extreme will have any chance in the Republican primaries ensuring they are too extreme to make the move to the middle needed to be elected.
Oppose VAT, fundamentally regressive. Mitch needs to set up his campaign pac and tuck up to prep for the big show. He’s solid fiscally, a genuinely nice person, who has a bad habit of not knowing how to gladhand very well.
That is what makes it like 1964. The Tea Party, like the John Birchers then, will ensure that only the most extreme will have any chance in the Republican primaries ensuring they are too extreme to make the move to the middle needed to be elected.
I figure it more like 1968. LBJ was an unknown running on JFK’s legacy in 1964. Similarly, 2012 is the crash from Hope and Change. Further, what’s the deal with vilifying the Tea Party people? Since when has concern for the US’s fiscal future meant that your are extreme conservatives?
It could also be 1972 (in reverse): Obama wins reelection, but GOP wins big in Congress, due to having taken the initiative in the campaign, and forces Obama soon after into early retirement with a much more conservative Congress.
I should be honest, I don’t think it will be 1972, and I don’t think it will be Daniels. I frankly think this is the Republican 1932. Or maybe 1860 (think about that for a while).
Where is the next George Washington? We need him!
Or her… =D
*Does jumping jacks to make the comment filter happy*
I have no problem with a VAT as long as it eliminates the income tax.
You should have a problem with VAT – a big problem.
Government in general applies constant pressure to increase taxes. That pressure is resisted only if the tax is painful to likely voters. VAT hides the tax – so taxpayers will simply ignor it. Income tax also hides the pea with withholding. Hey! I get money back!
If you really wanted to shrink government, make everyone have to reach into their pocket the day before an election and watch their money go out to the lse.
Or maybe 1860 (think about that for a while).
Ken, back in 1860, the Republicans had Lincoln, (probably, the most amazing and lucky politician they’ve ever had. Who gives us powerful insights combined with inspirational rhetoric like Lincoln’s “House Divided” speech? Those are big boots to fill.
It seems if you someone who can fight and if you want someone who understands space policy, then newt gingrich would fit the bill.
I don’t hate him, completely. And normally he has something worth listening to.
He could weak in regards to executive experience- though I think he e better than Obama in that regard, but that isn’t saying much.
Daniels doesn’t have the guts to fight. We already saw what happened when you run a spineless wonder against a dirty fighter… back in 2008, when John “Moderate And Inoffensive” McCain helped get Barack Obama elected President.
Expect to see more about Daniels, though: he’s the MSM’s choice to run against Obama. That should tell you something.
I have no problem with a VAT as long as it eliminates the income tax.
Unless you repeal the 16th Amendment (fat chance), you’ll very quickly find youself paying the VAT and the income tax. Oh, they’ll find a reason to “temporarily” reimpose the income tax to cover some sort of emergency, real or imagined.
You should have a problem with VAT – a big problem.
Government in general applies constant pressure to increase taxes. That pressure is resisted only if the tax is painful to likely voters. VAT hides the tax – so taxpayers will simply ignor it. Income tax also hides the pea with withholding. Hey! I get money back!
The VAT also requires all of the regulatory complications of the income tax while, as you point out, it’s a stealth tax that affects the price of everything.
Unless the candidate is for really radical change, its not going to matter. Candidates that could actually fix things are unelectable.
We have reached the point where 51% of the us households pay no federal income tax, that 51% can vote to take more and more from the other 49% until it collapses.
(http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/05/51-of-americans-pay-no-federal-income-taxes/238329/)
We have also reached the point where mandatory expenditures exceed revenue, so even if we cut everything but entitlement programs and debt payments to zero we would be in the hole.
80% of Last weeks seven year bond sales where sold back to the Federal reserve through POMO.
No one that is electable has a plan to actually fix this.
Therefore the 2012 election does not matter.
What does the end game look like?
Living in Canada, i have to disagree that VAT taxes must be hidden, we see the GST applied to every bill, just like state/provincial sales taxes. PM Harper got some big bonus points from the public for cutting the GST from 7% to 5%, despite economist’s outcries.
We have reached the point where 51% of the us households pay no federal income tax, that 51% can vote to take more and more from the other 49% until it collapses.
This is an oft-repeated factoid, but I’m a bit skeptical. I don’t know a single adult who pays zero income tax, and I’m not wealthy. My BS detector is really pegged here.
If it’s true, though, a significant proportion of those paying no taxes are probably unemployed due to the current recession. Generally speaking, people don’t immediately change their political stripes due to temporary hardship. Get a sufficiently pro-growth administration, and the percentage of those paying taxes will spike upward.
A little too diffident for my tastes. He reminds me of the Ruler of the Universe in Douglas Adams’ oeuvre.
ESR recently had a blog post that was more along the lines of [No one that is electable has a plan to actually fix this. Therefore the 2012 election does not matter. So instead let’s chat about GPS device protocols some more.]
Your train of thought seems much more prudent.
Johnson and Paul, in that order. Both are truly committed to limited government. Probably can’t say that of any other candidate we’re likely to see.
Eric Weder Says:
Living in Canada, i have to disagree that VAT taxes must be hidden, we see the GST applied to every bill, just like state/provincial sales taxes.
I agree that a VAT doesn’t have to be hidden. Every country that has a VAT has their own rules and mechanisms for how it is implemented. Knowing how the US government works, it isn’t hard to believe that our version would be as stealthy as they can make it while being as convoluted and corrupt as our current tax system. Making the tax stealthy means that when people see the prices of everything increase, they’ll just blame the “greedy corporations” instead of the greedy politicians who caused the increase. Congress will be heavily lobbied to grant special VAT consideration for companies and politically connected industries just like with the income tax. And we’ll end up paying the VAT in addition to the income tax, not instead of it. History shows that for each additonal dollar of revenue they collect, Congress will spend at least a $1.17.
It’s time the government went on a serious diet. We’re broke and can’t afford the government we have. Prove that spending has been cut to the maximum extent possible and then (and only then) we’ll talk about increasing taxes.
We have reached the point where 51% of the us households pay no federal income tax, that 51% can vote to take more and more from the other 49% until it collapses.
This is an oft-repeated factoid, but I’m a bit skeptical. I don’t know a single adult who pays zero income tax, and I’m not wealthy. My BS detector is really pegged here.
Ken, I used to write income tax software (sold to professional preparers; it is not a do-it-yourself app like Turbo Tax), and I supported our users during the tax season.
Sorry to blow your BS detector out of the water here, but even fifteen years ago a significant number of folks who earned the Earned Income Tax Credit pay no federal income tax. The number of folks who qualify for that credit expands every year, either from a broadening poverty level or by Congress expanding coverage.
For 2008 I paid zero income tax. Bad income year for me. That said if we’re gonna keep the income tax, then everyone except maybe kids under 21 in summer jobs should pay income tax. But the tax bill should be presented quarterly, not deducted weekly and automatically.
Pro Libertate..
>Johnson and Paul, in that order.
Agreed, I’d also put them in the unelectable in the general sense category. In the last election cycle I gave the legal maximum to the Paul campaign. This cycle, the day he announced, I gave Gary Johnson the legal maximum for his primary fight. I’ve had dinner with Gary Johnson and if I could appoint someone to be president he would be it.
His (correct) pro drug legalization stance kills his chances for the red state primary battles and his primary message “I’m going to take away your goodies” kills it for the general. The libertarian bent of republican voters in NH is his only chance. He might eek out a win in NH if all the stars aligned. If he is in the running “polls wise” in the fall, I’m seriously contemplating moving back to NH for 6 months to campaign.
As for the 51% If we expand the definition to include those that work for government, such that they may receive 100K for their gov job and pay 10K in tax for a net government benefit of 90K, I’d argue that the number if WAY over 51%.
Everyone who makes money should pay taxes. That includes kids with paper routes. Everyone should have a stake in the efficiency of the government.
VAT strikes me as a horrid idea. It raises the price of everything and skews the information prices can transmit. Government’s ability to screw things up will result in varied VATS. You watch: VATS for this and that will be higher and VATS for other things will be lower. Just look at what they do with cigarettes today. At a time when you want to encourage people to buy things, VATS will discourage that. A sensible government would lower the VAT when times were bad and raise it when times are good.
“Sensible” – well so much for that idea.
To me a flat tax has all the good points of a VAT and none of the bad. Totally flat. Everyone pays the same percentage. No deductions for anyone or anything. Then, like VATS, the government’s adjustment of the flat tax rate is simple, clear, and …. transparent.
As for Mitchy the Kid and the other candidates:
I’m willing to listen to what Daniels has to say – as well as the others. But so far I don’t see anyone in the game who will step up and confront Obama..again and again and again.
An incumbent can lose if conditions are bad.
An incumbent can lose if his opponent is a good fighter – tough, smart, articulate, no nonsense. Charisma helps too.
Or an incumbent can lose with a combination of those two.
I personally think that Obama can be easily beaten by any candidate who is articulate, lively, demonstrates common sense, and is unafraid to confront him time and time again. Someone who thinks fast and constantly illustrates the illogic of Obama’s positions and actions. Someone who will go after him, relentlessly, with intelligence, and without crossing the anger or loony line. And I think that this person does not have to be am ultra-Right Winger.
It’s early but so far, I don’t see it.
I think America is hungry – HUNGRY – for a straight shooting grownup who is not into facade and who has some real experience, and who faces facts. Just look at the hard things Christie has put through and yet his numbers are pretty good. Why?
See above.
I HOPE America has learned it’s lesson about voting in inexperienced rock stars and/or goofballs – from any party.