Iowa: Cain 37, Romney 27, Paul 12, Gingrich 8
posted at 9:50 pm on October 21, 2011 by Allahpundit
Remember when Iowa was going to be a battle between Perry and Bachmann for the conservative vote? He’s now at 5.9 percent, she’s at 3.9 percent. They’re barely ahead of Newt Gingrich — combined.
Cain by 10 with the caucuses just 75 or so days away. Unless he’s taken major damage over this week’s abortion kerfuffle, which I doubt, I don’t see why he can’t be this cycle’s Huckabee.
Minor caveat: The poll was completed before the Piers Morgan interview on abortion aired. Iowa conservatives weren’t happy about that, but Cain did some useful damage control today and has plenty of time to do more. Major caveat: The margin of error in this poll among likely Republican caucus-goers is, er, 7.4 percent. In no other poll does Cain lead by this much (his next highest total in Iowa is 30 percent), so it may be an outlier. But look at it this way: Even allowing for the maximum error here, he still leads Perry 30/13. Perry’s chances in New Hampshire are almost as dead as Bachmann’s right now, so he’s suddenly in a position of flaming out in not one but both of the two key early states. I don’t know how he’d recover if that happened. South Carolina would be his firewall, but the damage to his fundraising if he lost Iowa would be colossal and, per Giuliani’s 2008 “strategy,” campaigns that stake their viability on a single state a few weeks into the primary schedule aren’t good bets. South Carolinians would also have to think strategically if Cain won Iowa: By opting for Perry instead of Cain, they’d ensure a split in the “Not Romney” conservative vote that would probably guarantee Romney’s nomination. Which is why, while Perry can skip New Hampshire, I think he’s stuck having to compete in Iowa. Sooner or later he’ll have to suck it up and start attacking Cain in earnest.
Speaking of fundraising damage, a nifty graphic from National Journal about the fall-off in Perry’s cash haul once the debates got going:
Note how quickly Romney’s fundraising whirred to life once he finally had a credible challenger. He’s got an Iowa dilemma too now: If Perry continues to flail, shouldn’t he seize the opportunity by jumping in and trying to cinch the nomination with a win there too? Why, maybe he should…
But their paid staff has increased from three to four since August, according to the Romney campaign headquarters, and an Iowa Republican official said that Romney representatives have blanketed the state to sign up supporters and stay in touch with backers from 2008.
“I’ve been amazed at how well they’ve been able to do it under the radar,” the Iowa GOP official said. “They cover a lot of ground. There isn’t a county event where they don’t have a guy there … making sure they are keeping their own people home so they don’t bleed support.”
“They know what they’re doing,” he said.
Four years ago, Romney received 25 percent of the caucus vote and came in second to former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee. The result was disappointing because Romney had made a priority of winning the state. But if Romney could match that result or get close to it after having kept expectations low, it would be a win. And if he finishes ahead of Perry, it could be a fatal blow to the Texan.
Amazingly, none of the other candidates has any major organizational effort happening in Iowa. Romney could, very possibly, swoop in and blow the rest of the field away with an eleventh-hour effort. Dagger in the heart for the tea party.
Via the Daily Caller, here’s Coulter floating the idea of a Romney/Cain ticket. If Cain does win Iowa and, maybe, South Carolina, why shouldn’t he be on the ticket? He’s said he’s open to the idea of being VP; as the winner of two key early primaries, he’d be the preferred candidate for a lot of key Republican voters. He’d bring regional, religious, and racial diversity to a ticket with Romney. And as a Beltway outsider who connects with blue-collar voters, he’d defuse some of the Democrats’ attempts to demagogue Romney’s wealth.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3
Quick preview summary: My plan fer drilling in Texas, part XXIIII. That’ll do the trick, yessireebob.
whatcat on October 22, 2011 at 1:25 PM
I believe Rick Perry is speaking in Iowa today, Knucklehead. He’s releasing his plan on Tuesday, I think…Steve Forbes just tweeted:
Lots more on @GovernorPerry’s #flattax plan in the coming days and weeks. Thrilled by the response so far; excited to see where it goes.
I’m just now hearing about Cain saying it isn’t important to know the names of “small insignificant states around the world”. Can’t imagine how I missed that one.
capitalist piglet on October 22, 2011 at 1:44 PM
A strategic thought: If Romney loses the Perry voters to front running Cain, then Romney is buried.
So tell me again why Romney believes personally trashing Perry is a good move for Romney?
That only shows a basic ignorance of the battlefield among the GOP Brahmin consultants who are still stuck on stupid in belief that Perry is the threat to their candidate.
That is using 30 day old information. The GOP REMfs are going to blow this battle from arrogance.
jimw on October 22, 2011 at 1:50 PM
Yeah, this is all just a big joke, like the names of “small insignificant states around the world”.
At least Perry knows something about governing.
capitalist piglet on October 22, 2011 at 1:50 PM
I didn’t bother answering it because the answer is so obvious.
I find evrything wrong with those observations. Cain has about as much experience fighting Washington as me – which is zilch. Pray tell, in what capacity?
TheRightMan on October 22, 2011 at 1:55 PM
Completely, defiantly ignorant. These people defy natural order: they emerge out of failure to repeat their failures without any impulsion to learn or change. They are deathless failures.
I believe “imbecile” is the Latin term for being unable to fight. This describes Romney. He’s a gold-plated imbecile.
rrpjr on October 22, 2011 at 2:06 PM
Yeah! I, like everyone else, have spent many sleepless nights tossing & turning worried sick that Palau and Liechtenstein haven’t been a big enough concern to me.
That’s good, since he has that governor gig to get back to – Pawlenty wasn’t as fortunate. Always nice to have a job waiting for you at home when things don’t work out, I say.
whatcat on October 22, 2011 at 2:20 PM
You agree LMUSA just stated the obvious?
whatcat on October 22, 2011 at 2:23 PM
Sigh… what is obvious is the answer to your question.
Question: I asked what you found incorrect in those observations.
Answer: Everything! Cain has zilch experience fighting Washington and is not the real deal.
TheRightMan on October 22, 2011 at 2:29 PM
Eh. You’re certainly welcome to your opinion even though it’s clearly a minority one.
whatcat on October 22, 2011 at 2:40 PM
test
Spathi on October 22, 2011 at 2:48 PM
I’ll take a FlatTAX over the current system, but Perry has yet to come up with a plan to “get to” the FlatTAX. Cain’s proposing a FairTAX (which I prefer for a number of reasons) and 999 is a path to get to that.
Perry needs to put out his bridge between the two, he’s yet to do that.
I’ll take either a FlatTAX or a FairTAX over the current system, Perry’s got to play some catch-up though and needs to make up some lost ground in a hurry.
Jason Coleman on October 22, 2011 at 2:55 PM
Cain needs 9-9-9: nine percent federal spending cuts three years in a row to balance the freaking budget.
AshleyTKing on October 22, 2011 at 4:19 PM
Perry’s funding is drying up and Romney is baiting him into spending what is left to trash him. No one else is getting donations and once Perry’s cash is gone, he is done and the nomination belongs to Romney.
csdeven on October 22, 2011 at 4:34 PM
I don’t agree with you end conclusion, but you may have a good point about Romney forcing Perry to spend his money trying to prove he’s not an idiot.
whatcat on October 22, 2011 at 4:52 PM
He certainly seems like the type of guy to do it.
CrankyTRex on October 22, 2011 at 5:01 PM
Go Herb! Promise me you’ll never change! :D
benny shakar on October 22, 2011 at 5:18 PM
test test
Spathi on October 22, 2011 at 6:15 PM
Heh.
“Honkie for Herman”
“Beat Obama with a Cain”
davidk on October 22, 2011 at 6:43 PM
If I had known there was going to be a test today I would have studied.
whatcat on October 22, 2011 at 6:48 PM
I’m still trying to figure out the extra 7 or 8 states that Obama said he had left to visit during campaign 2008.
Winebabe on October 22, 2011 at 7:05 PM
I have never been a fan of some of the explanations for seemingly dumb behavior from a candidate that generally doesn’t act in that fashion.
During the exchange between Romney and Perry, Romney asked him a direct question that Perry was d@mned, irrespective of how he answered it. I know that is a debate tactic used against those inexperienced in debating. People thought Romney was losing his cool, but in the final analysis, Perry looked weak. He asked Perry if he was going to keep speaking over Romney’s time. Had Perry answered “no” we would wonder why he was still speaking. He answered “yes” and we wondered why he wasn’t going to abide by the rules he himself insisted everyone follow. At the end, the moderator remarked that he thought republicans always followed the rules.
So, the ad Perry made about the illegal lawn care guy was petty and it made him look foolish. The Romneycare part was awesome! The clips made it appear that Romney wanted a national plan in the past and now does not. I have been told the comments were out of context, but have yet seen the clips in the context they were spoken. Irrespective of the truth, the ad is devastating with the base. Unfortunately, the indies may not care, and in the end it will have zero affect because when push comes to shove, we rational folk will vote for whomever the GOP nominee is.
csdeven on October 22, 2011 at 7:21 PM
Calm down, everyone. Spathi is doing a mic check at OWS. The drum circles are not loud enough.
onlineanalyst on October 22, 2011 at 8:12 PM
TheRightMan on October 22, 2011 at 11:44 AM
I told the husband that I’m observing the same thing.
The personality cultists have found themselves a new savior to prostrate themselves before. I’m not looking for a savior-I’m looking for a president…and I don’t think that Cain currently has what it takes to be an effective one.
annoyinglittletwerp on October 22, 2011 at 8:38 PM
Same here.
The more the guy talks the worse my gut feels. I’m starting to wonder how easily Obama could destroy him during the debates. Or, for that matter.. how much RINO he is actually hiding.
Between pandering to the media, saying he’s a pro-life pro-choicer and seeming to have no basic understanding of foreign policy… it makes my freaking head spin! I’m having moments where I am seriously beginning to wonder whether Obama will actually be able pull this off. Not because of anything great he does.. but because our side is so screwed up!
At least Newt has gone through the fire. What else can they throw at him? And even if they have something.. he handles himself so well! He seems to easily fire back at attacks or stupid questions with ease and a smirk.. blowing them out of the water. But he’s so far down in the polls. Newt is a master at debates! He’s proven it. He’s a genius when it comes to history and economics and fresh ideas…. his mistakes have been no worse than any of these other candidates and he has done far more for the GOP and America. But does he have any chance at all of rising in the polls?
When Ron Paul starts looking good to me it’s bad. It’s very bad.
JellyToast on October 22, 2011 at 8:58 PM
I think that Romney can afford the backlash because Romney’s 25% is not going anywhere. Romney’s strategy is to destroy Perry first and then after South Carolina to go after Cain. The only thing that would prevent this is if Cain raised a lot of money and used it to attack Romney after Iowa. Both Romney and Cain want Perry out as soon as possible.
Bill C on October 22, 2011 at 9:26 PM
This is so obtuse as to make an answer impossible. Cain has fought Washington. His political debut was asking a question of Clinton during the 1993 health care debate. You can read the rest at wikipedia. I have no doubt that Cain is a conservative however I do have doubt that he is a good politician. Being a gaffe machine will not serve us well in 2012.
Bill C on October 22, 2011 at 9:32 PM
I’ve decided to do a shot everytime Punkchenko, Capitalist phony piglet, CsDeven, and Honda v65 bash Cain. (they don’t seem to like black men in positions of authority)
Alcohol poisoning here I come.
Hard Right on October 22, 2011 at 9:36 PM
This is Romney’s strategy. (I am not saying it is a good strategy but it is what Romney is trying to accomplish.) It is completely true that I did not read this before I posted this:
Romney thinks Perry is the candidate that must be defeated first. I think csdeven is exactly right. Cain will not have the cash nor the organization that Perry enjoys and will, therefore, be easier to defeat for Romney.
Bill C on October 22, 2011 at 9:37 PM
The more I read csdeven, the more I respect his political analysis. I could not agree more. Perry’s attack was petty. However, it was the only line of attack Perry had against Romney’s charge that he was soft on immigration. Remember this political truism: If you are explaining you are losing. What Perry needed to do was to put Romney on the defensive. He has also opened up the line of attack that Romney is a flip flopper. (csdeven will disagree with me about whether he is or not.) The flip flopper charge is the most devastating against Romney. However, I believe it will not matter that much. Why? Romney’s 25% doesn’t care.
Bill C on October 22, 2011 at 9:43 PM
The only bridge between a flat tax and a fair tax is a constitutional amendment repealing the 16th amendment. Cain’s plan gives the Democrats a national sales tax and a VAT. (Cain’s corporate income tax is a VAT.)
The real problem with Cain’s plan is that it deals with a proximate cause rather than a real cause of our fiscal problems. The real cause is big government spending. Trying to choke off revenue temporarily with 999 will not stop the spending. Only a BBA will stop the spending.
Bill C on October 22, 2011 at 9:48 PM
Oliver North yesterday was raving about Cain (not endorsing.) He’s know Cain for several years and went on book tours with him and Tea Parties.
His exact words were that Cain is “the real deal.”
Elisa on October 22, 2011 at 9:51 PM
It’s not a VAT.
However, if you’d like to demonstrate that it is a VAT, go right ahead and show your work.
A BBA would be great but will not stop SSA and Medicare from swallowing the budget.
A repeal of the 16th would be great as well, but not 100 percent necessary in the short term.
999 is a process/device/bridge to move from one taxation system to another, which is necessary and absent from Perry’s plan.
Salut!
Jason Coleman on October 22, 2011 at 10:12 PM
FIFY
The War Planner on October 22, 2011 at 10:15 PM
Really? And in what position of authority is Cain over anyone?
csdeven on October 22, 2011 at 10:59 PM
That makes two of us, Bill.
gryphon202 on October 23, 2011 at 12:01 AM
Except to total irrelevance other candidate’s support exceeds 25% (as Cain is experiencing over Romney). Besides , it would be little comfort to me to hold on to 25% when there’s 75% out there. It might be of some comfort in an it’s-all-over bunker situation, along with laying plans for a new Berlin to pass time – but not very helpful outside of the bunker.
whatcat on October 23, 2011 at 12:01 AM
You know I like you, my friend. But before you and others start calling us cultists because we are willing to support someone who makes mistakes and genuinely like the man, let me explain to you what my personal thinking is.
I am a conservative and I am a REALIST.
I really hope that Perry’s performance improves and I’m not just talking about in debates. The turning point for Perry was not the immigration tuitions thing, but when he said, “heartless.” He lost a lot of people. Not me. Of course Perry will try and seal the border as President. The rock thing came and went and won’t harm Perry, who did nothing wrong. (and neither did Cain.)
Perry has no one but himself to blame for losing the support he had. He doubled down on the “heartless” when he said, “how else should they pay for college?” He should have just been quiet on that point. Tempers were already inflamed.
Then he started looking desperate in the last debate. (His wife too, God love her. I can understand her frustration.) He is a seasoned politician. He should not have looked desperate, even if he felt desperation. That scared me when he talked over Romney and went after him for a gardener. More than once, too, and doubled down in an ad. I don’t know who gave him this advice, but they should be fired.
It’s not too late for Perry.
I still like Perry and would certainly support him if he started doing better. Maybe this week when he explains his flat tax he will come alive. I think that Perry and Cain would both make great Presidents.
Newt is brilliant, but I don’t see him getting the nomination. I think he could win in the general against Obama, because so many can’t stand Obama. But we can never underestimate the fact that one of the few things the general public knows about Newt is that he is on his third wife and cheated on the first 2 and gave a ridiculous public excuse for doing so. He could overcome “The Gingrich that Stole Christmas” persona that the media gave him. He could come off more likable in 2012 than he was in the 1990’s. But will independent women in the general forget his personal life and vote for him? (Remember that pig and abuser Clinton never left his wife and she stood by him. That counts for some of these women.)
Let’s face it, Santorum and Bachmann are not going to get it.
So realistically AT THIS POINT IN TIME (if Perry or Newt do not improve their standings) there are ONLY 3 OPTIONS left for 2012.
One is Obama winning.
Two is Romney winning.
Three is Cain winning.
We can all complain about Cain’s faults and Perry’s faults, etc, etc, but this is what we conservatives have to choose from. We need to face reality.
And for those of you conservatives who support Perry, what will you do if Perry doesn’t come close to getting any more support in the next 2 months? Is throwing Cain away the answer? Must we destroy Cain to give Perry support? If Perry can’t get support on his own by the way HE acts and the things HE says and HE proposes, he doesn’t deserve it.
Cain jumbles up answers sometimes so he can’t win? What if all that leaves us with is Romney? Then what? Is it wise to trash Cain? Why not just examine and criticize him and his policies within reason. Why must some people call him incompetent, a liar, a dunce, a phony? (not all detractors do these things) Does that help our side? Especially when this man’s entire life has said otherwise?
I don’t think that Romney will do as well as Cain in the general. I know that flies in the face of the establishment wisdom. But independents and the general voters look at things differently than we do.
Obama’s strategy will be to blame Wall St. It has already started. Romney will look like Mr. Wall St. And I watch him during the debates. He has this condescending phony smirk when he smiles while the others talk. That would not come off well against Obama. I’m sure Romney is a good man, but he doesn’t answer questions in interviews and debates and comes off like the typical politician. People don’t like phony typical politicians.
Yes, Cain could learn a little bit of that. He doesn’t always have to answer questions and do it honesty. But that is both a good and bad thing. For me Cain’s main problem that scares me is that sometimes he is thinking out loud and he is not answering the question posed to him, but a question he is thinking in his head. So he jumbles up the answer. He thinks he has answered the question clearly already the first time, so the interviewer must be asking a different question the second time. Instead, the interviewer is still on the first question. Or Cain is just off in left field thinking of something else entirely and answering that. This is a problem I recognize. But I don’t see it as insurmountable. The man is extremely smart and he knows how to learn quickly from his mistakes more than most.
The vast majority of the time Cain is excellent in interviews. He was on more liberal media outlets these past few weeks than all the others combined. Who else did an hour on CNN or went on The View? One hour of excellence, and one minute gets publicized. It’s worth mentioning, but there is such a thing as balance and overkill.
People will forgive someone who is being direct and honest with them, if they misspeak. They will say, “he’s not a politician and that’s a good thing.” I think Cain has that Reagan “Teflon President” thing going on. So likable and sincere than nothing bad sticks to him. Something our side needs when the media starts attacking whoever our nominee will be, even Romney.
I don’t think there are many people here who would not support Cain if he had some past political experience and didn’t misspeak and knew more about foreign policy.
So, do we have to discard him because he is still learning? When all we have left might be Romney or Obama? Does our candidate have to be perfect to win in the general? Not against Obama they don’t. Which is good, because none of them are perfect.
Foreign policy? What moderate or conservative voter in the general would not think Cain was better than the disaster that Obama has been. Dissing our friends and cozying up to our enemies. Most candidates have just been coached longer. They aren’t geniuses in this area.
Cain has good conservative instincts and will with foreign policy. Cain will surround himself with excellent advisers who will give him the right facts. That is Cain’s best quality. He knows how to analyze a problem and assemble the right facts, then make the right decision.
I don’t think we should destroy or discard Cain. Let’s wait and see how Perry does. What if Perry doesn’t pull this off? Why do permanent damage to Cain, who might be all we have left? And he might surprise everyone by being one to the best Republican candidates we’ve had in a long time.
Not that Cain can’t do anything to lose my support. Just that so far there haven’t been any deal breakers and I suspect there won’t be.
Like Oliver North said yesterday, Cain is “the real deal.”
It doesn’t make me or anyone else a cultist to have affection for Cain, who is a very endearing, good and decent man of humor and grace. These are not simply my opinions. For months in poll after poll he is everyone’s first or second pick or someone with low negative numbers.
I’m being realistic here. Not a cultist.
Sorry this was so long. Good night everyone.
Elisa on October 23, 2011 at 12:08 AM
Even if that were the case, there is certainly no lack of problems in running Romney. If you disagree, I’ll let other folks run down what I’m sure will be quite lengthy bulletpoint lists on the problems with running Romney.
But you can make such laundry lists of complaints of both real and imagined problems with any/every candidate (and I think I’ve seen ‘em all here). But they’re all neither here nor there in reality, as it is with your perceived problem with Cain.
whatcat on October 23, 2011 at 12:10 AM
Hear, hear! Good post, Elisa. Couldn’t agree more.
Demosthenes on October 23, 2011 at 1:13 AM
I’m still trying to figure out what the argument for Perry is if Cain “isn’t ready.” I get being for Newt or Romney in that instance, but not Perry.
It’s not like Perry has been able to articulate any kind of plan to fix things, and the most coherent argument he’s made so far was to call the base heartless. And this is without going into the media lions’ dens like Cain has been for the last month or so to defend a plan that both sides have a vested interest in ripping apart. It seems like his wife has even done more press than he has.
He’s governor of perhaps the only state in the union that could probably run itself without any government at all, so the challenge there is not so much about fixing what is broken (which is what we have in DC) or convincing people ideologically neutral/opposed to you to support your policies (a la this campaign.) So I’m not sure how much of Texas’ jobs record and policy successes are just Texas being Texas and how much are Rick Perry.
I guess if you want to say he has foreign policy experience dealing with Mexico’s crap, that would be on there, but that’s not a huge deal (to me anyway.)
So I just don’t understand the appeal.
CrankyTRex on October 23, 2011 at 2:22 AM
Show my work? Since when has Hot Air become an online university?
How about I just link to trustworthy sources, Cain’s website, that claim 999 is some kind of VAT?
Remember, the above quote is Herman Cain’s description of his tax. For further discussion of Herman Cain’s VAT see here and here.
Bill C on October 23, 2011 at 7:34 AM
McCain won with the nomination with a plurality due to the winner take all primaries in 2008. Before April 1st the primaries are proportional but they become winner take all after that. Romney would just need to keep in two or three conservatives and then win in the moderate/liberal and Mormon stronghold states. See here for Romney’s path to victory.
Bill C on October 23, 2011 at 7:41 AM
Trust me, I am not a Romney fan. Karl does a good job of unearthing Obama’s plan for beating Romney and not-Romney. I don’t know if the plans will work, actually I doubt it, but I would not be happy if the GOP was stuck with an elitist candidate. I think if you read between the lines of Karl’s analysis the best candidate would be Perry. Cain has already said enough stupid things that could be turned into commercials, insulting Hispanics for example, that he would be a perfect candidate for a frontlash strategy.
Cain has just this past week said a number of things that were bad gaffes. Speaking from the heart is a good quality in a friend but it isn’t in politics. Most people are not engaged so their impression of a candidate can be shaped by advertising. Obama will have plenty of money to shape Romney as the out of touch, Kerry-esque elitist. And Cain as the crazy, loose cannon old man. If you don’t have a job or are not rich blame yourself? You think unemployed people want to hear that?
Bill C on October 23, 2011 at 7:58 AM
Ah, but my point is that when it comes to pluralities, even just 25.000001 beats 25. That’s even assuming the 25% figure is correct, there’s no margin of error, and that it can’t fall any lower than that already dismal peak number.
That’s a whole lot of assuming. And I’m not quite sure what a “Mormon stronghold state” means. Maybe Utah in the same sense Texas would very likely go Perry. Not a big geo-political map.
The New York Times? That would be the last place I’d look for insight on GOP politics – or go seeking economic wisdom from Paul Krugman. But even setting that aside, anybody could announce the “inevitable path to victory” for any of the candidates and imagine a scenario to support that presupposition. About a month ago it would have seemed reasonable to offer the inevitability of Rick Perry. With Cain cleaning both Perry’s and Romney’s clock now, it would seem reasonable to make the inevitable path claim for him. But it would be a fool’s errand to make the “inevitable path” case in any of these instances.
If the history of the nomination process has taught us anything over the last several hundred years, it’s that there are no sure things. It’s one mighty bumpy road and about the only thing you can expect is the unexpected. I would hold off on liquidating all my assets and betting it all on a candidate at InTrade. I suspect very few people would be willing to do so, despite an “inevitable path guarantee”.
whatcat on October 23, 2011 at 9:20 AM
And Perry will get turned into GWBII. He’s going to be incredibly easy to paint with that, especially if he’s stammering his way through interviews and debates as he has thus far. Do you want to have to run against Obama AND the Bush Derangement Syndrome?
Newt will get the philandering “inside the beltway” old man treatment. Bachmann will be Palinized. Ron Paul will be the crazy old uncle that everyone smiles and nods at but doesn’t listen to. Santorum will be the guy that hates gays and wants women to die on the floor.
No candidate is going to get away from being caricatured by the media, so picking a candidate based on how they might come after that candidate is a foolish pursuit.
CrankyTRex on October 23, 2011 at 11:44 AM
Bill,
Not one of those sources say that Cain’s tax is a VAT save for Ace (who does and then backs off, then on again). “Roughy” a VAT, does not make something a VAT, kind of like a VAT doesn’t make something a VAT. In addition most of those who are modifying their term VAT do so by including parameters that are not included in the plan but are offered as “what if this were added” to make it a VAT.
Ace’s argument is mostly an appeal to authority and gross misrepresentation, and a poor one at that, I’ll show why in a moment.
Any sales tax can be “called” a VAT, but that doesn’t make it a VAT.
NO ONE has yet done the legitimate work to actually call it a VAT straight out in valid legitimate arguments.
Why? Because it’s not a VAT. Corp income taxes are not a VAT, especially when products purchased B2B are un-taxed. Under a VAT system, products and services purchased by a company from another are explicitly taxed.
All of the people making legitimate arguments take great care to consistently modify the label VAT. That is weasel wording and it renders their arugments false.
If a company has interest income, that income is taxed, that fact alone makes it not a VAT. If a company receives income from rents, that income is taxed, that alone would make it not a VAT as well.
One can bend over backwards to find elements similar to VAT taxation in some companies particular taxation burden under Cain’s plan, but that does not make it a VAT in any way shape or form.
If you are going to call it a VAT, show your work and demonstrate that it is, no one has yet to do that, they only rely in modifying the label VAT to introduce confusion and derision without valid basis.
I’ve given two examples that show directly that Cain’s plan is not a VAT, I only need one to do so. You have nothing to show that it is a VAT other than false arguments and a statement that uses the words Value Added to describe something that is actually not in the plan at all.
—————————
Which brings us to Andy at Ace’s who makes a critical mistake.
Realize that Financial Adivisor’s report that you and Andy quote from discusses a “business transaction tax” the business transaction tax is not a part of Cain’s 999 plan, but rather is a discussed option for comparison. Cain proposes a business income tax. The two are quite different, as shown above in the case of rents and B2B purchases.
A business transaction tax would indeed radically expand the revenues, but again, Cain isn’t proposing a business transaction tax, he’s proposing a corporate income tax where B2B transactions and many other business transactions are completely exempt from taxation.
Using the words value-added structure does not equate to value-added tax, but that’s actually immaterial, because the business transaction tax isn’t a part of Cain’s plan in the first place.
———————-
Again, if you want to call it a VAT, show your work, you’d be the first to do so, if you can do it legitimately and without resorting to appeals to authority, misrepresentation and spurious similarity (or other false arguments), I’ll be happy to acknowledge your success.
Opinions that something is “like a VAT”, or an opinion that something has “elements of a VAT” or an opinion that something is a “modified VAT” are worthless if they can’t be backed up by fact and a legitimate defense.
Jason Coleman on October 23, 2011 at 1:34 PM
Yeah, too long. I’m not going to bother.
csdeven on October 23, 2011 at 1:38 PM
I’m sorry but Cain’s own website described it as “…a subtraction method value-added tax.” That is where the quote Ace cited comes from.
People who are interested can look at the National Reviews breakdown of the plan to decide if they think it is a VAT.
Bill C on October 24, 2011 at 1:27 AM
Caricatures are much more effective when they come from the mouth of the people who you are trying to beclown. Kerry’s quote about being for something before being against it was devastating. Almost daily Cain is saying something stupid that gives ammunition to the Democras. (Just to be clear I am not arguing with Cain, only that it is important to offer the truth with a spoonful of sugar. That was Reagan’s genius.) Do we want to take the chance that Cain is another Sharon Angle?
Bill C on October 24, 2011 at 1:31 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3