Video: “Party Of Ideas” now on day four of talking about feeble budget gimmick that’ll never pass

posted at 6:40 pm on April 12, 2012 by Allahpundit

As a famous man once said, “If you don’t have a record to run on, then you paint your opponent as someone people should run from. You make a big election about small things.” Doesn’t get any smaller than this, but at least they’re getting closer to admitting the true purposes of the Buffett Rule. One, of course, is to have a bludgeon handy against mega-millionaire Mitt Romney and the other is to start shaping public perceptions ahead of the coming death struggle over the Bush tax cuts. Biden tied both of those up in a tidy package today by introducing — wait for it — the “Romney Rule,” shorthand for Romney’s nefarious plan to encourage growth by keeping the tax burden on job creators relatively low. It’ll work like a charm on the left, but as liberal Michael Tomasky notes, it ain’t the left they need to worry about in November:

More problematically, I wonder if it’s good politics. As I said, the base loves it. But beyond that, I suspect its appeal is limited. This may well be for bad reasons—that is, Americans have had it so pounded into them over the last 30 years that anything like this constitutes “class warfare” that they may just reflexively jump to that conclusion. That’s a shame, and it’s very much worth trying to alter that viewpoint in the long term. In the short term, though, Obama needs to get himself reelected, which probably means that he needs to win independent voters by something like the eight points he won them by last time—or at least by five or six. And “higher taxes for the rich” isn’t going to motivate many swing voters.

I point again to the new poll (pdf) from Third Way of 1,000 independent voters from 12 swing states. I certainly don’t agree with Third Way about everything, but here I think their general pessimism about the old-time liberal religion is warranted. They asked a few questions in this poll that I haven’t seen asked before, and it’s worth noting them.

If you open the above pdf, go look especially at questions 29, 30, 36, and 37. To me, 36B is the most telling. Would you be more likely to vote, the survey asked, for a candidate who said we should help the middle class by stressing growth and opportunity, or by making sure the rich paid their fair share of taxes. The former won by 76 to 20 percent. Other answers indicate that respondents don’t mind the rich paying higher taxes, and even generally back the idea. It’s just not very interesting to them. They’re far more interested in growth than fairness.

Take five minutes to scroll through that Third Way poll that he links. Lot of awkward stares being exchanged in Chicago over this data set, I’ll bet:

Even on the question of how best to reduce income inequality, “swing independents” split evenly between higher and lower taxes on the rich. What’s more, there’s also an almost even split between support for higher taxes and a flat tax:

Exit question: How long will they stick with the Buffett Rule after it goes down in flames in the Senate tomorrow? I can’t imagine them dropping it altogether if only because it’s a way to keep needling Romney about his wealth, but if this is the cornerstone of their economic rhetoric come fall, they’re in deep trouble.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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

How about a caption?

“The WH SNL link”

Schadenfreude on April 12, 2012 at 6:43 PM

Now I reallllllly want a Dr Pepper

burrata on April 12, 2012 at 6:43 PM

Keep ‘em coming…

In other news, Romney is now ahead by 2 nationally:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/04/12/fox-news-poll-romney-edges-obama-as-approval-president-drops/

GOPRanknFile on April 12, 2012 at 6:43 PM

Man…with their signs. Goebbels is smiling somewhere.

CycloneCDB on April 12, 2012 at 6:46 PM

PBHO will create the “Ann Rule” which targets SAH moms and will raise a whopping 34 million over 30 years.

Bishop on April 12, 2012 at 6:47 PM

Alinsky dont listen to what they are saying…what are they doing?

tom daschle concerned on April 12, 2012 at 6:48 PM

How long will they stick with the Buffett Rule after it goes down in flames in the Senate tomorrow?

I think they will stick with it because the idiots of America ,
a k a Obama’s people will be told by the Lean Stream Media that Republicans blocked Obama’s attempt to bring fairness to America.

burrata on April 12, 2012 at 6:48 PM

Methinks Uncle Joe renaming it “The Romney Rule” is going to be a bridge too far with many of the voters who are up for grabs. After all, if they weren’t turned off by rank partisan opportunism, they wouldn’t be swing Independants.

Kataklysmic on April 12, 2012 at 6:50 PM

This may well be for bad reasons—that is, Americans have had it so pounded into them over the last 30 years that anything like this constitutes “class warfare” that they may just reflexively jump to that conclusion. That’s a shame, and it’s very much worth trying to alter that viewpoint in the long term.

No, Tomasky, it is class warfare.

Bitter Clinger on April 12, 2012 at 6:50 PM

Joe throws number around and no one asks how they were calculated or if there is a shred of truth to them. The “cost” Slow Joe talks about is money that other have earned. Invest in people not government.

StevC on April 12, 2012 at 6:52 PM

I think they will stick with it because the idiots of America ,
a k a Obama’s people will be told by the Lean Stream Media that Republicans blocked Obama’s attempt to bring fairness to America.

burrata on April 12, 2012 at 6:48 PM

But that’s AP’s point. It’s not “Obama’s people” that Obama has to worry about. He needs a message to appeal to independents and this ain’t it.

Bitter Clinger on April 12, 2012 at 6:52 PM

No comment under the picture?

The Nerve on April 12, 2012 at 6:54 PM

Wasn’t the Reagen Rule yesterday? Also some guy named Buffet.

rubberneck on April 12, 2012 at 6:56 PM

At least liberals don’t enact laws that descrimate against women.

This is a side show that will die over the weekend. Unfortunately for women, the laws against women enacted by every republican controlled state in this country is here to stay.

Uppereastside on April 12, 2012 at 6:57 PM

He needs a message to appeal to independents and this ain’t it.

Bitter Clinger on April 12, 2012 at 6:52 PM

Looking at how Obama is running his ” campaign”
it looks like he is not even thinking of making an effort
to appeal to independents . It is as if he doesn’t even need them.
There is something else he is planning, not elections.

burrata on April 12, 2012 at 6:58 PM

Would you be more likely to vote, the survey asked, for a candidate who said we should help the middle class by stressing growth and opportunity, or by making sure the rich paid their fair share of taxes. The former won by 76 to 20 percent. Other answers indicate that respondents don’t mind the rich paying higher taxes, and even generally back the idea. It’s just not very interesting to them. They’re far more interested in growth than fairness.

I love it when Tomasky suffers.

Schadenfreude on April 12, 2012 at 6:58 PM

The red spot, top/left, is how much the “Buffet Rule” would bring in.

Schadenfreude on April 12, 2012 at 6:59 PM

This administration doesn’t have any “new” ideas. They’ve followed the liberal play book and nothing is working. Since nothing is working, they’ll try it again.

GarandFan on April 12, 2012 at 7:02 PM

How long will they stick with the Buffett Rule after it goes down in flames in the Senate tomorrow?
I think they will stick with it because the idiots of America ,
a k a Obama’s people will be told by the Lean Stream Media that Republicans blocked Obama’s attempt to bring fairness to America.

burrata on April 12, 2012 at 6:48 PM

…It is the ignorance regarding this issue that gets so tiring! They keep coming back with it, and the Parrot Press keeps repeating it.

KOOLAID2 on April 12, 2012 at 7:03 PM

I love it when Tomasky suffers.

Schadenfreude on April 12, 2012 at 6:58 PM

You wouldn’t be Schadenfreude if you didn’t. LOL

Bitter Clinger on April 12, 2012 at 7:04 PM

Admittedly, I don’t often read the signs in front of Biden or Obama, but is “Economic Fairness for the Middle Class” the new Obama campaign slogan? Doesn’t exactly roll off the tongue.

toby11 on April 12, 2012 at 7:05 PM

Obama wants to punish Stay at home moms AND wealthy, successful women. I mean, maybe Rush is right. He’s just going for the stupid vote at this point.

MeatHeadinCA on April 12, 2012 at 7:05 PM

Admittedly, I don’t often read the signs in front of Biden or Obama, but is “Economic Fairness for the Middle Class” the new Obama campaign slogan? Doesn’t exactly roll off the tongue.

toby11 on April 12, 2012 at 7:05 PM

Many soviet phrases aren’t kind to the tongue.

MeatHeadinCA on April 12, 2012 at 7:06 PM

Party of Bad Ideas.

Party of Failed Ideas.

Party of Marx’s Ideas.

alchemist19 on April 12, 2012 at 7:07 PM

BTW, the NORKs launched the big Obama…

MeatHeadinCA on April 12, 2012 at 7:08 PM

O/T: North Korea launches rocket—-radar spots Hilary Rosen off life-support.

Rovin on April 12, 2012 at 7:09 PM

We are in the general election season and Obama’s team still can’t come up with their slogan. They are lucky that 85% of the media is liberal, or someone might actually be saying their campaign sucks.

rubberneck on April 12, 2012 at 7:09 PM

Why doesn’t the Modern Democrat party (Pelosi, Obama, Reid, Schumer, Durbin, Biden, etc.) just run on their record instead of pushing this obvious BS?

Oh, I almost forgot. Everything they control/meddle with/”fix”/”invest” in turns to crap. So, I guess we’ll be hearing this BS for a long, long time to come.

Absolutely pathetic.

visions on April 12, 2012 at 7:10 PM

I can’t imagine them dropping it altogether if only because it’s a way to keep needling Romney about his wealth, but if this is the cornerstone of their economic rhetoric come fall, they’re in deep trouble.

They are in deep trouble.

cicerone on April 12, 2012 at 7:10 PM

At least liberals don’t enact laws that descrimate against women.

This is a side show that will die over the weekend. Unfortunately for women, the laws against women enacted by every republican controlled state in this country is here to stay.

Uppereastside on April 12, 2012 at 6:57 PM

…here Upperyeastside let me help you and DPenis…since this is a thread about the Buffett Rule….war on womens!!!…war on womens!!!!….war on womens!!!…condoms condoms!!!…war on womens!!!…Now you can take a break and go regurgitate the bile in the brain.

KOOLAID2 on April 12, 2012 at 7:11 PM

He’s just going for the stupid vote at this point.

MeatHeadinCA on April 12, 2012 at 7:05 PM

It’s been pretty dependable so far.

squint on April 12, 2012 at 7:13 PM

Admittedly, I don’t often read the signs in front of Biden or Obama, but is “Economic Fairness for the Middle Class Proletariat” the new Obama campaign slogan? Doesn’t exactly roll off the tongue.

toby11 on April 12, 2012 at 7:05 PM

It’s actually pretty scary that that’s on their signs. At what point do they go full commie? Geez.

visions on April 12, 2012 at 7:14 PM

Obama wants to punish Stay at home moms AND wealthy, successful women. I mean, maybe Rush is right. He’s just going for the stupid vote at this point.

MeatHeadinCA on April 12, 2012 at 7:05 PM

Hey, he knows where his bread is buttered. He won 70% of the high school dropout vote in ’08. Try to picture a smart person voting for him–I’ll bet you can’t do it. The sanctimonious facutly lounge types will still cast their ballots his way but gone are the days when academic credentials were directly proportionate to common sense.

Kataklysmic on April 12, 2012 at 7:16 PM

Admittedly, I don’t often read the signs in front of Biden or Obama, but is “Economic Fairness for the Middle Class” the new Obama campaign slogan? Doesn’t exactly roll off the tongue.

toby11 on April 12, 2012 at 7:05 PM

How about: “Economic Fairness for Middle Class Households that Earn LESS than $250,000 in Any Given Good Business Year”?

minnesoter on April 12, 2012 at 7:16 PM

This is a side show that will die over the weekend. Unfortunately for women, the laws against women enacted by every republican controlled state in this country is here to stay.

Uppereastside on April 12, 2012 at 6:57 PM

Oh you are so right. On my daily drives I see them out walking barefoot, dishevelled, blank stares, and obviously malnourished. I really feel for the ones working in the nearby vineyards. I just drink my coffee in my Porsche and think, how could I make things better?

arnold ziffel on April 12, 2012 at 7:17 PM

He’s just going for the stupid vote at this point.

MeatHeadinCA on April 12, 2012 at 7:05 PM

He’s already got the black vote, dead people and second graders locked down. If you add the stupid vote to that it might be 50% +1.

alchemist19 on April 12, 2012 at 7:21 PM

At least liberals don’t enact laws that descrimate against women.

This is a side show that will die over the weekend. Unfortunately for women, the laws against women enacted by every republican controlled state in this country is here to stay.

Uppereastside on April 12, 2012 at 6:57 PM

Hahaha. Where is the magical robot factory that produces you clowns?

Chuck Schick on April 12, 2012 at 7:22 PM

You know what BitMe said is a flat out lie.

Kini on April 12, 2012 at 7:22 PM

Uppereastside on April 12, 2012 at 6:57 PM

Lord, why do you create ‘humans’ with gnat-brains?

Schadenfreude on April 12, 2012 at 7:24 PM

At least liberals don’t enact laws that descrimate against women.

Uppereastside on April 12, 2012 at 6:57 PM

What about the baby girls you kill in the womb?

John the Libertarian on April 12, 2012 at 7:25 PM

There is NO war on women, except in the imagination of the left.

It ended today and the right can claim success.

Only stupid broads fell for it.

Lefties hate women and children.

Schadenfreude on April 12, 2012 at 7:25 PM

The Buffett rule: Don’t Pay Your Taxes!

John the Libertarian on April 12, 2012 at 7:25 PM

Uppereastside on April 12, 2012 at 6:57 PM

Panderer, and idiot. Women are not handicapped, or crippled. Yes, I don’t care to be PC.

Do you believe in them being capable and having the same, not spcial, opportunities, or do you believe them to be crippled, physically or especially mentally?

Also, how come women in this admin. are pais way more than men?

Schadenfreude on April 12, 2012 at 7:27 PM

@ uppereastwhatever

Having lived in flyover country, the Deep South, and your beloved New York, I can assure you women in the places you describe (besides the Soviet Socialist Counties of the People’s Democratic Republic of New York) are not suffering, gnashing their teeth, dropping over dead from the non-aborted “fetuses” they carry, etc. Outside of utopian places like CA, NY, Illinois, etc., people are doing just fine without nanny government wagging its finger at them.

Thank you very much, from the Unwashed Masses.

franciscodanconia on April 12, 2012 at 7:27 PM

It’s so amazing how many people can get worked up by the government Leftists, Unions and various parasites about “the rich” stealing from them by becoming rich. When the government is the only entity that can legally confiscate all the wealth and material goods from these gullible idiots and truly make them poor.

chickasaw42 on April 12, 2012 at 7:27 PM

Remember when the “party of ideas” thought it was a good one to invent “the office of the president elect” and plaster that official-looking plaque big and large on the podium everytime Obama spoke between November and January? Now it looks like they are going for “economic fairness for the middle class.” How trite!

DrStock on April 12, 2012 at 7:27 PM

pais = paid

Schadenfreude on April 12, 2012 at 7:27 PM

I say they should switch over to bashing stay at home moms when this Buffett clown car run out of gas.

forest on April 12, 2012 at 7:27 PM

At least liberals don’t enact laws that descrimateagainst women.

This is a side show that will die over the weekend. Unfortunately for women, the laws against women enacted by every republican controlled state in this country is here to stay.

Uppereastside on April 12, 2012 at 6:57 PM

Ill bite. Name one.

But at least liberals do pay women 16% less than men. So u got that going for you.

Spliff Menendez on April 12, 2012 at 7:32 PM

These ivy league lawyer types just dont seem to smart, in my opinion. Everything their trying now is backfiring. Its becoming something of a spectacle. Its fun waiting to see what they will come up with next.

newportmike on April 12, 2012 at 7:37 PM

Funny how being wealthy wasn’t a problem when John Kerry, who earned his millions the old-fashioned way (he married it), was running for President.

Socratease on April 12, 2012 at 7:55 PM

Ill bite. Name one.

But at least liberals do pay women 16% less than men. So u got that going for you.

Spliff Menendez on April 12, 2012 at 7:32 PM

It’s a TRAP!!!

Proceed with caution, yer dealing with a real rocket surgeon here…

BigWyo on April 12, 2012 at 8:06 PM

Buffett Rule. Reagan Rule. Romney Rule. Wonder what tomorrow’s rule will be. They’re really struggling to find a message.

Dee2008 on April 12, 2012 at 8:25 PM

It’s a TRAP!!!

Proceed with caution, yer dealing with a real rocket surgeon here…

BigWyo on April 12, 2012 at 8:06 PM

It has to be a trap. I refuse to accept the notion that anyone, even a deadbeat liberal, could be that uneducated. If he really is that dumb, well…bless his little heart!

BruthaMan on April 12, 2012 at 8:25 PM

Unfortunately for women, the laws against women enacted by every republican controlled state in this country is here to stay.

Uppereastside on April 12, 2012 at 6:57 PM

You should give your handlers their money’s worth and provide some links to text of these terrible laws.

No? No links? Ahh, just rhetoric then, gotcha.

JusDreamin on April 12, 2012 at 8:31 PM

It has to be a trap. I refuse to accept the notion that anyone, even a deadbeat liberal, could be that uneducated. If he really is that dumb, well…bless his little heart!

BruthaMan on April 12, 2012 at 8:25 PM

I’m thinking the ‘master plan’ from the voices in his head didn’t look so good after they were put to paper…

But I don’t know. They say these East Coast $hitbirds are supposed to be the smartest, most sophisticated people on the planet…

..as far as they’re concerned anyways…

BigWyo on April 12, 2012 at 8:59 PM

Even money, Soros paid troll. (or whoever hires and pays them). Uppereastside on April 12, 2012 at 6:57 PM

newportmike on April 12, 2012 at 9:12 PM

At least liberals don’t enact laws that descrimate against women.

This is a side show that will die over the weekend. Unfortunately for women, the laws against women enacted by every republican controlled state in this country is here to stay.

Uppereastside on April 12, 2012 at 6:57 PM

Why does the Obama admin discriminate against women by paying them 18% less then they pay men for the same work?

Female employees in the Obama White House make considerably less than their male colleagues, records show.

According to the 2011 annual report on White House staff, female employees earned a median annual salary of $60,000, which was about 18 percent less than the median salary for male employees ($71,000).

http://tinyurl.com/btcgn6p

McCain Hater on April 12, 2012 at 9:36 PM

Would you be more likely to vote, the survey asked, for a candidate who said we should help the middle class by stressing growth and opportunity, or by making sure the rich paid their fair share of taxes. The former won by 76 to 20 percent. Other answers indicate that respondents don’t mind the rich paying higher taxes, and even generally back the idea. It’s just not very interesting to them. They’re far more interested in growth than fairness.

From now on, every time I feel despair about the mushy liberal tendencies of the average vote, I’m going to remember this.

There is hope for this country yet.

RINO in Name Only on April 13, 2012 at 12:02 AM

Wow!…Upperyeastside is still looking for linkys…while I’m looking over all the threads for the day!

KOOLAID2 on April 13, 2012 at 12:22 AM

I thought the Buffett rule was that its never too early to drink because its five o’clock somewhere.

magicbeans on April 13, 2012 at 12:57 AM

I see that Drudge has a caption – “Biden Tells Crying Baby: You’ll Have To Pay For Romney’s Tax Cuts…..”

In truth, that crying baby already owes $75,000 to pay for Obama’s debt. Get to work, kid….the Government needs to collect taxes from you.

olesparkie on April 13, 2012 at 8:18 AM

The kid sitting to the left of Joey Choo Choo looks as though he’s playing a mean harmonica!

I’m glad someone made good use of their time.

ya2daup on April 13, 2012 at 8:34 AM

At least liberals don’t enact laws that descrimate against women.

This is a side show that will die over the weekend. Unfortunately for women, the laws against women enacted by every republican controlled state in this country is here to stay.

Uppereastside on April 12, 2012 at 6:57 PM

Post the year candidate. Simply brilliant.

And to think this Einstein’s 5 votes next november will offset my vote.

acyl72 on April 13, 2012 at 8:41 AM

So.. according to the guy worth 10.5 million you should vote for him because the other millionaire is bad because …. he is a millionaire.

ObamatheMessiah on April 13, 2012 at 8:51 AM

I think as an independent voter I will go for a successful businessman rather than a public money supported politician.

dahni on April 13, 2012 at 12:39 PM