Latest Romney ad hits back on Team Obama’s bogus “$5 trillion” claim

posted at 2:01 pm on October 7, 2012 by Erika Johnsen

The biggest item with which Team Obama was able to come out swinging following last week’s presidential debate (except for something about Mitt Romney being too “aggressive” and possibly trying to cheat on live television) was playing up their hilariously-contrived claim that Mitt Romney’s plan for ‘$5 trillion in tax cuts for the wealthy must necessarily raise taxes on the middle class or increase the deficit’ — a claim with which Robert Samuelson took umbrage:

To justify its $5 trillion figure — the estimated tax loss over a decade — the Obama campaign had to cherry-pick Romney’s proposal and the TPC analysis. It had to ignore any revenue raised by reducing tax breaks and assume that, faced with a conflict between the rich and the middle class, Romney would automatically side with the rich — as opposed to shielding the middle class from any tax increase. On Wednesday, Romney promised to protect the middle class.

The TPC report was widely interpreted as saying Romney would have to raise taxes on the middle class. It didn’t, says the TPC’s Howard Gleckman. It simply pointed out that he couldn’t keep all “his ambitious campaign promises.” He’d have to make choices and modifications. So what else is new?

Despite its highly imaginary derivation, Obama has continued to use the figure on the stump and the campaign has touted it as point-of-fact fodder (even though, when pressed, the logic starts to fall apart, heh), so the Romney camp is finally hitting back with an ad of their own disputing Team Obama’s numbers:

Unfortunately, the $5 trillion figure sounds sufficiently startling that Team Obama will probably keep using it (which means we should probably also respond with the significantly more frightening one of $16 trillion waiting in the offing), and we’ve still got another month of these campaign exaggeration/distortion/deception reindeer games with which we’ll all have to contend.


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

Comment pages: 1 2

tm11999 on October 7, 2012 at 6:08 PM

The House of Representatives and the Senate Republicans “follow” me on Twitter. But, somehow, I don’t believe that they are transfixed on every word I type.

By the way, whose sock puppet are you?

kingsjester on October 7, 2012 at 6:23 PM

Well get ready for constant hourly ads by obama. he’s got nearly 1 billion dollars they say to throw at us…

sandee on October 7, 2012 at 2:49 PM

They’ve been spending it as fast as they have been taking it in.

Let’s see an ad that shows

Under Obama, in just 4 years, each household has $4000 more taxes per year, $2500 higher insurance premiums per year, $5000 lower net worth and $40,000 more national debt. You really can’t afford 4 more years of Obama

talkingpoints on October 7, 2012 at 6:24 PM

tm11999 on October 7, 2012 at 6:08 PM

Honey, if you like Michelle’s work better, go to her site. This isn’t it. The people at this site enjoy this one.

talkingpoints on October 7, 2012 at 6:31 PM

talkingpoints on October 7, 2012 at 6:24 PM

Our med insurance costs have skyrocketed to $ 3K this year, and we’re praying that our SE tax estimations will cover us, come 4-15-13 !!
NOBAMA !!!!!!!

pambi on October 7, 2012 at 6:34 PM

the reason i suggested wiki was because of the way y’all were acting, and i thought that was where you would feel comfortable looking. to see the vitriol and personal invective launched at me because i might have a few questions about the political leanings of the owners of this site was enlightening. those of us that try to keep the constitution in our hearts and tend to speak up when we recognise doughy,1 step back politics, might step on others toes when pointing out the facts. that was not my intention. the new america that these totalitarian leftists are trying to cement in this next election must not be allowed to succeed. and we shouldn’t have any quarter for go along-get along politics. bone up on y’alls troll recognition awareness, otherwise you might make enemies in your own camp, and we don’t need that.

tm11999 on October 7, 2012 at 6:36 PM

tm11999 on October 7, 2012 at 6:08 PM

Gosh. I wonder what political ideology usually writes (and quotes) the Wiki pages.

kingsjester on October 7, 2012 at 6:12 PM

….ummmmmm!….let me recall hmmmmmm!…yep!…think you might have something there!
….turdmouth1170 maybe needs to listem to gay Eds show oncest in a while!

KOOLAID2 on October 7, 2012 at 6:37 PM

tm11999 on October 7, 2012 at 6:36 PM

Perhaps try to be a bit less vitriolic in your approach.
Although, out of the heart the mouth speaks, so that’s unlikely.
Our responses were well-deserved.

pambi on October 7, 2012 at 6:39 PM

HA…boot neanderthal man…. tm11999…. off this site..what a crude M F

LaRepublican on October 7, 2012 at 6:40 PM

m11999 on October 7, 2012 at 6:36 PM

You’re either dense or too smart by half. Yes, Reagan Conservatives on this site know that Townhall tends to leans more toward the middle than Michelle Malkin’s editorial direction of this site. Hence, Jazz’s weekend duty. However, a surprising number of us have hung in there because Ed and Allah are very good Bloggers and we enjoy the discussions around here.

If you have something worthwhile to add to the topical discussions around here, please do. If all you’re interested in, is telling us how lousy it is around here, then you have nothing worthwhile to add to the discussion, do you?

kingsjester on October 7, 2012 at 6:41 PM

tm11999 on October 7, 2012 at 6:36 PM

…maybe you should have come around here sooner 1170 instead of voicing your concerns only in the home stretch!

KOOLAID2 on October 7, 2012 at 6:42 PM

to see the vitriol and personal invective launched at me because i might have a few questions about the political leanings of the owners of this site was enlightening.
tm11999 on October 7, 2012 at 6:36 PM

A few questions?

…gay friendly ed and atheist allah took over…

tm11999 on October 7, 2012 at 4:14 PM

Um yeah, those are some deep questions sweetie.

cozmo on October 7, 2012 at 6:43 PM

kingsjester on October 7, 2012 at 6:41 PM

Hey, I like Jazz. He is more up to date on the energy side of things than I now am.

…OMG! The nutball has succeeded in creating cracks in the HA family. I want to be on the Hatfield side. Just call me Devil.

cozmo on October 7, 2012 at 6:47 PM

hey cosmo bonehead

tm11999 on October 7, 2012 at 5:08 PM

…I didn’t notice that before!…does that hurt coz ?…or did you get a new last name?

KOOLAID2 on October 7, 2012 at 6:50 PM

KOOLAID2 on October 7, 2012 at 6:50 PM

Considering the source, and the beat down that preceded, and followed, the ignorant comment, I figured the nutball was projecting. Or brain damaged from all the hits to the head it has been taking.

cozmo on October 7, 2012 at 6:56 PM

Because the Romney campaign has herein elevated Cutter’s words, making her point seem definitive, you get the sense that the Romney tax cut is just “slightly less” than 5 trillion (added to the deficit). BAD. Better to stick with Romney’s own debate words, which convincingly gave the impression that there would be NO addition to the deficit.

So, clearly, this is a very counterproductive commercial.

anotherJoe on October 7, 2012 at 3:52 PM

No, she didn’t say ‘slightly less.’ She said ‘nowhere near.’

Big difference.

fossten on October 7, 2012 at 7:28 PM

Trust Obama to figure out how to use Appeal to Authority a Straw-man, and a Lie of Omission all in the same claim. “Hey, there are experts out there using the exact same straw-men!”

The lib think tank has repeatedly denied that their analysis says anything decisive about what policies Romney would put into action. Simply because they don’t want to be taken for a laughing stock.

Axeman on October 8, 2012 at 9:26 AM

Comment pages: 1 2