What do you think of Herman Cain's 9% ? 48% Say Good Idea? People Are Such Gullible Sheeps

reply to post by Agent_USA_Supporter


At this point he is not appealing to all americans, he's smart for not doing so and winning because of it. He is only appealing to GOP voters because that is who votes in the primaries he is in.
Ron Paul got left in the dust long time ago. I believe it started in the second debate when Ron Paul presumtuously declared himself a third seed and would not declare a VP until he was in the lead, pointing over in Romney and Perry's direction.

This must have shocked people into opposition because most probably thought he was just there for the comedic value.

reply to post by TinfoilTP


Still dont believe me eh?

Thread

Ron Paul got left in the dust long time ago. I believe it started in the second debate when Ron Paul presumtuously declared himself a third seed and would not declare a VP until he was in the lead, pointing over in Romney and Perry's direction.

I am qutie tired of your repeated attacks its getting very old TinfoilTP.

Ron Paul got left in the dust long time ago. I believe it started in the second debate when Ron Paul presumtuously declared himself a third seed

Nice try with that cliam Ron paul did well in that debate.

Yes vote for this guy he has a plan! Pay over double in sales tax! That is going to make middle/lower class living so much easier, can't wait for this to happen!

reply to post by Observer99

I agree with the education/indoctrination comment, I was never taught common sense, that comes from within, and is suppressed.
Did you ever see this in history class?

www.earlyamerica.com...

Published anonymously by Thomas Paine in January of 1776, Common Sense was an instant best-seller, both in the colonies and in Europe. It went through several editions in Philadelphia, and was republished in all parts of United America. Because of it, Paine became internationally famous. "A Covenanted People" called Common Sense "by far the most influential tract of the American Revolution....it remains one of the most brilliant pamphlets ever written in the English language."

reply to post by jheated5


I'm already paying 8% sales tax and a lot more than 9% personal tax. His plan would help people like me. I could save more money and have a much better budget for things like life changes.

I've always been a fan of the K.I.S.S principle.

Originally posted by TDawgRex
reply to post by jheated5

 

I'm already paying 8% sales tax and a lot more than 9% personal tax. His plan would help people like me. I could save more money and have a much better budget for things like life changes.

I've always been a fan of the K.I.S.S principle.

So this budget your saving up for wouldn't include anything you would now be paying 17% sales tax on???

State sales tax plus, Local sales tax plus, Federal sales tax would=18.25% for me almost a 10 % increase on everyday living right there.
Then if Corporations had to pay 9% they would add another 10% to the products that already cost me 18.25% more.
So we are at 28.25% increase for everything I buy, why would I vote for that?

reply to post by jheated5


I'm already putting out 33% of my wages every check. And that's not counting state sales tax which is 7.75%, yep I was rounded up.

9,9,9 would reduce that to a small degree. I'm still looking into it though. But what I see so far, I like.

reply to post by TDawgRex


So you saying the corporations are going to absorb that 9% tax and not pass that increase on to you?
Are you a corporation?
If you are its a great instant 1% increase in profits for you, because if I was corporation I would raise product 10% to cover new federal tax.
Its more forms more paper work someone needs to pay for that.

reply to post by Gmoneycricket


Can you show me the math? I ask that respectfully.

Let's say I currently bring home $29,000.00 annually before taxes. After taxes it is roughly $19,000.00+.

By my math, under 999, I would be bringing home roughly $21,000.00 after taxes. Did I forget something?

I do realize that food, gas and other prices have there ups and downs and that affects the household income.

In addition, if the 999 plan were successful, it could always be reduced to a 777 plan or lower.

Don't want to see a 666 plan though...

By the way...I hate math!

reply to post by TDawgRex



As long as corporations, the new American Czars, can get taxpayer subsidies; in effect welfare for the rich; I can guarantee you that taxes will continue to rise. Cain, Perry, Paul, or Obama won't be able to do a damn thing about it because both houses vote in their self interest and it's the big corps that hand out the swag and pull the strings.

Even the GOP/TPM Christ like figure [Ronald Reagan] raised taxes.

www.forbes.com...

reply to post by whaaa


I do agree with you sadly enough.

I have touted getting rid of the incumbents and investigate every last one of them. If found guilty of graft, send them to prison, not censur them.

Gotta fix Congress before you can fix the Presidency.

But I think that is a pipe dream for now.

9-18-27 plan

9% if you make under 40,000 a year.
18% if you make 40,000 - 250,000 a year.
27% if you make 250,000 + a year.

Don't like it? Feel punished for being rich? Who cares? Fixing the nation is first. Don't like paying more taxes? Make less money that's what all these poor people are choosing to do right? Not reigning in capitalism to make it work for themselves.


I'm a sims city politician too.

Originally posted by TinfoilTP
reply to post by MrWendal

 

If your man Ron Paul was a "winner" I bet you'd be alright with him voting the way he chooses to.

Maybe you should look back into my posting history before you make any bets huh?

I dont care WHO you choose to vote for. What matters to me is people who actually have a clue making such decisions. Be informed. Have an opinion.

Also very funny to me is how you assume I am a Ron Paul supporter. I am, dont get me wrong, but you just kind of assumed it based on what exactly? Because I said elections should not be viewed as sporting events? That as Voters we have a responsibility to elect people based on issues and not based on picking the winner in advance and being right? It is the same reason that I give when people say voting for someone is "wasting a vote". There is no such thing, unless of course your voting for all the wrong reasons.

Voters who view elections as some type of sporting event are part of the problem, not the solution. They are not informed, and if they are informed that are doing nothing with the information. The clearly are not voting based on the information, they are far too busy picking the next "winner" as if the Presidency were a high stakes version of American Idol. They are guided by what the idiot box we call a TV tells them. Right now Herman Cain is the flavor of the week, even today CNN was going on and on and on about Herman Cain. What made it interesting to me, as they continued to build him up they also tore him down. Giving excuse after excuse about why he would not even make it too much longer on the campaign trail.

Originally posted by TDawgRex
reply to post by MrWendal

 

Too funny.

I have supported both Cain and Paul and at one point actually hoped they would be running on the same ticket for POTUS/VPOTUS. I have done my homework. And I respect both candidates, but I just happen to think that Cain has a better chance than Paul.

I'm actually starting to sour on Paul just because of his rabid supporters, who will not listen to any criticism of their guy. I'm not a robot, I can think for myself and make my own choices. People that blindly follow are how you say?...oh yea, stupid.

But if Romney wins the primary, the only elections I'll be voting in will be local.

So sue me if I find politics interesting and at times entertaining.

edit on 13-10-2011 by TDawgRex because: (no reason given)

I dont care who you vote you for. If you think Cain is the way to go, more power to you. Follow your heart and vote on the issues, the thing is, that is not what you are doing. You give yourself away with this one statement....

but I just happen to think that Cain has a better chance than Paul.

You can change the names to whoever you want, if your vote is based on the whom you think has a better chance to "win".. your doing it wrong! I dont care if it is between Paul or Cain, Obama and Hilary, Romney and Perry, or Coke and Pepsi. If your vote is going to who you think has a better chance to "win", you need to reevaluate why your voting to begin with. The issues should be #1 #2 #3 and there is no #4. Electability is a made up word and should not be the determining factor when casting your vote.

Do you realize if people had always voted like you do, you never would have had an FDR as President because this country today would have never elected a man in a wheelchair, he would have been "unelectable" or he "couldnt win" or he would have been a "wasted vote".

Get it??

wrong thread...sorry.

reply to post by MrWendal


I see you are passionate about the political process...I think. (joke intended)

I have looked at all the candidates on the Republican side and only find Cain and Paul appealing as candidates.

Both are straight talkers, both have a proven track record in their respective field, but both also have flaws in my opinion, but who doesn't?

I usually hate the argument of, "Anybody else but Obama" as it doesn't really address the issues. But on occasion I find myself thinking the same. But I do my darnest to keep my political thinking on a rational scale, not emotional. I think we are seeing where emotional voting gets us.

As it stands right now, if Paul wins the primary, I'll vote for him. Just as I would vote for Cain if he wins the primary. If any of the others win, I'll keep my votes local as I'm not partial to the rest of the pack.

There is still time before the primaries and I hope that Paul and Cain can heal their divide somehow. I'd still like to see them together as a ticket.

I like how one of the posters on WSJ said this:

"I have a condition called liberalidous - it is caused from having to listen to liberals (I would have said stupid liberals, but that is an oxymoron). "

I don't think the person knows what an oxymoron is or they are trying to complement liberals by saying that they are smart and they don't like to listen to smart people.

reply to post by Agent_USA_Supporter


Sure lets vote Hermen Caine into office, he can't possibly be worse than Barack Obama and at least his name isn't satanic. Caine is a business man, he knows how to make money and making money can be applied to the nation as a whole. This would be like voting Donald Trump into the oval office, he already told China if he was voted into office he'd bankrupt them and i believe it. It's these guys' bread and butter to make money and they know how to do it. Personally i'd like to see Trump as president just to watch China squirm under the heel of his shoe.

Why the attacks?
His plan is so simple that it's making sense with many people.
He's clicking with folks because of this long awaited, simplistic approach and that's why he is up in the polls.
Finally someone is thinking outside of the box and to many, this is a sign of real hope and true change.

You can't get any more fair than when everyone pays the same percentage.