For years, Democrats were seen as the major party more likely to raise taxes, and as a result, were in a constant state of fear and defensiveness over the issue. If there was a candidate running an attack ad over taxes shortly before an election, it was a pretty safe bet that the candidate was a Republican.
But as the fight over tax policy heats up inside the Beltway, it's interesting to realize it's Democrats who are on the offensive. President Obama's re-election campaign launched this new television ad yesterday.
For those who can't watch clips online, the ad tells viewers that Mitt Romney supports tax breaks for millionaires, but actually raises taxes on millions of working families, while Obama wants the wealthy to "pay a little more so the middle class pays less." The tagline: "Two plans; your choice."
Republicans continue to work from the assumption that voters will always side with them on taxes, opposing any tax increase by any amount on any one at any time for any reason. But Obama seems awfully confident he's playing the better hand -- the ad wouldn't talk up asking the rich to "pay a little more" unless it was an idea with broad public support.
The tagline was also of interest because it seeks to frame the campaign in a specific way. For months, the conventional wisdom has said the 2012 race would be "a referendum, not a choice." In other words, the Republican candidate and his agenda is almost irrelevant -- the election will come down to Obama supporters vs. Obama opponents.
But that's exactly why the president's campaign is pushing the "two plans; your choice" frame.
If the race is a referendum on Obama, and the mainstream is unsatisfied with the direction of the country, the president has a far more daunting challenge. But if voters are inclined to see the election as a choice between two competing visions, Romney is the one in trouble because the Republican agenda is wildly unpopular.
That's even true on taxes, where Obama is challenging the GOP on its bedrock issue.
Leave a Comment:
"Republicans continue to work from the assumption" ....that everyone watches Faux Nooze and that the pundit/stenographer class know what they are talking about even though the polls tell a different story .
The reality they created is collapsing like a black hole.
And it is a "choice" between which direction WE as a nation will go. Do we go backward to spending on the Plutocracy while the disappearing middle class continues floundering and the poor are not seen and our social safety net disappears as our jobs are hemorrhaged to low/no wage markets; or do we go forward shoring up the middle class, keeping healthcare affordable, opening opportunities and demanding that the 1% start to pay a bit more, after all of the largesse that they've been enjoying at taxpayer expense?
That is the choice before US in November! What vision has made your pocket a little bit more safe so far?
Mitt wants voters to see everything as black and white, while POB wants the voters to see the grays and yellows with Mitt.
I don't see the country as going in the wrong direction, and an economy that is adding jobs, however minimally, as a tragic situation that should cost the president the election.
The veritable and utterly 'turkey' quality of Mitt Romney should surely insulate Obama from losing.
The following statement was sent to me regarding the new health care law. I would like to know if this is true or not.
It was said by a Dr. who was not in favor of the bill.
This is what he said....people who smoke, have cholesterol problems, diabetes, etc, etc...have three months to correct the problem. If you do not, the doctor says bye bye. Otherwise he is held responsible for your condition. So, while health care is offered to those of us with pre-existing conditions, we have to address those conditions. If the med's do not work or we do not improve for whatever reason in the three months, we are let go by the doctor. Then, we have to find another doctor to take us. He also said many doctors are retiring or just quitting because of all the paperwork. They have hired extra people to just handle this. This means there will be more people insured and seeking doctors and less doctors to choose from. This is only a very small part of it. In other words, we will fall through the cracks....and doctors will be reluctant to treat us. I have been with him for 14 years and I am concerned he will drop me...it is a possibility he may have to to protect himself.
Bogus. But don't listen to me, go ask your doctor.
Please forward the mind altering substances that have been provided to the person who sent you"Dr. who was not in favor ".
Which doctor where ?
Nothing Changes . You get insurance , the doctor treats you .
Oldest trick in the book FUD
Fear Uncertainty and Doubt , brought to you by ...CrossRoads GPS
Seriously , it reads as something your crazy uncle sends you after listening to Rush and then turning to his library of Hannity tapes
Doctors as a group are fairly Republican, at least in my neck of the woods, and addicted to Faux News. They harangue each other with disinformation and radiorumors. While Doctors may look down on patients with unhealthy behaviors, no Doctor in his right mind would simply send them away--seing only well patients will not pay the bills. Now if I were an insurance company, I would put this Doctor's fears into practice. For years they have busily winnowed their ranks of sick people, in pursuit of the ideal of taking in maximum premiums while minimizing payouts. Panicked insurers may have spread the rumor about discharging patients whose behavior costs them money, but this is just a slight exaggeration of what they already do. ACA seeks to counteract insurer's misbehavior by enacting community rating: everybody gets insured, the sick don't get excluded.
How ridiculous! First of all, when you get a fear mongering email like that, check it out at snopes.com. The latest one I heard was that part of the healthcare law requires everyone be implanted with microchips by 2013. My Dog! Where do they come up with these things?! http://www.snopes.com/politics/medical/microchip.asp
Somehow we have let the crazies out of the asylum and are now calling them Republicans.
This is complete and utter baloney, like everything else the right wing says. All you have to do is understand that "If a Republican says it, it's a lie."
I've heard that there is a potential shortage of GP doctors coming up. GPs do not make as much money as surgeons and other specialists, so more and more are going into the specialties but have almost as much debt. There has been talk about loan forgiveness for MDs studying GP, but it hasn't gone anywhere (perhaps because Drs are reported to be fabously wealthy?). But this shortage is not due to the ACA.
I'm related to many MDs and they all have the same opinion on the ACA; we need it. One MD is a plastic surgeon specialing in reconstruction and trauma accidents (like you cut open your hand on a power saw). She doesn't do much, if any, of the boob work. She works in a near-city hospital and almost a third of her patients are without insurance. And more than half of those, never pay her. But what is she supposed to say, then, to the parents of the small child who has a major gash on his forehead? "You have no insurance, so the intern down the hall can sew your child up. He'll have a huge scar, unlike the almost invisible work I do, but at least I won't be keeping your child beautiful for free!"
Blatantly false. There is nothing in the law that says this. Does this supposed "doctor" get his information from Fox News, perhaps?
You can find claims and complaints about that going back many years. The catch is that it's insurance company paperwork they're complaining about, and it has nothing to do with the ACA. (To the extent that the ACA deals with this at all, it has some incentives for streamlining the process.)
Based on the experience in Massachusetts, it's likely there will be a short-term backlog once the law takes effect, as people who have not been getting basic care find doctors, but within a year or so there, providers adjusted, and there is no noticeable difference in getting an appointment.
Basically, what this phony message is saying, in fewer words, is "To solve the problem of other people to suffering with untreated medical conditions, you might have to be inconvenienced by a little longer wait for an appointment. Wouldn't you rather they just suffered instead?"
I can hardly imagine a more immoral appeal to selfishness.
Hey Steve? Talking of ADs...how about a comment on the new 'OBAMA LIES' ad. I think we could mock one up in less than a minute with MITT LIES using your columns...
It's about time Democrats started understanding they have the public on their side on issues, AND USING IT to their advantage. It's kind of amazing we have to be Obama and his political team kudos for this sort of obvious message. About all you can say is IT'S ABOUT DAMN TIME!
I think Democrats should talk about this and also healthcare, since republicans are trying to paint it as a tax increase which is not truth. Obama is doing OK in most of the swing states based on the latest election polls but this can change if he doesn’t address these issues http://www.pollheadlines.com/
The ad could just as easily be used for Dems running for Congress. Republicans passed the Ryan budget. So when are the rest of the Dems going to start clubbing Republicans with the budget? A coordinated national campaign with the President and the other Dems could make the Ryan budget the issue for November. There is enough meat in that issue for Dems to use even if they are distancing themselves from the President.
A Republican tells you that all Republicans are liars. Do you believe him?