But once he got the tax increase he wanted, which he did while his party controlled Congress, he didn’t ask for a dime more.
Obama also got every single thing he wanted on taxes, and now wants more, as a condition of cutting spending.
I don’t think Clinton will play it that way. Clinton’s a good government type, whereas OBama is a machine politician. He won’t cut even a dime of pure waste unless he’s getting something out of it, much less entitlements.
No he didn’t. He wanted the disastrous Bush tax cuts ended for people making over $250K. That wound up being $400K when the extortionists threatened to blow up the economy over tax breaks for billionaires.
I listen to all of his speeches. I think he’s very good at giving speeches. I’m not alone in this opinion. Even though I don’t always agree with his policies, strategies or positions, I have always admired his tone. I don’t see him as either “partisan” or a “hack.” Quite the opposite. He is head and shoulders above 98% of the Republican politicians in this regard.
Was the compromise $400,000? I’d forgotten, sorry about that.
nm, already addressed.
But color me shocked that you were mistaken.
Shocked.
Well, it’s not like Obama’s going back and demanding that the 250K-400K demographic get taxed more. Instead, he’s now demanding other revenue streams, although his specific demands are a pittance and can’t be his real offer.
Cite about these new taxes he’s “demanding” that he’s never talked about before?
Like removing the tax breaks for private and corporate jets? Little stuff. Be nice if he’d make public what he’s actually after. The Republicans did. Clinton would.
Or maybe I’m just right and he doesn’t want a deal, he wants an issue.
Cite about these new taxes he’s “demanding” that he’s never talked about before?
He wants new revenue as part of a budget deal. It’s not my fault he won’t tell us whose taxes he’d raise.
Do you not know what the word cite means? Provide a cite for your allegation that he wants new taxes that Obama hasn’t talked about before.
A citation.
Not more opinions from you.
HInt: When people ask you for a “cite” about something, they don’t mean “Please repeat the exact same thing you just said without a frigging cite.”
Geez, are you guys really that uninformed or are you asking for cites for trolling purposes?
President Obama, having accepted many more spending cuts than tax increases since Republicans won the House in 2010, has set additional tax increases as the price of an entitlement deal. The House speaker, John A. Boehner of Ohio, and the Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, having acquiesced to end most of the high-end Bush tax cuts late last year, have ruled out further tax increases.
Don’t accuse other posters of trolling.
Ah, sorry. I do have to ask these two though, did you really not know that Obama has been demanding more tax increases as the price of a budget deal, even after the Bush tax cuts expired?
You said that he’s keeping the desired tax increases secret. What is the evidence of this? It seems pretty well known that Obama wants to raise taxes on higher incomes.
You said he’s “demanding other revenue streams.” I read your cite, and it doesn’t say anything about Obama proposing new or different taxes compared to what he’s been proposing for years.
And you’re also saying that his tax proposals are secret, which seems like a major league cop out.
So you aren’t aware of any new taxes that he hasn’t proposed before, you can’t cite anything that even implies that, and you’re saying that his tax agenda is secret despite years of on-and-off negotiations with Republicans.
This all smells like a big pile of shhhh-aving cream.
It’s partly my fault for enabling this, but if people want to have another discussion of Obama and taxes and everything else Obama-related, please take it to another thread. This thread was intended to be about Hillary Clinton and her experience as secretary of state in particular.
OK, getting back on track: Hillary Clinton’s record as Sec of State must be pretty decent, since if there were actual major screw-ups, one suspects that the far right would harp on them instead of making up BS regarding Benghazi.
This of course explains why the “Stop Terry McAuliffe” ads that appear at the bottom of my Straight Dope screens have the sub-head “Help fight the Obama/Clinton regime & their crony Terry McAuliffe.” You can just feel the right’s Clinton love, right there.