« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

More on the Winning Argument

By: Erick Erickson (Diary)  |  August 13th, 2012 at 08:00 AM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

In USA Today, Instapundit Glenn Reynolds quotes Iowahawk: “Paul Ryan represents Obama’s most horrifying nightmare: Math.”

Let me break the math down for you.

If Barack Obama gets his way and raises taxes on everyone making $250,000.00 a year or more, the amount of money he brings in will not close his own budget deficit. Nevermind the national debt — he won’t close this year’s budget deficit.

In fact, if we get the Democrats’ their wet dream of tax policy and take 100% of all annual income of everyone making $250,000.00 a year or more, we still won’t close Barack Obama’s budget deficit.

So what do we cut? What do we do? That’s the genius of the Paul Ryan pick. He forces the Democrats to confront the reality of their policies, not just their bumper sticker demagoguery packed in grade school marxist rhetoric about fair shares and the rich.

The Democrats are, right now, winning the votes of people in the middle class though their policies are screwing the middle class. Once you point out the very simple, very understandable math, suddenly the middle class realizes the Democrats are coming for them next.

Oh, and Steny Hoyer, the House Democratic Whip, already said as much.

Tags: , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • Bill S

    Brief, accurate and to the point. Well done.

  • ctredstater

    Romney-Ryan’s ability to educate the electorate

    vs.

    Obama-Biden’s ability to scare them.

    I like our chances.

    Bring It On!!

    Great stuff, Erick!!!

  • Spartan4Life

    The subject is not the economy. The subject is the debt. I think he is figuring this out.

    Don’t get me wrong. The economy is a big problem for Obama. I just think voters are rightfully skeptical of any politicians telling them they are going to “fix” it. I think what really scares Americans is the idea that the government could squander our wealth and living standard.

    In an ideal world, Romney/Ryan will be able to link the two and make it abundantly clear that the current occupant of the WH has no plan or intention to do anything about the deficit or debt. The trick will be to get American voters to care enough to throw this bum out.

  • Darin_H

    and you don’t even have to make your friends show their work either.

    It’s simple – Obama’s tax plan raises* $85 billion per year. Obama’s deficits are over ten times that per year.

    *of course it won’t raise nearly what they score it as, but that’s not necessary for this purpose.

  • commonsenseobserver

    When it matters, he always delivers. He did it in Flordia, and throughout the subsequent primaries. I believe in Romney and Ryan, because I believe in America.

  • tnguy

    I’d wager that, sadly, most Americans don’t understand the difference between a billion and a trillion, either. Most congressman certainly don’t.

    To be effective, Ryan and Romney have to find a way to put the #s in a way that most people can understand. Make it personal to them, help them to appreciate that dilemma we face.

  • fredflintlock

    Romney/Obama will likely be safe and boring, but Ryan should be free to shoot holes in Biden’s soaring vaguenesses with a strong set of facts and numbers that can be checked by inquisitive voters.

    Although Romney did make a remark last night to 60 Minutes that has the Obama surrogates wee-wee’d up this morning. He said, “There’s only one president that I know of in history that robbed Medicare of seven-hundred-sixteen billion dollars to pay for a new risky program of his own that we call Obamacare.”

    On Morning Joe (apologies F&F) this was referred to as demogoguing the issue. They were frantic to make it clear to the voters that Romney had lowered the quality of the discussion with a set of prepared fun facts. Apparently such remarks just aren’t made on MSM network television news shows.

    Maybe Ryan is having a positive influence on the candidate already.

  • ctredstater

    Governor Romney is, to use a phrase, “misunderestimated”.

    this is not “McCain II”.

    Governor Romney does understand the seriuosness of the situation – and the need for change. and he does really want to win. the fire is in the belly. he will have to grow as a communicator – but that just comes with the job. hoping young Ryan can help coach him to increased clarity and drawing points of distinction.

    Go Romney Ryan Go!!!!

  • fredflintlock

    He is also the first one to be well schooled in the Obama-Axelrod gang’s capabilities prior to launching his campaign. That could make the difference in this marathon.

    And yes, Romney did come to life during a his primary victory speeches. Waiting for the convention and what comes after.

  • funwithknives

    of The Vice Doofus, debating a real economics graduate,and a demonstrably better speaker.

    I am commencing a ‘watching party’ starting today.
    Key words/ phrases instigate a downing of libations.

    Suggestions for what Joltin’ Joe might say as a trigger?
    All submittals will be considered.

  • Berean

    The reality is that even with Team Obama having spent over $100 million on largely false attack ads he does not lead Romney by any significant percentage except in polls where the party ID sample is WAY off. Polls where the Party ID sample is more in line with reality show either a tie or Romney lead.

    If you really believe that we will have a +8 DEM turnout or higher (in other words more Dems and fewer GOP than in the Democrat wet dream year of 2008) then you may as well go home because at that distribution no campaign would win. When you take those polls and rebalanace the DEM/GOP/IND to more historic numbers the Obama lead disappears completely.

  • fightnright

    Dems DO have their own sets of official talking points, which they WILL immediately use in rebuttal of our calling them on their lies.

    Using logical fallacies plus cloaking information in invalid statistics is the Dem method of misleading the less informed (‘just because an argument is made in scientific terminology doesn’t make it science’) .

    Yet these are the talking points that casual voters will read and hear most, via the headlines of major media, popular magazines, and on primetime shows as well. The Dems spit them out like bullets, and our winning will also depend on which narrative voters ultimately believe.

    Yesterday on Fox News Sunday, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz was called on her Mediscare lies at least twice by the guest host. But even after being corrected, she still continued repeating them like a mantra, and of course DWS had the last, inaccurate word. Later, Liz Cheney said that Wasserman-Schultz claiming not to know the political leanings of a DNC PAC with direct ties to the White House seemed something like being *disingenuous* (??!!!)

    On the record, the left has no problems calling Romney/Ryan’s Medicare facts false, and twisting the Republicans’ platform and personal reputations in the most deceptive ways imaginable.

    Unless the Republicans find more effective ways of calling the lies of the left LIES, and the carriers of the falsehoods LIARS, we haven’t ~found~ a way of educating the masses.

  • fightnright

    that’s left wing super PAC (Priorities USA Action), not DNC .

  • JSobieski

    If those folks lying means that we lose, we would never win. We are always outgunned on communication, but we do win many elections.

    We just need to be agressive in getting our position out there, and in empasizing certain key aspects:

    Can still opt for traditional medicare

    No impact on those older than 55 (unless they want to go with premium support)

    D’s such as Clinton (see deal reached with Newt on the eve of impeachment) have agreed to it in the past

    Current Democrat Senator Wydon supports (or at least did support) the most recent Ryan Medicare reform plan

  • fredflintlock

    Think that rate has improved in four years?

  • JSobieski

    Anyone think the McCain campaign did a good job framing any issue?

    Anyone remember one negative thing McCain said re: the then current Congress?

  • fightnright

    also, when making fundamental Medicare points (such as the ones you lay out) in debate, blocking a rebutting Dem from *changing the argument* by demanding they tell you “Where are these claims inaccurate?” might reduce the opposition to going “hummena-hummena-hummena” just like Ralph Kramden.

  • JSobieski

    Just another added benefit.

  • checkmate2012

    are out there. Check this out and I foresee an ad:

    “As Senator Wyden has observed, ?Absent a bipartisan effort to fix Medicare and protect this guarantee?if nothing is done?what the years ahead ensure is that seniors and health care providers will be getting a steady diet of cost shifting and arbitrary cuts until the Medicare guarantee is kaput.?

    That quote is from http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/04/saving-the-american-dream-comparing-medicare-reform-plans#_ftnref73

  • http://www.alanjoelny.com alanjoelny

    See the video: http://bit.ly/SeFmFy Some tidbits:

    ?I?ve read it. I can tell you what?s in it. There are some ideas I agree with, and there are some that we should have a healthy debate about because I don?t agree with. The major drivers of our long-term liabilities as everyone knows are Medicare and Medicaid, and health care spending.

    And:

    Social Security we can probably fix the same way Ronald Reagan and Tip O?Neil sat down together?that?s manageable. Medicare and Medicaid ? massive problem down the road. That?s something our children will have to deal with.

    Also:

    ?This is an entirely legitimate proposal?

  • checkmate2012

    “Quick quiz: Who said this about Medicare? ?With an aging population and rising health care costs, we are spending too fast to sustain the program. And if we don?t gradually reform the system while protecting current beneficiaries, it won?t be there when future retirees need it. We have to reform Medicare to strengthen it.?

    It wasn?t Representative Paul Ryan (R-WI), Mitt Romney?s new running mate, who has been vocal about the need for Medicare reform. It was President Barack Obama, just last year”.

    http://blog.heritage.org/2012/08/13/morning-bell-facing-the-medicare-debate-head-on/

    I guess robbing it by $716B is the way to um, strengthen it….

  • johnms

    tnguy hits the nail on the head. I don’t think that people really understand what these numbers mean, because they get tossed around and sound so similar and interchangable.

    I like to talk about it this way:

    I think that a million dollars is sort of an upper limit for an comprehensible amount of money. If you won a million dollar lottery, you might receive $50,000 per year for 20 years.

    Alternately, if you work an entire lifetime, from age 18 to 65, and make an average of about $40,000 per year averaged over your lifetime, you will have earned about two million dollars over the course of your lifetime of work. So a million dollars is about half a lifetime’s labor.

    A billion dollars is a thousand million dollars. It can actually help you to understand this if you say it this way. Compare:

    “The Treasury Department said it expected to lose $25.05 billion on the auto industry bailout”

    to:

    “The Treasury Department said it expected to lose 25 thousand million dollars on the auto industry bailout.”

    See the difference? Suddenly the meaning is much more understandable — and appalling.

    Trillion is even more difficult to understand. So I like to explain it as a million millions, If you had a million millionaires, and pooled all of their money, you would have a trillion dollars.

    If I were writing Paul Ryan’s debate opening statement, I would have him start out by explaining million, billion and trillion in just those words, not ever use the word billion, but use thousand-million instead, and never say the word trillion without pointing out that it is a million-millions.

    Then he and Joe can talk numbers.

    If Ryan can get this to sink in, he will have a VERY sober, attentive audience.