Hillary Airs Another Indiana Ad Hitting Obama On Gas Tax
I've just obtained a copy of another ad hitting Obama on the gas tax that Hillary just started airing in Indiana.
The last-minute ad, which went up late on the Friday before election day, says Hillary's gas tax holiday would "save families $8 billion," and adds: "Barack Obama says that's just pennies."
"He'd make you keep paying that tax, instead of big oil," the ad continues.
The "just pennies" Obama quote comes from an Obama response ad that says that the gas tax holiday would save Indiana residents "just pennies a day."
As noted here before, Hillary chief strategist Geoff Garin has said the campaign's internal polling indicates that the gas tax holiday is persuading Hoosiers that she is in touch with their economic anxieties. This second ad suggests they're sticking with this all the way through election day.
The Obama campaign moved to engage Hillary more directly in the gas tax dispute today, issuing a second ad hitting back at her criticism of him on it. Now Hillary has hit back again.
Now Obama should hit her with a third ad of his own. He needs to pound away at this, because he's right, and he's got the high ground.
Clinton is a shameless panderer who doesn't have the facts on her side.
May 2, 2008 6:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, and he needs to hit hard. He needs to quote the many newspapers that say that all the experts, from left to right, agree with Obama that this "tax holiday" would be more harmful than good in the long run and that the oil companies will NOT bear the brunt, our infrastructure will.
He also needs to talk about the fact that the prices will rise to meet the increased demand so there will be NO savings and that the president needs the CHARACTER to value the long term costs of his decisions over the expediency of short-term pandering. He needs to point out that short term pandering is what gets us into the kind of environmental and economic mess we're in.
May 2, 2008 6:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
You guys have it all wrong. It's not pandering. Hillery feels it her gut that if we eliminate a tax that amounts to about a 3% savings at the pump, then we will save 3 pennies for every dollar spent.
Of course, we will need to put the lost revenue on the national credit card, but so what? It's not like my grandkids are going to buy me gas on their own 50 years from now. So I'll make them pay for it now.
May 2, 2008 6:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great ad. The topic has traction for Clinton and Obama is on the wrong side of this. He may be right on the analysis but this is a political and kitchen table topic. He just doesn't get it and that will be his loss.
BTW, it seems that all of the cable news is leading with this--Clinton positive and Obama the naysayer. Guess which way taxpayers will go given the choice of promising to seek a lower tax or dismissing it?
Matthew
May 2, 2008 6:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
He just doesn't 'get' that people WANT to be lied to, and deceived, about saving money?
It will not happen. The consumer will save no money under the McCain/Clinton plan. Why you folks either cannot understand the economics of an inelastic market, or just don't care about lying to voters, I will never understand.
May 2, 2008 6:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Can you find any economist who thinks its a good idea? Just one? Even Paul Krugamn, a huge Hillary fan, admits shes wrong on this one.
May 2, 2008 6:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
So you are applauding Clinton lying to the voters of Indiana? WTF is up with her supporters? The only standard you seem to advocate is "anything Clinton says is GOLD..."
Pathetic.
May 2, 2008 6:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Where's the lie? This will save everyone money, even if pennies. The tax shift to windfall taxes needs to be part of an energy plan to help bring costs down. Even if the impact is minimal, at least Clinton and McCain can claim to taking action while Obama offers just words.
Matthew
May 2, 2008 6:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, the price will stay the same. All the experts have been saying that the money saved by taking away the tax will be replaced by the price going up, meaning that the money will mostly go to oil companies.
May 2, 2008 6:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
They control the price. Taking their profits away removes their incentive to raise the price. Actually, putting a spotlight on their profits gives them an incentive to hold the price down.
May 2, 2008 11:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Right, it's not like there hasn't been an increasingly bright "spotlight" on them for the past several months or anything. It's not like they've shown that they don't really give a crap about public opinion, other than the tiny fig leaves they wear for their regular congressional appearances.
And as far as "Taking their profits away removes their incentive to raise the price", wow, how many times can a person be wrong in such a short sentence? This isn't taking their profits away, and even if it miraculously did, that increases their incentive to raise prices.
Based on historical precedent, this is what would happen: Tax is suspended, price at pump goes down not quite as far as the amount of tax; tax returns, price at pump goes up a little more than the amount of the tax. In between, price increases at least as much (and probably more) than it would of anyway.
Result: Oil companies benefit, again. Citizens lose, again. Oil company executives snicker at pandering politicians and the people who believed -- or pretended to believe -- that this was a good idea.
May 3, 2008 10:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Economists are the liars and panderers, just like Mathew is saying. They don't know nothing about no gas tax!!!
Go Hillery GO!!!
May 2, 2008 6:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
aff input,
Your comments mught have a more positive effect if you knew how to spell your candidate's name.
Na...nevermind.....
May 2, 2008 7:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Think it's a joke.
May 2, 2008 7:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
It won't save you a single nickel. As proposed she'd repeal the $0.184 per gallon tax and apply to oil companies. Oil companies would then pass through not only the new windfall profit tax (as I noted early, corporations don't pay taxes, their customers do), but also increase the price of gas since it's low supply and high demand that is increasing the prices now.
So, it's a LIE.
May 2, 2008 6:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh c'mon. Why insult people's intelligence? We all know its a lousy idea that would have ZERO impact. I'm fine with the pander, because if it works, it tells me that we need someone who can play this game in order to win.
TO EVERYONE ELSE: Seriously, there is little to debate here. Anyone who believes the 'holiday' is a good idea is doing one of two things - (a) Spinning for their candidate (not uncommon) or, (b) Not willing to invest the minimal energy needed to learn how this is a lousy idea.
The more interesting debate is the political one. If panders work, why shouldn't we use them? Hillary, by coupling the 'holiday' with a tax, has made the entire thing harmless (the boost in oil company profits would be recouped with the tax). If we're working with an electorate that can't wrap its head around substance, should be we nominate someone who knows how to play the game?
May 2, 2008 6:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
We should be better than that, win or lose.
May 2, 2008 8:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
You go into an election with the electorate you have, not the one you wish you had. High minded and losing campaigns are worthless.
May 2, 2008 10:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
You don't have to lose. Just be smart and use common sense.
May 3, 2008 7:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
**Do believe that this congress will pass a windfall tax against Big Oil? Big IF, dude. *IF* that doesn't happen a lot of people will lose their jobs. What do you think that $.18 a gallon pays for? Obama needs to do an ad saying "Like NAFTA, McCain's Gas Tax Plan, which Hillary signed on to, will cost us jobs. Hillary liked NAFTA, and she likes McCain's Gas Tax. It will only hurt working Americans."
May 2, 2008 7:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
The lie is that the price will go down. It won't. This would require an increase in supply which will not be possible in the summer months (and likely not after that either). Therefore, consumers will save nothing and even if the oil companies are made to pay the "windfall tax", at least part of this will be passed on to the consumer (see price inelasticity of demand). So, prices for the consumer might even rise as a result of this. Additionally, even if the "windfall tax" is successful, this money won't be guaranteed to go into the infrastructure trust fund.
This is bad all the way around.
May 2, 2008 10:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
The lie is that supply and demand have anything to do with the price of oil at the pump. Got to keep your eye on the pea. That's just the oil companies shucking and jiving you, son. Hey. Don't blame us. It's that old invisible hand moving the price of gasoline. Keep your eye on my watch. Sleep. These aren't the droids we're looking for. Nothing to see here. Move on.
May 2, 2008 11:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Matthew, regardless of his hatred of Obama, has a point here. Although, I would express it differently. If this shameless pander works, more power to her. If voters are persuaded by sweet sounding, but ineffective policy now, who is to say that it will change in November? Do want to lose in November because Obama couldn't pander shamelessly, like Clinton? A president Hillary is better than a president McCain.
p.s: We always have, and always will get the government we deserve. If Indiana voters, in their enduring stupidity, vote for Hillary because of the gas tax 'holiday', then she is the candidate we need in order to win in November. For Obama's candidacy to be worth the effort he needs to show that he can win votes while being against horseshit panders. I'm tired of high minded losing campaigns. Losing campaigns don't get us healthcare. Losing campaigns don't get us better economic polocu. If we need someone of sufficient political ruthlessness (and shamelessness) in order to do some good, so be it. I'm tired of losing to mental midgets like McCain and Bush.
May 2, 2008 6:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
if that is the kind of leadership we get by winning, then what is the point of winning?
May 2, 2008 9:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, the people in poverty and without healthcare are really being well served by our electoral losses. Process purity is something you can afford if you're livelihood and well being isn't dependent on the outcome of the election.
May 2, 2008 10:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
They're not served by panderers winning, either. Just look at Clinton Episode I.
May 3, 2008 11:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
Stilton, I understand your point, but you have to realize that she will not get anything accomplished if she's elected.
I need only reference the 1993-4 task force on health care reform. Democrats had the White House, 57% of the Senate and 59% of the House. Despite this, Clinton took her task force private and would not let anyone from Congress have any input or discussion.
She even managed to piss off Democrats in Congress, so when her task force finally produced a proposal, Congress crushed it. Yes, the health care lobby worked against her, but she was by far her own biggest enemy.
Now, proving that she's learned NOTHING from her previous failed experience, she's trotting this ridiculous gas-tax holiday out. Never mind that it is UNIVERSALLY panned. The measure is unlikely to even be presented for a vote - and if it is, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are set to torpedo it. And, of course, Dubya is the ultimate firewall against it. She won't get it passed, and she knows it.
Think about it this way. Every major paper in America says it's bad. Every major economist (including at least 3 Nobel winners) says it's bad. Obama says it's bad. David Paterson (Clinton super) says it's bad. Paul Krugman says it's bad. Michael Bloomberg says it's bad. Nancy Pelosi says it's bad. Harry Reid says it's bad.
You would think Clinton could roll out at least one superdelegate endorser who says this tax is a good idea. Just one.
Evan Bayh? Silence. Mike Easley? Silence. Ted Strickland? Silence. Ed Rendell? Silence.
May 2, 2008 9:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm with you on the 'holiday' being pointless policy and shameless pandering.
Also, its time people stopped using numbers without context. Yes, Democrats 'controlled' the House and Senate. But guess which region formed a strong plurality of the Democratic caucus? The Deep South. On paper we had a Democratic Congress, but nothing close to a progressive one. The losses of '94 were the natural conclusion of Nixon's Southern strategy. Right wing Christians finally started voting Republican further down the ballot.
Blame the Clintons all you will, but I for one am happy that our current Congress isn't so reliant on that part of the country for its caucus' strength. Now we'll have a Democratic Congress and a more progressive caucus.
May 2, 2008 10:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, Obama says people will get $30/month out of the holiday. And he ridicules that. He figures it's nothing. Has people smirking about it. He, on the other hand, is going to really change things. Right. Sleep. Sleep. Nothing to see here. Only people who need $30/month extra are uneducated low class white voters clinging to their ignorance instead of voting their economic interests.
May 2, 2008 11:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Pretty sure all the figures have been somewhere around $30 for the whole summer, or $10/15 per month (which agrees with my own estimated savings, and I have an hour commute every day and will be moving across country in a giant truck the middle of summer). Is the equivalent of two extra hours per month at a minimum wage job really a windfall to even the poorest of the automobile-using workforce?
And again that is all under the ridiculous and directly controverted assumption that the tax reduction would trickle down to the price at the pump.
May 3, 2008 3:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
Clinton won this issue.
Obama has done nothing but lose.
May 2, 2008 6:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Again, can you find any economist who thinks its a good idea? It seems even Weaver nows shes wrong, he just thinks shes doing the politically right thing.
May 2, 2008 6:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
She won because she's right. She will lower taxes and we will reap the benefits.
I don't care what experts have to say. I didn't have to look up the fact that I'm right in a book or something. I looked it up in my gut. Don't trust experts; trust your gut.
May 2, 2008 6:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
**She's trying to get some of McCain's mojo to rub off on her by adopting HIS gas tax plan. How sick is that? Ewwww!
May 2, 2008 7:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
If won, you mean lied. I agree. She's a liar. Apparently that's what you want in a candidate.
May 2, 2008 6:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Clinton is also lying on this issue.
May 2, 2008 6:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Great ad. The topic has traction for Clinton and Obama is on the wrong side of this."
Its only a great ad for the mentally retarded and Hillary supporters - but then again, they are one in the same.
May 2, 2008 6:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is elitist to think people with kitchen tables do not also have the Inter-Webs and are able to see right through such a blatent pander.
That you agree with the analysis but prefer to play poltics indicates you are not qualfied to raise what you are holding, there.
Sir. Step away from the babies, sir. SIR!
May 2, 2008 6:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Word up.
People are not that stupid.
But go ahead and think they are right up to the time they just shock the shit out of you by actually being way smarter than you, in your greatness, ever imagined.
Sometimes that's how you get smarter.
May 2, 2008 6:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
We can't base policy on "facts" and "figures". We have to trust our gut. When egghead economists universally say "this is stupid", then you know it's smart.
Bread and circus. That's what the people want.
May 2, 2008 6:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well said Mr. Bush
May 2, 2008 8:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow, how empirically dense. If it came out that Clinton had decided to stop collecting all taxes and pay for that with a bond issue solely to China, Iran and Zimbabwe, I'm sure you'd find some pointless way to say that Obama's opposition was a sure-fire lose.
On a somewhat unrelated note, does anyone know if there is a way to put posters on /ignore?
May 2, 2008 9:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Op-Ed Columnist: Dumb as We Wanna Be
Thomas Freidman's Editorial in the NYT says it all about Hillary and McSame's Holiday tax.
May 2, 2008 6:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama needs to say this: payout to oil companies and who takes their money....
May 2, 2008 6:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am a Hillary Clinton supporter and I approve that message.
Oilbama wants to do nothing so stop whining about gas prices.
He voted yes on cheney's oil bill.
Clinton vote no freaking way.
May 2, 2008 6:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Clinton vote no! Clinton smash!
May 2, 2008 6:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Makes sense. You lie in almost every post you make here. She lies throughout this ad and whenever she finds it politically expedient. A match made in amoral Heaven.
May 2, 2008 6:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
The great thing about Hillary on her little gas tax tirade is by the time she is done with it mccain will definitely be running from it. Just because you reduce a tax on something, there is nothing to compel the oil companies from raising the price right back up to where it was. With all of her "washington experience" if this is all she can come up with to deal with the economy you have to be mental to support her.
gotalife = elephant in the closet (its ok to come out)
Is that you karl? you left your little buddy all alone in the white house, how does he tie his shoes now?
May 2, 2008 6:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
pander-bear
May 2, 2008 6:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sadly, that's actually a very well done ad. And given the utter failure of the media to highlight that EVERY LEARNED ANALYSIS comes to the same conclusion -- that this is pure political pander that will solve nothing for Americans at the pump -- I fear it may work on some voters. Even if it is nothing more than a bald-faced set of lies.
Yet another reason Hillary has no business serving as the nominee of our party.
May 2, 2008 6:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Unless Hillary Clinton is G-d, there is no way she's going to be able to bring gas prices down, and her pretending that she has that ability is pandering at it's highest level. Market forces, the sinking dollar, diminishing supply, and increasing demand are all working to keep gas prices higher. And if Hillary had any balls, she'd tell the American people as much. The era of cheap oil and gargantuan SUVs is over and the sooner we, as a nation, wrap our heads around that fact, the sooner we can get to work developing conservation measures and alternative fuels.
May 2, 2008 6:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
I once liked HRC. I hope her truth-bending ads have the same effect on those elusive white-working-class voters as they have on me, i.e. they're a real turn-off. He didn't say $8 is pennies, Bitch. He said it would save pennies a day, which is true.
May 2, 2008 6:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ayuh, me too. No more obliteratti.
May 2, 2008 6:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Obama can't bluff past Wright issue";
"Does Obama really want us to believe this is how he makes important decisions? Or is this is a politician bluffing his way through a tough moment and trying to get away with it?"
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0508/10043.html
No, he can't.
May 2, 2008 6:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Seriously, link ONE expert opinion that says the gas tax holiday is a good idea. ONE.
May 2, 2008 6:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Much less the President of these United States.
May 2, 2008 6:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Greg - You never posted the new Insider Advantage Poll.
Obama is now back up by 5. 7 point swing in 2 days.
May 2, 2008 6:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
He went from +15 just over 2 weeks ago and slid all the way down to -2.
Now he's back to +5:
05/01 - 05/01 611 LV 49 44 Obama +5.0
04/29 - 04/29 571 LV 42 44 Clinton +2.0
04/14 - 04/14 541 LV 51 36 Obama +15.0
May 2, 2008 6:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Insider Advantage polls are even greater works of fiction than Greek ferry schedules, Saddam's WMD's and the script read by that soothing voice on the tech support line that tells you the menu options have recently changed and your call is important to them. But I guess even IA knows when they've stretched the limits of credulity and have to make a correction.
May 2, 2008 7:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
"...greater works of fiction than Greek ferry schedules, Saddam's WMD's and the script read by that soothing voice on the tech support line that tells you the menu options have recently changed and your call is important to them."
This is priceless! Wish I could write this well!
May 2, 2008 7:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
If your talking about the one in NC it is still complete crap its stats for turnout are in favor for Hillary big time, its under sampling the young vote and the AA vote.
May 2, 2008 6:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have already voted in NC but i drove past the polling place and there was quite the line, and there is no Hillary sign at that polling place. There are a few Obama ones though.
May 2, 2008 6:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, I know. I agree 100%. I'm just wondering when Greggie will post the new polling.
May 2, 2008 6:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
It seems apropos to pull out this quote again:
"One of Clinton's laws of politics is, if one candidate is trying to scare you, and the other one is trying to make you think, if one candidate's appealing to your fears, and the other one's appealing to your hopes. You better vote for the person who wants you to think and hope." - Bill Clinton, October 2004
May 2, 2008 6:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Unfortunately, this is a pretty good ad... A completely misleading, bordering on lying ad, but a good one.
May 2, 2008 6:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Take a memo!
Pandering and betting on the ignorance of the electorate is just what I want in my president!
May 2, 2008 6:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Unfortunately that's exactly what much of the electorate wants. That's why we have Pres. Bush.
May 2, 2008 6:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Have you seen how popular he is?
How stupid are people that they got how bad he is even with the media lying their asses off, being infiltrated by propaganda artists from the military and the WH?
Jesus Christ - give me a break. Americans figured this bullshit out on their own.
You arrogant arrogant snot.
May 2, 2008 8:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Betty, can't you play nice? Just because someone disagrees with you, do you have to call them names?
May 2, 2008 11:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Lying email about Obama's full name in circulation;
but birth certificate still won't be released:
Among the many allegations in the chain email is one about Obama’s name: “By the way. His true name is Barak Hussein Muhammed Obama. Won’t that sound sweet to our enemies as they swear him in on the Koran!” That's blatantly not true, as far as we know. But the campaign still won't release his birth certificate which
perhaps is adding fuel to the rumor."
Uh oh.
May 2, 2008 6:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Candidates have to release their fucking birth certificates now?!
May 2, 2008 6:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
OH MY GOD, "MUHAMMED" LIKE THE BOXER?!
Middle names truly are serious business.
May 2, 2008 6:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gotalife has now exposed itself as another Racist Scumbag Aryan Nation Troll(ANT)
May 2, 2008 6:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
All he has to do is release his Birth Certificate. McWar too, he might be 100 years old.
May 2, 2008 6:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
But why? It's so SILLY!!
May 2, 2008 6:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Can you release YOUR birth certificate so we can see who you work for and shame them into bankruptcy?
The best thing about 11/08 is that you will hopefully go away for 4 to 8 years. In your away time I can only hope that you're molested in the bad way by a Grizzly bear or killer shark.
May 2, 2008 6:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
"“By the way. His true name is Barak Hussein Muhammed Obama. Won’t that sound sweet to our enemies as they swear him in on the Koran!”"
Can Edward Norton's character in "American History X" appear and make you bite a curb or something? You are a douchebag.
May 2, 2008 6:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
You mean it's really
Obama OSAMA HUSSEIN MOHAMMED X LENIN?
O Noes! What will we tell the kittehs?///////1
May 2, 2008 7:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Gas Tax Holiday proposal by Late Shift Hillary would save the same amount for Billionaires as it would for Joe Six Pack. Hillary feels Billionaires pain at the gas pump!
May 2, 2008 6:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Democrats in our state legislature have gone to the mat over the gas tax with our Republican governor opposing increasing the tax to pay for badly needed road and bridge improvements. She undermines everything the Democrats have tried to do in our state. Raising taxes is always politically costly but sometimes unavoidable.
Hillary is a REPUBLICAN. She's no more likely to rebuild our imploding infrastructure than McCain.
May 2, 2008 6:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good thing is, Hillary's proposal would not trump the Minnesota State Legislature. Federalism, in all it's beauty.
May 2, 2008 6:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
They are just now playing an ad blaming MN Democrats for the increased gas tax. Maybe Hillary would like to endorse the ad - paid for by the Republican Party and Hillary Clinton.
May 2, 2008 6:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, well, I don't think Minnesotans will give a crap. Remember, we have a governor who was elected by a bare plurality in a three person race.
No worries. Bring it on. The Republicans are dead in the Legislature.
May 2, 2008 6:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Its sad because she knows this does nothing, but is willing to "fight" for something that only splits the party, and does nothing for the people. She does this because it benefits her.
The Clintons love wedge issues and they love manipulating the populace with stupid unimportant crap like this.
May 2, 2008 6:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Clintonian instinct in response to Truth is to throw more sand in the air. What does this inspire? I could have voted for Sen Clinton, but there is something seriously hair-brained Lucy Ricardo wrong with her campaign. It is no longer 1992. The Inter-Webs are toxic to lies that are repeated. This is not deep poltical science.
Stupifying it is, the depth of her fall, and her Autumnal Abyss yawns still before her. Obliteration means no Sen Majority Leader role will be offered.
And WTF does Bubbuh Emeritus do? I'm betting on another bypass.
Pax,
M.
May 2, 2008 6:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Senator Hillary Gas Bag Clinton introduces her Oil Well, Woop-De-Doo-Doo Senate Bill:
Has Hillary jumped the Shark.
She claims that her experience qualifies her to get things done in Washington.
If her Gas Tax Holiday Bill does not get passed, then she will have been exposed as someone who can not get even an urgent piece of legislation(by her own definition) moved on.
Vermont Teddy Bears have now added McHillaryCain, the conjoined at the hip Pander Bear, to its product line.
May 2, 2008 6:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
When she wins, will you cross back over the pond wanker?
May 2, 2008 6:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
When she concedes to Obama or loses to McCain will you go away forever?
May 2, 2008 6:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
When she concedes to Obama or loses to McCain will you go away forever?
May 2, 2008 6:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
What's a "pond wanker?"
May 2, 2008 7:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
I believe it's a early Roman warship.
May 2, 2008 8:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Reposted from the Udall thread:
And another thing about this moronic gas tax holiday - how stupid is to try to pander to working-class people with a tax break that 1)cuts out the poorest workers, those who rely on public transportation - they won't even get the lousy $30, 2) overall gives a bigger break to the people driving the least fuel-efficient vehicles...you know, the ones we can thank for prices being as high as they are right now in the first place (better fuel efficiency = lower demand = lower prices), and 3) has anyone mentioned that it averages out to about $30 per driver spread over 4 or 5 months? Hey, don't knock it, that works out to about 1-1/2 McDonald's Value Meals per month.
Never let it be said that Hillary is out of touch with ordinary working people.
Here's Obama's response ad: A shot of 1-1/2 fast food value meals with the caption: "Here's Hillary's solution to high gas prices." Meanwhile the voiceover can explain how much it will actually save the average driver and end up with, "does she really expect you to believe that giving you $7.50 a month is going to solve the problem?"
Or some such.
May 2, 2008 6:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
hey if the bush admin. is willing to lie to us saying that rebate that went out 5/1/08 is going to jumpstart the economy while he had to borrow the money to do so, then I can put a few cents in my pocket from what HILLARY wants for us, in fact, she went up to the Hill to make it into legislation, yes, in the middle of her campaign.
And Mr. Me too, only brought it up until SHE did. He was clueless as para usual, behind the things that matter to the taxpayer. He only came forth AFTER HILLARY did. Thats not a leader, give me Hillary. She's talking to my bank account, Obama is not ready for prime time.
May 2, 2008 6:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
She's riding McCain's coattails on this one. And she's going to adversely effect your bank account: the oil companies will pass through the tax. No CORPORATION PAYS TAXES. ITS CUSTOMERS DO.
May 2, 2008 6:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Every time I question if Hillary really is that bad, she does something to that tells me--no!She's even worse than I originally thought.
See, she's showing us that she's a real leader--damn the experts, damn the facts--I'm leading America on the road to nowhere.
May 2, 2008 6:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Clinton and Obama have energy solutions, but only clinton has an immediate relief plan. All Obama does is complain/give speeches, where is his immediate relief plan? In changing washington, which may take a few years at the earliest?
May 2, 2008 6:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow, the $50 will go a helluva long way toward paying my tuition bill. Thanks Hillary (and good luck passing this bill).
Why not completely jump the shark and say you're in favor of a proposal to give everyone who makes less than $100k a $20k "citizen's bonus." Might as well, because it is just as likely to pass Congress as the gas tax holiday.
Or, we can come back down to reality and force the issue on the Republicans and push through a modern GI Bill.
Now there is some reality and issue-based identity politics for you! ;)
May 2, 2008 6:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
The last thing they want are educated voters.
May 2, 2008 6:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
$50 msy not mean to me or you who pay that much on for cable. But it means a lot to a lot of people. The guys who have to use a pick-up or a van for work would save a lot more than that. I agree it's not much, but definitely more than what Obama is offering in immediate relief - none.
May 2, 2008 7:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
No one saves any money under this plan. It's bad government and bad economics.
May 2, 2008 8:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, like, what 15 years on Hillary's fabled health care reform?
May 2, 2008 6:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
All Obama does is complain?
Hillary: The Boys Club is ganging up on me.
--They always ask me the first question in the debates
--the press is mean to me.
Her bold solution? She lies about herself.
--I'm from PA. I'm from New York
--I was under heavy fire in Bosnia
--I was against NAFTA
--I'm a regular gal, I'm not an elitist
Her next solution? Destroy Obama, get McCain elected so she can say I told you so.
She doesn't, for a minute, believe in the Gas Tax Relief scheme. She sees an opening, knows it's bad for the country, but is going to promote it anyway--that's real Clinton Character.
May 2, 2008 6:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Uh....$1000 permanent tax cut per family per year?
Yeah....that's MUCH worse than a whopping $30 (MAX) for 3 months.
(Assuming the tax cut ever makes it to the pump - which, given that oil companies will be taxed to make up the shortfall, will likely never happen.)
May 2, 2008 9:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Somewhee I read the Iraq War is going to eventually cost every family $50,000. Maybe we could cancel that.
May 2, 2008 6:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
To the supporters of this proposal:
Since the tax isn't collected from the consumer, but rather is collected from the oil industry directly, what makes you think the oil companies will pass that savings on to consumers?
May 2, 2008 6:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Having a windfall profits tax will ensure that the rebate will be passed on to consumers. The higher the oil company profits, the higher thier taxes, so they do not have an incentive to drive up prices.
May 2, 2008 7:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
You have GOT to be kidding, unless the tax is 100% of profits they still have incentive, especially when they don't have to do a damn thing to get that profit...just open their pocket and put it in...
May 2, 2008 8:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's called incidence, i.e. who actually pays for a tax...we will pay for this tax because not only will demand raise prices anyway, the oil companies will raise the prices on top of that to pay for the tax, pay it later at a depreciated rate and leave joe sixpack to make up the difference, again. The revenues will not be collected immediatelyy and don't get me started on the freakin' indirect costs of this idiot plan Clinton came up with...oh wait, she's just copying McCain.
May 2, 2008 9:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Josh on the home page --
From the AP ...
Former President Bill Clinton was in West Virginia on his wife's behalf. In Clarksburg, he called her a scrapper and contrasted her appeal among working-class voters with the elitists he said support Obama.
"The great divide in this country is not by race or even income, it's by those who think they are better than everyone else and think they should play by a different set of rules," he said. "In West Virginia and Arkansas, we know that when we see it."
So Bill foments class war while Hill foments gas war. They really are two for the price of one.
May 2, 2008 6:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
I almost choked on my dinner when I read that quote.
The part that really got me was about others wanting to play by their own rules. I just can't believe that he has the audacity to say that after everything they've tried to pull during this primary. They're just shameless.
I'm not generally a conspiracy theorist, but I am seriously beginning to wonder if Karl Rove isn't really advising them behind the scenes.
May 2, 2008 6:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bill Clinton==>James Carville===>Mary Matalin===>Karl Rove===>Bill Clinton===>Hillary
May 2, 2008 8:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
What's wrong with using windfall profits for a gas tax holiday? You can argue it can't be done ... but you can argue the same about Obama's ideas.
People want action not talk.
May 2, 2008 6:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Putting forth a "solution" that cannot be done (thanks to Congress) in the end is "just talk."
Check your premises and your logic.
May 2, 2008 6:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's impossible to get a veto proof windfall profits tax before the summer driving season if ever. Hillary knows that. It's all a sham.
May 2, 2008 6:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh shit, give me a break.
Why doesn't she just promise a couple of free gallons of milk to everyone? Or a chicken for every pot? That's about the amount of "relief" this will provide each month. Assuming any of the "relief" gets to the consumer, which as others have pointed out is not guaranteed.
May 2, 2008 6:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Even if it passed, the oil companies would just pass the cost of the windfall tax on to consumers.
Thus, Hillary's plan benefits only herself and oil companies -- 1) it increases demand for gas; 2) consumers will ultimately pay for the windfall profits tax.
May 2, 2008 6:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Plus indirect costs, a net loss for joe sixpack. But who cares, right!? We don't need to be the party of good government anymore.
We pander on crap like this and we're no better than the fucking Republicans.
May 2, 2008 9:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
It can be done, it just won't have any effect. So you make the oil companies stop paying the tax on gas, and, oh, btw, now you have this other tax to pay which (in order to pay for the gas tax( is EXACTLY THE SAME AMOUNT! So while McCain's might have a slight but negligible effect, McHillary's will have exactly no effect.
May 2, 2008 8:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's an effective ad. And truthful. That is why it will succeed.
May 2, 2008 6:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Truthful nothing. It's a lie.
May 2, 2008 6:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
How about we end the Iraq War. That has cost the average tax paying American $40,000 dollars and counting.....not to mention the blood guts and dried up bones of American soldiers, Iraqi men women and children and several other countries soldiers.
This is just hyperventillating bullshit.
Consider the costs...
$4,681 per household.
$1,721 per person.
$341.4 million per day.
http://www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar_home
May 2, 2008 6:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Clinton want to end the war. So does Obama. What's your point.
May 2, 2008 6:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
No she doesn't. She is just lying now. Like Hillary said herself: "watch how they vote" She voted for the Iraq war, and she voted to attack Iran, and she is eager to launch a Nuclear Holocaust that would "Obliterate" seventy million Men, Women and CHILDREN.
May 2, 2008 7:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Right after she bombs Iran back to a parking lot....please
May 2, 2008 7:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
She will.
May 2, 2008 6:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Before or after starting a new war with Iran?
May 2, 2008 6:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Only if it is politically expedient to do so.
May 2, 2008 7:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
That is something that Obama has done excellently - he always links the war and the bad economy.
May 2, 2008 6:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow. There she is sitting in a big truck. She must be just like me! She's got my vote now!
She's the most geniune politician in Washington!
May 2, 2008 6:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Would you like a 3-piece meal or a bucket? Buckawwwk!
May 2, 2008 6:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Does that mean I get to bite off your head?
May 2, 2008 6:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ineffective. No reasoning emanates from it.
May 2, 2008 6:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's Mike the Headless Chicken.
May 2, 2008 8:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillery is just a regular gal. She like herself some whiskey!!!
May 2, 2008 6:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Isn't she supposed to go cross-eyed *after* she's drunk?
May 2, 2008 6:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yup.
May 2, 2008 6:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Two things will be happening by the end of next week as a result of Obama's poor showing in the primaries:
1. Obama will agree to Clinton's challenge of a free form debate.
2. Obama will quietly start asking the DNC to consider seating the FL and MI delegates.
But his desperation will be palpable and just sink him further. Clinton's wheel is spinning up and Obama's down.
May 2, 2008 6:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Two things will be happening by the end of next week as a result of Obama's poor showing in the primaries:"
To follow the bullshit part of your argument before getting to the utterly nonsensical bullshit portion - Obama has won more states than Hillary.
May 2, 2008 6:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
"According to the poll, the number of Democrats who would feel enthusiastic if Clinton were the nominee has fallen from 45 percent in January to 38 percent in March to 33 percent now. Enthusiasm for an Obama victory has also dropped, from 45 percent in March down to 36 percent now."
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/01/dem.poll/index.html
Only 33% of DEMOCRATS are enthusiastic about Clinton. She's not only bringing down Obama, she's bringing down herself and the party.
May 2, 2008 6:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fogu's analysis is always Fair and Balanced(tm).
May 2, 2008 6:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Then what the hell are you doing here with gotnolife, squawking this over and over?
Like it's life and death that people believe some crap of Hillary's?
If Obama has no chance - what do you care what we are saying here?
Do we hang out at Hillary sites and insist that she's losing? I don't think so - because she's losing.
We don't need no one to co-sign no shit.
You and gotnolife on the other hand, never stop squawking.
May 2, 2008 6:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
You think this is an Obama site?
Now that is funny!
Buckaaaak!
May 2, 2008 7:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
I know that Obama supporters are in the majority here by a wide margin, chickenbrain.
May 2, 2008 8:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is an Obama echo chamber. Betty is one of the head cheerleaders. Be nice to her. She is under a lot of stress right now. Her world is falling apart.
May 2, 2008 11:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why would Obama "quietly start asking" to have the MI and FL delegations seated?
For the umpteenth time, Obama does not need any delegates from MI or FL to win the nomination.
May 2, 2008 6:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
The gas tax is a 2 question issue:
1) Who's REALLY taking the VACATION?
and
2) Who REALLY ends up PAYING for the VACATION?
Credit card vacations get VERY EXPENSIVE in the end!
May 2, 2008 6:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
BOOM!
May 2, 2008 6:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh dear Jeebus, this woman is trying to be a Republican even while running as a Democrat.
Worse, she can't see that everyone outside DC can tell that the 'gas tax holiday' will only benefit the oil companies. (I will grant there are a lot of people who think that it's 18 cents per dollar, not the actual 18 cents per gallon - that's a failure of education and journalism.)
Every time she says something, she makes herself look worse. I wouldn't have thought it possible, but she's doing it.
Please, Hillary, go home.
May 2, 2008 6:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
The ad is a flat-out lie, no two ways about it.
But that is OK, because the end justifies the means.
The tax reduction is economically unfathomably stupid; every single one of economists asked, right, left or independent agrees.
But that is OK, because the end justifies the means.
Clinton is putting the Congressional Democrats in an awful spot; either vote for something unfathomably stupid or have attack ads by Republicans using the words of the "ultra-liberal Hillary Clinton" against them. Way to help the party.
But that is OK, because the end justifies the means.
Of course, Clinton knows as well as you and I that this will never pass nor, if it did, would the consumer ever receive the benefit of a $0.184 per gallon (which is about $10 per month per car if you have an SUV.) She is just doing it to exploit the false hopes of the electorate to help her fight on.
But that is OK, because the end justifies the means.
Clinton knows that the drop would cause stockpiling fuel en masse; this would go against the expected production levels and if it did not outright cause a supply crisis, the raw price would still skyrocket way beyond the $0.184 that people would "gain."
But that is OK, because the end justifies the means.
Clinton knows that her "windfall tax" proposal will not pass nor, if it did, would it be able to recoup the amount lost in the giveaway.
But that is OK, because the end justifies the means.
Clinton knows that the vacation from reality.. no, sorry, "gas tax holiday" if ever passed would cost more than it brought in and it would cause job losses and infrastructure deterioration. Fortunately, she knows it will never pass.
But that is OK, because the end justifies the means.
Clinton ignores the fact that even in the most ideal situation, the biggest beneficiary would be those who drive the most cars and the largest cars. She could have proposed to give a gas voucher for the middle class down, which would be more money for those who actually need it and not for those who do not. But she did not, because this is a better slogan.
But that is OK, because the end justifies the means.
Instead of working to help people avoid USING gasoline, the environmentally and economically sensible solution, she is encouraging more fossil fuel consumption.
But that is OK, because the end justifies the means.
And in the end, Clinton must be elected no matter what the cost to the people, to the poor, to the nation, to the environment or to the party.
May 2, 2008 6:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
There is not a single statement in that ad that is a lie.
May 2, 2008 6:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
The ad says Obama said $8 billion is "just pennies." He did not say that.
Knowingly stating an untruth is a lie.
But that is OK, because the end justifies the means.
I understand your position on this, fogu2. The end justifies the means.
May 2, 2008 6:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank God that even in the worst case scenario, we only have 8 more years to endure "truth" in the Clintonian sense. I'm looking forward to the "true" war zone stroies she'll be telling after she's been in the white house.
May 2, 2008 6:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
But by that time won't Chelsea be old enough to run for President?
May 2, 2008 6:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Where on earth is she getting those numbers? Who's doing her accounting? Maybe there needs to be another switch-up in the Clinton campaign...
May 2, 2008 6:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Voters want action now! Even if its the stupidest action imaginable!
Hmmm, kind of sounds like the rationale for voting for the Iraq War...
May 2, 2008 6:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
In the .S. we use 300,000,000 - 4000,000,000 gallons of gas per day. That's right, per day. At 18.4 cent tax per gallon times three summer months. You do the math. She's accurate and truthful.
May 2, 2008 6:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're from the South?! No!! Never would have guessed.
May 2, 2008 6:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't go bashing the South.
Especially not before the NC primary.
May 2, 2008 7:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fair enough. I posted in anger.
May 2, 2008 7:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is not a lie of COMMISSION it is a lie of OMISSION.
Fixed tax amount (18.4c) removed affects the dynamic forces of supply/demand (in an already peak summer season, that may have been had LOWER gas prices because people were NOT driving as much because GAS PRICES ARE HIGH). But, -18.4 means oil companies can plausibly say "demand has increase..." so UP goes the price and guess what? Big oil gets a MULTI BILLION DOLLAR TAX BREAK.
(and that doesn't even address the omission of facts about where the 18.4c in revenue is going, and how that shortfall will (WON'T) be made up).
A CHICKEN IN EVERY POT AND A TIGER IN EVERY TANK!
(and a hand in every wallet, and a knife in every back)
May 2, 2008 6:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
I guess maybe I should feel good that a democrat is succeeding based on a totally bogus idea the way the republicans have for years. She's certainly showing that the republicans won't be able to go any lower into the gutter than she can, because now she is the gutter. The last scene of Animal Farm should be playing in voters' minds, but these days it seems like the citizens of the land of the free and the home of the brave prefer to keep the boot fixed firmly on their throats. Go Hillary!
May 2, 2008 6:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry, edit typo on the amount:
In the U.S. we use 300,000,000 - 400,000,000 gallons of gas per day. That's right, per day. At 18.4 cent tax per gallon times three summer months. You do the math. She's accurate and truthful.
May 2, 2008 6:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're from the U.S.?! No!!! Never would have guessed.
May 2, 2008 6:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary's "dangle shiny things in front of the mouth breathers" strategy is working on Fogu. Any other takers?
May 2, 2008 6:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fair point, but you aren't doing all of the math. If you impose a 18.4 cent tax on the oil company, they will increase the price per gallon at the pump by 18.4 per gallon--so, at most, a wash. That's assuming that it is rational to believe that George W. Bush will sign such a bill. And I'm not going to get into the whole supply/demand discussion because it is pretty clear you are just cheerleading and not doing any substantive analysis.
May 2, 2008 6:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
I just did the math.
300,000,000*90*.18=
4,968,000,000
5 billion, not 8. Adjusting my spreadsheet...
.18 cents per person, and .65 cents per car per day.
Mana from HEAVEN!!!
May 2, 2008 6:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Since you're so big into math and all....Hillary's ad says she'll save "families" $8 billion. Ok, that's basically $8 billion for the entire US population. There are 310 million people in the US; every billion dollars therefore represents something around $3.25 per person.
8 x $3.25 = $26
Multiply that by average household size of 3 people:
3 x $26 = $78
Divide that by the 3 months of the "holiday":
$78/3 = $26 per family per month.
If it's a two-car household:
$26/2 = $13 per vehicle
If gas remains at a current average price of $3.50 per gallon:
$13/3.5 = 3.71 gallons per month
In a reasonably fuel efficient vehicle getting 20 mpg city:
3.71 x 20 = 74.2 miles
With a short commute of 10 miles to work each day:
74.2/10 = 7.4 trips to/from the office per month
In other words, jack shit.
Gee, numbers are fun, aren't they?
May 2, 2008 7:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, illegal immigrants and caucus states do not count so it is really more than that.
May 2, 2008 7:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just for fun I made a spread sheet. There are currently 303,990,070 people in the country.
Hillary's 8 billion would save them each .29 cents per day.
Using the 2002 census, there were 85,000,000 cars on the road. Over 90 days, that's $1.05 per day.
Who thinks that will make a bit of difference for anyone? A buck a day?
In the immortal words of Thamas Jefferson, "gimme a fucking break."
May 2, 2008 6:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary is truthworthy hard scrappy worker, after the what we got, she's great!
May 2, 2008 6:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
What does Al Gore think of the Gas Tax Holiday ?
May 2, 2008 6:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is a fascinating argument that is unfolding now. I'm certainly an Obama supporter, but I'm a Democrat first. For years, we've evaluated candidates based on their honesty of purpose and quality of their intentions. Sound policy and good motives have been getting killed by political ruthlessness for years. The result of which has, until recently, been a right wing and reactionary Congress. If Hillary's gas tax 'holiday' pander pays off, doesn't that tell about the kind of electorate that we're working with? If a little shameless pandering allows us to do real good, why not do it? Why not? An electorate that isn't willing to invest the energy necessary to learn why the gas tax 'holiday' is a bad idea, isn't one that will elect Obama.
May 2, 2008 6:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
An electorate that only has a choice between two Republicans pandering to them is an electorate that no longer has the freedom to choose a better alternative.
If you don't like Obama, draft Gore, but don't elect Hillary McCain.
May 2, 2008 6:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Pfft. Hillary is no Republican. On every major (and consequential) domestic policy issue she either where Obama is, or to the left of him (healthcare). Need I remind you he attacked on healthcare from the right?
Foreign policy is why I voted for Obama and why I support him. But I'm nowhere near believing Hillary is a Republican. She may be as ruthless as they are, but she isn't one of them.
May 2, 2008 7:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes and no. On her own meager Senate record, she is pretty similar to Obama. But she wants to take credit for Bill Clinton's time in the White House. So I also give her a debit for it, putting her solidly to the right of Obama.
May 2, 2008 8:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Using a little right-wing pandering to defeat a Republican is one thing; to defeat a Democrat is entirely another.
May 2, 2008 6:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Short memories here? Didn't Obama attack her healthcare proposal from the right? Also, this isn't a classic left-right pander. Its just a shameless pander. We're for stimulus checks, but against a gas tax 'holiday' which sounds like it does the same thing. Plus, by adding the tax on profits she ensured that oil companies' profits aren't boosted by the pander. Its neutral and pointless, but apparently politically effective.
May 2, 2008 7:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, he did not "attack her healthcare proposal from the right."
Obama said that he thinks the mandate idea is good but that he does not believe it is feasible to get it passed that way and therefore a non-mandated program is the better option to start with.
Clinton then said that Obama does not advocate Universal Healthcare because he does not have mandates. Oh, and added that she is just using the mandates for negotiation leverage and does not expect them to survive in the final program.
Oh, and then Clinton said that Obama was espousing "right-wing talking points."
But the end justifies the means.
May 2, 2008 7:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
You seem to forget the radio ads about how Hillary was going to 'force' people to buy healthcare they couldn't afford. With Harry and Louise look alikes, no less.
If you want to continue spinning for Obama, go ahead. All progressive policy wonks believe that Hillary's proposal got us closer to the ideal and insured more people. The very same people who just as universal in their opposition to gas tax b.s
May 2, 2008 7:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, you are right. I am forgetting that and it should count. Mind you, I do not think she has adequately explained how she will ensure that it will be affordable but I will certainly concede the larger point about the ad.
One thing I feel that still glosses over, though, is that Obama specifically agrees that a mandate would ultimately be better; it is just that he feels that is not the policy we should try to implement now. Until questions about affordability etc. are resolved, he thinks no mandates are the better option.
And that Clinton also acknowledges that she does not think mandates will happen.
May 2, 2008 7:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ummm, there was a radio ad with "lookalikes"?
May 2, 2008 7:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Haha..... Sorry, I meant the mailers.
May 2, 2008 8:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
How do you have look-alikes on the radio?
May 2, 2008 7:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Everyone looks the same on radio.
May 2, 2008 7:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
And as I've seen expressed elsewhere before : if voters have a choice between a real republican and a fake republican, why would they choose the fake one?
May 2, 2008 7:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
How is this a classic Republican issue, other than the fact that its useless? Tax credit to consumer (which we favor) is nullified by rising price (which we're against) and oil company profits (which we're also against). But the profits are nullified by the tax on oil companies (which we're for). All in all, one bit of mind numbingly useless policy. Not left, not right. Just stupid. If pandering to the masses with stupid ideas gets a Democrat in the WH, so be it.
May 2, 2008 7:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just keep it up Hil...
Any hope you had of becoming Majority Leader when you finally crawl your way back to the Senate has evaporated with this latest stunt.
May 2, 2008 6:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow the lines are being drawn!
Is does this seem to be hip right now. President bush, many members of congress and many members of corporate America have utterly failed to uphold anything resembling fiduciary responsibility to then propose a stimulus package as a handout to ease our burden/strain.
I want the government to work for me and the rest of America, all of America no matter what class, what race or what gender! I am sure that many of you do as well but I fail to see how this idea solves any of our issues. I think she is wrong, economist think she is wrong, politicians think she is wrong and I would imagine many of you know that she is wrong. It is not a big deal, its just an idea that is not good for the long-term, let's see what she throws out next! You know it's going to be a doosy!
May 2, 2008 6:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
unabogie, run some numbers on that rebate we're getting from the president's rebate to jump start the economy. Since we have to borrow it, how much is that going to cost me and my kids?
that won't work either right? But I'm glad I have it, we're paying over 4$ in california in the bay area.
May 2, 2008 6:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you're willing to borrow money forever, you always feel rich right?
Get used to that $4 a gallon. It will be there after whatever short-ass temporary tax holiday we get.
May 2, 2008 6:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't know how to start, calculating how much that will cost us, since it's all being borrowed from the Chinese. What's their interest rate?
May 2, 2008 6:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
When this is all over, Hillary will make a wonderful running mate for McSame.
May 2, 2008 6:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
She's been vetting herself for that position for 6 weeks at least.
Fine with me if she goes over.
May 2, 2008 7:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good riddance. She would be in welcome territory
McCain/Hillary 08
May 2, 2008 7:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
This blatant pandering might pay off with the voters in Indiana and NC, but will it convince the Super-Delegate that she is the right person for the job?
Obama needs to hit this issue hard and often. He needs to explain it clearly and concisely why it won't work.
I might even put out an ad that is one minute of quotes from Economists, newspapers and other politicians from both sides of the aisle that calls this a bad idea that will not save any money at best and a political stunt and pandering at it's worst. And then give the quote that Hillary doesn't have to listen to experts and the quote from Garin where he basically admits it's a stunt, but it's working.
May 2, 2008 6:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is also a pretty good indication of how she'd govern, i.e., surrender to every horrible idea the Republicans offer.
May 2, 2008 7:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey Matthew. Did you ever answer Opus' question about your comment regarding Barack's half-Black arm around the White supporter's shoulder? You know, the racist question?
Wondering
May 2, 2008 7:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Please stop saying people aren't stupid enough to swallow this. I'm in OH, and I know a 55-year old maintenance guy who rants about the estate tax.
Race, class, pshaw. They ain't nothin' without stupidity.
May 2, 2008 7:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Damn if you didn't say a mouthful.
As I like to say, pretty much every fucked up thing in the world is easy to understand if you just remember this truism: Half of all people are below average.
But then I remember this truism: There's far too much stupid in this world than can be explained away on account of just the stupid people.
heh. And at night, the ice weasels come....
May 2, 2008 7:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
I demand you give the full quote! "Hillary's campaign is a snowmobile racing across the tundra and then suddenly it flips over, pinning you underneath. At night, the ice weasels come."
Next you'll be saying McCain wants troops in Iraq for 100 years.
May 2, 2008 8:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you.
I was standing behind a group of people at the post office. I'll try to be sensitive here, but they looked like they lived in their car. It was a matriarch with a varied group of younger family and they were trying to get a P.O. box for one of the girls. Well, they were having trouble with the clerk and the requirements and the clerk mentioned the Patriot Act.
The grandmother - fat, filthy, toothless, wearing 30 year old torn stretch pants - turned around and looked at me and then told the clerk the following:
I don't want to hear anything about the Patriot Act. I think it's unconstitutional. I think the war is unconstitutional - we're killing babies and this president wants too much information about us and it's wrong and I don't want to hear it or anything about 9/11.
I swear to god. You could have knocked me over and I was so ashamed for ever looking down on these people.
So go ahead and keep looking down on people, asshole. You'll get your come-uppance - every arrogant asshole does.
May 2, 2008 7:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Statement by 150 economists opposing the gas tax holiday, including 9 Indiana University economists:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0508/Economists_for_the_gas_tax.html#comments
May 2, 2008 7:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Pat Buchanan nailed it on MSNBC--Obama is too much "faculty lounge".
Can he beat anybody not named Alan Keyes?
May 2, 2008 7:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
How about Hillary Clinton?
May 2, 2008 7:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes.
He has kicked the Arses off of the Great Clinton Dynasty!!!
May 2, 2008 7:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sure, he's currently kicking Hillary Clinton's ass, and no one would mistake her for Alan Keyes...as far as I know.
May 2, 2008 7:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ummm. he beat Hillary like 27 times.
May 2, 2008 7:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
29
May 2, 2008 9:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Durned in-tee-lektchuls!
May 2, 2008 7:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
He's still running ahead in the polls, so I guess most of America is "faculty lounge."
That's one strange thing about the "elite" argument. It seems to ignore the fact that white, college-educated people who live in or near big cities is a pretty significant voting block. Maybe appealing to these people isn't a bad thing. We vote in higher numbers.
May 2, 2008 7:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Plus, we're not batshit insane like some people we could mention.
May 2, 2008 7:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Joe Biden, John Edwards, Hillary Clinton, Denise Kucinich, Chris Dodd, Mike Gravel, Bill Richardson.
Beat 'em all.
May 2, 2008 7:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow, maksutov66 walked right into that one.
May 2, 2008 7:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Pat Buchanan?
That would be Pat Buchanan who absolutely hates black people and is a white supremacist who wrote a book about how white people were being outnumbered and were gonna die out?
That Pat Buchanan?
I really give a shit about his opinion.
May 2, 2008 7:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Gas Tax Holiday proposal by Late Shift Hillary would save the same amount for Billionaires as it would for Joe Six Pack. Hillary feels Billionaires pain at the gas pump!
May 2, 2008 7:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Let us ot kid ourselves what this is about. She's simply trying to sweep up a few more low information, low education, low intelligence voters from the left end of the bell curve. Their votes count too. Ask Rove.
May 2, 2008 7:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Scheming, cynical and all for the status quo.
That's HILLARY CLINTON for you!!
May 2, 2008 7:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, no matter that every expert and even every non-expert that isn't a Republican knows damn well she is lying.
I hope Obama hits her hard on this. His next ad needs to have quotes from tons of experts, it needs to be loaded with sources and facts.
Hit her hard because as long as the low-information voters lack information they will believe her lies.
May 2, 2008 7:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I figure we have the same chance of getting a windfall profits tax as we do of getting out of Iraq or getting health care reform. At least she's a consistent liar.
May 2, 2008 7:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why that woman should never be allowed back into the White House.
1) AUMF in 2002
2) Kyl-Lieberman
3) "Obliterate" Iran
4) Gas Tax Holiday
She has shown that pandering for votes will always come before sound policy.
May 2, 2008 7:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
An Open Statement Opposing Proposals for a Gas Tax Holiday
In recent weeks, there have been proposals in Congress and by some presidential candidates to suspend the gas tax for the summer. As economists who study issues of energy policy, taxation, public finance, and budgeting, we write to indicate our opposition to this policy. Put simply, suspending the federal tax on gasoline this summer is a bad idea and we oppose it.
more here....
http://www.politico.com/static/PPM43_080502_list_gastax.html
May 2, 2008 7:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Corporate media is going after mcwar for saying the war in Iraq is about oil.
Sometimes a gaffe is the truth. Sounds like a liberal and bad news for mcwar. Make a great ad.
Anyhoo, this will work for Clinton.
She wins both States on Tuesday.
May 2, 2008 7:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hill's plan will save the average John... thirty dollars in 6 months. That can get you a blow job in a lot of towns in 'Merica.
Obama is out of touch with poor peckers.
May 2, 2008 7:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
I dont know whats funnier, your post or your name, LOL
May 2, 2008 7:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
FF is one of my faves. I'm alway happy to see you Big Dawg.
;)
May 2, 2008 8:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
A Texas super for Hillary:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0508/A_Texas_super_for_Hillary.html
I smell toast.
May 2, 2008 7:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Another DNC member. HRC is poison to the elected supers.
May 2, 2008 7:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, because Texas is going to go to the Dems in November.
She's done gotalife. It's over. All she's doing now is destroying the eventual nominee of her own party. That's it. She won't get the nomination. If you're a Dem (which is suspect) I suggest you start thinking longer term.
May 2, 2008 7:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ahem.
It very well could because it is poised to.
May 2, 2008 7:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
However, that's only if Barack is on the ballot.
Hillary will lose us Texas for suer.
May 2, 2008 7:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is Obama destroying the party with the race cards not the Clintons.
May 2, 2008 7:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
HRC knows that her chances are almost zero unless Obama implodes.
She's given up on the supers and just wants to rack up votes to be able to make an argument that she must be VP. The "unity" ticket is being pushed heavily on pro-HRC blogs.
Obama won't do it but that's what she's going for.
May 2, 2008 7:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Inviting Hillary Clinton into the Whitehouse as your VP would be about as smart as inviting a mongoose into your pants.
May 2, 2008 7:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, should have to train the boss silly.
May 2, 2008 7:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Now that is funny.
May 2, 2008 7:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
What pro Clinton blogs?
He did implode with Wright and lost the white votes.
May 2, 2008 7:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Talkleft, for one.
They post at least once a week about a unity ticket and they go apesh*t when Pelosi says it'll never happen.
Also, Ambinder put a poll up on it today. 75% said that the idea was an offense to humanity (or something like that).
May 2, 2008 7:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Obama for VP ship has sailed.
May 2, 2008 7:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're funny. That's the way they talk about it on Talkleft too sometimes -- as though Obama has to ask to be VP.
Talkleft is a fun site to read because it has this breathtaking intellectual dishonesty. The gas tax nonsense is a challenge for them but I have to say they are doing some very impressive backflips on the issue.
May 2, 2008 7:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, winning does tend to do that, as you can't be your own VP.
May 2, 2008 7:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
"What pro Clinton blogs?"
That ought to tell you something.
May 2, 2008 7:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Right, keep telling yourself Obama imploded. It'll make you feel better.
May 2, 2008 7:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
No.
No no no.
Another woman, perhaps.
Because Hillary doesn't come alone.
May 2, 2008 7:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
After May 6th Obama's lead in Pledge delegate count will be almost the amount of delegates he still needs to clinch the nomination.
May 2, 2008 7:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Only if he gets them to seat FL and MI as they voted.
Buckaaaawk!
May 2, 2008 7:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Only if he gets them to seat FL and MI as they voted"
..he doesn't need that, he's already winning in every category.
May 2, 2008 7:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
What are you babbling about? Michigan and Florida are irrelevant. Obama can and will hit 2025 through a combination of pledged and super delegates. He's the nominee.
May 2, 2008 7:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
For crying out loud, how many times do you have to be corrected on this?
Obama doesn't need ONE SINGLE DELEGATE from Michigan or Florida to win the nomination.
May 2, 2008 8:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Damn, how many ways can Hillary Clinton lie to the American people? I am astonished!
May 2, 2008 7:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'd like to know how many ways you can tell her it's over before she gets it.
May 2, 2008 7:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Clinton is trying to make this a class war issue - Obama can all of the Nobel Prize winning economists and College professors he wants speaking out against this - "I am Hillary Clinton and I am for the people"...
May 2, 2008 7:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
I actually think this will be her last gasp. It's like the end of a fireworks display when they just throw all the shit up there they can. But she's run out of time. There's nowhere to go if she doesn't finish Obama off RIGHT NOW. A 50-50 split benefits him, not her. She has to win really big. It's the final round. And she has to knock him out or she's done because she knows she can't win this on points.
And Brothers and Sisters - SHE'S DONE!
May 2, 2008 7:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Barack Obama is the choice of free-agent donors
Obama has received twice as much money as Hillary Clinton has from donors who supported other candidates in the Democratic race.
By Dan Morain, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
May 2, 2008
Campaign donors who previously backed also-ran Democratic candidates have adopted Sen. Barack Obama as their second choice, preferring Obama by a ratio of nearly 3 to 1 over Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and giving him twice as much money.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-donors2-2008may02,0,2411222.story
May 2, 2008 7:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
i just want this Dem nomination process to end.
May 2, 2008 7:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
You know, I'd hate to see HRC do really well next week, but maybe if she does, and starts to look stronger, the media will finally start tearing into her for a change.
She's been able to attack Obama's "electability" for months now without anyone really asking "but what about you're electability, Hillary?"
She's got negatives over 50%. Maybe it's time for the talking heads and columnists out there to take her at her word and start really talking about electability.
May 2, 2008 7:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Crickets.
You know I post this point from time to time on TPM, and I've never once got a response from a Clinton supporter. This one stops them cold.
May 2, 2008 8:16 PM | Reply | Permalink <