The official R3V Presidential poll

[herbivor]

I would vote for any candidate that I knew could get the constitution amended to repeal the electoral college.
I also think if the Obama superpacts were wise, they would start airing ads to support Gary Johnson and try to pull as much support away from Romney as possible.

[VinniE30]

I would vote for any candidate that I knew could get the constitution amended to repeal the electoral college.
I also think if the Obama superpacts were wise, they would start airing ads to support Gary Johnson and try to pull as much support away from Romney as possible.

If the libertarian party didn't exist I definitely wouldn't be voting for romney.
You're making the assumption that johnson would be taking more votes from the romney than obama. It's honestly hard to tell because the libertarian party is closer to the dem party on social issues (LBGT rights, separation of church and state, etc...) but closer to the rep party on the fiscal side. I think the majority of voters vote based more on social issues. And also that there's a lot of dems are fiscally conservative.(but obviously not the majority and that's not where the party officially stands)
IMO, the libertarian party takes the best sides of both rep and dem (socially liberal but fiscally conservative) along with a big emphasis civil liberties and small gov which is most important to me and something that both rep and dem parties have been set against.

[Wiglaf]

Johnson.

I've decided that voting third party is not "throwing the vote away", I'm done voting for the lesser of two evils. That mentality just perpetuates a system that I don't like. If a third party candidate got over 10%, that would seriously turn some heads and spark some of the changes we would need in electoral for something to actually happen.

And I can't believe the vote Romney is getting in here. You would really vote in these religious zealots? Fuuuck that. These people are fucking scary.

[VinniE30]

Johnson.

I've decided that voting third party is not "throwing the vote away", I'm done voting for the lesser of two evils. That mentality just perpetuates a system that I don't like.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

[Kershaw]

yes, please, go

as in go away

Hurry up and die you decrepit old man.

[Sailor37]

And I can't believe the vote Romney is getting in here. You would really vote in these religious zealots? Fuuuck that. These people are fucking scary.

You have to realize that a lot of people, including myself, aren't really voting FOR Romney, but more so AGAINST osama.

[Kershaw]

That sounds pretty silly, maybe you could provide some examples of Obama being so bad that you think Romney is going to do better? I just can't help but think anything Obama does that i don't agree with, Romney would do much much worse.

Just tossing this out there.

[VinniE30]

Just tossing this out there.

How is that image relevant in this discussion?
I agree with it but keep that circlejerk crap in r/atheism
No one is even talking about religion here. It's actually pretty funny that you randomly "just toss it out there" when the message is that you're not trying to force your beliefs on people.

[gwb72tii]

That sounds pretty silly, maybe you could provide some examples of Obama being so bad that you think Romney is going to do better? I just can't help but think anything Obama does that i don't agree with, Romney would do much much worse.

ah, the young and the ignorant ha ha

how about spend less money??

think romney is going to increase borrowing from 42cents of every dollar spent to more?

[CorvallisBMW]

ah, the young and the ignorant ha ha

how about spend less money??

think romney is going to increase borrowing from 42cents of every dollar spent to more?

With giant tax cuts for millionaires, yes. Less money coming in = more borrowing.

I don't buy for even 1 second that he'll cut spending. Bush ran on the same platform, same ideologies, same party, hell he even had 6 years of Congressional control and he ballooned the national debt beyond where it had ever been. What makes you think Romney is any different?

[gwb72tii]

tax cuts have never resulted in lost revenue

[CorvallisBMW]

So you're saying that if GDP remained constant, and tax rates were cut, the gov't would take in more money? Please, explain.

[gwb72tii]

So you're saying that if GDP remained constant, and tax rates were cut, the gov't would take in more money? Please, explain.

yes, in a make believe world where you could hold GDP constant tax cuts would result in lower revenue.

but we're not living in a make believe world. tax rates influence behavior.
tax cuts have always resulted in higher revenues, at least in my lifetime.

ps - yes, romney will, at least he promises he will, spend less than the messiah
but then the messiah promised to cut the deficit in half so who knows
at least he has a budget plan to agree or disagree with, unlike obama

[CorvallisBMW]

yes, in a make believe world where you could hold GDP constant tax cuts would result in lower revenue.

but we're not living in a make believe world. tax rates influence behavior.
tax cuts have always resulted in higher revenues, at least in my lifetime.

ps - yes, romney will, at least he promises he will, spend less than the messiah
but then the messiah promised to cut the deficit in half so who knows
at least he has a budget plan to agree or disagree with, unlike obama

I agree that GDP never remains constant, but lets look at an example. (all numbers are made up for simplicity)

Current GDP: $10
Tax rate: 25%
Gov't Income: $2.50

Romney comes along and drops the tax rate to 20%. That means the gov't takes in $2 and the private sector "keeps" $8 instead of $7.50. The private sector takes that extra $0.50 and invests it, making, oh let's say 100% return (for shits and giggles). So the next year:

GDP: $10.50
Tax rate: 20%
Gov't income: $2.10

So even if a company can DOUBLE it's money within 1 year on an investment (impossible), government receipts will still decrease. In fact, to see receipts stay constant at $2.50, the ROI on that $0.50 would have to be X*0.2=$2.50, so X= $12.50, or $4.50 more than current GDP. That's an ROI of 800% on their $0.50.

It is physically and mathematically impossible for a cut in rates to create a net increase in tax receipts. There are other economic factors that can grow GDP and cause an increase in receipts, but tax rates are not one of them.

[Cliche Guevara]

but we're not living in a make believe world. tax rates influence behavior.
tax cuts have always resulted in higher revenues, at least in my lifetime.

Economists disagree. http://www.igmchicago.org/igm-econom...irlrss5UC27YXi