REPUBLICAN DEBATE SEPT 05, 2007 (Full Poll)

Who won the debate?

  • Congressman Tom Tancredo

    Votes: 1 1.8%
  • Congressman Ron Paul

    Votes: 24 43.6%
  • Fmr. Governor Mike Huckabee

    Votes: 7 12.7%
  • Fmr Mayor Rudy Guliani

    Votes: 2 3.6%
  • Fmr Governor Mitt Romney

    Votes: 1 1.8%
  • Senator John McCain

    Votes: 2 3.6%
  • Senator Sam Brownback

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Congressman Duncan Hunter

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Don't Know/Nobody

    Votes: 18 32.7%

  • Total voters
    55

JohnRM

Don't make me destroy you
Joined
Apr 18, 2004
Messages
11,582
Location
Death Star
I just had to add a full poll covering ALL of the candidates, cause to only list three is just...erroneous and unfair.

Who do you think won the debate?

NOTE for Mods: The other poll does not include all of the candidates.
 
I have been usurped, if rightfully so. Poll should be public.

Ron Paul held strong against the IRS (as he has on the daily show and colbert report). His small government policies are right on. I just wish he was for a democracy push in the middle east.
 
Tom Tancredo. His firm stance on illegal immigration and border security and sanctuary cities coupled with his "take no guff" attitude about fighting back did it for me.
 
I have been usurped, if rightfully so. Poll should be public.

Ron Paul held strong against the IRS (as he has on the daily show and colbert report). His small government policies are right on. I just wish he was for a democracy push in the middle east.
Without the IRS to enforce collection of revenues, no money to pay the troops.
 
Well, I just finished watching it (YouTube) and although I like Dr. Paul, I'd have to say that Mike Huckabee looked the best out there.

Duncan Hunter looked good too. Very presidential sounding.

Tom Tancredo just seemed to mumble everything.

McCain seemed superficial.

Guliani seemed trollish (as in a real troll, not like forum trolling).

Sam Brownback had some good points, but was otherwise unremarkable.

Mitt Romney seemed superficial and smug about himself.

Ron Paul said the things that I wanted to hear, as a voter, but he comes off as very angry, confrontational, and as a grumpy old man. He also left himself open to a lot of hits and didn't defend himself adequately.


Anyone notice how some candidates were cut off almost immediately when time ran out, but Romney, Guliani, and some others were allowed to keep going for another 30 seconds?
 
Without the IRS to enforce collection of revenues, no money to pay the troops.

Well, he doesn't say that all tax collection would be eliminated, only that the form of collection would change. I am not sure that a national sales tax is the right way to go, but the IRS needs to go or at least be reformed.
 
Anyone notice how some candidates were cut off almost immediately when time ran out, but Romney, Guliani, and some others were allowed to keep going for another 30 seconds?
I did notice that. It was kinda later on when I did and I tried to see if it was certain speakers or what they were talking about.
 
Well, he doesn't say that all tax collection would be eliminated, only that the form of collection would change. I am not sure that a national sales tax is the right way to go, but the IRS needs to go or at least be reformed.
It would essentially change in name only, since the experienced enforcement agents would likely be retained to go after the new brand of tax cheats. Saying you are getting rid of the IRS when you are really just renaming it is pretty dishonest.
 
Enforcement agents does not = IRS.

The FairTax (H.R.25/S.1025) is a bill in the United States Congress for changing tax laws to replace the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and all federal income taxes (including Alternative Minimum Tax), payroll taxes (including Social Security and Medicare taxes), corporate taxes, capital gains taxes, gift taxes, and estate taxes with a national retail sales tax, to be levied once at the point of purchase on all new goods and services.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FairTax

It's not a fairytale, it's H.R.25/S.1025

Without the IRS to enforce collection of revenues, no money to pay the troops.
 
That's who enforces collection of taxes. Unless you want to start over with a bunch a rookies, it would just be a renaming.

I think that you misunderstand what we're saying, here. The problem with the IRS is the powers that it has to ruin a person's life or to harass them without good cause. It is a corrupt organization that needs to be reformed so that it has limitations on its power, greater oversight; and in the end, what the IRS is today, will not truly be the IRS afterward. When people talk about the IRS, the heart and soul of that discussion is the abusive nature of the service (as if it were an actual service to the people). Enforcement agents in a Fair Tax system would not be anything like the IRS.
 
You pay the tax upon purchase. If you do not pay 23% upon retail purchase, than someone above you in the chain of consumption (the place you bought it) WILL pay the 23% (based on total sales).

99% of the IRS would be gone. The new service could be named the: "How simple can we make it, pay taxes or we arrest you" task force (of perhaps 2000 people).

Anyone who does not support H.R.25/S.1025 (The "Fair Tax") is a...
 
I think that you misunderstand what we're saying, here. The problem with the IRS is the powers that it has to ruin a person's life or to harass them without good cause. It is a corrupt organization that needs to be reformed so that it has limitations on its power, greater oversight; and in the end, what the IRS is today, will not truly be the IRS afterward. When people talk about the IRS, the heart and soul of that discussion is the abusive nature of the service (as if it were an actual service to the people). Enforcement agents in a Fair Tax system would not be anything like the IRS.
You think the new agency would be any different? It will be made up of the same people. Under the fairtax, citizens would be abusively accused of participating in the black market in order to avoid the 30% tax.
 
The government then loses its biggest tool to incentize behavior. The tax credit is a huge policy making tools.
 
You pay the tax upon purchase. If you do not pay 23% upon retail purchase, than someone above you in the chain of consumption (the place you bought it) WILL pay the 23% (based on total sales).
The tax on a $100 item would be $30 (aka 30%). The 23% tax rate is another fairytale.
 
You think the new agency would be any diffeent? It will be made up of the same people. Under the fairtax, citizens would be abusively accused of participating in the black market in order to avoid the 30% tax.

Europe doesn't seem the have that problem with regard to their national sales tax.
 
The IRS does little involving the black market. Their juristiction is more along the lines of lower-upper class people who cannot afford a conniving accountant.

I have heard Neil Boortz debate the fair tax, in open live forums, far too much to think some cfc yahoo is going to throw a clog in the machine.
 
Top Bottom