Slog

News & Arts

The Stranger Suggests

Critics' Best Bets
Music Arts & Food


Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

Tuesday, December 4, 2012

Two Youngish Men Will Try to Sell the Bush Economy to Republicans Tonight

Posted by on Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 11:28 AM

Tonight, Marco Rubio and Paul Ryan will be giving important speeches at the Jack Kemp Foundation dinner, Politico tells us. The speeches are important because they're framing how the two young stars of the Republican Party plan to move forward.

Rubio also plans new ideas on immigration, aimed not at broad citizenship but at creating a bigger Hispanic middle class. “The answer,” Rubio will say in his after-dinner remarks, “is not to make rich people poorer. The answer is to make poor people richer.” If he makes the sale in countless such appearances over the next two years, he’ll begin a formal presidential campaign shortly after the midterm elections of November 2014, Rubio sources tell us.

Ryan, 42, will kick off his own drive to redefine the party — and himself — as the pre-dinner keynote speaker before 300-plus conservative faithful on the same stage, detailing his thinking on how people of all classes can rise up economically and improve socially. Top Republicans tell us Ryan tried to push his ideas for a more creative “war on poverty” during the presidential campaign but was muzzled by nervous Nellies at Mitt Romney’s Boston headquarters who didn’t see an immediate political payoff. So Ryan seethed when the “47 percent” tape emerged, convinced that the impact was worse because the campaign had no record on issues relating to inclusion or poverty, exacerbating the out-of-touch image that the hidden camera cemented.

I don't think these two guys can just chime in with the same "tax cuts for the rich will benefit the poor" bullshit, because I think the American people are finally, blessedly, sick of hearing it. But Republicans (especially the kind of wealthy Republicans who'd attend something as stuffy as a Jack Kemp Foundation dinner) don't seem to be sick of it yet. And if you need proof of the fact that Republicans haven't learned anything in the wake of the 2012 election, you can't do much better than the knowledge that Paul Ryan—the most hated VP candidate since Dan Quayle—is considered the leader of his party now.

 

Comments (28) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
Max Solomon 1
I heartily suggest they continue down this path.
Posted by Max Solomon on December 4, 2012 at 11:37 AM
Cato the Younger Younger 2
Jack Kemp = Failed VP Candidate
Paul Ryan = Failed VP Candidate

Sounds like a fitting match!!
Posted by Cato the Younger Younger on December 4, 2012 at 11:42 AM
Urgutha Forka 3
Rubio: “The answer is not to make rich people poorer. The answer is to make poor people richer."

*whispers to Rubio*

Psst... if you make poor people richer, then by definition, you're making rich people poorer.
Posted by Urgutha Forka on December 4, 2012 at 11:50 AM
Fnarf 4
90% of Latinos in the US hate Cubans, specifically Republican Cubans. The GOP is in for a shock if Rubio is their front man on this topic. But of course, he's not -- the GOP front man, as far as most people are concerned, is Joe Arpaio. Problem.
Posted by Fnarf http://www.facebook.com/fnarf on December 4, 2012 at 12:03 PM
TheMisanthrope 5
More hated than Sarah Palin?
Posted by TheMisanthrope on December 4, 2012 at 12:06 PM
6
Since 1970 we've been unable, as a country, to make rich people richer and poor people richer simultaneously. If the GOP has a legitimate plan to pull that off, I'd consider it. But if they trot out the policies of the last 40 years, which have made the rich richer at the expense ( or being generous, just stagnating the wages of) the middle/working classes, then they should just stop talking.
Posted by wxPDX on December 4, 2012 at 12:07 PM
fletc3her 7
The young guns have all the same ideas as the old guard.
Posted by fletc3her on December 4, 2012 at 12:21 PM
DOUG. 8
Palin, Edwards, Lieberman, Kemp, Quayle, Bentsen, Ferraro...being a VP candidate on a losing ticket pretty much assures future political impotence. I expect Paul Ryan to continue the trend.
Posted by DOUG. http://www.dougsvotersguide.com on December 4, 2012 at 12:27 PM
9
They can't back away from tax cuts for the rich, because that is the party's actual platform. So they have no choice but to keep tinkering with the fairy tale that sells it.
Posted by Proteus on December 4, 2012 at 12:32 PM
10
Nobody hated Dan Quayle -- we just laughed at him. He was too dumb to hate.
Posted by sarah70 on December 4, 2012 at 12:37 PM
11
I want to see more than just "fair" taxes. What about reparations?
Posted by neoanderthal on December 4, 2012 at 12:41 PM
Matt from Denver 12
@ 5, yes. There were polls taken. Palin may be down there now, but she wasn't in 2008.

@ 8, it wasn't being a failed VP candidate that ended Edwards' career. Remember, he was actually up there with Obama and HRC in the early stages of the Democratic nomination process. Also, Bentson was old and still got to be an important senator. Same with Lieberman, who was a major power in the Senate during most of the Bush years and who won re-election in 2006 after he lost the primary. So at least safely entrenched senators can continue to have a decent career if they lose.
Posted by Matt from Denver on December 4, 2012 at 12:42 PM
13
Top Republicans tell us Ryan tried to push his ideas for a more creative “war on poverty” during the presidential campaign but was muzzled by nervous Nellies at Mitt Romney’s Boston headquarters who didn’t see an immediate political payoff. So Ryan seethed when the “47 percent” tape emerged, convinced that the impact was worse because the campaign had no record on issues relating to inclusion or poverty, exacerbating the out-of-touch image that the hidden camera cemented.


What an idiot.
Posted by keshmeshi on December 4, 2012 at 12:58 PM
Free Lunch 14
Sorry: if a billionaire makes a few million less, the adjective "poorer" does not apply.
Posted by Free Lunch on December 4, 2012 at 1:33 PM
You_Gotta_Be_Kidding_Me 15
So Republicans want 100% of the Bush tax cut to survive while Democrats want 98% of the Bush tax cut to survive. Doesn't sound like a whole lot to sell.
Posted by You_Gotta_Be_Kidding_Me on December 4, 2012 at 1:34 PM
You_Gotta_Be_Kidding_Me 16
I thought that Lieberman was the most hated VP candidate since Dan Quayle.
Posted by You_Gotta_Be_Kidding_Me on December 4, 2012 at 1:37 PM
GhostDog 17
@3 See, that's the difference between conservative and liberal economics.

According to the conservatives if you grow the economy fast enough then rich people can be ridiculously rich and poor people can have enough that they won't die in the street(which is good enough because poor people are poor because they aren't virtuous enough). The thing is that conservatives have said this since at least Reagan.

According to liberal economists, otoh, no matter how fast you grow the pie capitalism naturally trends towards concentration of wealth. Rich people get richer and poor people get more poor.
Posted by GhostDog on December 4, 2012 at 1:37 PM
treacle 18
Can we stop waging "war" on everything? This "war" on poverty has --just looking at the statistics over the last 40 years-- apparently enriched the wealthy and done nothing for anyone else. Not a very promising track record.

Maybe we should try fighting Eurasia instead.
Posted by treacle on December 4, 2012 at 1:50 PM
treacle 19
@17 - I think your second paragraph is essentially correct, except that it's not capitalism that inexorably concentrates wealth, capitalism is the philosophy and practice of positive-interest currency. But in fact it is the mechanics of the currency itself that tends towards concentration of wealth. If you had a currency with negative-interest, or even "mutual credit"/no interest... money-wealth would not concentrate.
Posted by treacle on December 4, 2012 at 1:56 PM
20
@19,

So how does that explain concentration of wealth in societies that used gold coins? And societies that outlawed usury?
Posted by keshmeshi on December 4, 2012 at 2:39 PM
balderdash 21
Regrettably, I think that while the American people might be said in aggregate to be sick of hearing it, it is in fact probably only a slim majority who are sick of hearing it. Altogether too many Americans for comfort believe in Biblical creation, Reaganomics, and hell, probably astrology for good measure.
Posted by balderdash http://introverse.blogspot.com on December 4, 2012 at 3:02 PM
Supreme Ruler Of The Universe 22
This is my proposed strategy for Republicans.

The best line of Mitt Romney's, one that should have been his major theme was "Republicans are the party for people who want to get rich".

If the Republicans could do that, for even a significant portion of Obama voters who really just want to climb the wealth and status ladder -- not merely get education credit voucher, we could easily retake majority status.
Posted by Supreme Ruler Of The Universe http://www.you-read-it-here-first.com on December 4, 2012 at 3:15 PM
balderdash 23
You were actually on to something until your last sentence there, bailo, but I think you overestimate the proportion of straight-up psychopaths in the electorate. Things would probably go easier on the GOP in a lot of ways if they were honest, but "Come all ye greedy fuckers" isn't going to net 50.1% of the vote.

Now, what probably would appeal strongly enough to the average, mostly decent but flawed individual's greed is if they announced a lottery in which one lucky Republican voter would win a billion dollars. That'd be a fucking landslide, because people are terrible at math.
Posted by balderdash http://introverse.blogspot.com on December 4, 2012 at 3:21 PM
Supreme Ruler Of The Universe 24
#23

Take all the wanting to be upwardly mobile families in Renton, Kent, Auburn.

Give them a combination of tax breaks, business incentives, education grants, but also real stuff, like contracts, jobs, consultancies...the real meat of what the BigWigs get, but maybe on a reduced basis. Start awarding $50,000 contacts, buy more from small business.

Even if we could get 10% of the people onto the wealth track we'd get a majority.
Posted by Supreme Ruler Of The Universe http://www.you-read-it-here-first.com on December 4, 2012 at 4:20 PM
balderdash 25
@24, so you're going to hand out, what, 30 million $50,000 government contracts?

For what? To whom?

And with whose $1.5 trillion?

And... have you noticed that what you're describing is profoundly socialist?
Posted by balderdash http://introverse.blogspot.com on December 4, 2012 at 4:56 PM
Knat 26
Once again, the GOP convinces themselves that all Americans care about is money. I'm amazed that this tactic still works. I would think that the obvious patronizing inherent in "We're the party of the haves, and soon-to-haves" would be offensive in its obviousness, but then some people will convince themselves of anything, if the lie is comforting enough.
Posted by Knat on December 4, 2012 at 5:13 PM
27
"improve socially"?
Posted by legacy builder on December 4, 2012 at 8:42 PM
28
As a small business owner, who talks to other business owners. Most of the guys in Seattle who lean republican just want a reduction of paperwork. I do too. But I also have no qualms with my tax rate and I know it's important to the social environment that lets my business thrive.
The DNC needs to address our tax code and simplify it in a way that's more fair and easy enough that people aren't scared to start a business.
The GOP have been running on the fear that our current system is just to soak the little guy and then creates a narrative and twists it into a structure that benefits the rich.
The way the GOP have used social issues to get themselves in a corner, will allow them over time to come back with 'new ideas' to simplify the tax code. Which we all know what that means... Cato, kiss your SS goodbye.
Posted by CbytheSea on December 4, 2012 at 10:22 PM

Add a comment

Advertisement
 

Want great deals and a chance to win tickets to the best shows in Seattle? Join The Stranger Presents email list!


All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact Info | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy