Gay Patriot Header Image

Americans prefer budget cuts as means to cutting deficits;
media prefer Obama as candidate in general election

Take a gander at Yahoo!’s headlines in this screenshot I took at 10:24 PST (1:24 GayPatriot blog time):

Note the last one. By clicking on that headline, we don’t get a news story, but an opinion piece by a former official in the Carter administration. Just took one google search to determine Mr. Shapiro’s politics. Yeah, his USA Today bio claims that “Since 1979, his only partisan activity has been voting”, but the tone of his column suggests otherwise.

Perhaps, Yahoo!’s editors includes that column in their headlines because they wanted to balance out yet another poll (and this one which tends to lean left) showing that American prefer budget cuts to spending hikes as a means to reduce the deficit: “Cutting government programs is favored as the way to reduce the budget deficit by more than twice as many Americans as those who favor raising taxes, said a Reuters/Ipsos poll.

As per the last headline, expect more such coverage of Romney, with various media outlets styling opinion pieces critical of the presumptive Republican nominee and praising the Democrat as news.  But, the Reuters/Ipsos poll shows us just how out of touch is the incumbent, a Democrat who, since his election, has favored increasing government programs — even after voters repudiated this approach in the 2010 elections.

Share

4 Comments

  1. showing that American prefer budget cuts to spending hikes as a means to reduce the deficit:

    How do spending hikes reduce the deficit? Did you mean to say tax hikes?

    Comment by Rattlesnake — April 17, 2012 @ 3:24 pm - April 17, 2012

  2. If Republicans weren’t idiots, they would call Obama’s bluff on the tax increase rhetoric. They would say, “All right, we will give you a tax increase, but first these three things have to happen. 1. Domestic spending must be cut back to 2008 levels and capped. 2. Medicare must be reformed. 3. Repeal ObamaCare.”

    Obamacrats claim they want compromise. Offer a compromise and call their bluff.

    Also, unlike Obama’s tax increase, those three measures would significantly reduce the deficit.

    Comment by V the K — April 18, 2012 @ 6:37 am - April 18, 2012

  3. All right, we will give you a tax increase

    All right, first question. Which taxes? Are we talking an increase in the top marginal tax rate? A raise in capital gains? The type matters.

    but first these three things have to happen. 1. Domestic spending must be cut

    Acceptable, the domestic budget is bloated. But why only domestic spending? The military budget is equally bloated.

    back to 2008 levels

    No, that’s just a stupid partisan measure. I’m not stupid, I know you haven’t just picked 2008 out of thin air. It’s the last year a Republican President was in office, thus by getting spending cut to 2008 levels, you symbolically ‘roll back’ all influence Obama has had on the budget.

    So cuts, yes. But not aiming to emulate any specific year, the cuts hit where they hit.

    and capped.

    Definitely not. First off, it’s an unworkable proposal. If implemented by an Act of Congress, it could just be repealed by another Act of Congress at any time. By constitutional amendment? Good luck getting that through Congress at all, then after that it goes to the states, where it would be mired in further debate for years to come if it passes at all (which I doubt).

    Also, as I stated before, individual states have passed Balanced Budget Amendments. Quite strict ones too. Then found ways to overspend regardless.

    Talk of capping and balancing is just a distraction designed to appeal to the Tea Party, not a serious proposal.

    2. Medicare must be reformed.

    Of course. But how? Also you forgot Medicaid and Social Security. If reform is to be done, there’s no reason to stop at Medicare, the other two are in equal need.

    3. Repeal ObamaCare.

    No. This is another stupid partisan measure, ObamaCare is now officially a chew toy to be fought over and including it in a supposedly serious proposal is the surest way to derail it, demonstrating you were never really serious. Which you weren’t. You even admit this whole thing would just be a publicity stunt.

    Of course this whole post has been beside the point. It is a publicity stunt, but would it work? Well we’ll never know, because the Republicans would never dream of doing it. Propose tax increases? Even as a joke? Grover Norquist would have them all for breakfast. So even if it is a powerful weapon, it’s one the Republicans have pledged to never use.

    Comment by Serenity — April 18, 2012 @ 9:26 am - April 18, 2012

  4. Hi Dan,
    Yes, polls show Americans would prefer budget cuts over increased taxes (who wants tax increases?). But, and it is a mighty big but–and one I am surprised you don’t mention here–when Americans are asked what they would agree to have cut, there is no consensus on this (maybe less Defence spending (big) and definitely less Foreign Aid spending (very small)). Americans like big government when it is a program they like, Dan, and don’t want to see it cut. When you phrase the question–”Would you be prepared to cut [name program] expenditures rather than raise taxes (especially on the rich) to balance the budget” you don’t get the answer you champion. A nice summary of recent polling data that doesn’t tend to support your take on things can be found here.”

    Comment by Cas — April 19, 2012 @ 4:19 pm - April 19, 2012

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.