1) Then why have you voted Republican?

2) Bullshit.  The get paid by check -- electronic or paper -- just like everyone else.

3) You assume that there is no inheritance tax -- or, as you Republicans like to call it, a "death" tax.  Hmm.  Well, I guess that since we know that there is one, we can completely dismiss you claim as being totally false.

4) So?

5) I'd like to see some proof to back up that claim.

Your claim that the super rich -- I'm assuming that you mean the majority of them -- vote for Democrats requires proof.  (Here's a golden oldie: "A lot of people call you the elite.  I call you my base.")

Your statement that the middle class -- I'm assuming you mean the majority of them -- vote for Republicans is a waste of bandwidth.  Gore got about half a million more votes than Bush.  And what was the percentage in 2004? 51-49?   Not exactly a "mandate", is it?

It's clear that you learned your debate style in the lap of a Republican.  Lesson 1: If the truth is inconvenient and lying doesn't work, ignore it.

Oh, and your zip code anecdote is another logical fallacy, but I'll bet you can't spot it.

by Juarez Traveller on 02/19/2008 01:16:36 AM EST

[ Parent ]

If I may. Ken, you really need to start reading the articles you link to. This is how the article defines "rich".

"A key measure of each district's wealth was the number of single-filer taxpayers earning more than $100,000 a year and married couples filing jointly who earn more than $200,000 annually, he said."

Are these the super rich people we are talking about? I don't think so. Also, I am familiar with those districts in Maryland, Pennsylvania and Florida and I can tell you that with the cost of living there $200,000 a year is not a whole hell of a lot of money.

The real point to that article is that the suburban Republican is becoming an endangered species. Just like I have been telling you all this time. 

by z1p101 on 02/19/2008 10:50:38 AM EST

[ Parent ]