What's new

Should Mitt release his tax returns?

Why is it absurd? The analogy is spot on- both are meeting the legal requirement and think that is all that should be expected. The guy paying his child support would probably think it's an absurd comparison for the opposite reason as you (he would actually think Mitt should release his taxes, like most people do).

Mitt may be damned if he does, damned if he doesn't, I agree. Presidents are often forced to make tough choices like that. It's nice to know that Mitt will throw the American people under the bus and look out for himself if he is faced with such a choice as president.

Why would the American people vote for somebody that threw them under the bus?
 
Even if Mitt's taxes are completely clean and error free the opposition will turn it into "Mitt made 100 million over 10 years and 'only paid 13 million' in taxes". There really is no upside to releasing any more than what he has already agreed to.

Actually, if that is all there is to them, Romney would be better off releasing them.
 
What do his taxes have to do with the premise that his business skills are what the economy needs? I don't see the connection.



What does his father have to do with anything? I don't see the connection.

And I haven't seen very many people saying that there are "big time questions" about how he made his money.
His taxes show us how he made his money, and how much money he really made. You don't think that is important to know about a guy who's whole campaign is based on his business skills being good for the economy? And his father relates because his own father not only agreed that people should release them, but he is the one who first started the practice.

Do the American people actually want him to release 4 (or whatever) years of tax records? I haven't seen any surveys or heard any outcries that indicate that. People like yourself who are demanding that he release more tax info are very small in numbers, and nearly all among the democratic opposition. Or so it seems to me.
You seriously haven't seen any polls on this?

I hope this source (USA Today) is okay with everyone, it's the first link a google search returned...
Headline: Poll: Most say Romney should release additional tax returns
https://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/story/2012-07-19/romney-gallup-poll-tax-returns/56333412/1
An excerpt:
"In the poll, those surveyed: [snip]
Agree by a substantial margin of 17 percentage points that Romney in particular should release more than two years of returns. By 54%-37%, they say Romney should release tax returns from additional years. Those calling for more disclosure include 75% of Democrats, 53% of independents and 30% of Republicans."
 
Even if Mitt's taxes are completely clean and error free the opposition will turn it into "Mitt made 100 million over 10 years and 'only paid 13 million' in taxes". There really is no upside to releasing any more than what he has already agreed to.
That is better than the opposition right now saying "He made 100 million over 10 years and didn't pay any taxes. Plus he lied about not working for Bain, made his money in vulture capitalist ways, and potentially committed felonies when he lied about offshore accounts, and should not be trusted because he's being way too secretive about something that is generally considered something that is supposed to be open."

The "upside" is he gives the people what they want. If he's going to be criticized either way, might as well be decent to the American people.
 
Why would the American people vote for somebody that threw them under the bus?
Exactly. That is what reporters need to start asking Romney when he says only small minded people are concerned about his tax returns, when polls show that in fact the majority of Americans want him to release them.
 
I think it's pretty silly. I would love to see a poll that asked the following questions;

1) Do you think Mitt has been successful in business?
2) Do you think Mitt has taken advantage of every possible loophole/tax stratgey he and his advisors could find .. rather than pay more than legally required?
3) Do you think that most ANY person that is wildly successful in business has bent a few rules and conducts inside the grey area?

All of these answers are yes. What more is so damn important? You want to show that he paid less taxes (as a %) than a guy that earned $80,000 .. so what if he did? Does that make him a criminal? Dishonest? (or does it mean the tax code needs an overhaul ... and who's fault is that?)
 
Let's take a look at that. Seems like this should help Mitt's chances in the election! This is getting stranger and stranger, that he doesn't just put more info out there.

Not it isn't. You just want it more which is fine.
 
Exactly. That is what reporters need to start asking Romney when he says only small minded people are concerned about his tax returns, when polls show that in fact the majority of Americans want him to release them.

Well then I think the Obama supporters should have nothing to worry about.
 
Like Mitt. He gives millions to charity.
No, that is not above and beyond. That just lowers his tax burden. If he paid the full tax rate PLUS gave to charity, that would be above and beyond. Like the guy who pays his child support PLUS buys birthday presents, school supplies, helps with homework, takes him camping, etc.

If you pay your child support, but then DEDUCT the cost of birthday presents, camping trips, etc, then you are about the same as Romney giving to "charity" but then deducting it from his taxes.
 
His taxes show us how he made his money, and how much money he really made. You don't think that is important to know about a guy who's whole campaign is based on his business skills being good for the economy?

That's hardly his whole campaign.

And his father relates because his own father not only agreed that people should release them, but he is the one who first started the practice.

I'm well aware of that. I still don't see how it relates. Would your own opinion be any different if Mitt's father were not one of the first to start the practice?

You seriously haven't seen any polls on this?
...
"In the poll, those surveyed: Agree by a substantial margin of 17 percentage points that Romney in particular should release more than two years of returns. By 54%-37%, they say Romney should release tax returns from additional years. Those calling for more disclosure include 75% of Democrats, 53% of independents and 30% of Republicans."

Thanks for the reference. No, I wasn't familiar with that. If the majority of Americans feel that way, I'll actually change my mind and agree that Romney should release more returns.
 
Well then I think the Obama supporters should have nothing to worry about.
Trust me, the only thing Obama supporters are worried about is voter suppression. And even with a fair amount of voter suppression, Obama is still probably going to win by a decent margin.
 
If you pay your child support, but then DEDUCT the cost of birthday presents, camping trips, etc, then you are about the same as Romney giving to "charity" but then deducting it from his taxes.

Becasue they are deductions, not credits, $.85 of every dollar Romney gives to charity comes from Romney's pocket, while only $.15 is tax reduction.
 
Trust me, the only thing Obama supporters are worried about is voter suppression. And even with a fair amount of voter suppression, Obama is still probably going to win by a decent margin.

You mean requiring ID to vote? And if Obama's got this in the bag, then why do you care if Romney releases his taxes or not?
 
Back
Top