A psychotic and hilariously edited version of Chris Christie’s presidential campaign announcement (For a related video, click here

Campaign Stop

Spring 1960 Robert Kennedy at a drive-in in Bluefield during his brother’s quest for the 1960 Democratic presidential nomination | West Virginia | Photos by Bob Lerner for the Look magazine article “The Kennedys: A Family Political Machine” | 35mm Negative - Via

  • mitt romney:women don't need birth control, global warming isn't real, can't afford your medical bills? not my fucking problem get another job hoe, what are minorities, haha gay marriage good joke, that country is pretty brown and menacing let's bomb them. also not only am i the laughing stock of the international community i also held down and taunted a gay kid at some point in my life haha i'm rich bitch whatevs. i'm running for leader of your country and will be responsible for the governing body that makes the rules for your life, is that cool with you?
  • youth of america:politics is boring idc
  • miley cyrus:-hair cut-

I have just spoken to Sterling and am excited to announce that she will once again be running for President in 2016!  

Sterling’s campaign prioritizes more food for cats, more attention for cats, more sunlight, and universal health care.

She is the best candidate for office because, as you can see, she is already wearing a suit and also looks very dapper in a fine hat.  Make the right choice, vote for Sterling.

Some of the wildest campaign slogans come from the 1940 Presidential campaign:

FDR’s Republican opponent in 1940 was Wendell Willkie, a business leader with no experience in political office. Willkie and the Republicans focused considerable criticism on Roosevelt’s attempt to win a third term.

While there was no constitutional barrier to a third term in 1940, no president had ever exceeded the two-term precedent established by George Washington. The fifteen Willkie campaign buttons seen above include many with a “third term” theme. There are also buttons aimed at Eleanor Roosevelt—reflecting the First Lady’s high profile in Washington.

Despite this chapter in their political history, Wilkie and FDR went on to become allies!

You can read more about their strange story on the blog of the Franklin D. Roosevelt Presidential Library.

Image: Campaign buttons, FDR Presidential Library.


On the Trail: #GOP2012 Convention

This week, Republicans gathered in Tampa, Florida to officially nominate Mitt Romney (@MittRomney) as their candidate to challenge incumbent President Barack Obama (@BarackObama). Follow @GOPconvention for official event photos, and browse the #GOP2012 hashtag for photos from convention-goers.

Once the convention is over, candidates will return to the trail in their quest for votes. Here are just a few of the reporters following Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan, and sharing photos from the campaign trail: Alex Moe (@alexnbcnews) of NBC, Ashley Parker (@ashleyrparker) of The New York Times, Zeke Miller (@zekejmiller) of Buzzfeed, Felicia Sonmez (@feliciasonmez) and Philip Rucker (@philiprucker) of The Washington Post, Kevin Madden (@kevinmaddendc) of Politico, and Ginger Gibson (@gingergibson) of The Star-Ledger.

The Final Days, the Biggest Issue, and the Clearest Choice

As we go into the final days of a dismal presidential campaign where too many issues have been fudged or eluded – and the media only want to talk about is who’s up and who’s down – the biggest issue on which the candidates have given us the clearest choice is whether the rich should pay more in taxes. 

President Obama says emphatically yes. He proposes ending the Bush tax cut for people earning more than $250,000 a year, and requiring those with high incomes to pay in taxes at least 30 percent of any income over $1 million (the so-called “Buffett Rule”).

Mitt Romney says emphatically no. He proposes cutting tax rates by 20 percent, which would reduce taxes on the rich far more than anyone else. He also wants to extend the Bush tax cut for the wealthy, and reduce or eliminate taxes on dividends and capital gains. 

Romney says he’ll close loopholes and eliminate deductions used by the rich so that their share of total taxes remains the same as it is now, although he refuses to specify what loopholes or deductions. But even if we take him at his word, under no circumstances would he increase the amount of taxes they pay. 

Obama is right. 

America faces a huge budget deficit. And just about everyone who’s looked at how to reduce it – the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, the bi-partisan Simpson-Bowles Commission, and almost all independent economists and analysts – have come up with some combination of spending cuts and tax increases that raise revenue.

Just last Thursday, executives of more than eighty large American corporations called for tax reform that “raises revenues and reduces the deficit.”

The practical question is who pays for those additional revenues. If Romney’s view prevails and the rich don’t pay more, everyone else has to.

That’s nonsensical. The rich are far richer than they used to be, while most of the rest of us are poorer. The latest data show the top 1 percent garnering 93 percent of all the gains from the recovery so far. But median family income is 8 percent lower than it was in 2000, adjusted for inflation. 

The gap has been widening for three decades. Since 1980 the top 1 percent has doubled its share of the nation’s total income  – from 10 percent to 20 percent. The share of the top one-tenth of 1 percent has tripled. The share of the top-most one-one hundredth of 1 percent – 16,000 families – has quadrupled. The richest 400 Americans now have more wealth than the bottom 150 million of us put together.

Meanwhile, the tax rates paid by the wealthy have dropped precipitously. Before 1981 the top marginal tax rate was never lower than 70 percent. Under President Dwight Eisenhower it was 93 percent. Even after taking all the deductions and tax credits available to them, the rich paid around 54 percent. 

The top tax rate is now only 35 percent and the tax on capital gains (increases in the value of investments) is only 15 percent. Since so much of what they earn is from capital gains, many of the super-rich, like Mitt Romney himself, pay 14 percent or less. That’s a lower tax rate than many middle-class Americans pay. 

In fact, if you add up all the taxes paid – not just on income and capital gains but also payroll taxes (which don’t apply to income above incomes of $110,100), and sales taxes – most of us are paying a higher percent of our income in taxes than are those at the top. 

So how can anyone argue against raising taxes on the rich? Easy. They say it will slow the economy because the rich are “job creators.”

In the immortal words of Joe Biden, that’s malarky. 

The economy did just fine during the three decades after World War II, when the top tax rate never fell below 70 percent. Average yearly economic growth was higher in those years than it’s been since, when taxes on the rich have been far lower. 

Bill Clinton raised taxes on the rich and the economy did wonderfully well. George W. Bush cut them and the economy slowed. 

The real job creators are America’s vast middle class, whose spending encourages businesses to expand and hire – and whose lack of spending has the opposite effect. 

That’s why the recovery has been painfully slow. So much income and wealth have gone to the top that the vast majority of Americans in the middle don’t have the purchasing power to get the economy moving again. The rich save most of what they earn, and their savings go anywhere around the world where they can get the highest return.

It would be insane to compound the damage by raising taxes on the middle class and not on the rich. 

Logic, fairness, and common sense dictate that the rich pay more in taxes. It’s the key to avoiding January’s fiscal cliff and coming up with a “grand bargain” on taming the budget deficit. And it’s central to getting the economy back on track.