As do most young people under 30, just out of college, beginning careers, etc, most of which aren't on assistance. Which also supports the claim that Republicans aren't connecting with young people either. But we are talking subsections of subsections. And taking the poor, on assistance out of the mix, still doesn't result in an Obama loss in 2012. Again, that group doesn't make up a large percentage of actual voters. Was it a factor?? Certainly, and I can't and will not try to debate that fact, but it was by far not the only or largest factor in Obama winning the election. And to blame it strictly on the poor, welfare recipients ignores the perception (right or wrong) that people have about the Republican Party being very exclusive and out of touch with the common man.

Do you consider the Earned Income Tax Credit, by which people who work receive an income tax refund that exceeds the taxes that were withheld from their paychecks "government assistance?" Whether you do or not, it is. People who paid less in federal income taxes than they received in federal benefits voted overwhelmingly for Obama - twice.

 

I am not disparaging everybody who makes less than $30,000/year nor have I claimed in any of my posts that all of them are drawing government checks. I would much rather see people receiving the EIC than welfare checks for staying home and doing less than nothing.

To add to it, according to the statistics that Randy Parker provided earlier, it would appear that Obama won the largest percentage of votes for all categories of education except one.

A record number of adult American adults are no longer in the job market. As the welfare state grows, it will become increasingly difficult to defeat despots such as Obama.

 

As But as Lady Thatcher said, “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.” Americans are like frogs in a pot of water that will eventually begin to boil.

A record number of adult American adults are no longer in the job market. As the welfare state grows, it will become increasingly difficult to defeat despots such as Obama.

 

As But as Lady Thatcher said, “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.” Americans are like frogs in a pot of water that will eventually begin to boil.

 

Would you rather there be working voters receiving government assistance in the form of Earned Income tax credit? Or unemployed voters receiving SNAP, housing and Medicaid? It really doesn't matter, because both are entitled to vote.

 

Much ado is made about tax credits, especially the Earned Income Credit. But I can tell from personal experience, it doesn't help with the day to day expenses. It's not like it's a huge benefit. I usually had to use mine to pay past due medical bills.

Would you rather there be working voters receiving government assistance in the form of Earned Income tax credit? Or unemployed voters receiving SNAP, housing and Medicaid? It really doesn't matter, because both are entitled to vote.

 

Much ado is made about tax credits, especially the Earned Income Credit. But I can tell from personal experience, it doesn't help with the day to day expenses. It's not like it's a huge benefit. I usually had to use mine to pay past due medical bills.

I already stated that I prefer seeing people getting the EIC than welfare. It is a shame that weak political leadership has gutted our economy and allowed politicians to buy votes with government handouts. Real incomes have been declining and the economy will most likely fall into another recession before Obama leaves office, if we are not already in a recession. Most people also realize that the inflation rate is beginning to climb rapidly, despite government claims to the contrary.

Would you rather there be working voters receiving government assistance in the form of Earned Income tax credit? Or unemployed voters receiving SNAP, housing and Medicaid? It really doesn't matter, because both are entitled to vote.

 

Much ado is made about tax credits, especially the Earned Income Credit. But I can tell from personal experience, it doesn't help with the day to day expenses. It's not like it's a huge benefit. I usually had to use mine to pay past due medical bills.

 

$6,000 is not a huge benefit??? In what world? It can help with day to day expenses if the person applies for the advanced benefit which can give them $100 per week more in their pocket.

Evidence? For your definition of "wise voting decision," I suppose you can call it that.

I don't need no stinkin' evidence to state an opinion. :lol2:

 

Obama is the worst president in history and a growing number of people agree with me. The people who voted for him after his disastrous first term deserve their fate. The rest of us are just innocent victims of his abuse.

 

(Those are opinions too, so I have not bothered to cite polls, etc., and you are certainly entitled to disagree without the need to present your own evidence.)

The second paragraph of the first post quoted is the claim that you made that remains unsubstantiated. It's an opinion that you are entitled to, but if you only need to validate it to yourself, why bother posting it?

Liberals constantly post opinions with no supporting evidence. Worse yet, when evidence is presented, instead of refuting claims with evidence of their own, they demand that somebody else provide better evidence. I don't play that game. If you don't think that the huge gap in percentages of people with low incomes supporting Obama and those who voted for Romney is illuminating, then provide your own evidence to support your position.

 

Some things are self evident and the fact that Obama's presidency has been a failure and is only going to go downhill from here is one of those things (in my opinion). Feel free to present evidence of Obama's effectiveness. This is the court of public opinion but to me, it looks like the jury is ready to deliver its verdict two years early on Obama's performance. The glove fits.

 

$6,000 is not a huge benefit??? In what world? It can help with day to day expenses if the person applies for the advanced benefit which can give them $100 per week more in their pocket.

 

Maybe it's changed. It's been about 20 or 25 years since I was eligible. The most I ever got as a refund was about $2200. And I have no idea what the advanced benefit is or how it works.

 

$6,000 is not a huge benefit??? In what world? It can help with day to day expenses if the person applies for the advanced benefit which can give them $100 per week more in their pocket.

 

So, apparently the advance earned income credit ended in 2010. I never even knew about it even though it had been in place since 1978! It also reduced the amount of the year end credit. The $6000+ credit is the max with 3 or more qualifying dependents. It scales downward based on the number of dependents. A single person is eligible for ~$495 according to what I read. The benefit is currently in the midst of a temporary increase to the 3+ max. In 2017, it reverts to the max of 2 dependents, right now just over $5400.

 

Those are the max credits.

2014 Tax Year

 

Earned Income and adjusted gross income (AGI) must each be less than:

 

• $46,997 ($52,427 married filing jointly) with three or more qualifying children
  
• $43,756 ($49,186 married filing jointly) with two qualifying children
  
• $38,511 ($43,941 married filing jointly) with one qualifying child
  
• $14,590 ($20,020 married filing jointly) with no qualifying children
  

Tax Year 2014 maximum credit:

 

• $6,143 with three or more qualifying children
  
• $5,460 with two qualifying children
  
• $3,305 with one qualifying child
  
• $496 with no qualifying children
  

Do you consider the Earned Income Tax Credit, by which people who work receive an income tax refund that exceeds the taxes that were withheld from their paychecks "government assistance?" Whether you do or not, it is. People who paid less in federal income taxes than they received in federal benefits voted overwhelmingly for Obama - twice.

 

I am not disparaging everybody who makes less than $30,000/year nor have I claimed in any of my posts that all of them are drawing government checks. I would much rather see people receiving the EIC than welfare checks for staying home and doing less than nothing.

 

No I hadn't considered EIC. But the EIC has been around since 1975, and has been expanded by every President, both Democrat and Republican. And while it is a type of entitlement program (and a fairly large one), I'm not sure that it is viewed as a program tied to and maintained by Democrats. Yes a large number of the under 30 group gets to claim this benefit, but I don't think this benefit is strongly influencing voting behavior, as again both Democrats and Republicans have been playing with and expanding this credit since it's inception. It's a fact that younger people lean more liberal, especially on the social issues. That's the reason Republicans are overwhelmingly losing the under 30 vote, not because of a 40 year old tax benefit.

So, apparently the advance earned income credit ended in 2010. I never even knew about it even though it had been in place since 1978! It also reduced the amount of the year end credit. The $6000+ credit is the max with 3 or more qualifying dependents. It scales downward based on the number of dependents. A single person is eligible for ~$495 according to what I read. The benefit is currently in the midst of a temporary increase to the 3+ max. In 2017, it reverts to the max of 2 dependents, right now just over $5400.

 

Those are the max credits.

 

Again, $6,000 is not a huge benefit? The single person getting the minimum has no children and greater earnings.

 

It galls me when people want to minimize how much a free benefit helps, particularly one where they can get over $6,000 (equivalent to taxable income of $10,000 for many of us).

No I hadn't considered EIC. But the EIC has been around since 1975, and has been expanded by every President, both Democrat and Republican. And while it is a type of entitlement program (and a fairly large one), I'm not sure that it is viewed as a program tied to and maintained by Democrats. Yes a large number of the under 30 group gets to claim this benefit, but I don't think this benefit is strongly influencing voting behavior, as again both Democrats and Republicans have been playing with and expanding this credit since it's inception. It's a fact that younger people lean more liberal, especially on the social issues. That's the reason Republicans are overwhelmingly losing the under 30 vote, not because of a 40 year old tax benefit.

 

You are correct, I would be very surprised if the EIC plays any role in a vote as it's now ingrained in the culture and both parties have kept it going for a generation.

If you don't think the EIC is a big deal to those who receive it, try stopping by your local Liberty Tax or H&R Block office the first week of February and see the stampede.

 

It's just my opinion but I view the EIC as better than straight welfare since it supplements income in an effort to keep low income workers in the work force. If you have kids and you're making $20k per year, another $4-6k of income is huge.

If you don't think the EIC is a big deal to those who receive it, try stopping by your local Liberty Tax or H&R Block office the first week of February and see the stampede.

 

It's just my opinion but I view the EIC as better than straight welfare since it supplements income in an effort to keep low income workers in the work force. If you have kids and you're making $20k per year, another $4-6k of income is huge.

 

Never said EIC wasn't a big deal to those that get it. It is a big deal, and trust me, I was a benefactor of the EIC for several years in my 20's. My point, was that the EIC has been a Bi-Partisan entitlement, and expanded by every President since it's inception (Reagan made one of the biggest expansions in 1986, which in fairness were tied to closing other loopholes). It's such an established part of our tax code, though, that I don't think it has any influence over voting behavior (unless of course a candidate was threatening to end it, which I don't think anyone has suggested). Especially considering nearly 1 in 5 that are eligible for the credit, completely miss the opportunity to take it.