rates of the last nine years is not a tax decrease, they would believe it s continuing the status quo. but $3 trillion of that number comes from continuing the bush tax cuts. president obama favors continuing 82% of the bush tax cuts himself. so president obama supports most of that number. the remaining $2 trillion is cobbled together from taking governor romney s proposals to reduce the corporate rate, which by the way, president obama wants to reduce the corporate rate too. and adding to it rhetoric from the campaign about reducing the middle income tax burden. the reality is this $5 trillion number is not a specific plan by romney. it s cobbling a number of things together and including things obama and romney both agree on. but it is a number, a plan he has talked about. unfortunately, we are out of time, congressman. thank you so much. president obama claims $3 trillion of that number himself,
let s solve this. mitt romney s move to the middle with the polls showing him trailing the president in battleground states, he showed more centerist last night than in the primary debates. i like the fact in my state we had republicans and democrats come together and work together. regulation is essential. you can t have a free market work if you don t have regulation. my view is that we aught to provide tax relief to people in the middle class. let s bring in former new york governor george pataki and former governor ted strikland. good to see you. governor strickland, do you think governor romney earned some undecided voters last night? i would give him a b-plus on style. i would give him a d-minus on
he said my way or the highway! he said my way or the highway because he said governor, let me answer this last question, which is one of the things american people were looking for last night in their frustration with congress is who is going to be able to work with congress? who is going to move things forward? give me your take on what they might have come away with from the debate last night, governor strickland? i think governor romney used massachusetts as an example. so he was able to get democrats to help him pass a comprehensive health care bill, which during most of this campaign he s rejected his own accomplishment. listen, mitt romney has a plan to cut taxes, $5 trillion. it s going to be revenue-neutral and the only way it can be revenue-neutral is to add tax burdens to working middle class people. now, he wouldn t mention a single deduction that he was
it so closely may not know dodd frank and some of the specifics they talked about. and there s also criticism of the format, that it was a little too open-ended. do you think that voters, just in general, took away something important from this or does this format need to be scrapped and to go back to the old where the buzzer hits? i think last night s format was very good for the american people. maybe not so good for pundits or people who want to score these things like ball games. but let me tell you why it was good for the american people. they don t want to see whether someone can give an answer in 60 seconds. they don t really care about that skill. they care about whether someone has plans, whether they have ideas and can they defend those ideas. and they got to hear that last night. president obama and governor romney got to have an open-ended exchange on i think the most important questions in this campaign.
oba these appliances could have been made here in america. but a company called global tech maximized profits by paying its workers next to nothing. under sweatshop conditions in china. when mitt romney led bain, they saw global tech as a good investment. even knowing that the firm promoted its practice of exploiting. low-wage labor to its investors. mitt romney - tough on china? since when?