Stick a fork in Daniels...

[You kip if you want to...]

...he's done.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x93UsezYvrE&feature=sub

[tpfkaw]

Well he's right - Clinton's "surplus" would not have been possible were it not for the dotcom bubble, and its bursting caused revenues to decline below projections.

[Meeker]

Well he's right - Clinton's "surplus" would not have been possible were it not for the dotcom bubble, and its bursting caused revenues to decline below projections.

... which was then made much worse by the Bush tax cuts and not enough simultaneous decrease in spending - two things which occurred under Daniels' OMB.

Daniels also predicted the Iraq War would cost about $50 billion and it's now nearing a trillion.

[SvenssonRS]

Well he's right - Clinton's "surplus" would not have been possible were it not for the dotcom bubble, and its bursting caused revenues to decline below projections.

... which was then made much worse by the Bush tax cuts and not enough simultaneous decrease in spending - two things which occurred under Daniels' OMB.

Daniels also predicted the Iraq War would cost about $50 billion and it's now nearing a trillion.

In all fairness, I seriously doubt he counted for the fact that we would stay there for nearly ten years.

[albaleman]

Daniels never had a chance to begin with. His poll numbers have never gotten above 1 or 2 percent.

[California8429]

Well he's right - Clinton's "surplus" would not have been possible were it not for the dotcom bubble, and its bursting caused revenues to decline below projections.

... which was then made much worse by the Bush tax cuts and not enough simultaneous decrease in spending - two things which occurred under Daniels' OMB.

Daniels also predicted the Iraq War would cost about $50 billion and it's now nearing a trillion.

Tax cuts they created in order to not turn into a depression after the boom.

And he has already told reporters (in that big newsweek interview i think) that he was told to predict the war spending on a lot shorter time frame, but it wasn't 10 years at all.

[exopolitician]

Daniels never had a chance to begin with. His poll numbers have never gotten above 1 or 2 percent.

He had a better chance than some of the top tier contenders being mentioned, but now that I think about it he's actually the complete opposite of what the GOP should be following behind. The fact alone that he was apart of the Bush Administration still makes his name a bit toxic.

[Meeker]

Well he's right - Clinton's "surplus" would not have been possible were it not for the dotcom bubble, and its bursting caused revenues to decline below projections.

... which was then made much worse by the Bush tax cuts and not enough simultaneous decrease in spending - two things which occurred under Daniels' OMB.

Daniels also predicted the Iraq War would cost about $50 billion and it's now nearing a trillion.

Tax cuts they created in order to not turn into a depression after the boom.

That doesn't explain why the tax cuts weren't coupled with cuts in federal spending to keep the budget plan deficit neutral.

[Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey]

He's not any more "done" than he was before. His VAT proposals probably hurt him much more than this (though his VAT proposal would be part of a massive tax code overhaul, not just a huge tax raise).

[Mr. Morden]

He's not any more "done" than he was before. His VAT proposals probably hurt him much more than this (though his VAT proposal would be part of a massive tax code overhaul, not just a huge tax raise).

He doesn't have "VAT proposals".  He just said that he's open to including a VAT as part of a complete redesign of the tax system:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1010/43648.html

[Bull Moose Base]

I don't think his role in the Bush Administration which doubled the debt will hurt him much in a primary myself.  (I'd also argue most Republicans don't actually care about the debt except as a tool of partisanship.)

I do think the "truce" and his mixed messages on taxes (including some tax hikes as governor) will hurt him in a primary and if he wins that, his record in the Bush Administration will then hurt him in a general election.  Though I guess that could conceivably be used as an electability argument against Daniels in the primary.

[Mr. Morden]

RCP says "Republican sources in Indiana say Daniels is about 75 percent of the way in for a presidential run. The last 25 percent of his decision will come during the next four months of the Indiana legislative session, when he will try to pass education reform and a budget."

link

Oh yeah, and he'll be attending CPAC this year:

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0111/Daniels_to_CPAC.html?showall

[California8429]

Well he's right - Clinton's "surplus" would not have been possible were it not for the dotcom bubble, and its bursting caused revenues to decline below projections.

... which was then made much worse by the Bush tax cuts and not enough simultaneous decrease in spending - two things which occurred under Daniels' OMB.

Daniels also predicted the Iraq War would cost about $50 billion and it's now nearing a trillion.

Tax cuts they created in order to not turn into a depression after the boom.

That doesn't explain why the tax cuts weren't coupled with cuts in federal spending to keep the budget plan deficit neutral.

Very true, but at they did do half of the solution (though Bush' non discretionary funding increase was half of Clintons and continued to shrink until the end of his administration where it was under inflation)

[Yelnoc]

Well he's right - Clinton's "surplus" would not have been possible were it not for the dotcom bubble, and its bursting caused revenues to decline below projections.

... which was then made much worse by the Bush tax cuts and not enough simultaneous decrease in spending - two things which occurred under Daniels' OMB.

Daniels also predicted the Iraq War would cost about $50 billion and it's now nearing a trillion.

He was told by Bush that the occupation would only last three months.  If Bush had kept his word then he would have been right on target.  He resigned during Bush's first term because all of the stupid sh**t the man was trying to do.

I'm not sure how this "sticks a fork in Daniels".  The Youtube clip is of him talking about the fights he had with the Republican Congress over their idiotic spending decisions.  He is just hedging around laying the blame squarely on the Republican Party because it is those people whom we will be trying to get to vote for him in the primaries.

[milhouse24]

My problem with Daniels is that he doesn't seem to want it as badly as Romney, Palin, T-Paw, Santorum, Barbour, Thune, or Gingrich. 

Daniels seems too modest to want to be President and the presidential candidate cannot be modest because voters will lose their passion for Getting out the vote.

[feeblepizza]

In reality, Clinton's last budget left a deficit of $128 billion instead of the predicted $133 billion surplus. Dubya's first budget left a deficit of $157 billion. True, there's a $29 billion difference, but over eight years, Clinton left a combined deficit of $1.4 trillion, while Dubya left a combined deficit of $2.1 trillion (a $7 billion difference). So Bill Clinton was just as fiscally irresponsible as Dubya was.

[Bull Moose Base]

Clinton left a combined deficit of $1.4 trillion, while Dubya left a combined deficit of $2.1 trillion (a $7 billion difference). So Bill Clinton was just as fiscally irresponsible as Dubya was.

Um...

[feeblepizza]

Clinton left a combined deficit of $1.4 trillion, while Dubya left a combined deficit of $2.1 trillion (a $7 billion difference). So Bill Clinton was just as fiscally irresponsible as Dubya was.

Um...

$7 billion is nothing in Washington.

[patrick1]

Clinton left a combined deficit of $1.4 trillion, while Dubya left a combined deficit of $2.1 trillion (a $7 billion difference). So Bill Clinton was just as fiscally irresponsible as Dubya was.

Um...

$7 billion is nothing in Washington.

You are missing a few decimal points.

[feeblepizza]

Clinton left a combined deficit of $1.4 trillion, while Dubya left a combined deficit of $2.1 trillion (a $7 billion difference). So Bill Clinton was just as fiscally irresponsible as Dubya was.

Um...

$7 billion is nothing in Washington.

You are missing a few decimal points.

No, I don't believe I am. The data is accurate and unbiased.

[patrick1]

Clinton left a combined deficit of $1.4 trillion, while Dubya left a combined deficit of $2.1 trillion (a $7 billion difference). So Bill Clinton was just as fiscally irresponsible as Dubya was.

Um...

$7 billion is nothing in Washington.

You are missing a few decimal points.

No, I don't believe I am.

700 billion....

[feeblepizza]

Clinton left a combined deficit of $1.4 trillion, while Dubya left a combined deficit of $2.1 trillion (a $7 billion difference). So Bill Clinton was just as fiscally irresponsible as Dubya was.

Um...

$7 billion is nothing in Washington.

You are missing a few decimal points.

No, I don't believe I am. The date is accurate and unbiased.

700 billion....

Which is still nothing in Washington.

[Bull Moose Base]

Clinton left a combined deficit of $1.4 trillion, while Dubya left a combined deficit of $2.1 trillion (a $7 billion difference). So Bill Clinton was just as fiscally irresponsible as Dubya was.

Um...

$7 billion is nothing in Washington.

You are missing a few decimal points.

No, I don't believe I am. The date is accurate and unbiased.

700 billion....

Which is still nothing in Washington.

Republican math skills strike again.  Sounds like Daniels gave you that estimate of how much 2.1 trillion minus 1.4 was going to cost you.

As for saying 700 billion was nothing, where were you during the stimulus debate?  We could have used you.

[minionofmidas]

Well he's right - Clinton's "surplus" would not have been possible were it not for the dotcom bubble, and its bursting caused revenues to decline below projections.

... which was then made much worse by the Bush tax cuts and not enough simultaneous decrease in spending - two things which occurred under Daniels' OMB.

Daniels also predicted the Iraq War would cost about $50 billion and it's now nearing a trillion.

In all fairness, I seriously doubt he counted for the fact that we would stay there for nearly ten years.

Anyone not a raving madman could have told you that...

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

He's also too short. (Daniels)