Barbara Comstock, you’re next!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think she was toast as soon as her party proposed a tax bill that will negatively affect a huge number of her constituents. NoVa Republicans tend to lean socially liberal/fiscally conservative. What is the point of having a Republican rep if her party is going to cause your taxes to increase?

Socially liberal voters who are opposed to their own taxes going up. Shaking my head. That’s a good one. Classic even.

That's not the objection. The objection is to the distribution.

I'm socially liberal. I would be happy to pay more in taxes for better roads, cleaner water, stronger military. I'm not willing to pay more in taxes so that millionaires and billionaires can pay less, especially if it means adding $1.5 trillion in debt.

I'll pay if they pay, though. Willingly.

Exactly.

+2 I'm not opposed to higher taxes across the spectrum of those who can pay, as long as they're being used to further the common good. I'm damned if I'm going to willingly pay more so people like the Trumps can pay less, however.

[Anonymous]

This twitter feed has a chart from the Tax Policy Analysis center that I think Barbara will find interesting.

https://twitter.com/kristinapet

[Anonymous]

The Senate tax plan retains estate tax but doubles the amount exempt. It should be raised but perhaps only by 1.5.

It also has medical expense deductions. Since so many bring up double taxation it is sensible to be able to deduct SALT up to a max of 50k instead of mtg interest. I wish there would be no casualty loss. Another poor choice in the plan is increasing child tax credit even for people earning scads of money.

It is not hard to have many brackets. Far simpler than a ratmaze of deductions and credits. The senate has 7 brackets - why not 8-10?

[Anonymous]

Comstock still waiting to see if she can get the ok from Rep leadership to say she opposes the tax bill. ?

[Anonymous]

Barbara Comstock is now playing the "sexual harassment" card. She will easily get re-elected by the old cows.

[Anonymous]

I'm a woman. I voted for Comstock (and Clinton). I regret the Comstock vote. I hope she loses - she isn't doing her job and representing her constituents. If you literally have to hide from your constituents, you don't belong in office.

[Anonymous]

I live in her district. I called this week to insist she vote against H.R. 1.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I live in her district. I called this week to insist she vote against H.R. 1.

As many have done. What a massive slam to her constituents. Moving our itemized deductions to other rep's constituents who might not have 24k of deductions under current tax regs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm a woman. I voted for Comstock (and Clinton). I regret the Comstock vote. I hope she loses - she isn't doing her job and representing her constituents. If you literally have to hide from your constituents, you don't belong in office.

The district should push her out of office NOW using whatever legal means are available if she isn't dong her basic job.

[Anonymous]

It makes me angry to see her glad-handing at events all over town, while politicians are screwing us over. She needs to represent her district not act like a beauty queen. She is worthless.

[Anonymous]

A better woman should run against her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A better woman should run against her.

there are at least 3 right now lining up to do so

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A better woman should run against her.

there are at least 3 right now lining up to do so

She has to go. What a shame!

[Anonymous]

She voted for the tax bill-- guess she thinks picking donors over her constituents is her only chance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She voted for the tax bill-- guess she thinks picking donors over her constituents is her only chance.

+1 likely knows she may lose the next election and is lining up next job