To help Romney, the center did so under the most favorable conditions, which also happen to be wildly unrealistic. The analysts assumed that any cuts to deductions or loopholes would begin with top earners, and that no one earning less than $200,000 would have their deductions reduced until all those earning more than $200,000 had lost all of their deductions and tax preferences first. They assumed, as Romney has promised, that the reforms would spare the portions of the tax code that privilege saving and investment. They even ran a simulation in which they used a model developed, in part, by Greg Mankiw, one of Romney’s economic advisers, that posits “implausibly large growth effects” from tax cuts.The numbers never worked out. No matter how hard the Tax Policy Center labored to make Romney’s promises add up, every simulation ended the same way: with a tax increase on the middle class. The tax cuts Romney is offering to the rich are simply larger than the size of the (non-investment) deductions and loopholes that exist for the rich. That’s why it’s “mathematically impossible” for Romney’s plan to produce anything but a tax increase on the middle class.
Romney is a liar, just like Obama. He cannot keep his budget promises; they are mathematically impossible. Anyone who thinks that Romney offers a serious alternative to Obama is either an idiot or an ignoramus. And those who endorse Romney as a better alternative to Obama are nothing more than charlatans. Conservatives, particularly those who claim to love the constitution, can still support the one candidate who still offers a serious alternative to Obama. However, if they choose to get caught up in the matter of electability, and consequently choose to sacrifice their stated principles for pragmatic political achievements, they will truly deserve the disappointment that inevitably awaits them.