While Mitt Romney was running for President, he kept making one mistake over and over (beyond any election-day specific mistakes, or mistakes about the lay of the political land). Every time the question of his tax plan would come up, he claimed he wanted to keep taxes 'revenue neutral' by 'closing loopholes.' In short, he wanted to do exactly what Barack Obama wants to do- keep taxes on everyone except "the rich" low, and raise taxes on those evil rich. The difference is that Obama said it outright, and Romney did not.
Part of this comes from a fallacy, too long accepted as fact, on the part of Republicans- the idea that tax cuts need to be "paid for." This should be laughed at, mocked, and ridiculed until no Democrat has the courage to say it ever again. Lowering marginal tax rates increases tax revenue. Every time that a Democrat or someone from the Media (BIRM) asks about "paying for tax cuts," the response should be, "They categorically pay for themselves. Decreased tax rates result in increased tax revenue."
Now, Republicans will be challenged on this. They'll receive push-back. But, as with so many things, the facts are on our side.
George W. Bush lowered tax rates, and revenue climbed. Maybe he's not the best example, because he spent too much.
Ronald Reagan lowered tax rates, and revenue climbed. He also "spent too much," but he had to deal with a Democrat House. But maybe he's not the best example either, since Democrats hated him so much.
John F. Kennedy lowered tax rates, and revenue climbed. I really like that one, because it tends to make Democrats apoplectic. They can't criticize him, because they've made JFK their patron saint. But neither will they concede that ground. It's fun watching their rhetorical gymnastics to get out of that bind.
Every single time someone says anything to the effect of "we have to raise revenue," the Republican answer must be, "Then History demands we lower tax rates."
Every. Single. Time.