E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
President Obama and his allies continue to hold a sizable fundraising advantage over Mitt Romney and his allies, including a 2-to-1 edge in available cash, according to the latest totals filed with the Federal Election Commission.
The numbers show that Team Obama (the campaign, the DNC, and the major pro-Obama Super PAC Priorities USA Action) had a combined $144 million cash on hand as of April 30, and it raised $41.7 million last month.
That's compared with the $77.5 million in the bank that Team Romney (the campaign, the RNC, the pro-Romney Super PAC Restore Our Future, and the anti-Obama Super PAC American Crossroads) has reported, and it raised a total of $29.5 million in April.
But these fundraising figures tell only part of the story.
Last week, the Romney campaign announced raising a combined $40 million with the RNC and other committees -- essentially equaling the Obama-DNC haul -- which spurred stories about how Team Romney was catching up to Team Obama. The Romney camp also said it had $60 million in bank.
But the fundraising totals the Romney camp filed with the FEC are short of those numbers.
So how did it come up with $40 million raised in April and $60 million in the bank?
The Romney campaign tells First Read that its Victory Fund brought in $17 million, but those numbers won’t be filed to the FEC until July. That $17 million -- added to the campaign's $11.7 million and RNC's 11.4 million -- gets you to $40 million.
And the Romney camp gets to $60 million in the bank when adding up the campaign's cash on hand ($9 million), the RNC's ($34.8 million), and that Victory Fund ($17 million).
Overall, when you add up the totals for the campaigns, political parties, and top Super PACS, here’s where we stand:
Team Obama raised in April: $41.7 million
Team Romney raised: $29.5 million (they are also counting that extra $17 million from the Victory Fund)
Team Obama cash on hand: $144 million
Team Romney cash on hand: $77.5 million cash on hand
The components:
Obama: $25.7 million raised, $115 million cash on hand
DNC: $14.4 million raised, $24.3M cash on hand
Priorities USA Action $1.6 million raisd, $4.7 cash on hand
Romney: $11.7 million raised, $9 million cash on hand
RNC: $11.4 million raised, $34.8 million cash on hand
Restore Our Future: $4.6 million raised, $8.2 million cash on hand
American Crossroads $1.8 million raised, $25.5 million cash on hand
Leave a Comment:
Fuzzy math at it's finest;
Too bad - so sad!
Why doesn't Willard write himself a check or two for a couple of million ala Meg Whitman?
Him & the Mrs. didn't blink an eye when they dumped $150K down the RNC rat-hole last week...
Romney is lying about his numbers to give a false image that he has more support than he actually has!
Kind of the same way Romney rented that baseball field to give a speech, and then couldn't even fill the place up to the 50 yard line, on the field!
Romney - What a maroon! (Bugs Bunny)
Obama/Biden 2012
Envy of the rich again there fiesty bot.
Now Fiesty you know Romney is a vulture. He will never write a check.
To Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL who said. Fuzzy math at it's finest; Are you one of those that pays 40k for a plate to raise money for Mr Obama (sorry President Obama)?
Your troops got together this weekend and came up with a new strategy. Any way President Obama has does big Fat Cats ini Wall Street donating and let's not forget Hollywood.
Conservative donors slow to back Romney's campaign
`~snips`~
Romney is hardly hurting for cash, having reported more than $61 million in the
bank by the end of April. But financial reports released Sunday reveal a
potential struggle for Romney in persuading his party's more conservative donors
to open their wallets for him, although there are still more than five months
until Election Day.
Romney has been aggressively courting conservatives, speaking out recently
against China's "one-child policy" and addressing graduates at the evangelical
Liberty University. Last month, Romney told the website Breitbart.com that the
news media were involved in a "vast left-wing conspiracy to work together to put
out their message and to attack me
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_CAMPAIGN_DONORS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-05-20-20-09-06
==============================================
Hmmm, it's not the left wing; Willard.
Watch your back Mitt the "righties" are just not that into you. Your money is no good. Millions of us small time donors got our President's back because we love him and what he is doing.
Obama/ Biden 2016
TO: Bob Jones-3591206 who wrote:
Are you saying that because Republicans have absolutely no sense of fairness towards American Workers, while at the same time Corporations are making record profits?
I suppose Republicans like the idea of repealing the minimum wage too, which is why no American Worker in their right mind could even think of voting for Romney, and you also make the case of why the "Ryan Plan" is created to work against the American People.
Republicans remain totally apathetic toward the American Worker, and rather than discuss a "living wage" or fairness to American Workers, Republicans rely solely on calling the American People who ARE trying to work a living AND for a fair wage and to enjoy "quality of life", Republicans can ONLY think of "envy towards the rich" as if the Rich are somehow "victims" and remain totally oblivious towards Working Americans.
Obama/Biden 2012
Romney's life's lesson 1: difficult to make money as a barber.
Fuzzy math at it's finest;
Goes right along with his calculations that gas would be $2.50 a gallon and unemployment would be less than 4% if he were elected. For a man that graduated with two degrees from Harvard, he still speaks like a moron.
Team Obama cash on hand: $144 million
Team Romney cash on hand: $77.5 million cash on hand
Apparently he can't even get his 1%ers to stand with him.
Let's see: really smart people, Silicon Valley and other tech millionaires, most of the rich of Hollywood, NYC and Boston..... Hey I think Team Obama really has a chance here!!
Yep, Mr. Obama's "war" chest must be growing since the 1 PERCENTER "Fat Cats" on wall street, the "Fat Cats" on Bollywood, and the "Fat Cats" who invest in the DOW are contributing and wasting their money on his demise.
Wait a minute....Mr. Obama preaches continuously that the 1 PERCENTER "Fat Cats" need more taxation so he can spend more on his "pet" Go Green agenda.
Such a hypocrite.
AG....where is the 50 yard line on a baseball field? Next to the right field or left field lines?
I see experts are forecasting unemployment at 7.5% by end of 2013. The GOP just can't get a break!
Obama/Biden 2012
As far as I am concerned it really doesn't matter who has raised the most money. The amounts raised are, IMO, obscene.
SeekingSanity - I would hope unemployment rate is well below 7.5% by the end of 2013 and it might happen if the American people vote Obama and the democratic controlled Senate out of office.
Seeking Sanity--so you think that is a positive that unemployment dips to 7.5% in 18 more months? If Obama had any financial sense and could get GDP growth to 6% like under Reagan and Clinton, this wouldnt be an issue. The unfortunate reality is that the employment numbers are likely to come after the new president is in office right now not looking so hot for Obama but there is plenty of time left for him to continue to divide the country into the takers and payers and win.
Please show me Feisty and others, where he is lying or his numbers are fuzzy. They may be, but I can not find info on what seems fuzzy.
The 'Fat Cats' have a tough choice.
The guy who wants to raise their taxes but has helped the DOW rebound big
OR
The guy who's pitching a repeat of the Wall Street crash of '07.
They are simply choosing the guy who won't crash the country. Again.
I'll take a pass - I would have better luck teaching my cats algebra!
Cats already know how to multiply...
Fiesty,
It's all "Shut up and sit down, America! Do as I say and there won't be any trouble."
And that's what liberalism is.
It all stems from a mind-set of intolerance.
I just could not find the lies you claim. All I was asking was for you to produce them. Not asking for you to give a kidney or convince me. I have not seen them. That does not mean they do not exists. Intolerant.
TO: jollyoldsoul1 who wrote:
A distinction without a difference.
Obviously, Romney couldn't, and didn't, fill either.
Do you think "playing stupid" will be one of Romney's tactics?
Obama/Biden 2012
I was always though the more votes won the election, not money donated..silly me
guess all of those fat cats who paid their "fair share" to President Obama's war chest just bought their "don't tax me" chit, but time will tell...either way this election is going to get so dirty I am going to have to go to a mud wresting match just to feel clean
This is the thing about Romney that I don't understand--he lies when the truth isn't that bad. Why lie about how much money you've raised? It can be easily disproven, as here. And now we won't trust another number his campaign gives out.
Please point me to where I claimed it was a lie?
I believe what I said was, fuzzy math... interpret it anyway you want!
Go put words in someone else's mouth - it won't work on me!
You're all under a glass cage, specimens. THEY are laughing at you.
Fiesty,
Sorry, to call them fuzzy means something is untrue, to me. I will re phase, I could not find the fuzzy claim. If it is what you believe, you must have numbers I have not seen. Will not put words in you mouth, would just like for you to back them up. Or do you not believe in that.
Thank You!
I'm not sure how or why you can't see the shell game being played in front of you, but let me try to explain.
First Team Romney claimed to have had $60 million in the bank, which is bogus on it's face according to what was filed with the FEC.
When questioned on the fuzzy math, they come up with this brilliant excuse;
I hope I have cleared up my original comment for you!
The latest rightwing "strategery" is to come into a race in the final 30 days with a sh!tload of money and negative ads. The money cannot be calculated in time to even check if it is compliant with campaign rules. Democrats across the nation, at every level, prepare for this -- The Dirty Angry Ambush Money!
The Obama supporters are out in force today. They have nothing to stand on except the abysmal record of Obama since he's been in office. Blame Bush, blame the republicans, blame anybody but the loser president in office right now. Is that Feisty Redhead or Head in the Sand Redhead?
sfcret - as anyone with even a rudimentary understanding of our economy knows, getting unemployment down to 7.5% by the end of next year would be quite an accomplishment. Many of our manufacturing jobs are having to be brought back to the US - which means building new production areas. That isn't done overnight. Anyone who expects unemployment to drop quickly is out of touch with reality. In other words - they're Republican!
TO: Steeler Fan-380417 who wrote:
It's just his "nature" to do so. Plus, he's desperate.
The article already pointed out that Romney's numbers are fudged, or not accurate, which again, is typically Republican. Lie and deny pile-a-tricks.
Obama/Biden 2012
Lesson no. 2 to Romney the Barber - life is unfair (no financial parity).
SeekingSanity,
Please name "one thing" that has improved under this administration. I'm not looking for a "problem solved" answer, just something that has improved! Please don't go to "jobs", those numbers have and are being twisted enough to make a pretzel envious. Look at the month by month number of people on Food Stamps since this administration took office, those numbers can't be fudged!
I find it amusing that they party painted as the "Wealthy", is having trouble raising as much money as the party which claims to be for the "Have Nots" in our country!
Life's Lesson No.3 for Romney: Perception Matters. You are Romney the Barber (for gays), but everybody perceives you as Romney the Barbaric.
Your reputation is now out there. Don't complain, because now Life Lesson No. 2 applies here - that is - life is unfair.
Expert tips for your family summer vacation, don't put your dog on top of your auto, this is something only a fool would do !
OBAMA/ 2012 !
Seeking Sanity--nobody is moving manufacturing jobs back here to the US, they are starting new manufacturing jobs here because it makes economic sense--especially with the recession in Europe and the new higher cost to do business in Europe. You are wrong about moving the employment numbers you just need GDP growth 6% or higher like financially astute presidents like Reagan and Clinton got. They new that you stimulate the economy by giving private enterprise incentives to invest here and you dont make it harder for them to do business in the US nor do you tax them higher than the rest of the world making US companies less competitive with foreign competitors. If you actually stopped campaiging and started actually thinking maybe you could post more intelligently on this matter.
Romney would ship all our jobs overseas if elected !
Patriotic--learn economics--Obama is already shipping our jobs overseas. You did notice companies like Aon moving thousands from Illinois to London. Why is that? Because our corporate tax rate is the highest in the world and no other country taxes earnings in the host country earned in foreign countries. Obama wants to increase this tax, so what do you think will happen? More global companies will move their operations and headquarters overseas it only makes sense. So sorry dude you have it backwards and its already happening.
Patriotic American - GE is one of the many companies moving production and jobs back to the United States. By the end of 2014 they will have 70% of the production of their products back in the US. They are finishing 4 manufacturing centers in order to bring those jobs back. And, their goal is to move over 90% of their jobs back here over time.
As we are seeing, manufacturing IS coming back and will continue to do so under President Obama.
Night guys - off to a dinner meeting!
Beverly
Sorry, there is this thing called "Term Limits" or are you saying that when they lose in 2012, they will return in 2016? Grover Cleveland did that, the only one and probably the last one to do so.
American Girl
As opposed to your imbalanced sense of fair? In 50 years, I have only worked for one person who paid me less than more than they would have been paid for the same work, when they started.
I worked in fast food for nearly 10 years. By far, the only places paying minimum wage are places that really don't have the income to pay for such wages such as really small businesses. The reason is that most people grasp capitalism. They understand that to get ahead you must improve yourself and not be a slave working for meager wages. As soon as someone with a little more self-motivation than a house plant, finds some place that will give them the same hours a few more hours of work, better benefits, or a little more an hour for the same hours, they are gone.
No not apathetic, they understand how things really work a whole lot better. If you give people who could work, what they want or need without working it, they have no need to improve themselves or society.
"If you are not moving forward, then you are falling behind"
"There is no better motivator to produce, than to experience being without."
As Caleb said to Joshua - "I want that mountain". That mountain contained the most fortified cities and the perhaps the most fiercest fighters of all Palestine. History says he took that mountian.
nomoresameo
You miss the point of the article. Obama's funds are falling short of targets set, and decreasing. Romney's funds are increasing as time continues. This is not good, because for Obama to win, he must dominate the airwaves and have money to cart people to the polls who aren't that excited to vote without help.
Seeking Santity
The key number is not the unemployment U-3. The key number is the size of the workforce which is now smaller than in 1981 - when Reagan was sworn in. You have 6 months to improve this. I'm in design services, and I can tell you that that most design firms are still operating at 40-50% of capacity on staffs that are 30 - 50% the size they were 4 years ago. That capacity will only produce about a 1% annual increase in GDP.
Anything they work on affects your growth and will take 6 - 12 months before any work becomes new jobs. Translation unemployment overall is going to remain about the same heading into Election day. That is not good thing for Obama/Biden.
sfcret - just like in war, he who controls the air . . . wins. That means he with the most money probably wins - ask Santorum about that.
Seeking Sanity
as anyone with even a rudimentary understanding of our economy knows, getting unemployment down to 7.5% by the end of next year would be quite an accomplishment.
Really? If the economy was growing .2% is nothing seeing the record for growth in one month has seen .4% before. I'l use the modern revisionist (not as radical as probably what really occured which was previously estimated to have peaked between 9.5 & 11.7%.
1920 unemployment 5.2%
1921 unemployment 8.7%
1922 Unemployment 6.7%
1923 Unemployment 4.8%
Any decrease is in our unemployment is more attributable to the decrease in size of our workforce, not because people are getting jobs. Our slow decrease in unemployment is a failure of the administrations policies.
To all the folks saying that Obama/DNC is receiving more money from Wall Street than Mittens please have a look at the attached article from the ultra-liberal, Hippy-loving, progressive (tongue in cheek) periodicals Christian Science Monitor, Bloomberg plus others.
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Elections/From-the-Wires/2012/0202/Mitt-Romney-draws-more-Wall-Street-donations-than-Obama
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-01/romney-sees-surge-in-wall-street-donations-as-obama-s-decline.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/01/mitt-romney-wall-street-campaign-contributions_n_1247866.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/02/obamas-world-of-finance-b_n_1250954.html
http://money.cnn.com/2012/02/01/news/economy/wall_street_romney/index.htm
I could go on and on and on pasting articles depicting that Wall Street LOVES Romney... You Foxbots need to learn the difference between FACT and FICTION... Fox is FICTION!!!!!!!
Get enough money and any idiot can win.
That's why a bigger middle-class trumps the 1%. Obama can raise more money by casting a wider net.
The bigger the size of the middle class - the healthier America as a nation. More people would pay more taxes to support each other, including the rich - more consumers shopping at Walmart, the Waltons make more money. Middle-class taxpayers can't hide their wealth as the rich have been able to do. Middle-class live off their paycheck, which can be hidden and is easily taxed.
The middle class also have to behave well to stay on thei jobs to pay mortgages and other bills.
I can't understand the rich and power have been oblivious to this common sense.
correction: Middle-class live off their paycheck, which can NOT be hidden and is easily taxed.
"That's why a bigger middle-class trumps the 1%. Obama can raise more money by casting a wider net."
Keep drinking the koolaid. Obama 's major financial backers include the likes of plutocrat Jon Corzine, who famously lost 1.2 billion of investor money. Obama spends most of his time not doing his real job, but fundraising from fatcat Hollywood and Wall Street billionaries.
The Hill researched political donations from Bain’s senior executives, and found that their mentality has been rather Democratic, at least until now:
President Obama has to do what he does to win. The alternative of Romney would be a disaster to the Nation.
Bob in Virginia - sounds like the Bain employees know something about Romney that you don't. Why would they be donating to Romneys competitor?
Thanks for that great talking point. Maybe we should all be asking more questions of the people who used to work with Mitt.
Job1--how could Romney be any more of a disaster than we already have?
Kirk, if the Republican's direction is the wrong direction then we are headed to much higher unemployment numbers if they decide to massively and indiscriminately cut funding to the Government as a whole.
We may be getting deficits down then but that will not matter because we will have 25% to 40% unemployment nationally. If Republican's get control of all branches of the Government and go hog wild with cutting instead of making precision cuts that lean up agencies but do not cost too many jobs then it is a very real possibility. Not to mention all of the other social tyranny a lot of Evangelical Republican politicians want to impose on Americans.
And this is what is wrong with our political system. Money buys votes, especially when the incumbent can use tax payer money to buy those votes. We need to have some form of controls where the voice of the people is hard above the voice of the money is heard!
The point I tried to make here is - Romney will be disastrous for the Middle Class. The only connection Romney the Barbaric has with the Middle Class lies with his alter ego - Romney the Barber - I don't think that bodes well.
Geowil--if you associate government employment with a good economy, we have already lost the debate and discussion. If you want to grow the economy, you need to allow small business and corporations more investment return on their dollars and markets to sell their products. Maybe if we need less government bureaucrats etc, they can actually get employed in the private sector and be productive. You did notice that the economy did well under Reagan and Clinton in which the private sector was provided the investment subsidies to expand, produce and employ. You did notice right that when the money is spent instead on federal, state and local budgets that we get anemic growth and large deficits and no new tax revenue right?
Romney wants all his supporters to donate all their money to him so he can finish his Elevator 1.2 Million dollars !
But Patriotic American--look all of those people who be employed constructing and finishing his elevator. Very short sighted of you. I love how all of you want to punish the successful. It used to be we held those who were successful in business in high esteem and we used self reliance and personal accountability to rise above the personal jealousies because we knew there was nothing stopping us from opening our own business. Now you dont want there to be any consequences for the personal choices one makes in life and if we follow True Patriot, he wants equal outcomes. He thinks the person who chose to become a teacher knowing they would make the salary being offered should have the same economic consequences in life as Albert Pujols who is clearly more talented and people are willing to pay alot of money to see him play baseball. Obama and True Patriot want to tax Albert to the point he is equal to the teacher. Or he wants to make sure that gas station owner who invested his own money and worked 7 days a week 14 hours a day to make enough money to buy 2 more gas stations and now is considered a working wealthy person has the same economic outcome as the college professor who just wants to work 20 hours a week and not take any economic investment risk even though that person chose to be a professor. And what about those people who choose to have children early in life, no we shouldnt reward those who didnt have children we should punish and tax them to ensure they dont make any more than the person who chose a different path. Thanks Patriotic American you reminded me of what patriotism really is in this country.
TO: Kirk-2957282 who wrote:
Easier than you think. Just take a look at the "Ryan Plan" if you want a lot of answers.
Obama/Biden 2012
Kirk what I am saying is that if you kill 50% of the Governments jobs all at once in a non-played out over years way you are going to be shooting the economy in the head. If you close down half of the Government you lose those jobs, it creates unemployed workers that the private sector will not absorb for years. If you do it in a methodical way over 5 to 10 years the hit to the economy because of those lost jobs becomes less dramatic.
I am not saying that Government jobs = growth. Some Government spending does by consuming product and driving up demand but general Government employment does not drive our economy; supply and demand does and this is why we have to end out addiction to the service sector. Service sector produces nothing that can be sold it just employs people and pays them money that they send to other countries by buying things we use to make here that are now imported.
When we stop feeding the service sector and get back to basics we can start seeing some real growth in exports and our GDP.
Hey fiesty they found your replacement she is a bammy bot school teacher in N.C. She knows how to lay the law down to her students lmfao. Why do you and her sound so much alike because you're bot bots?
Hey Romney: Don't take checks from Gingrich.
It's going to be hard creating an effective attack ad against the President. I saw one called "Broken Promises"on the TV the other night, a series of clips of the President's speeches, showing he was trying to keep the country's hopes up during the recession. It just brought home how inspiring and uplifting he has been during these dark times. Plus, President Obama is just so easy on the eyes, his handsomeness kind of distracts from the Republican negative message.
I remember when the press said that about Ted Bundy.....
Amy,
Have you run out of debunked Obama talking points so soon , so you are now down to his good looks?
Pathetic.
TO: Bob in Virginia-5210392 who wrote:
And he's a great singer too!
Oh yeah!
Obama/Biden 2012
Not really. They can just show Obama's own videos with his own words telling us how if he didn't turn the economy around by his 3rd year he'd be a one term president, how he blamed Bush for high gas prices, but thinks of himself as blameless today for the same, how as a Senator he voted against raising the debt ceiling because it was unpatriotic and now he's all for unconditionally raising the limit, how he said he'd close Gitmo, but didn't, how his economic team bragged unemployment would not grow above 8% with his trillion dollar stimulus, but it has remained above 8% for a record number of months.
You see Amy, Barry has a record now, and it isn't a very good one.
You set women back 60 years. You behave like an absolute buffoon.
That's funny, because I'm pretty sure you're not a woman, JoAnnaSmith. Don't ask me how I know, just call it women's intuition.
Gas prices are going down, the Chinese activist is safe in New York (what? another diplomatic success for the Obama administration?), the economy is looking up, the President is winding down the war in Afghanistan ahead of schedule and Romney is unlikeable. I almost feel sorry for you,"JoAnna," except you, lucky you, get paid to post and I do it out of love :)
JAS - every time you post your blithering nonsense you make women look bad. My guess is you just worship Bachmann and Palin!
Luckily there are those of us on this site who have intelligence and can counter-balance your stupidity. Amy is one of those!
Obama/Biden 2012
Hell Ames - I'm pretty sure Snuffy isn't even human!
If men acted like you Amy, we'd have Eva Longoria as president. While she'd be a step up from Obama, she'd still be far short of what this country needs for a leader.
I don't feel sorry for you. People that behave like you deserve what they get.
SS--really? Have you read your own posts lately? Your lack of self awareness is pretty glaring. Have you not noticed your own hero worship to the point you cant even admit Obama's own screwups and you cant even see how bad things are in your own home state the guinea pig for Obama's economic policies. Until you show some objectivity and critical thinking of your own you really have no business attacking others.
The Smith1 person is typical of the conservative way of thinking. She used a portion of Amy's comment and tried to use it against her. A typical right wing tactic that is as useless as Smith's comments.
Wow. I am really embarrassed for all women by Amy's statement, "... President Obama is just so easy on the eyes, his handsomeness kind of distracts from the Republican negative message." Surely this is a joke , and I am embarrassed for YOU especially.
Are you supposed to be a liberated liberal woman, while saying such silly statements? We women fought long and hard for our rights to vote, Amy. We will NOT elect men on perceived attractiveness. By the way, in my opinion, one adjective I would NOT use of Obama is "handsomeness." He's a geeky, scrawny big-eared doofus.(Especially since beauty is in the eye of the beholder). And besides that, he's a feckless leader. Go back to the 1950's!
Jody-1593626
Lighten up. I don't support President Obama just because he's handsome and likeable. He's also smart and strong minded, too, and, of course, I support his policies. It's just so wonderful to have a President one can admire, for a change. I don't know why Republicans want to take that away from us. It feels good when the world admires him too. We have a popular President, world wide.
Amy, have you ever traveled internationally? Have you googled the popularity of Obama in various areas of the world? We absolutely do not have a popular president world wide and Obama's approval ratings in the middle east are less than Bush's. In my international travels primarily for work, its true that Obama creates less of a negative reaction or cowboy image than Bush ever did especially in certain parts of Europe especially France. However, Asia certainly liked Bush more and respected him more. I think there is a benevolent tolerance for Obama almost like a naive child in Asia and in eastern Europe they consider him a dolt. The only place I get more positive than naive child tolerance is in Spain, France while in Germany and Great Britain, Bush was probably more popular. Before your childlike crush comes crashing down on you, maybe you should find out how people really think of Obama outside the US
Amy - as one of those who has traveled abroad several times over the past 3 years I can tell you our President is admired and the US is gaining respect because of him. We were the laughingstock of the world because of Bush and now European countries think very highly of the US because of Obama. I can't tell you the number of times I had people tell me they were glad to see we had elected an intelligent person to be our President this time. In France we are greatly admired for our choice of President. In Great Britain I could not meet anyone that didn't bring President Obama up and sing his praises. The man I date just returned from Asia and, even though he is not a big Obama fan, he was surprised at how highly regarded he is in Asia. And, he said the opinion of the US has risen considerably since President Obama has been elected.
We are very fortunate that we have someone serving as President who has countered the negative opinion Bush created for the US.
Amy - Just vile and gross...in fact I threw up in my mouth a little after reading your post. I guess if purple lips, jug ears and stammering speech is your thing, it's your thing. Then again, you do live in Maine. If you think Obummer is handsome, I would be terrified to see what you look like.
Juiceisgood - you just make yourself look very low class and ignorant with that post. You're clearly not in the same class - by a long shot as our President and would have to reach up to touch the soles of his shoes.
Obviously SS--you havent actually travelled abroad because your observations dont actually match Obama's poularity ratings in those countries. The only country we have similar observations are in socialist France. You are clearly wrong about Great Britain and Asia. In Asia, I am not sure they get excited about any of our presidents but this concept that the opinion of the US has gone up since Obama has been in office is just false.
Kirk - I travel extensively and clearly you just lie.
TO: NoLimitSoldier50 who wrote:
Because we've seen the crowds, not to mention he was immediately given a Nobel Peace Prize, among other reasons.
Romney can't draw that kind of crowd and he's already promising lots of overseas work. It's my guess that Romney is not wanted overseas, probably because of Republicans' record of being warmongers.
Obama/Biden 2012
If Obama manages his campaign finances as well as he has managed the tax payers money they will be out of money shortly. That $500 Million Soylent Green investment loss that Obama made is a fine example of poor cash management. Let's vote for a better leader. VOTE FOR CHANGE IN 2012!
UAW you seem to have forgotten the source of the debt we have is mostly from the Bush tax cuts. You apparently have little familiarity with the economics of the business cycle. And how many votes can the Pres cast in the House? Blaming him for the Republican obstructionism seems (odd, peculiar, ill-informed, stupid,) take your pick.
Tax revenues increased after the Bush tax cuts kicked in.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/beltway/2012/02/22/after-bush-tax-cuts-payments-by-wealthy-actually-increased/
read the article, but there are some serious omissions, like the cost of living increase of those years and the taxes on investment income versus profit gained. And the Authors numbers are misstated. How is a tax cut an increase of $1,887/year, and how is that equal to 1887%? It's not.
So when the bottom fell out, those that had and average of 4.4 million/year found themselves living in their car after they got laid off?
The Bush tax cuts alone are responsible for a minimum of $1 Trillion of the current debt of this great land. No doubt about it. That number is growing every day.
upset--that is just silly as if that were true, then why did Obama extend the cuts. They either promote additional spending or investment which equates to jobs, earnings and tax revenue or they dont. If you blame Bush for the deficit then you must give him credit for the additional revenue that was generated for the first 6 years after the cuts. Bush's problems related to the spending, the wars, the additional entitlement spending for our wealthy seniors etc.
Upset,
Many would argue that the Bush Tax cuts are responsible for $1 trillion staying in the private sector allowing the 90% of us who continued working through the recession to live comfortably. I'm not sure where the mentality comes from that the government can create jobs and oppurtunity by increasing taxes. That just sounds like a politician trying to get votes by misleading the public. Obama's "I'll raise the other guy's taxes" campaign rhetoric is finding a tough sell with educated Americans....
Because the only alternative the Republicans gave Obama was to let them all expire, which would have devastated the fragile economy. The Democrats tried to preserve the middle class portion of the tax cut only -- you know, the part that was doing the most good all things considered -- but the conservatives wouldn't have it. What the right wing of congress did on that issue was irresponsible, if not downright reprehensible.
Depends on how the tax funds are spent, doesn't it? Public works means government contracts for private companies, does it not? And what about all the money that goes into state coffers from Federal programs, the military, etc.? Seems like that's kept a lot of folks employed. If the recipients could be compelled to use Federal funds properly instead of refusing them or "appropriating" them for debt payments (as opposed to something productive), as some governors have done, we might all be a lot better off.
Wow, is that really how you see it? Forgive me for saying so, but that seems a terribly oversimplified and narrow view to me. I'm pleased to say that there are plenty of people in this country, both rich and poor, who aren't so... well, selfish. Given Obama's fundraising advantage and where it's coming from, doesn't seem to be as tough a sell as you think. Ever stop to ask why, given his policies, ANY rich person still supports Obama? I'll tell you why: they're able to think beyond themselves and their own pocketbooks. Would that we all could do the same.
Tony_Baloney - well said!
TO: UAWPleeeeeeease who wrote:
We intend to, we're going to change the House of Representatives from "Red" to "Blue", from Republican to Democrat!
Obama/Biden 2012
"The Romney campaign tells First Read that its Victory Fund brought in $17 million, but those numbers won’t be filed to the FEC until July."
Is anyone in the Romney camp aware that if you google "Victory Fund", the first hit that pops up is www.victoryfund.org, whose slogan is "Electing LGBT leaders to change America's politics" and whose home page has a big picture of President Obama thanking him for supporting marriage equality?
Donate now! :)
And a couple of hits below that, you get this Washington Post headline:
"Mitt and Ann Romney each give $75,000 to Romney Victory Fund"
Borrowing from the old piggy bank already, Mitt?
TO: JoAnne in PA who wrote:
Oh I do love it!
Seems like this election year is going to be a lot of fun after all!
Obama/Biden 2012
Yes give to the victory fund. ----- NOW! I just did.
LGBT
Obama/Biden 2012
O'Bama the talented Irish American president raises more money,
Romney the Barber raises more eyebrows by cutting more hair for gay people.
Its doesn't matter how much money Obama raises, its not going to be enough to get him reelected.
TO: Common Man-3493893 who wrote:
I'd have to counter that with: It doesn't matter how much money Romney HAS, it's not going to be enough to get HIM elected.
Republicans already know that people just don't like Mitt Romney, and even fewer people trust him.
We can't elect Romney based on his "jobs" record after Romney came in 47th out of 50 for job growth! Romney is a JOBS CREMATOR, and THAT is how Romney made his millions.
Obama/Biden 2012
Vote for real Hope and Change in 2012.
Well we will have to see about that.
Common Man - we are voting for real Hope and Change in 2012. We're voting as many of the sorry Republicans out of office as possible. THEN we can begin to get things done in the US!
Obama/Biden 2012
If the People see fit to re-elect Mr. Obama they will hamper him with a Republican congress. This will force him to use executive orders to make the "changes" he and his supporters want. So every change will get the scrutiny that the health bill had. It wont take long for people to see what his unencumbered lameduck self has in mind. There is more and more talk in the air about Mr. Biden getting the heave ho in favor of Hillary. You know Bill is pushing this, its become obvious he does not like Mr. Obama.
jollyoldsoul1 - just keep telling yourself these fairy tales. The Republican congress is on it's way out as Americans see how useless they have been. And, Biden will remain as VP. Hillary is getting set for 2016.
Obama/Biden 2012
Let us not be fooled. In my opinion, the Swift-boat campaign against John Kerry will look like a kindergarted tea party compared to what is planned against the Pres for the later stages of the campaign. AND don't forget that the Republican states that have passed voter-restriction laws take their playbook from the Ohio Secy of State that apportioned the voting machines to steal Ohio's electoral votes in 2004, the Supreme Court is positioned in case 2000 needs repeating, and PA and others are eyeing ways to divide their electoral votes to disadvantage the Dems in their blue-leaning states. Last and hardly least, many Republican strong men and financiers are writing off their Pres candidate to concentrate on electing more Republicans to state office, the House, and Senate. Your local Republican cannot be trusted to carry out anyone's agenda but Boehner's, Kantor's, McConnell's, Ryans, etc. Be warned.
To: American Girl-724855 who wrote.
I love it even more. Mitt Romney 2012, the end of an error.
Let's not forget all the Fat Cats from Wall Street and Hollywood.... that are in the tank for Obama. The Obama team uses Religion war, class war and let's not forget the Race Card. No doubt he has a mean machine behind him. Mitt's team just started to fight and all Catholics, Latins like me, Women like me, Christians, Jews, Protestants and Americans will rise up in the next Months.
I love it even more. Mitt Romney 2012, the end of an error.
"Mitt Romney 2012, the end of an error"
Romney died?
If this country is stupid enough to elect wooden Mitt after the hard lessons learned from the Bush horror years, than we deserve what we get. I, for one, will be voting for the President.
GoJoBiden - but it will be a shellacking of Romney. He's not good enough to run a sanitation service much less the United States!
lol gojo the rereg .
Remember that the RNC has to support not just Romney but has to pitch in where the money is needed elsewhere. The same for the DNC. The pac money cannot be used for setting up campaign offices and finances that the Romney campaign offices need to run. Pacs can run ads, make phone calls etc. as long as their finances are transparent. So, where has Romney spent his money to get out the vote? How many campaign offices has he opened up in critical states? The Obama campaign is way ahead in all these categories. Maybe just running ads will do it for Romney, but I am betting that he will have to spend big on getting out the vote and setting up campaign offices.
The incumbent ALWAYS has this advantage because their organization is already in place from their previous victory.
@ "Common Man" - Yeah - you keep thinking that! Maybe Willard will invite you over for a bar-b-q! lol
A barbecue would be great I will bring the macaroni salad.
Make sure you get it from someplace upscale, he's too good for cookies from 7-11
Thanks to citizens united, these campaigns are all about the money now.
The advantage the Obama Adm has is Romoney, has no message just the Ryan plan, and the same ole tax cut's and deregulation's that helped us into this economic mess!
Obama/Biden 2012 forward not back!
And Obama I guess has his own budget proposals which have yet to garner a SINGLE vote from EITHER party in Congress. Last one went down 99-0 in the Senate. Yeah, that's a man with a plan for sure!
More of this is forward........
Dumbest post of the day :)
NO MORE Years!
Enough of the Obama lies, broken promises, excuses, finger pointing, blame game :)
Show me the tax returns.
Show me the School records.
Ok. I know the perfect way to guarantee either of the candidates will win in Novemeber. If they take every dollar they have received in campaign contributions and applied it to the US debt, they would be automatic winners. If both of them do it, then maybe the voters will vote based on their vision, rather than what their campaign contribution will buy. It is a "win-win" for everyone and we wouldn't have to watch all the stupid attack ads anymore.
If you think Mitt Romney and Warren Buffet should keep 86% of their earnings while struggling middle class workers are only allowed to keep 73% of their earnings, vote Republican in 2012.
If you have no problem with foreign entities anonymously pouring unlimited, unreported sums of cash into the American political system for the purpose of influencing American elections, vote Republican in 2012.
If you think the largest profit earning corporations in the world (oil producers) should get billions in tax breaks while the Chevy Volt and any alternative energy source are demonized, vote Republican in 2012.
If you want more Americans to die in the middle-east wars, vote Republican in 2012.
If you think "deficits don't matter", vote Republican in 2012.
If you want to stop all progress on health care reform, vote Republican in 2012.
If you think the tea party members of Congress have worked to promote a healthier economic environment, reward them and vote Republican in 2012.
If you think that “tax cuts pay for themselves”, vote Republican in 2012.
If you believe our natural environment has been provided to us by God for the purpose making a select few exceedingly rich - damn the consequences, vote Republican in 2012.
If you believe millions of years of stored carbon being released into our atmosphere over a period of 100 years cannot possibly harm or alter the world in which we live, vote Republican in 2012.
If you believe trickle-down economics has worked well for the United States economy since it became the law of the land somewhere around 1981, vote Republican in 2012.
If you believe that it is not worth investing in education, particularly math and science, vote Republican in 2012.
If you believe women should be denied access to simple but important health care, vote Republican in 2012.
If you believe the American worker should not be allowed to “collectively bargain” with the man, vote Republican in 2012.
If you believe your own children, upon their retirement, should be given a voucher with ever decreasing value, instead of benefitting from an improved Medicare system similar to what we have for seniors today, vote Republican in 2012.
If you greatly fear / distrust / hate Muslims, homosexuals, minorities and immigrants, you should most certainly vote Republican in 2012.
Folks, the current advancement of the above policies are a dark foreboding for America. The writing is on the wall. Remember when you vote, that even Ronald Reagan would be branded a liberal by today’s Republican Party. Please make the right choice and help re-instate some sanity in our political system.
if you are not able to get through life without holding daddy's hand while thinking everyone else should pay for you living expenses the go right ahead and vote for Obama..
I think I will stick with the original idea of some good old fashion rugged individualism with no limits on success...
So republicans hate minorities? damn...guess i better start hating myself, have to love scare tactics..
If you want 4 more years of leaderless squander......
Vote Mr. Obama
If you think this is good and we're making progress.....
Vote Mr. Obama
May excuses, finger pointing and the blame game work well for you :)
"What I meant to say was......" Heard that way too much in the past 3 plus years :)
Guess it was a good thing that Republicans oversaw the end of slavery against the fights and wishes of the Democrats...........
Oh yea, that is the way it went wasn't it...... :)
Upset--do you think before you write this stuff?
on the same comparable basis you should have said
If you want Romney and Buffett to keep 86% of the earnings after the corporations they own keep 60% of their earnings and the middle class keep 100% of their earnings--vote GOP
If you want foreign entities just like they did for Clinton to continue to invest in the US--vote GOP
If you want corporations to employ more people, have greater revenue and have their stock worth more for middle class owners that own them in union pension plans and 401k plans--then vote GOP
If you want to stop class warfare and believe that individual choice makes a difference in a person's economic well being and that equality of outcome is not the right path for this country vote GOP
If you want to stop punishing success and rewarding bad behavior and feel that self reliance and personal accountability play a part in the social safety net vote GOP
If you believe that Reagan and Clinton understood where the middle of this country really stands and we dont need an ideologue for a president--vote GOP
If you believe that the woman should be treated no different than men and should pay for their choices and that woman should be treated no different than children, seniors and anyone with preventive health care issues--vote GOP
If you understand that our seniors own over 80% of the aggregate wealth in this country and understand that we cant continue our current entitlement path--vote GOP
If you understand and want sensible immigration reform and understand we cant continue to fund the benefits for all the world--vote GOP
If you understand that the standard of living of our children and grandchildren will be greatly decreased as a result of the current deficit spending by this president--vote GOP
Kirk - you're out of your mind.
Wow, it amazes me that two people can look at the same facts, yet come up with completely opposite responses. As an independent, I see it completely different from both Kirk and Upset. People need to understand everyone has their own opinion, but without compromise it will never work. No matter how you look at it, the current political environment has to go, GOP or DEM. They have both created the problems we are facing today, along with the indifferent people who vote on feelings, rather than facts.
DEE--could be but do you see how silly it is when you guys put that campaign crap up just saying the opposite? When you read Upsets list the only reaction from fiscal conservatives is rolling eyes and the same reaction of she is out of her mind. Hyperbole and embellishment serve no purpose and it doesnt change voting minds. Better off explaining how a certain policy or position is better than the other.
For example, if you think corporations are bad as upset does, explain why McDonalds is an evil employer or the local guy who owns 10 Dunkin Donuts or why Apple is bad for this country? She obviously thinks lowering the value of the stock of Exxon by taxing it more, helps its union pension plan owners and 401k plan owners and will create more jobs. Dee--can you explain it to me?
You mean entitlements the GOP gave the rich on their taxes?
Immigrants? Hell Romney had them working in his house until the press got wind of it.
Kirk it is just dribble you give.
Independently - True...to a point. I do not like our two party system because both parties are filled with crooks. However I DO understand there are major philosophical differences between liberal and conservative thought and those differences are at the core value level. How do you compromise on something that is one of your core values without compromising who you are?
If you believe murder is wrong do you compromise with a murderer? Sure, there can be compromise on some issue, but when you see a politician compromising on their core values, you have to wonder about their moral compass.
Personally I vote against the incumbent every election year and encourage others to do the same. As long as being a politician is a life long career you will have people in office more interested in how they can have the country service them than they are in serving their country.
JJ, I agree with what you are saying, but this country would not be great without compromise. I do not believe in either parties agendas completely, but I am willing to compromise on quite a bit. If you say nay and I say yea, and neither one of us is willing to compromise, how will that help our country? Every politician is crooked and follows the money, so I do not bet on one team. I vote candidate, not party.
dal, I am fully supportive of a progressive tax system but how is keeping the money you made an entitlement that the GOP gave the rich? So when Albert Pujols makes $20 million a year because people are willing to pay lots of money to go see him play baseball, somehow the GOP is giving him an entitlement by saying he only has to pay over 40% in combined federal and state income taxes? Explain that one to me. I have no clue how paying someone illegal or not to work is now somehow bad? The problem with my dribble is that its the same dribble coming back at us. I agree with Independently Tired and JJMurray that the real answers are in the middle which is why Reagan and Clinton were such effective presidents. Unfortunately our last two presidents were ideologues and look where that got us. Romney seems alot more of an independent with some financial acumen which is what we need right now--instead of worrying about gay marriage (which I support) or the snail darter etc.
Dee - you are correct!
Good one SS--wow you got me
Independently and Kirk - Apparently all three of us are willing to agree that "some" compromise is necessary. I personally think the best results in the last 40 years or so were when Clinton was President with a strong Republican Congress. Mind you, they still lied their butts off about a balanced budget, but at least they acknowledged there was a problem and told us the same lies.
Our debt and deficit spending have become so large that it is now actually frightening to average Americans. People want something done. The left wants more money and the right wants to stop spending. The compromise I would like to see has two parts to it. Since the history of the last 60 years plus shows that professional politicians in DC have not cut their spending at any point during all those decades the first thing we need to see is a no kidding cut in spending. We need evidence that these politicians get it and that they actually reduce how much the government spends next year below what was spent last year. I don't care if it's only a couple of billion, but that needs to happen first. Why? because every time in the past when they have been given more money, they simply find new ways to spend it and while cutting A or B they raise C and D by even more.
AFTER we see a demonstration that they can actually make the difficult call and reduce spending, only then would I say let's consider increasing their revenue. Keep in mind that revenue HAS been increasing since the end of the recession, i.e. for about two years, as the economy slowly is recovering. So despite the calls for more revenue, they have been getting more and have continued to increase deficit spending...or at best keep it at about the same level...which means they have increased their spending because otherwise deficit spending would go down with increased revenue.
This is the kind of compromise we need today...one which none of these professional, career, politicians is willing to actually do.
Romney sucks.
Amazing how much of that lead comes from the 1% who inhabit Hollywood and of course the venture capitalists that aren't named Bain.
The Hillary-ous cartoon of Mr. Obama breast feeding off of George Clooney spoke volumes on big $$ and who hangs with the big money. :)
The REAL Richie Rich :) lol
All4treason, big money from humanitarians vs anonymous big money from industrialists do not really equate. The former donate to causes that they believe in, in the hopes of making society better for all, the latter buy access to power to influence it for their own greedy self interests. Unless you are one of the billionaires buying million plates from the Koch brothers, you should be thankful for the altruistic individuals coughing up 40K at Clooney's table. If you are in the greater than $250K crowd, you didn't get there without public roads, schools, protection, etc. If you, like the vast majority of Americans are in the less than $250K crowd, you're being duped into voting against your own interests. So which is it? Are you a stingy a$$hole who has benefited from living in an America that increasingly favors the rich, with no desire to give back, or a dumba$$ who votes to see his ever harder earned dollars continue to concentrate at the top of the income spectrum?
That's been Obama's entire Presidency, raising money for re-election, so who's surprised? He's been holding fundraisers almost since he raised his hand and promised to attack.....oops, I meand "defend" the Constitution of the United States of America.
Meanwhile the nearest gas under $4.09 a gallon is over 50 miles away, and under $4 is over 90 miles. Milk is up to $4.38 a gallon, all food prices are up, other energy prices are up, and the price of absolutely anything shipped by ship, plane, train, or truck (which is EVERYTHING) in this country, is up.
But oh my goodness, those housing prices and mortgage rates are down, aren't they. Of course almost no one can get a loan anymore because of "Dodd-Frank", and rents are of course going up for those that can't afford to buy a home (ours just went up 14% because of "higher energy costs).
Unemployment is "down" ONLY because of the millions that have actually quit even trying to find a job anymore, or are working part time, neither group of people that is counted as "unemployed".
And the nanny state costs are up everywhere. Food stamps, welfare, energy and housing "subsidies", Medicaid costs...you name it and it's "free" from the government, then it's going up. Meanwhile, we get to PAY for all this "free" stuff.
mmmm mmmm mmmm Barack Hussein Obama mmmm mmmm mmmm
Cheryl- dont know where to begin with your litany of misstatements and falsehoods. Since Frank Dodd has not been implemented yet can your source your statement that loans are not available due to frank dodd? Please- if you cant then the entire column in my opinion is just one falsehood after another
Since Dodd-Frank was signed into LAW on July 21 2010, how do you get that has "not been implemented"?
And could you actually SHOW me where anything in there is a "falsehood" please?
Gas prices are over DOUBLE what they were when Obama took office. He's attacked the Constitution itself with his health care "mandate", not even couting the latest mandate against religous organizations.
Nanny state costs are UP, or haven't you been reading the news lately?
The unemployment numbers have fallen MORE because of millions not being counted as "unemployed" than jobs have been created, or don't you watch the government's own numbers?
A typical liberal, claiming there are "falsehoods", but can't actually point ANY out. Is that how libs plan on winning the election this year? Claiming everything is a "falsehood" while it STARES YOU IN THE FACE?
Cheryl -
Dodd-frank is being rolled out piecemeal, and there have been frequent delays. It is NOT in full effect yet, nor even halfway so. So it has NOT been implemented.
http://www.sec.gov/spotlight/dodd-frank/dfactivity-upcoming.shtml
Detroit-Storm - don't try facts or reason with Cheryl. Her hatred of everything Obama has no reasoning behind it. She has no use for facts and frankly, logic escapes her!
Obama/Biden 2012
"Money-digging" (also sometimes called "glass-looking") was a con or a fraud that was practiced in the Northeastern US at that time. The con man would have a "magic stone" which he would place in his hat, and then pull his hat over his face, excluding all light. The stone would then supposedly shine and the money-digger could locate hidden treasure. People would pay the money-digger to tell them where to dig, but there was another part of the scam. When you got "close" to the treasure, the money-digger would usually tell you that the treasure had moved. The whole thing was like looking into a crystal ball or doing palm-reading. Two interesting quotes:
(1) In an 1859 interview, Martin Harris, one of the three witnesses to the Book of Mormon plates, stated that in Oct 1826 Joseph Smith had been approached by an angel and told to "quit the company of the money-diggers."
Romney just quit!!
"Money-digging" sounds more like what Obama is doing than anything else.
Pushing his "magic stones" and demanding that the nation pay for it all. And when the nation supposedly is getting close to the "treasure", blaming someone or something for the "magic stone" not being there and demanding that the nation spend more.
Obama just quit!!
Mr. Obama has never completed anything in his life, without the help of taxpayer dollars.
He is the prime example of a person totally dependent on government handouts, well an also all of his rich buddies :)
Yes Mr. Obama says, you can have it both ways! :)
Remember......Do as I say, not as I do! Obama 101
All4Areason - let's see President Obama went to school then paid off his students loans with the money he earned. I think you'd have to say he did that on his own. Not like Romney, of course, whose daddy paid his way through school!
On fox news website the comment box no longer appears.
Why is Faux-Noise not allowing Comments on their top “stories”?
Answer: They don’t want people challenging them on their lies and they don’t want their drones entertaining people with all their colorful remarks.
Fox News has suffered a crushing blow to its propaganda machine.
See why
FOXBS
Fox dosen't tell lies....that's why we come to msnbc to read all the lies that is posted by the state run media....
LoL Fox news for dum fux . The only news service that had to go to court to prove they where in the " entertainment " business . Yet still call them selves a " news " service . Lord peeps some of us are NOT 12 .
Fox news lost all credibility years ago. Pretty much from the moment it was started. It was nothing more than an attempt by the right to counter liberal media. But they went to far to the right and became so biased that they are more like comedy than news.