How about all those new polls??

Fox News: Romney down by 9 nationally

Romney foreign policy misstep, a big one

By Jennifer Rubin

A firestorm has broken out in conservative policy circles over the selection of former Bush foreign policy adviser Robert Zoellick as the transition chief for national security for the Romney campaign. Advisers close to the campaign have told Right Turn Zoellick is already working with the campaign and gathering team members.....

As a former managing director of Goldman Sachs, which has been in the spotlight of financial controversies, Zoellick may also be a liability quite apart from his foreign policy views. In addition, in his non-governmental career he also worked as an outside adviser for Enron, the energy trading company that went under and lead to multiple criminal indictments. (Zoellick was not tied to any of the wrongdoing.) Completing a trifecta of controversial associations he also worked for Fannie Mae, as did a number of highly connected Washington insiders who helped Fannie Maeretain its privileged position as a government-supported lender shielded from oversight.

Multiple foreign policy hawks, some of whom have consulted with the Romney team, have voiced their complaints and concerns that Zoellick will color the entire Romney foreign policy apparatus. It also reinforces their concern that Romney’s young national security expert Alex Wong is too inexperienced and unsophisticated to manage a presidential-level foreign policy operation....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/post/romney-foreign-policy-misstep-a-big-one/2012/08/08/701ea0cc-e162-11e1-98e7-89d659f9c106_blog.html?hpid=z2

Apparently Barry thinks MSDNC and Shemp Mathews are a joke and not worth his time.

Shemp must be crushed that he won’t be getting an up-close and personal leg tingle from Barry.

If it saves us from 50 billion more "tingle up the leg" jokes from Joe in Albany, I'm in favor of it!

Well we all know that making the Rich richer will always trickle down to the poor. No really... ;)

Even foxnews poll cant twist this poll. now lets see those taxes Romney.

Maybe he'll be tossed out at the convention when he's polling at the level of congress.

The newest research from Nate has it as:
Today

"Obama chance of winning 73.3% Romney 26.7%"

Projected Winner Obama 303.6

Projected Loser Romney 234.4

Bill in Fairfax --

Not only have two Republican governors ask for the waivers so did ROMNEY in 2005. Really can't make this stuff up. Hypocrites make up the Republican Party.

As the Obama campaign has pointed out, Romney signed a 2005 letter to Sen. Bill Frist (along with Rick Perry, Jeb Bush, Mike Huckabee, Tim Pawlenty, etc.), when welfare programs were being reauthorized under Bush. As the governors lobbied Frist on the bill, they praised “state flexibility” (italics added):

The Senate bill provides states with the flexibility to manage their TANF programs and effectively serve low-income populations. Increased waiver authority,allowable work activities, availability of partial work credit and the ability to coordinate state programs are all important aspects of moving recipients from welfare to work.

So it’s not as if welfare “waiver authority” and changes to “allowable work activities” are facially radical. The memo/letter signify a loosening of work-activity requirements, the scope of which is yet to be determined. Those requirements were tightened under George W. Bush, according to Prof. Brodkin, who says welfare waivers have been used by Reagan, Clinton, and George W. Bush.

“Nobody used waivers more than Ronald Reagan. He used them to set up basically the first experiments with these kinds of work requirements,” Brodkin said, noting that Reagan allowed states to place more restrictions on recipients, not fewer. “Presidents use these waivers all the time.”

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/08/fact-check-does-obama-want-to-gut-welfare-reform/

Uh OH!

Heads explode!

Well done Backhouse, Feisty and Dennis: Hold down the fort, I'm taking the day off. And when the rwnj's come swooping in on FT and do their collapsing thing. Know that most have already read your powerful posts.

I suppose if you have no record to run on, continuing to bash and demean the opposition works.

I wonder how long that would last before people start asking about the real issues of the presidental race.

Bill, Fairfax VA

Gutting the Landmark Welfare Law

Bill, what part of "HHS Did What Mitt Romney And Several Other GOP Governors Wanted Them To Do" do you not understand?

Go find the 2005 letter that was signed by Mitt Romney, George Pataki, Jeb Bush, Mike Huckabee, Haley Barbour, Arnold Schwarzeneggar, Linda Lingle and Kenny Guinn in which they requested exactly what the July HHS memo said...give control of the work requirement to the states if they feel they can do a better job of managing it.

Even foxnews poll cant twist this poll. now lets see those taxes Romney.

Maybe he'll be tossed out at the convention when he's polling at the level of congress.

That was the shocker for me too! I saw the Fox Poll yesterday and thought it was a trick. Still think maybe it is some kind of trick to amp up conservatives but the poll suggests people (independents really) just don't like Romney and are breaking for Obama. Hmmm...

WELL DUH! Mr. Romney. No discussion of your taxes, your predatory business practices or anything else that would help the American people define you as a candidate? DUH! I guess you'd like that a lot.

But it ain't gonna happen Bubba.

WHERE are those TAX RETURNS? Let's see them. That will end the discussion once and for all.

Just how many jobs did you outsource overseas?

How about all those companies you gutted putting tens of thousands of Americans out of jobs so you could line your already gold-lined pockets some more?

How about those Swiss bank accounts, those Cayman accounts and how many other?

Geez, I don't seem to have any of those and my tax rate is a 34%, no 13%.

We're not going to stop talking about those things because they show just how out of touch you are with the American people.

You are one of the elite 1% Mr. Romney. You have NOTHING in common with the rest of us who struggle each day to make a living, pay our bills and find a way to pay for our over-priced medical care on far less than the single month of the INTEREST on your wealth.

You want to do something for America? Bring your money HOME! To AMERICA! Pay a fair tax rate on it and invest it in creating some JOBS for the American people. You're supposed to be a job CREATOR, not a job CREMATOR so let's see you put your money where your mouth is!

Then we'll see how we feel about your President aspirations.

You go Mr. President. You are one of us. YOU are what makes America great!

You have the vision for our future that WE THE PEOPLE understand and support.

Obama/Biden 2012

NJNB-

Once again a double-standard for Mitt Romney and his supporters. Although I don't agree with the afore-mentioned ad (which by the way has NEVER been aired) I fail to see how having someone on a conference call whose story is later used by a Super PAC in an ad against Mitt Roney is an example of "blatant" coordination.

A pro-Romney Super PAC recycled the entire "saved the girl" ad used by Romney in a prior election, using the same footage and almost exactly the same text.

Romney also invited several of the big donors to pro-Romney Super PACS to his Utah weekend, where they were free to attend meetings on his camaign strategy.

How are those not glaringly more blatant examples of coordination between a Super PAC and a candidate?

joe in Albany

Apparently Barry thinks MSDNC and Shemp Mathews are a joke and not worth his time.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That's the best you guys can come up with is that President Obama has turned down an offer by NBC???

Wow...Getting desperate for the right wing fundi crowd...

Bill in Farifax,

I do appreciate good research.

Your well research point proves that Romney's welfare ad is the dog whistle of the week. Drag out the old GOP talking point.

Well ,he will need more than this topic to get his campaign going according to the polls today.

I hope Bill, with your big interest in welfare to work law , next time you can explain how block grants work in states. Review the resources needed by states to efficiently use the tools they have to help folks get the education they need, the day care needed, and the various tax credits companies receive to hire those moving from welfare to work. The waivers are a small part of this.

Your crtique that:

. On an issue as important as this, an issue where Congress should most certainly have an opportunity to weigh in, the Obama crowd is using legalistic sleight of hand to impose their will by administrative fiat.

is the unrealistic.

Congress cannot do anything, they are frozen in time. They have totally given up their duties to provide any meaningful legislation.

They are resting on their 12% approval rating as they left DC for their much needed recess for five weeks.( Sarcasm intended in this last statement.)

Pardon the mixed metaphors, but it looks like the SS Mitt has sprung a major leak; and in response all the little mittbots are shoveling the Rafalca manure out as fast as they can this morning.

Ron -- Have a nice day off.

Liberals profess to be the champions of the poor and downtrodden, but if this were true wouldn't they be giving the people that they characterize as such a hand up? Wouldn't they want to establish an environment that encouraged success rather than one that denegrates it? Instead, they implement policies that assume the absolute worst in human nature and in practice create government dependence that only preserves the status quo while conveniently maintaining their voting base.

....

What does this mean?

What this basically means is that you don't really understand how to put forward a reasoned argument. Your paragraphs each consist of an expressing a personal opinion, and in the next paragraph you assume that your opinion is true.

Nice flight of fancy, but it doesn't work that..

Everyone is already dependent on the government. Do you think Mitt Romney could have made his millions in the libertarian paradise of an African 3rd world country?

The government isn't a foreign entity.

Governments are people too, my friend.

The government is YOU.

The more America gets a good look at Willard the more they will say; "Sorry but it's NOT your TURN"!

Obama needs to spend more time helping elect more Democrats to the Senate and the House and less worrying about himself.

His own job looks reasonably secure, but if he loses the Senate, he is still screwed.

Geo...you do understand that the reason fewer women are working is because the Republican war on public sector workers...which happen to be teachers, nurses..more traditionally women. remember your guys cheering with every announcement of, " we shed 10,000 public sector jobs last week. " dang, those teachers. Obama had a job plan that had the majority support of all americans, even GOPers. Your Repubs said, " hell no, we don't want the economy recovering. " Ok, they only said the first 2 words, but meant the rest. We have 30 straight months of positive job growth...would you prefer going back to losing the 800,000 a month when the President took office? Don't forget, the ONLY reason george w created any jobs was ...he increased public sector jobs.

And Romney is leading by wide margins in fundraising. What does that tell you? The elite rich are desperate to get him in there to save millions in taxes but the heart of America is going to President Obama.

Nobody is being fooled by this fool called Mitt who is a destroyer and no friend of people who work for a living.

Skip -- You wrote and I agree:

WELL DUH! Mr. Romney. No discussion of your taxes, your predatory business practices or anything else that would help the American people define you as a candidate? DUH! I guess you'd like that a lot.

But it ain't gonna happen Bubba.

Romney's suggestion below is hilarious.

Romney also said in the interview he would like a pledge (of sorts) with Obama that there be no “personal” attack ads. “[O]ur campaign would be-- helped immensely if we had an agreement between both campaigns that we were only going to talk about issues and that attacks based upon-- business or family or taxes or things of that nature.”

What does he think this is a cocktail party? LOL He's running for President for crying out loud. Sheesh, he best get with the program here.

On the first day of a Philosophy course that I had taken, the professor asked the class by a show of hands to indicate how many of us thought that man was basically good. Out of a class of about 35-40, I was surprised to find that as I looked around, mine was the only hand raised...

Well, what else would your expect from one of the dozens of Bible Thumper supposed institutions of higher learning, where you are told hourly, that man is evil and needs redemption, or man is full of sin and needs a cleansing, or any of that other nonsense they promote.

What a foolish or actually, a simply inane statement to open with to start some ridiculous rant against liberals.

The headline would have been closer to accurate if it had read; "it's not even a race". Those of us who are out among voters can't be surprised. Even in the south, the bastion of republican tea baggerism, there is much cussing and gnashing of teeth over the selection of Romney, the tea baggers, and the republicans in general. Waay too many express seething hatred for the whole "shooting match". One borderline racist, and very prominent metro Atlanta businessman recently told me ; while He disliked the President, He hated what the republicans had done to the country more, hated Romney, and the likes of "Paul Ryan even more, and dearly loved His country, therefore, He, and His family would be voting for President Obama. Course, He cautioned me not to tell anyone. Said, if found out, it could ruin Him. There is more of this all over the South than any poll will indicate. Many more of the republican ilk simply will not vote. Many will not like or believe this. Good for them!

Facts are so liberal so they must be wrong.

Sour Grapes folks.

You know what is funny. People come to Media Sites to complain about the Media. It's like giving money to a bank that is screwing you on fees.

These are facts and or information not 5 opinionated Friends. Deal with it or turn the Channel.

FR:

Speaking of "crazy" things outside groups come up with. The Romney campaign and RNC have done a good job pushing and highlighting the Priorities ad, which goes too far.

So, it's a fact. The ad "goes to far" because Chuck Todd or somebody says so. But no matter how many outright lies Romney spews forth, the punditocracy just turns a blind eye, or reports them as a "he-said-he-said" story, the way they've done with Romney's race-baiting lie about Obama wanting to pass out welfare check to (black) people who don't work, or the lie based on Romney's doctored video with Obama's "didn't build that (infrastructure)".

But when an ordinary American voices his OPINION of what he thinks of Romney, the pundits all pounce, even though there was nothing factually inaccurate in what the guy in the ad said, unlike the Romney ads. A few months back there was another ad where another man who had the misfortune of working for a Bain company called Mitt a "vampire." The media howled in outrage over that one, too, even though there were no false claims made in the ad.

Maybe Romney is dropping in the polls because the public is beginning to tune out the "impartial" corporate media pundits and their self-proclaimed "fact checkers," who mostly seem to judge what opinions are "out of bounds" and who don't seem to have a good understanding of what a "fact" actually is.

It's clear that the media doesn't like ordinary people speaking their minds if what's on their minds is a loathing for Mitt Romney based on the unpleasant personal experience of getting shafted by him and his corporate cronies at Bain.

To be continued (next week)

Oh, and please spare us from your Breitbart Bullcrap. True conservatives wouldn't even buy into your Fools Gold blathering definition of what it means to be progressive or liberal.

Fool's Gold, I give you FDR & JFK. Save the continued next week. Your premise is false. You're an idiot.

Dennis, Columbus, Ohio

How about all those new polls??

Fox News: Romney down by 9 nationally

Since it's impossible for Romney to be that far behind Obama, the only explanation is that Fox News is part of the Biased Liberal Media. What a shocker that is!

So true the collapsing cowards had a field day yesterday!

Fools Gold -- What garbage you write. Based on false assumptions/suppositions that combine collectively to form one huge smelly garbage heap.

You have proven yourself to be an arrogant FOOL.

You libbies are really banking on those polls but the PEOPLE of this country have yet to speak and that is something that cannot be scewed as polls easily can.

You do realize, don't you that the polls are conducted amongst PEOPLE? Of this country?

Maybe you don't.....

usa1967 - who do you think they talk to in polls? It IS the people. Your post makes no sense at all.

Brianb - when you have to depend on a movie based on lies to promote your candidate that speaks pretty well for who you're running. Yeah, you have to put your hopes in a slander piece about President Obama that has already received scathing comments about it's lack of honesty. But, that's all the GOP has - so I'm sure you're fine with it! Lies, deceit, slander - because you've got no candidate to run.

Obama/Biden 2012

Yes, I do realize that polls can be skewed easily by whoever conducts the so called poll amongst people.

Irish21: could you join us in the REAL world? Your President has been in office for almost four years. He has shown strength of purpose that whole time.

Americans know who he is, and are beginning to make it known that they will support him on election day.

Polls mean nothing.

Seeking Sanity.....maybe I should have said ALL the people, not just the lopsided sample the liberal state run media talk to.

Only morons rely on polls for making such claims as Obama is pulling ahead.

Finally, someone calling out these moronic RWNJ's for what they truly are - living, breathing poll prostitutes. It is funny, as Romney sinks like an anchor to the bottom of the deep blue see, these right wing freaks backtrack from polls like they are poison. Why last month, they couldn't find a poll they hated. Today, all polls are meaningless. Reminds me of how the GOP handled the economy - deficits/debt don't matter, until they do, and then again, according to the Ryan budget plan, they don't.

The third-party candidate who could derail Mitt Romney

By Scott Bomboy | National Constitution Center – Wed, Aug 8, 2012

A virtually unknown presidential candidate in Virginia could derail Mitt Romney’s bid for president. But how rare is it for a third-party candidate to influence a race for president?

Currently, Virgil Goode, a candidate running in Virginia, has about 9 percent of the projected vote in the upcoming November election, according to polling data.

With Mitt Romney needing Virginia—especially if President Barack Obama can take Ohio or Florida—Goode could become the little-known spoiler in the national election.

The former congressman has a strong enough following in rural Virginia to take votes away from Romney, and Goode has no plans to end his low-budget campaign....

http://news.yahoo.com/third-party-candidates-affected-presidential-history-101803297.html

Things are not looking good for Romney in Virginia.

JoeNY,

Romney should broker a deal on releasing his tax returns?

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL, now that is desperation!

Dont_carry— It's not looking good for Romney anywhere. People ARE listening and they don't like a thing he's saying - even when he changes what he's saying from day to day.

They don't like his cavalier attitude and his actual dislike of being around the "common people." You can see he's uncomfortable and feels ill at ease at every event. And, he wants to lead our country?

Again, THIS is the BEST the GOP has?????

Obama/Biden 2012

Projected winner means nothing... It's election day and voting that counts...

Mitch McConnell said four years ago, that his main goal was to make Obama a one term president.

Well, my goal and that of most Americans is to get President Obama re-elected...

President Obama is President of all the people, not just a select few...

Sick - oh but the GOP ads lying about Obama are okay? Why doesn't it surprise me you have no problems with that.

Brianb - again, the movie is a disgusting lie and everyone associated with it knows it. Why doesn't it surprise me that you're just fine with that and banking on it to get your lowlife candidate elected. It's all you have and to hell with the truth. That means nothing to the GOP.

Obama/Biden 2012

After four years of fear and smear, lies and obstruction from the gop you'd think they would have run somebody that wasn't complete crap, and mitt the twit was the best pick from the clown car of candidates.

For those states like Ohio where the gop is fighting hard to suppress your vote, get pissed, and take it to the voting booth in Nov.

Vote Every republican out of Every office Every chance you get. Vote!

Obama: Let's repeat auto industry success

President Obama, while villifying Mitt Romney for opposing the auto industry bailout, bragged about the success of his decision to provide government assistance and said he now wants to see every manufacturing industry come roaring back.

http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012/08/obama-lets-repeat-auto-rescue-with-every-manufacturing-131566.html#comments

But from GMs latest earnings

The engine that powers General Motors is running rough. And if the company doesn't tune it up soon, GM's comeback from bankruptcy is in danger of stalling.

The Detroit automaker said Thursday that its second-quarter net profit fell 41 percent on a big loss in Europe. And there are signs that North America, GM's main income source, also is slowing. Profits there have fallen for two straight quarters, the first time that's happened since the company left bankruptcy in 2009.

The results are another sign that the U.S. auto industry, a bright spot in the economy for two years, is heading into a rough patch.

GM's profit from April through June dropped to $1.5 billion, $1 billion less than the same quarter a year earlier. It had a $361 million pretax loss in Europe and $19 million of red ink in South America. In North America, pretax profits fell nearly 13 percent to about $2 billion. International profits, including Asia, also dropped, by 3 percent to $557 million.

The company is predicting lower third-quarter profits in North America as it incurs manufacturing and advertising costs for new models. Also troubling was GM's market share. It fell in all four of the company's regions, including nearly a two-point drop in the U.S. to 18.2 percent.

CEO Dan Akerson told analysts that GM's performance was worse than last year in most key areas.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/02/gm-earnings-q2-2012_n_1732147.html?utm_hp_ref=business

All this from a company with billions of tax loss carry-overs that inflate net profit, no start-up costs and no long term debt because of the bailout. It is also heavily reliant on one large customer, the Federal Government.

What the left can't seem to understand that bad products don't sell in the free market no matter how much help the government provides.

On the other hand you vilify the notion that if GM went through a legal bankruptcy, its management team would have been completely revamped and the ongoing operational costs been brought into line with the rest of the industry. You know something that a company called Bain were very successful at. But no, it's better to borrow Chinese money and drop 60K a job into a hole that will just need more in a few years.

@ Brian...in a sence your right about polls but don't use the latest numbers as you only point of debate. i'm in this blog everyday and trust me when i say your side doesn't waist anytime at all when poll numbers show an uptick in romneys favor. Just like everything else when you guys do it, it ok but when the other side does it, it's a sin.

Yours and the gop's hypocrisy no's no bounds.

I can't bear to vote for Romney or Obama. I'm voting for Hillary Clinton.

Romney is wishy washy and the most indecisive person i have ever seen. He can't even make up his mind on a running mate. And he can not stand by one cause and own it! How did he ever get this far? Is beyond me!

All any American has to ask themselves is, What would a Mitt Romney presidency really be like?

More Trickle Down?

More Outsourcing?

A Larger divide between the rich and poor?

More Senseless wars?

WOW! Tough choice in November!

Polls are like noses, everyone has one.

Only when the votes are in will we see how america votes...

If Obama wins expect a major exodus of John Galts... (in layman's terms, count on more business's leaving America.)

No business stays where it cannot afford to do business.

Wow... some long winded rants today, let me apologize in advance.

I find it interesting that some politicians really piss some people off. Tricky Dick did that for me, every word out of his mouth struck me as deceitful and disingenuous and I totally despised the guy while in office, while Jack Kennedy took on the mantel of a minor deity and I still morn his assassination. Obama on the other hand disappoints this soul, I guess primarily because he chose a more conservative and pragmatic path than I was hoping for, but don't get me wrong, he gets %100 of my half-hearted support. Romney on the other hand doesn't strike me ether way and as a mater of fact, I sorta feel sorry for him, spending his whole life wheeling and dealing other peoples money, squirreling away huge quantities of it in the process. Somehow I get the feeling Mitt doesn't view money as a tool to be used to set people to work but rather as a score card by which you can measure your status. But what really stacks the deck in favor of Barack Obama is the circle of friends these guys associate themselves with. A great example is his choice of Hilliary as Secretary of State. A brilliant political move that I believe started the slow burn conservatives have been enduring for these past four years. Suck on it Ann and Rush!!

Romney on the other hand has had to snuggled up to a busload of neo-cons, I think mainly because he has no other choice. Talk about having to sleep in the bed you made!!! Like I said, I feel sorry for the guy.

There are some things that I would like to know about Mr. Romney, but he NEVER answers a question directly. He immediately goes into deflect and misdirect mode. I find that phoney at best.

Just answer the goddamn questions Mitt, what are you afraid of?

What is it about Obama that has libs so blind. If the repubs were all about destroying the middle class (obviously another absurd accusation thrown out by libs) then the repubs would be all for Obama. He's doing a terrific job of tearing down the middle class all by himself and doesn't need repubs help. Let's look at what he's done so far. All those coal miners? They must be "rich" because Obama's putting them out of work at an alarming rate and the libs think that is great! All the construction workers that are a core of the dem party? He's not hiring them either. There's a pipeline to be built and he'd rather have them on welfare than be working. That trillion dollars in stimulus that was supposed to hire the blue collar, middle class to rebuild the nations infrastructure? Well, as Obama said, "I guess the jobs weren't so shovel ready after all," said with a chuckle and "screw you" attitude towards the middle class workers that didn't get hired. All those middle class workers in the oil fields and on the oil rigs? He put a lot of them out of work too. All this and more and libs still think Obama's on the side of the middle class?

Oh, and don't forget the heavy taxes he's raised on the middle class too. It's called inflation! Maybe the middle class doesn't need to eat. But, if you've been to the grocery store lately you know that prices are skyrocketing. Of course the politicians have disingenuously excluded food prices from the inflation index. But, the average person on the street knows better. Oh, and do you work for a company, industry or state that received a waiver from the Obamacare requirements? It doesn't take a genius to figure out that you are about to lose your health insurance once the waivers expire. Why were there waivers granted if Obamacare was such a great law?

As I said, you want to save the middle class then you need to vote Obama and his ilk out of the WH and Congress.

Joe NY -

Romney has to decide if he's going to counter punch the President or keep putting up soft defense.

Counter-punch? Romney punched first. He launched a series of negative ads (around 70% negative), while pro-Obama ads for the first few months were around 70% positive. Apparently ROmney can dish it out but he can't take it.

Since the President is getting traction on his tax returns, offer a deal- 4 more years of tax returns for all of the Presidents college records (financial, applications, transcripts, etc.).

What a deluded idea - Romney is already behind by not disclosing his birth certificate and putting in writing all the details of his life growing up. How about Romney releases his tax returns like the President already has, then we can talk about college transcripts. Face it - the President has dealt with questions about his citizenship, his patriotism, and his religion - ROmney hasn't faced NEAR that level of scrutiny.

The Romney campaign has to choose to go low blow or high road

What campaign have you been watching? Romney's VERY FIRST campaign ad used President Obama's words out of context, making a McCain quote look like it came from Pres. Obama. Pro-Romney ads continue to use the Presidents words out of context, distorting the facts and misleading the public. Pro-Obama ads haven't taken advantage of Romney's many gaffes or launched ANY personal attacks - no mention of his religion, his family, etc.

Romney needs to hit Obama on his record, his lack of availability to the media, FOIA requests, comments regarding going around Congress, comments regarding the success of the stimulus, his lack of taking questions and having press conferences, and his "Chicago" tactics.

Most of those items have already been tried - haven't you seen the pro-Romney's Super PAC ads?

Bill, Fairfax VA

Nice try Bill.

Dont_carry_it_all

Not only have two Republican governors ask for the waivers so did ROMNEY in 2005.

So if president Obama really gutted" the welfare reform law then isn't it because Romney (among many other Republicans) asked for it?

Food prices are sky high world wide. It's not ODAMA'S fault.Doughts in the middle of this country is why food prices have gone up'

All any American has to ask themselves is, What would a Mitt Romney presidency really be like?

And that would be different for the last four years how?

Food stamps and Medicaid make up a large--and growing--chunk of the more than 100 million recipients. "Among the major means tested welfare programs, since 2000 Medicaid has increased from 34 million people to 54 million in 2011 and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, or food stamps) from 17 million to 45 million in 2011," says the Senate Budget Committee. "Spending on food stamps alone is projected to reach $800 billion over the next decade."

We will still have Harry Reid defending every last cent of government spending

“The mean-spirited bill, H.R. 1 … eliminates the National Endowment of the Humanities, National Endowment of the Arts,” said Reid. “These programs create jobs. The National Endowment of the Humanities is the reason we have in northern Nevada every January a cowboy poetry festival. Had that program not been around, the tens of thousands of people who come there every year would not exist.”

We will still have Barack Obama defend every last cent of government assistance

"And at a moment when homegrown energy is creating new jobs in states like Colorado and Iowa, my opponent wants to end tax credits for wind energy producers,” he said. “Think about what that would mean for a community like Pueblo. The wind industry supports about 5,000 jobs across this state. Without those tax credits, 37,000 American jobs, including potentially hundreds of jobs right here, would be at risk.”

But that's a lie. Wind energy has already lost 10,000 jobs and needs the government to stay alive.

But at the other end of the green energy movement, when ethanol was the a the left's answer to green energy

Global pressure on the United States to relax its ethanol quota mounted on Thursday as the top United Nations food official said an "immediate, temporary suspension" of the mandate could help head off another world food crisis.

As the surge in corn prices revives a fierce food versus fuel debate, José Graziano da Silva, the director-general of the UN's Food and Agriculture Organization, wrote in the Financial Times newspaper that competition for a U.S. corn crop that has been decimated by drought was only going to intensify.

"Much of the reduced crop will be claimed by biofuel production in line with U.S. federal mandates, leaving even less for food and feed markets," he wrote in an op-ed just a day before the U.S. government issues a pivotal crop report that is expected to show U.S. corn output falling to the smallest in six years and stockpiles at near record lows.

http://en-maktoob.news.yahoo.com/easing-u-ethanol-mandate-help-prevent-food-crisis-101049936.html

Think we'll see an EPA mandate that actually makes sense before November?

This President has not seen a government grant, program or bailout that he didn't like. And like most politicians once the program is in place he runs on the platform that the other guy will take it away. We are running a deficit that is approximately 10% of GDP, and the debt if not 100% will be by next year.

Please tell me how electing Barack Obama will stop us from becoming Greece. Where in his platform does raise taxes enough AND cut spending enough to even slow down the deficit, never mind the debt?

Why, when this politician runs around the country promising the moon to every constituency he can find, should I believe he can even lower the growth in spending, never mind spending itself.

And at the end of the day who do you think can pay for all of these dreams? $1T+ deficits for every year of his presidency, with more and more promises, and no talk of sacrifices.

Reality is about to bite.

Richard

your post is amazing. A honest man can not get ahead in this Country. Do you think people like Romney or the Koch Brother got ahead by being honest. Hell no they didn't. Romney Stole his money just like that guy that bought Eastern Air lines. Romney bought company's there needed short term lands and couldn't get them. But these company's had something Romney wanted. Fully funded retirement's. That was what he was looking for. He stole those retirements from those people. Those people worked for years for that money and Good old Mitt, stole it from them. And then the tax payers got to pick up the tab for so Mitt and his rich friends could make billions. So in reality Mitt stole from all of us! You see to Mitt and People like the Koch brothers, spending a little money to get a return sometime of 100% or more is just good business. So what if it puts people out of a job and on to the streets. All this money the Koch's and others like them are spending is to put someone in the white house that will let them make more money. For every Million they give the Mitten, they expect 100 million. I say we let these people spend all that money and we elect President Obama again. People Obama has been cleaning up the mess the Rep's left him and us. The Rep's have let this rescission go on for 4 years just to keep Obama from getting re elected. Mitch McConnell said it flat out. His only job was to make sure Obama didn't get re elected. They want him to fail. That is just wrong. Un American. Obama was Elected by We The People. Its no wounder that the rest of the world think we are stupid. Of course McConnell is from the South. We are still fighting that civil war. It must just be killing McConnell and other Southerners to see a black family living in the White house. That wasn't suppose to ever happen in this country. I say Re elect President Obama. He is a good and decent man. He has a lovely family. His wife is a strong woman and I love the work she does for the family's of the service members, and with children's health. We need people like that as leaders. People that lead by example. Not the ones that say do as I say, Not as I do. Vote Obama

I have to laugh when I see well thought-out/written comments, such as Backhouse's have been "collapsed by the community"! I can only wonder if there are legions of paid watch dogs by Mitt that will not tolerate honest discussion. Sadly, I know that there are way too many unpaid Republicans that would silence anyone that disagrees with their point of view.

I have a question for those that allow the collapsing of comments; what was wrong with Backhouse’s comment above? It had value, it was not inflammatory (unless making a truthful statement is now “inflammatory”), and it was not advertisement. So, why do you allow honest dialogue to be hidden from the community you have created?

Surely there must be something you could do; e.g. monitor what is being “collapsed” and if not appropriate consider blocking the account of those that would squash free speech (at least if it was done with some level of frequency)? Knowing this was at least a possibility might result in a better place for discussion.

As always, good post Backhouse!

We need people like that as leaders. People that lead by example. Not the ones that say do as I say, Not as I do. Vote Obama

So why did Obama take every deduction he could, just like Romney, to lwer his tax rate to 20% of $750,000. If he led by example, he would have taken the standard deductions and paid 35% on all income above $250,000, and he could have voluntary to the deficit to ensure his effective rate was 30%.

If this is what he wants the 1% to do would this not be leading by example?

So, after carpet bombing attack ads during the Republican primaries, Mitt wants to take his ball and go home. What a joke.

Since the President is getting traction on his tax returns, offer a deal- 4 more years of tax returns for all of the Presidents college records (financial, applications, transcripts, etc.). Say I'll give you 4 years for your records.

NYJoe, how about we get Romney's tax returns AND his college transcripts too? We'd like to know how he did in school too and how Romney got his deferments for Vietnam running around in France.

By STEVE PEOPLES 06/05/12 12:53 PM ET

Though an early supporter of the Vietnam War, Romney avoided military service at the height of the fighting after high school by seeking and receiving four draft deferments, according to Selective Service records. They included college deferments and a 31-month stretch as a "minister of religion" in France, a classification for Mormon missionaries that the church at the time feared was being overused. The country was cutting troop levels by the time he became eligible for the draft, and his lottery number was not called.

President Barack Obama, Romney's opponent in this year's campaign, did not serve in the military either. The Democrat, 50, was a child during the Vietnam conflict and did not enlist when he was older.

But because Romney, now 65, was of draft age during Vietnam, his military background – or, rather, his lack of one – is facing new scrutiny as he courts veterans and makes his case to the nation to be commander in chief. He's also intensified his criticism lately of Obama's plans to scale back the nation's military commitments abroad, suggesting that Romney would pursue an aggressive foreign policy as president that could involve U.S. troops.

A look at Romney's relationship with Vietnam offers a window into a 1960s world that allowed him to avoid combat as fighting peaked. His story also demonstrates his commitment to the Mormon Church, which he rarely discusses publicly but which helped shape his life.

Romney's recollection of his Vietnam-era decisions has evolved in the decades since, particularly as his presidential ambitions became clear.

He said in 2007 – his first White House bid under way – that he had "longed in many respects to actually be in Vietnam." But his actions, Selective Service records and previous statements show little interest in joining a conflict that ultimately claimed more than 58,000 American lives.

Still, he repeatedly cites his commitment to public service and the nation's military while campaigning for president.

"Greatness in a people, I believe, is measured by the extent to which they will give themselves to something bigger than themselves," Romney said in San Diego last week to a Memorial Day crowd of thousands, flush with military veterans of all ages.

He did not address his own Vietnam history that day. And his campaign has refused to comment publicly on the subject over the past week.

Political rivals, military veterans among them, suggest that Romney's own decision not to serve in the military is in conflict with his pro-military rhetoric.

"He didn't have the courage to go. He didn't feel it was important enough to him to serve his country at a time of war," said Jon Soltz, who served two Army tours in Iraq and is the chairman of the left-leaning veterans group VoteVets.org.

Critics note that the candidate is among three generations of Romneys – including his father, former Michigan Gov. George Romney, and five sons – who were of military age during armed conflicts but did not serve.

As a presidential candidate in 2007, Romney told The Boston Globe he was frustrated, as a Mormon missionary, not to be fighting alongside his countrymen.

"I was supportive of my country," Romney said. "I longed in many respects to actually be in Vietnam and be representing our country there, and in some ways it was frustrating not to feel like I was there as part of the troops that were fighting in Vietnam."

Indeed, Romney strongly supported the war at first. As a freshman at Stanford University, he protested anti-war activists. In one photo, he's shown in a small crowd of students, smiling broadly, wearing a sport jacket and holding up a sign that says, "Speak Out, Don't Sit In."

But the frustration he recalled in 2007 does not match a sentiment he shared as a Massachusetts Senate candidate in 1994, when he told The Boston Herald, "I was not planning on signing up for the military."

"It was not my desire to go off and serve in Vietnam, but nor did I take any actions to remove myself from the pool of young men who were eligible for the draft," Romney told the newspaper.

But that's exactly what Romney did, according Selective Service records. He received his first deferment for "activity in study" in October 1965 while at Stanford.

As Soltz notes, the younger Romney was under no obligation to seek a college-related deferment.

"Vietnam was a war that the poor and the people who couldn't afford to go to college had to go to," Soltz said.

After his first year at Stanford, Romney qualified for 4-D deferment status as "a minister of religion or divinity student." It was a status he would hold from July 1966 until February 1969, a period he largely spent in France working as a Mormon missionary.

He was granted the deferment even as some young Mormon men elsewhere were denied that same status, which became increasingly controversial in the late 1960s. The Mormon church, a strong supporter of American involvement in Vietnam, ultimately limited the number of church missionaries allowed to defer their military service using the religious exemption.

But as fighting in Vietnam raged, Romney spent two and a half years trying to win Mormon converts in France. About that same time, Romney's father would famously speak out against Vietnam, declaring that he had been "brainwashed" by military officials into supporting the conflict.

Young Romney's comments indicated his support had waned, too.

"If it wasn't a political blunder to move into Vietnam, I don't know what is," a 23-year-old Romney would tell The Boston Globe in 1970 during the fifth year of his deferment.

His 31-month religious deferment expired in early 1969. And Romney received an academic studies deferment for much of the next two years. He became available for military service at the end of 1970 when his deferments ran out and he could have been drafted. But by that time, America was beginning to slice its troop levels, and Romney's relatively high lottery number – 300 out of 365 – was not called.

Romney - the scary one.

Guy,

I completely agree with you.

Collapsing the first post of a thread is just an attempt to make mischief by the trolls.

RCP has the President at 247 Electoral votes, Gov Romney 191 Toss-ups 100.

Northstar and Guy -- Let's just call them what they are:

Collapse holes!

is the contention that only post from the left are collapsed? i don't find that to be true.

i find it easier to ignore those that are predictable in their posts and show little or no thought of their own, sanity is my classic example. i do on occasion mark a post as inflammatory. if there are enough of those does a post get collapsed?

Wow, all of a sudden, the right claims polls don't matter.... chuckle...

The poll in November certainly does, and they can take that to court... (history will repeat)

Romney's message is all over the field, unable to focus on what matters most to Americans because of his refusal to release tax returns, possibly giving Harry Reid's claim some weight with independent voters. Is what he's hiding worth losing the presidency over?... He seems to think so...

Where are the specifics of Romney's tax policy? Does he truly believe he can be elected president while being evasive on substance? His own economic policy chief admits the numbers don't crunch...

chuck: I feel really sorry for you. You should see a shrink about your depression and delusions. With that kind of attitude you will never get ahead. Got any proof that Romney stole money from anybody. That's a pretty serious accusation and I'm sure you would never make it with out proof. Then again, libs do that all the time. I realize you are a die-hard fan of Alinsky. How about doing something different for a change. How about explaining what policies Obama has put in place or has indicated he wants to put in place that will really help the middle class? If you can come up with one you would be the first to respond to the challenge. Heck, anyone else who cares to respond I'd love to hear it. I know it won't happen because libs have no idea what works and what doesn't and they know that Obama hasn't done anything for them, except for the libs who are close to Obama and Obama has been successful in pushing taxpayer money towards them, like Solyndra.

witch -- good post. i have been asking for what seems like weeks for someone to help me understand why President Obama should be elected. No takers.

my conclusion is there are no strong Obama supporters here only those that look on Obama as the lesser of the two evils.

If a post isn't inflammatory, or in other words, doesn't use personal attacks then it should stand, regardless of what side of aisle they come from.

Gee BriBri - I am neither pissed or desperate. What does show through is your desperate attempt to pass yourself off as a master debater, yet all that comes across is you are a master-baiter, as evidenced by your sticky keyboard. Now that we have that cleared up, tell us again about all those polls that were at the core of your Bible Thumping selves two weeks ago, but are today, false idols. Seems you folks love a poll showing your candidate staying even, but hate any poll showing him sinking.

@Noah

Go ahead and call me a racist, bigoted, homophobe, right wing extremist, right wing nitwit, wing nut, Neanderthal, red-neck, religious zealot, GNOPer, Tea Bagger, RepublicOn, Greasy Old Parasite, “Grandma over the Cliff thrower”, “Poor Starver”, etc.

Consider it done. As they say, if the shoe fits... I see you refuse to talk about the conservative agenda and hijacking the GOP party to push it forward. Bullet points from that agenda - more corporate welfare, more welfare for the rich. Strangle/starve all other classes. Eliminate education. And of course my favorite, enact laws that legalize murdering your neighbor. Fun, fun, fun.

Brianb-999431

I Remember... he who laughs last, laughs best!

I finally found one thing in all of those driveling comments I can agree on. He who laughs last, laughs best. WE WILL be laughing when Romney LOSES in November.

You have the tail wind now Mr President. Keep going stronger and harder then before.

Obama/Biden 2012

.

Byron -

You do realize, don't you that the polls are conducted amongst PEOPLE? Of this country?

Maybe you don't.....

Maybe you don't understand the science behind polling, either, if you think an individual poll means anything. Especially a "national" poll that shows no impact of the electoral college. The only individual polls that have an effect will occur on election day. We'll be saying "So long!" to the leeching first lady and her husband in January 2013.

Sorry Colorado Man, I know you are desperate for some good news, but the electoral map is also tilted in favor of the Democrats. While it is harder to gauge how individual states will go and thus who will get the electoral votes, right now significantly more electoral votes are solid Dem or lean Dem than vise versa.

Wow, I got collapsed! YOU DO READ WHAT I WRITE.

hahahahaha. I consider it a badge of honor that the RWNJ's found my comments worthy of collapse!

Yeeeeehaw! Have a great weekend everybody, we've got'em on the run.

Obama/Biden 2012

Stepping back from political sides, Romney has a few overall problems that will continue to weigh him down:

1) For the past year, extreme right Republicans have preached how much they dislike Romney... they called him a Rino, they said he was no different than Obama, they called him a liar and "flip-flopper". Now that he is their candidate, they still do not like him... but they view him as better than the alternative. The problem is, that mentality means the entire GOP campaign is based on the hatred of the other guy. Their campaign is not about supporting their own candidate, it is about hating the other guy and hoping that enough people hate him, and vote in their favor. Hatred is a difficult emotion to feed for this long.

2) The VP choice killed McCain, and we may see a repeat now. If Romney picks an extreme right candidate, like Ryan, he will make his base happy and alienate moderates. If he picks a moderate candidate, he will piss off a base that already does not like him, and risk the possibility of lower voter turn-out.

3) The Republican party has spent the last 2 years focusing on the tax debate, and highlighting the Americans who do not pay income tax. It is widely known that many, MANY rich Americans do not pay income tax... due to legal deductions, write-offs, offshore accounts, etc. Romney's refusal to disclose his taxes, after the GOP has put so much focus on taxes, leads people to believe he is another 1% who does not pay income tax. This problem will continue to follow him because his own party has focused on it for so long.

4) Finally, Romney has yet to explain how he will pay for his tax-cut plan. Again, the GOP has spent the last 2 years complaining about irresponsible government spending. Now Romney proposes a plan that adds to the deficit, without explaining how it will be responsibly paid for. With so much focus on the debt and deficit, it is almost a requirement to disclose exactly how you will fix it. The more Romney dodges the subject, the more he looks like just another politician practicing "politics as usual".

No secret today.
Ryan, Romney and their Republican colleagues OPENLY advocate taking funds from the poor, disabled, elderly, retired and sick ~ for the express purpose of shifting $billions to the very wealthy in the form of tax breaks.

Under Mitt Romney's tax plan.
The nonpartisan Tax Policy Center found that Romney's TAX BREAKS FOR MILLIONAIRES would cost us around $86 billion yearly.
But for 95% of Americans who earn less than $200,000 - taxes would be increased.

Under Paul Ryan's plan, austerity for who?
Rep. Ryan (R-WI) also proposes tax cuts heavily skewed to large corporations and the very wealthy:
The Tax Policy Center finds that Ryan's additional tax cuts = $4.6Trillion.
Additionally, both Ryan and Romney want to extend the Bush tax cuts = $5.4 trillion.
TOTAL cost of Ryan's proposal in tax cuts alone = $10 trillion.

While crying about "perils of debt", Paul Ryan gives giant tax breaks to the wealthy and corporations. And like Romney = without conscience, he gouges basic programs like Medicaid, food stamps and Pell Grants to pay for them. The Ryan plan, endoresed by Mitt Romney, puts an even bigger burden on low and middle income earners via lethal blows to Medicare.

RomneyRyan's self-interest extends to giving themselves and their rich friends more $millions with which to buy up our elections, subvert our democracy ~ and install a government that reflects their 'vision' for us of more work for less pay, no safety nets, no environmental protections, no voice and no recourse for ordinary Americans.

I love it when First Read is sympatico with me. :)

“What’s the frequency, Grover”, is your Benzedrine, uh huh

You were brain-dead, locked out, numb, not up to speed.

You thought you’d pegged us an idiot’s dream.

Tunnel vision from the outsider’s screen.

You never understood the frequency, uh huh.

You wore Bain Capital like an armored suit, uh huh.

We studied your cartoons, radio, music, TV, movies, magazines.

People said, “Withdrawal in disgust is not the same as apathy.”

You smile like a cartoon, tooth for a tooth.

You said that privilege was the shackles of youth.

You got a horse, expensive and tax free, uh huh.

You never understood the frequency, uh huh.

“What’s the frequency, Rupert?”, is your Benzedrine, uh huh.

Tax returns, healthcare, draft dodging, dogging the scene.

You smile like a cartoon, tooth for a tooth.

You said that privilege was the shackles of youth.

You wore a shirt, magic undies beneath, uh huh.

You never understood the frequency, uh huh.

You wore Fox News like an armored suit, uh huh.

You couldn’t understand.

You said that privilege was the shackles of youth, uh huh.

You couldn’t understand.

You wore a shirt of violent extremes, uh huh.

You couldn’t understand.

You never understood, don’t f*ck with me, uh huh.

P.S. Rombot.Has.Nothing.

Weird Willard in Washington? No thanks. He belongs back in Utah converting dead Jews to Mormonism along with the rest of his cult.

Romney must get his act together. He must make this about the Obama economy. Tell Americans the true story of unemployment, weak GDP growth, spending and deficits. He must clearly articulate his plan. For those of you that know how to read, yesterday's Wall Street Journal had a great story on Romney's tax and economic plan. If only America was allowed to hear his side.

Okay, first of all, the main reason for the slowdown in the economy is a lack of spending. Since consumer spending is still low, the GOVERNMENT has to make up the difference, and that has to happen for as long as it takes to get the economy moving again. Secondly, deficits INCREASE during a recession, as unemployment leads to lower revenues and higher spending on safety net programs. Put that on top of the Bush deficits, and we get a trillion dollar shortfall.

Now, as for your reference to the Wall Street Journal, let me point out that it is a CONSERVATIVE newspaper/website. And when I went over it, they made a major flaw: when they argued that every past tax cut was progressive (i.e. the rich paid more taxes as a whole), this coincides with the Republican argument that the rich already pay most taxes. Assuming that this is true (which it statistically is), this means that the wealthy make more pre-tax income because of these cuts, and so pay a higher tax due to their increased income. Now since this is true, the opposite can also be thought of as true; raising taxes on the rich will decrease the amount the share of taxes that the wealthiest Americans pay. So essentially, if we were to raise taxes on the rich, the middle class would pay more taxes (not because of a tax increase, but because the share of the rich would decline).

The Cynicism of the Liberal Ideology

Liberals profess to be the champions of the poor and downtrodden, but if this were true wouldn't they be giving the people that they characterize as such a hand up? Wouldn't they want to establish an environment that encouraged success rather than one that denegrates it? Instead, they implement policies that assume the absolute worst in human nature and in practice create government dependence that only preserves the status quo while conveniently maintaining their voting base.

First of all, for the past 30 years we have enacted policies that "encouraged success;" what did that lead to??? The collapse of the global financial system, millions of Americans falling below the poverty line, income inequality at a record peak, and an economy that is weakened by a lack of consumer demand. The poor did not rise to the middle class; they stayed poor, or became very poor. During the postwar boom of the 1940s-1970s, we enacted liberal policies, such as the establishment of the welfare state, the creation of Medicare and Social Security, and strode to enact healthcare reform so that all Americans could be guaranteed affordable health care. What happened then?? We had the biggest economic expansion in history; income inequality was at an all-time low, businesses prospered, the middle class was strong, and poverty fell. Liberals: 1, Conservatives: 0.

The simple truth that liberals desperately try to avoid, is that success is the enemy of their cause. If you are successful, in all likelihood you have already rejected their notions of collectivism, wealth redistribution and big government in favor of individual initiative, fiscal conservatism and self-reliance.

If success was the enemy of liberals, why did we create an economic paradise 60 years ago that thrived on the double concepts of collectivism and individual initiative, wealth redistribution and fiscal conservatism, and big government and self-reliance??? The debt during the postwar boom fell and would have been decreased had Carter continued to reduce the deficit in the 80s instead of being beaten by the supply-side Reagan. Those concepts are not as incompatible as you think.

This is the reason that they are able to wage their class-warfare without any fear of reprisal; they have already determined that politically, any losses they suffer from doing so are acceptable.

That is true. We are waging class warfare without any fear of reprisal; we have accepted the political losses as inevitable and worthy of our cause. But we did not start this war between classes; it started 30 years ago, when the conservatives overran our government and began enacting policies that siphoned wealth into the hands of the elite. For 30 years, we have failed to fight back, with only a brief holiday under Bill Clinton. Now, we fight to the death, and will die willingly for our cause. We fight for liberty, for equality, for the rights of the poor and the middle class to be the masters of their own fate, not be enslaved by those who seek to suck more and more of the nation's prosperity. We seek to restore democracy by taking money out of the equation and reducing economic inequality so that all men feel that they have an equal opportunity to make something of our lives. You conservatives may bash us as communists and socialists, but all we want is to restore America to the type of democratic capitalism that enables everyone to make it big. All we see in conservative leaders like Grover Norquist and Mitt Romney are the hollow shells of men that have sold their souls to the highest bidder. So yes, we liberals are against capitalism; the kind of capitalism that has led to the massive theft of wealth from the masses to the wealthy.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

These poll numbers will not improve for Romney if he is not willing to answer simple questions about his qualifications or justify his contention that the wealthy need more tax cuts by releasing his tax returns to prove that he is "taxed enough already".

He claims his business experience is his primary qualification to be the President but he says that anyone who examines his past business practices are playing dirty....

He claims that the wealthy need tax cuts so that they will create jobs, but he will not show us the proof that his own tax rate is high enough for that to be a valid argument...

Mitt.....nobody is just going to take your word for it....this is an important job, and if it was you who was doing the hiring, you would certainly balk at an applicant who would not allow you to verify their resume......why would you expect that we would not want to verify yours?



• What more and more people are realizing is Romney is Bush II. Supply side economics is a fraud -- it doesn't work and never has. Combine that with the fact that Romney has no core, no spine and no real backbone and he is the phoniest candidate a major party has ever nominated for president and we have a victory for President Obama.

Some polls can be heavily skewed towards Democrats, but the ones that aren't show a much clearer picture; nothing can save Obama.

Optimism about economy down, poll shows

"The number of people who say the economy is starting to recover has dropped 5 points since April, from 24 percent to 19 percent, while the number who say that the economy remains in a downturn is up 6 points to 39 percent, a CNN/ORC International poll released Friday shows.

"That all seems bad news for President Barack Obama's re-election chances,..says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland."

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/optimism-economy-down-poll-shows-093440014.html

I have to agree with Charlie, I can see it on his face every time I watch him speak, he is lying through his teeth, just watch his face anyone can see that he is lying !!!

BACKHOUSE- I response to your comment Obama is a liar and a fraud of a President.

Let's Take A Closer Look At Obama..........

☹ April 2008 – Obama speaks disrespectfully of Christians, saying
they “cling to guns and religion” and have an “antipathy to people
who aren't like them.”

☹ January 2009 – President Obama’s nominee for deputy secretary
of state asserts that American taxpayers are required to pay for
abortions and that limits on abortion funding are unconstitutional.

☹ January 2009 – Obama lifts restrictions on U.S. government funding
for groups that provide abortion services or counseling abroad, forcing
taxpayers to fund pro-abortion groups that either promote or perform
abortions in other nations.

☹ February 2009 – Obama announces plans to revoke conscience
protection for health workers who refuse to participate in medical
activities that go against their beliefs, and fully implements the
plan in February 2011.

☹ March 2009 – The Obama administration shut out pro-life
groups from attending a White House-sponsored health care summit.

☹ March 2009 – Obama orders taxpayer funding of embryonic stem cell research.

☹ March 2009 – Obama gave $50 million for the UNFPA,
the UN population agency that promotes abortion and works closely
with Chinese population control officials who use forced abortions
and involuntary sterilizations.

☹ April 2009 – When speaking at Georgetown University, Obama orders
that a monogram symbolizing Jesus' name be covered when he is making
his speech.

☹ May 2009 – Obama declines to host services for the National Prayer Day
(a day established by federal law) at the White House.

☹ May 2009 – The White House budget eliminates all funding
for abstinence-only education and replaces it with “comprehensive”
sexual education, repeatedly proven to increase teen pregnancies
and abortions. 31 He continues the deletion in subsequent budgets.

☹ May 2009 – Obama officials assemble a terrorism dictionary
calling pro-life advocates violent and charging that they use
racism in their “criminal” activities.

☹ July 2009 – The Obama administration illegally extends federal
benefits to same-sex partners of Foreign Service and Executive
Branch employees, in direction violation of the federal Defense
of Marriage Act.

☹ September 16, 2009 – The Obama administration appoints as EEOC
Commissioner Chai Feldblum, who asserts that society should “not tolerate”
any “private beliefs,” including religious beliefs, if they may negatively
affect homosexual “equality.”

☹ July 2010 – The Obama administration uses federal funds in
violation of federal law to get Kenya to change its constitution
to include abortion.

☹ August 2010 – The Obama administration Cuts funding for
176 abstinence education programs.

☹ September 2010 – The Obama administration tells researchers to ignore a
judge’s decision striking down federal funding for embryonic stem cell research.

☹ October 19, 2010 – Obama begins deliberately omitting the phrase
about “the Creator” when quoting the Declaration of Independence
– an omission he has made on no less than seven occasions.

☹ November 2010 – Obama misquotes the National Motto, saying it
is “E pluribus unum” rather than “In God We Trust” as established by
federal law.

☹ January 2011 – After a federal law was passed to transfer a WWI Memorial
in the Mojave Desert to private ownership, the U. S. Supreme Court ruled
that the cross in the memorial could continue to stand, but the Obama
administration refused to allow the land to be transferred as required by law,
and refused to allow the cross to be re-erected as ordered by the Court.

☹ February 2011 – Although he filled posts in the State Department,
for more than two years Obama did not fill the post of religious freedom
ambassador, an official that works against religious persecution across
the world; he filled it only after heavy pressure from the public and from
Congress.

☹ February 2011 – Obama directs the Justice Department to stop
defending the federal Defense of Marriage Act.

☹ March 2011 – The Obama administration refuses to investigate
videos showing Planned Parenthood helping alleged sex traffickers
get abortions for victimized underage girls.

☹ April 2011 – For the first time in American history, Obama urges
passage of a non-discrimination law that does not contain hiring
protections for religious groups, forcing religious organizations to
hire according to federal mandates without regard to the dictates
of their own faith, thus eliminating conscience protection in hiring.

☹ June 2011 – The Department of Veterans Affairs forbids references
to God and Jesus during burial ceremonies at Houston National Cemetery.

☹ July 2011 – Obama allows homosexuals to serve openly in the military,
reversing a policy originally instituted by George Washington in March 1778.

☹ August 2011 – The Air Force stops teaching the Just War theory to officers
in California because the course is taught by chaplains and is based on a
philosophy introduced by St. Augustine in the third century AD – a theory
long taught by civilized nations across the world (except America).

☹ August 2011 – The Obama administration releases its new health
care rules that override religious conscience protections for medical
workers in the areas of abortion and contraception.

☹ September 2011 – Air Force Chief of Staff prohibits commanders
from notifying airmen of programs and services available to them from chaplains.

☹ September 2011 – The Army issues guidelines for Walter Reed Medical
Center stipulating that “No religious items (i.e. Bibles, reading materials
and/or facts) are allowed to be given away or used during a visit.”

☹ September 2011 – The Pentagon directs that military chaplains may
perform same-sex marriages at military facilities in violation of the federal
Defense of Marriage Act.

☹ October 2011 – The Obama administration eliminates federal grants
to the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops for their extensive programs
that aid victims of human trafficking because the Catholic Church is anti-abortion.

☹ November 2011 – The Air Force Academy rescinds support for Operation
Christmas Child, a program to send holiday gifts to impoverished children
across the world, because the program is run by a Christian charity.

☹ November 2011 – The Air Force Academy pays $80,000 to add a
Stonehenge-like worship center for pagans, druids, witches and Wiccans.

☹ November 2011 – Obama opposes inclusion of President
Franklin Roosevelt’s famous D-Day Prayer in the WWII Memorial.

☹ November 2011 – Unlike previous presidents, Obama studiously avoids any religious references
in his Thanksgiving speech.

☹ January 2012 – The Obama administration argues that the First Amendment provides no protection for churches and synagogues in hiring their pastors and rabbis.

☹ February 2012 – The Obama administration forgives student
loans in exchange for public service, but announces it will no
longer forgive student loans if the public service is related to religion.

☹ February 2012 – The U. S. Military Academy at West Point disinvites
three star Army general and decorated war hero Lieutenant General
William G. (“Jerry”) Boykin (retired) from speaking at an event because
he is an outspoken Christian.

☹ February 2012 – The Air Force removes “God” from the patch of
Rapid Capabilities Office (the word on the patch was in Latin: Dei).

☹ February 2012 – The Army orders Catholic chaplains not to read
a letter to parishioners that their archbishop

You sound as if you would like to have anal sex with Mitt Romney, truetexan. Are you a giver or a taker?

WOW!

Check it out! ALL of my posts above were collapsed by the 'community'. And for what? Nowhere in any of those posts was I rude, obnoxious, insulting, or in any way did I violate the CoH.

No. I was collapsed because the regular loons on this site make it their prime objective to sensor and stomp out any/all comments that do not support their agenda. They have their regular targets too (of which I am certainly one).

Well, you freaks can try to hide from the truth, but it won't change reality. And you can all cry FOUL loudly in November.

(A note to Tyler: If you want people to take this site seriously, you really need to get control of the 'regulars' here. They strip away all credibility that you may hope to achieve.)

The GOP has been hijacked by the religious right and the racists. Republican leadership panders to such people.

I do feel a bit sorry for Repubs. Not because they're losing the presidential race--which is great--but because the middle and working class among them are so misled. Socialism is a dirty word to these people and Republican leadership wields it like a club to hammer Obama. Most Republicans seem to be unable to recognize that we are already surrounded by social programs that all but the most militant teabaggers can agree on.

POLICE------SOCIALISM

FIREFIGHTERS----SOCIALISM

PUBLIC EDUCATION------SOCIALISM

INTERSTATE HIGHWAYS-----SOCIALISM

THE MILITARY-------SOCIALISM

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION-------SOCIALISM

NASA--------SOCIALISM

NATIONAL PARKS-------SOCIALISM

FCC-----SOCIALISM

FTC-----SOCIALISM

ATF/CIA/FBI/DEA-------SOCIALISM

FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION-------SOCIALISM (I spelled it out because this one is especially important. Imagine a society where drug companies just put their products out like the quack peddlers of old without any oversight, or farms that sold their beef and produce raised in unsanitary conditions. People would be dying from unsafe drugs and E coli left and right.)

Heck, having a government in the first place is SOCIALISM. It's not a dirty word, folks. We are a society and there are just some things that we can do better together.

billybob: I think you give them more credit than they deserve. Obama has a "D" behind his name and that is all that matters to them. It might be because their daddy and granddaddy always voted that way. I think that except for the naive who have a clue about politics and human nature, they consist of the disgruntled and jealous. They can't make decisions for themselves, or at least they haven't made good ones, and they want others to take care of them and they are just plain jealous of those who have succeeded in life. It's a heck of a lot easier to complain "woe be me" and complain that it's always someone else' fault than it is to get of your tush and take responsibility for yourself. They love the promises that they hear that someone else will make it better for them. But, for some reason, even though those others don't actually do anything to make it better for them they'd rather continue to hear the promise than face the reality that the only person who can make it better for themselves is themselves. That's why they hate conservs. The promise of the opportunity for them to succeed doesn't register with them because then they would have no one else to blame. Just look at Obama: He is the epitome of this. He hasn't done anything to help anyone other than his supporters (by funneling taxpayer money to them without accountability). The libs know that he hasn't helped anyone and has in fact made things worse. So far Obama has been typical lib and blame everyone else even though the evidence is clear for everyone to see, that the only person he has to blame is himself for not putting forward policies that would help anyone. (see above explanation). The fact is that he's gotten everything he's asked for except to increase taxes on the rich. His minions aren't smart enough to figure out that so raising the taxes would do nothing to help anybody out and would in fact hurt a lot of the people who were intended to help. Actually, I don't think even his followers believe that it would help anyone. They just want to see the "rich" punished.

don_draper

Sorry Colorado Man, I know you are desperate for some good news, but the electoral map is also tilted in favor of the Democrats. While it is harder to gauge how individual states will go and thus who will get the electoral votes, right now significantly more electoral votes are solid Dem or lean Dem than vise versa.

It's clear you also don't understand the nature of polling. And while Hussein may lead in electoral votes in states that are not in question, he has nowhere near what will be required to win, and the polling is skewed toward the states with high populations that are already solidly liberal, thus not showing the effect of the electoral college. And as long as MoveOn doesn't contaminate states again this year, Michelle O. is out of the White House in January.

And, by the way, it's "vice versa."

I agree Dont_carry_it_all, the political side of a poster should not be an issue. I would only add to your criteria that the post should be on topic (which btw this one is not). Too often as I try to read through the posts to see what well-meaning people that cared enough to take the time to compose a post are saying I find myself reading some totally off-topic rant or manifesto. "Off Topic" should be a good reason to state for collapsing a post.

Let's see ----- the GOP wants to elect a Mormon Cultists who actually believes that God cares about his Magic Underwear. That wearing Magic Underwear is a critical concept to God, salvation and living a life that guarantees a trip to heaven in the afterlife. He also truly believes in the Joseph Smith BS and all the nonsense about disappearing Golden Tablets...and all the rest of the Mormon Cultist crap.

And you GOP clowns think this is ok...for a US President to believe in this garbage.

Wow. And I thought the GOP were all WHACK JOBS after the last time around with the Quitter-In-Chief, Sarah "golly gee willikers" Palin.

You people in the right wing prove that you really can get more and more WHACKADOO with every new election!!

Forget statistics. The gap between the rich and poor has not been this wide since the roaring 20's. I'm glad Barack has kicked special interests out of DC and cut the pork out of bills. Vote Hillary. Barack needs to come off the golf course.

Hi Guy -- Excellent idea! They should add the category "off-topic." That said, I'm fairly certain occasionally my post would be collapsed. Ha! I'm willing to go along to get along however. Regards.

Looks like the GOP is dumping Romney at the Convention, the RePubs know this Clown they adopted is not worthy for anything !!!!!!!!

Cute trick by NBC.

Put polls together that include 50% more Democrats than Republicans in the sample (even though surveys show they are equally split right now), and then claim that Obama is ahead.

If you adjust those same polls for a realistic split between Republicans and Democrats and look at the far more accurate Likely Voter polls, you would find that Romney is actually slightly ahead.

The Liberals are going to be awfully disappointed when the truth hits home.

Golly gee guys why did you collapse me, didn't I call the Republicans enough bad names

Here comes the collapse. My first question is, why do I visit MSNBC? Just to be collapsed, I guess.

The second question is, out of this entire article, there is not one reason listed to vote for Obama. And, that is my biggest question of all. Considering the miserable economy during Obama's "reign", why would anyone vote for Obama? I will never understand. The sheer gymnastics routine that has to be done to create a virtual reality of Obama's "reign" is getting weary.

Republicans started gaining ground in 2010 with a push of "cleaning up Washington" and "not politics as usual".

They have completely abandoned that platform, in favor of ANOTHER typical "politics as usual" candidate. THAT is why they are losing ground.

What Romney needs to do is get back to the "clean up" message. He needs to be honest with his taxes. He needs to be honest with exactly how he will pay for the tax cuts he wants. And he needs to get a moderate VP, because the Republicans will vote for him no matter what, and the moderates are who he needs.

Fortunately for Obama, it is very unlikely that Romney will do ANY of that.

To be honest, Romney and the Republicans have 4 years with me. If they play, politics as usual, I will be one highly offended voter. And, the Republicans will NOT get my vote again in 2016. Republicans have these next 4 years for me to keep this country out of 3rd world status.

As far as Obama, I see nowhere but 3rd world status as the only possibility based on his policies. I am also tired of Obama having to divide and conquer in order to get his way. Just petty to me.

'Some polls can be heavily skewed towards Democrats, but the ones that aren't show a much clearer picture; nothing can save Obama.'

• LOL!! Sure -- Fox News --- that "pro democrat, liberal leaning" news network has Preaident Obama leading by 9%. Congratulations Pjam 09 -- you win the stupid comment of the day award.

unpatriotic american: What has Obama done that's good for the country?

witchrunner,

Get real and get out of Lalaland! I love the FOX network today with their own poll giving our president a 9% point lead. if that awful right wing cutter of Medicaid and Medicare Paul Ryan gets chosen to be Mittens VP it will grow even more. Two multi-millionaires don't know a thing about the average Americans or america!

Piegan...Obama has a FANTASTIC and COMMENDABLE record of removing RELIGION from gov't.... where it DOES NOT BELONG. See... a president should do what's in the best interest of ALL of the people. Something RWNJ Biblethumpers just can't comprehend. This is NOT a 'Christian Nation'.... NEVER has been, NEVER will be. What's best for ALL citizens trumps your warped view of the world. That's why we live in a REPRESENTATIVE REPUBLIC and NOT a Democracy. TYRANNY OF THE MAJORITY ( which is EXACTLY what the Religious Right tries at every opportunity to invoke ) DOES NOT FLY HERE.... EXACTLY the way our forefathers intended... to prevent whackjob religious nuts from trying to tell the members of the public who aren't CRITICAL THINKING/LOGIC/REASON impaired what to do, what to think and how to live. Your FAIRYTALE and it's MYTHS apply ONLY TO YOU and don't you EVER forget it.

It's not an even race – Obama's ahead

The Republicans forgot, the onus is on them to convince Americans to fire a likeable, positive, inspiring President, during whose administration bin Laden was executed, and the war in Iraq brought to an end. If Obama wasn't experienced in foreign policy and domestic issues before, he sure is now. And his administration is all set up and has proven effective.

Changing horses in midstream is costly for it's own reasons, and there has to be a high reward for doing so. Installing Romney in the White House is just not that cost-effective.

(Hey! Look at me, I can think like a venture capitalist :)

Romney, the gig is up... you are down about 9point on average. Release those taxes and lets see you down 20% when people actually see how much you and your friends game the system.

13.9% in taxes is despicable when ordinary salaried people pay 35% for anything over $125k.... Carried interest my butt... it's called Legal cheating.

So Romney, no matter how much money you raise, WE THE PEOPLE WILL STILL DEFEAT YOU. Republicans take note: deception only works for a finite amount of time. Your lies, distortions and deceptions will always catch up to you.

Obama/Biden 2012

We already have a GREAT Vice President with a clear vision for the United States, and that Vice President is Joe Biden.

Obama - Biden 2012 Forward with the Truth!!!

It should be obvious to Americans that the "Paul Ryan Plan" is only meant to turn Medicaid and Social Security into private business.

Is there any surprise that the "Golden boy"of the GOP is out there as a VP nominee?

They are also ready to boot any regulation to protect the enviornment and start drilling, and keep on using water for fracking, despite the drought.

Leave it to the GOP to destroy the planet!

Uh, Amy? You READ the Fox poll? If you did, you'd notice something pretty interesting- 45% democrats, 35% republicans.

Do the math- there's your nine points. CNN did not give their break out, so it's probably similar- much like NBC giving democrats a +11 in their last poll.

Weight it properly, and the race is still tied, but Obama's approval numbers are in the tank.

By the way, Gallup, which does the only good piling on the electorate, has the democrats at their traditional, +4 margins.

I posited above that this over sample of democrats this month all serves to further a big "momentum shift" story after the conventions.

Bet I'm right.

So do you think that the "over sampling" is to give Dems a false sense of security?

Do you think this is a ploy by the "Liberal Media", intentionally trying to help Mitt Romney?

What is your theory ?

Uh, Amy? You READ the Fox poll? If you did, you'd notice something pretty interesting- 45% democrats, 35% republicans.

Wait, isn't this the part where Conservatives start rolling on the ground kicking and screaming accusing the pollsters of purposely oversampling Democrats???

These polls always seem strange to me - I guess cause I have never been polled nor do I know of anyone who has been. I live in a very large city and I have never seen anyone get polled at the exit after voting. I also wonder how many people are honest when they answer a polling call. That may sound horrible but it is a thought.

FYI;

The Fox poll also indicated most Americans are in fact DEMOCRAT. You can't sample a population and skew the numbers so that you get an even number of A and an even number of B if A is 60% and B is 40%. If there are more democrats in the US then the poll will show more democrats. The POINT:

Romney needs the Conservative Democrats (particularly the white Moderate Democrats) in order to win the Election. That is how ALL Republicans have won office since the Days of Nixon otherwise he'd only have Big Money and Conservative Republicans.

We are supposed to distrust someone who has successfully earned a large amount of money in favor of a guy who got every penny out of taxpayer’s pockets?

You need to explain who you are talking about. Because Mitt Romney successfully earned millions of dollars getting money from the US taxpayer for companies he bought and then sticking the US taxpayer with the bill by draining them off cash and tossing out the workers, who then collected unemployment and sometimes retirement money at the expense of the US taxpayer. Again.

One earned his money in business and the other earned his preaching the Communist manifesto on inner city streets! Now! Who should I trust?

If you are so gullible that you believe that Obama is a Communist, then there is no easy answer to your question. Such people represent a true failure of the democratic process.

Gibe and GEo...do you guys get paid to demonize the poor? Would be curious to see a link about the 1/3 on welfare from any non partisan source...any. How dare the President expand the qualifications for welfare and food stamps during the worst recession since the Great Depression. those kids can learn to live on 1 meal a day, eh..i hear Taco Bell is cheap. Let me be clear..i am lucky enough to have never required either welfare or food stamps, but i know people who have...good, decent, and yes, hard working people. Folks like you, all high and mighty and putting them down...shame on you. i almost wish on you to have to know what it is like.

gideb,

could give the source of your statement that 1 out of every 3 Americans receive some type of welfare benefits ? ( not including SS or Medicare, which we know are not welfare programs.)

Thanks...

Vote for Obama if your receiving government assistance. Now that one out of every three Americans are receiving some type of welfare benefits ( I said welfare benefits NOT SSN OR MEDICARE) who else would you vote for but a Democrat so you can continue to be a parasite on the taxpayers of this country.

EVERYONE receives government assistance. Do you think Mr Romney could have made his millions in a libertarian paradise, such as any 3rd world African country?

Beyond that, a significant part of his money came from having his companies receive help from the US taxpayer, and then draining them of cash.

You, my friend, helped pay for his million dollar horse.

The uneducated voter is the Democratic voter who can't make it on their own without Daddy government.

No one can make it on their own without the government. That's 100% of us.

Joey in Albany,

You can't disprove the meat of my post... so you resort to name calling.. how childish~! How old are you again?

Okay, well if someone made $178k and they are single, they are stuck in the 33% rate, but if you are Romney and made $20,000,000, you only get to pay 13.9%... I wont call you a moron at all... you speak loudly for yourself.

I could never vote for Obama who stands by and allows a shameful,disgusting false ad that accuses Mitts of killing someone's wife. That goes to show what type of character Obama is.

Glad you believe that. Because it wasn't Obama who put out that ad. It was an independent PAC.

However, do you like the idea that many husbands and wives will die without health insurance?

Because lack of healthcare is not a joke. Romney's promise to repeal healthcare isn't a joke. People dying of cancer because of lack of healthcare is not a joke.

It happens. Sorry if you want to swallow the Republican fairy dust; I sympathize with you. It would be so wonderful if life were the way Romney wants us to believe it is. We could all have million dollar dancing horses.

But we don't. We are struggling to get by.

I like to say Hey Liar OBAMA how about you show all your seal records including FAST AND FURIOUS THEN MITT WILL SHOW MORE. PUT UP OR SHUT UP. !!!!

Obama released his tax records years ago.

Sherry - I do know what it's like, coming from a very poor background. I will never forget the day my dad told me to go to the food assistance program at the local high-school. I was thinking all morning on what to do, so at lunch time I slowly began walking to that door, almost there I said to myself I would rather do without then let anyone know I'm poor. Still to this day I have not recieved any government assistance, and it is very hard out there!

It's so funny that anyone that disagrees with the right wing, according to them, doesn't have a job, or is on welfare. That means that those 68,000,000 voters that voted for Obama don't have jobs and are on welfare.

I wonder how that explains that in my city, Obama polls at 64%, favorable, and the unemployment rate is 6.1 percent?

Again we never accused the right wing of being the smart ones. These Neo-Nut Right Wing Drones Conservatives going on with their crazy Rush talk, just crawl out of the wood work from time to time.

Most likely many of them need jobs and are on welfare.

Apparently running deceptive ads does work. At least for the moment, I suspect when the truth comes out about how utterly and blatantly false these Anti-Romney ads are there will be a backlash on Mr. "I'll change the tone in Washington".

No surprise that NBCNEWS.com has no mention of the blatant lie by the Obama campaign regarding the death of a steel workers wife. Obama Deputy Campaign Manager Stephanie Cutter outright lied when she claimed to have no knowledge of the individual or the story of his wife.

You are going to have to explain your ability to read Ms Cutter's mind.

Since the ad wasn't put out by the Obama campaign.

But beyond that, you are going to have to explain what exactly is wrong with the ad, if you have such a big problem with it.

If Mr Romney takes office, he will repeal Obamacare, and when he does, people like this guy's wife will die due to lack of healthcare. Do you seriously think that that is acceptable?

People like you play games with other people's lives and then turn around tell us how disgusted YOU are at other people?

"Positive"- Well, we've learned that he positively hates wealth and ownership of anything as individuals.

Fail. Go back to class. You haven't learned anything.

It's genuinely alarming to see an incompetent Republican candidate like Romney Hood crash and burn on the national political stage while a dwindling number of card-carrying members of the right wing lunatic fringe desperately try to invent reasons to justify their senseless decision to vote for him anyway. It suggests they have no real interest in the issues or in the country's future; only in their vaguely defined, utterly failed political ideology. Perhaps this event signals America's rejection of the GOP's hard turn to the right and it will provide motivation for the Republican Party to return to the political center where the country generally exists.

President Obama in November! He is clearly our only real choice!

I am so sick and tired of all the GOP liars on this site. Let's see - if you vote for Obama you're getting handouts - nope, never have. But for the poor who need help right now, I have no problem that they are getting it.

You don't work. Let's see - work 6 days a week and during the upcoming months that will be 7 days a week.

You don't pay taxes - again a lie from the liars on the right. I know NO ONE who doesn't pay taxes.

And, now you're basing the re-election on a movie based on lies from the far right.

Just how low does the GOP stoop to elect a person who is disgusting; has no ethics; no integrity; no plans for the country; no business trying to lead a group of turtles across the street!

piegan - I'm surprised they let you on the phone conversation with Cutter. You must really have good contacts. And, you know she lied, how?? Oh, that's right - like every other Republican, you're just making it up as you go along!

Obama/Biden 2012

Buckaroo Banzi

Tunde Akins: Why is so hard for you liberals to understand the difference between "income tax" and taxes on "investment income"?

Unfortunately, you are the one who doesn't get it... I do my taxes myself having both long and short term capital gains...and I can't claim salary as long term investment. That is exactly what Romney does (legally)... there's a law written for people like Romney to do so (called carried interest taxation). That should be illegal and repealed... laws should not be written specifically for a small minority of US citizens who are super wealthy. Tax codes should be simplified since GE paid 0 on certain years, and I guarantee you that Romney paid less than 5% on years he didn't know he was running (Swiss and Cayman bank accounts).

Think "Son of Boss"... Romney was it's architect at Marriot Hotels, and Marriot was eventually charged with tax fraud. Tells you all you need to know about Romney, right? Please educate yourself before saying what you know little knowledge about.

Also, how in the world does Romney have over $100,000,000 in IRA account - this is almost impossible, so something shady must have happened here... if it looks and sounds like a duck... we say, it's probably a duck.

"It’s not an even race right now -- Obama’s ahead …"

Thanks for the laugh.

Gallup and Rasmussen survey voter ID and find that Republicans (35%) and Democrats (34%) are about equally split, and then certain pollsters take samples that have about 50% more Democrats than Republicans in their sample. The result is a poll that is about 10% skewed towards Obama, which includes 'Registered Voters which is skewed towards Obama by about 4% - see link for reason;

Rasmussen has the best record by far over the last two Presidential elections (average error = less than 1%), and they also poll Likely Voters, which is far more accurate than polls of Registered Voters, and Rasmussen has Romney ahead 47% to 43% for Obama.

Based on the far more accurate Likely Voter polls by State, and a historical split of the 'Undecided Voters', Romney has 297 Electoral Votes vs 231 for Obama.

Roy, you need to get your facts straight. Gallup says that 47% of the American electorate supports President Obama while 45% support Romney. Clearly, your fantasies are not supported by facts. On the other hand, Rasmussen tends to run counter to the direction to which the vast majority of the other polls are pointing, including FOX, and that is to another landslide win for Obama.

Latest Gallup results:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/150743/Obama-Romney.aspx

President Obama vs Romney Hood as an average of nine national polls:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/150743/Obama-Romney.aspx

Read 'em and weep, Roy.

*Romney vs. President Obama:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html

Really ? How much of the stimulus have you seen ? The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. QE1 and QE2 caused a healthy gain for Wall Street though. The banks are being paid interest on the $1.5 trillion in reserves that are sitting there not being lent out. Goldman Sachs was just cleared of responsibilities for their part in the mortgage debacle that sent us into a recession, in part because the regulators did not do their job overseeing them. What a crock !

Sailcat-2064101 "Roy, you need to get your facts straight. Gallup says that 47% of the American electorate supports President Obama while 45% support Romney"

Gallup polls 'Registered Voters', which are skewed towards Obama by about 4% (see link for explanation). With that adjustment, Rasmussen has Romney ahead by 4% and Gallup has Romney ahead by 2% - within the margin of error, but both showing Romney ahead. All pollsters will switch to the far more accurate 'Likely Voter' format before the election.

Sorry to burst your bubble.

http://www.polimerican.com/adults-vs-registered-vs-likely-voters/

job @2.26 --interesting observation. similar to things like the GOP hates women, or that entire state is a indicted when someone with a statename in their identifier says something with which folks disagree.

gross generalizations by either side are very prevalent and disgustingly inaccurate.

A vote for Obama is a vote for a petty dictator. All he cares about is power, nothing else. Don't you realize that?

Vote for President Obama! The survival of the middle class depends on it!

How's the "middle class" been doing so far under Obama? Oh that's right he has lead the worst recovery in history, with the majority of the pain being felt by the middle class.

If you want to go down the road of losing power, jobs, and sustainability like Europe then vote for Obama who will continue to lead us down a road that has already been traveled and is falling as we speak.

High taxes, government ran health care, and every other progressive thought has already been tried in Europe and instead of bringing equality and some Utopian society you have debt problems, a shrinking middle class, and a line around the corner to see a doctor. Europe is a dead, they just don't know it yet.

Tunde Akins

Joey in Albany,

You can't disprove the meat of my post... so you resort to name calling.. how childish~! How old are you again?

Tunde - this is typical of "the conservative brain". If you can't dispute the message, attack the messenger. You might google "the conservative brain", I suspect you'll find some interesting research on the subject. Fear is an important motivator at times of personal danger but it has no place in making polity.

Roy Wilson -

Still spouting that Rassmussen nonsense?

You seem to forget they changed their polling practices after the last Presidential election, and in 2010 were the most inaccurate of the major polling organizations. They erred greatly on the side of the Republicans.

Maybe their founder, Scott Rassmussen, should quit taking kick-backs from the Tea Party and pay more attention to his accuracy.

Rasmussen Polls Were Biased and Inaccurate; Quinnipiac, SurveyUSA Performed Strongly

By NATE SILVER

Every election cycle has its winners and losers: not just the among the candidates, but also the pollsters.

On Tuesday, polls conducted by the firm Rasmussen Reports — which released more than 100 surveys in the final three weeks of the campaign, including some commissioned under a subsidiary on behalf of Fox News — badly missed the margin in many states, and also exhibited a considerable bias toward Republican candidates.

Other polling firms, like SurveyUSA and Quinnipiac University, produced more reliable results in Senate and gubernatorial races. A firm that conducts surveys by Internet, YouGov, also performed relatively well.

The 105 polls released in Senate and gubernatorial races by Rasmussen Reports and its subsidiary, Pulse Opinion Research, missed the final margin between the candidates by 5.8 points, a considerably higher figure than that achieved by most other pollsters. Some 13 of its polls missed by 10 or more points, including one in the Hawaii Senate race that missed the final margin between the candidates by 40 points, the largest error ever recorded in a general election in FiveThirtyEight’s database, which includes all polls conducted since 1998.

Moreover, Rasmussen’s polls were quite biased, overestimating the standing of the Republican candidate by almost 4 points on average. In just 12 cases, Rasmussen’s polls overestimated the margin for the Democrat by 3 or more points. But it did so for the Republican candidate in 55 cases — that is, in more than half of the polls that it issued.

//fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/04/rasmussen-polls-were-biased-and-inaccurate-quinnipiac-surveyusa-performed-strongly/

This latest poll is nothing more then spin. It was a poll of registered voters and not likely. Also, only 4 out of 10 respondents said they were paying attention to the race, and of those Romney leads. So when the fall campaign season actually begins and people do start paying attention, we will see if the polls remain as they are being reported today.

Will the lies and deception from the Obama campaign turn the majority of voters against him? Not that they will have any affect on liberals, who don't seem to have any moral or ethical standards. It seems more honest that liberals don't care what is done or said, as long as they win. It is pretty sad to think that lies are now the norm for liberals, but do they actually stop if their candidate gets elected?

Roy,

http://www.polimerican.com/adults-vs-registered-vs-likely-voters/

first you give me a site for American Association for Medical Colleges (AAMC) as your PROOF that Bush didn't agree to any spending increases for FY2009, and now you give us a site that has this in the titlebar:

Mitt Romney Official Site

Support a Smaller, Smarter, Simpler Government? Donate $5 Now!
www.MittRomney.com

You need to comeup with some better sources. SERIOUSLY!

Romney's already lost his gambit to win the independents based on a purely economic message. He's unlikable, nobody trusts or believes him, and his policies, on the rare occasion that he can be pinned down enough to offer a specific stance on anything, are generally unpopular to anyone who isn't a millionaire.

He's reverting to Republican dog whistle politics (messaging on welfare for the lazy, war on religion) to try to heal his rift with his own base and relying on his allies at the state level to suppress enough of the vote to give him an opening.

jdmbo,

They were put there because of the lack of "JOBS..JOBS..JOBS" that was promised by the Republican Party/Tea Party in 2010 that never happened! Instead, all anyone got was "NO...NO...NO" but we will cut education, health-care and welfare while getting the credit rating of the USA lowered! Yeah...reelect them, NOT!

Romney's Fairy Tales will Cast a Spell on the GOP for a Thousand years, Media fact checking Organizations have found all of Romney's Super PAC ads to be false !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So, after carpet bombing attack ads during the Republican primaries, Mitt wants to take his ball and go home. What a joke.

Since the President is getting traction on his tax returns, offer a deal- 4 more years of tax returns for all of the Presidents college records (financial, applications, transcripts, etc.). Say I'll give you 4 years for your records.

NYJoe, how about we get Romney's tax returns AND his college transcripts too? We'd like to know how he did in school too and how Romney got his deferments for Vietnam running around in France.

By STEVE PEOPLES 06/05/12 12:53 PM ET

Though an early supporter of the Vietnam War, Romney avoided military service at the height of the fighting after high school by seeking and receiving four draft deferments, according to Selective Service records. They included college deferments and a 31-month stretch as a "minister of religion" in France, a classification for Mormon missionaries that the church at the time feared was being overused. The country was cutting troop levels by the time he became eligible for the draft, and his lottery number was not called.

President Barack Obama, Romney's opponent in this year's campaign, did not serve in the military either. The Democrat, 50, was a child during the Vietnam conflict and did not enlist when he was older.

But because Romney, now 65, was of draft age during Vietnam, his military background – or, rather, his lack of one – is facing new scrutiny as he courts veterans and makes his case to the nation to be commander in chief. He's also intensified his criticism lately of Obama's plans to scale back the nation's military commitments abroad, suggesting that Romney would pursue an aggressive foreign policy as president that could involve U.S. troops.

A look at Romney's relationship with Vietnam offers a window into a 1960s world that allowed him to avoid combat as fighting peaked. His story also demonstrates his commitment to the Mormon Church, which he rarely discusses publicly but which helped shape his life.

Romney's recollection of his Vietnam-era decisions has evolved in the decades since, particularly as his presidential ambitions became clear.

He said in 2007 – his first White House bid under way – that he had "longed in many respects to actually be in Vietnam." But his actions, Selective Service records and previous statements show little interest in joining a conflict that ultimately claimed more than 58,000 American lives.

Still, he repeatedly cites his commitment to public service and the nation's military while campaigning for president.

"Greatness in a people, I believe, is measured by the extent to which they will give themselves to something bigger than themselves," Romney said in San Diego last week to a Memorial Day crowd of thousands, flush with military veterans of all ages.

He did not address his own Vietnam history that day. And his campaign has refused to comment publicly on the subject over the past week.

Political rivals, military veterans among them, suggest that Romney's own decision not to serve in the military is in conflict with his pro-military rhetoric.

"He didn't have the courage to go. He didn't feel it was important enough to him to serve his country at a time of war," said Jon Soltz, who served two Army tours in Iraq and is the chairman of the left-leaning veterans group VoteVets.org.

Critics note that the candidate is among three generations of Romneys – including his father, former Michigan Gov. George Romney, and five sons – who were of military age during armed conflicts but did not serve.

As a presidential candidate in 2007, Romney told The Boston Globe he was frustrated, as a Mormon missionary, not to be fighting alongside his countrymen.

"I was supportive of my country," Romney said. "I longed in many respects to actually be in Vietnam and be representing our country there, and in some ways it was frustrating not to feel like I was there as part of the troops that were fighting in Vietnam."

Indeed, Romney strongly supported the war at first. As a freshman at Stanford University, he protested anti-war activists. In one photo, he's shown in a small crowd of students, smiling broadly, wearing a sport jacket and holding up a sign that says, "Speak Out, Don't Sit In."

But the frustration he recalled in 2007 does not match a sentiment he shared as a Massachusetts Senate candidate in 1994, when he told The Boston Herald, "I was not planning on signing up for the military."

"It was not my desire to go off and serve in Vietnam, but nor did I take any actions to remove myself from the pool of young men who were eligible for the draft," Romney told the newspaper.

But that's exactly what Romney did, according Selective Service records. He received his first deferment for "activity in study" in October 1965 while at Stanford.

As Soltz notes, the younger Romney was under no obligation to seek a college-related deferment.

"Vietnam was a war that the poor and the people who couldn't afford to go to college had to go to," Soltz said.

After his first year at Stanford, Romney qualified for 4-D deferment status as "a minister of religion or divinity student." It was a status he would hold from July 1966 until February 1969, a period he largely spent in France working as a Mormon missionary.

He was granted the deferment even as some young Mormon men elsewhere were denied that same status, which became increasingly controversial in the late 1960s. The Mormon church, a strong supporter of American involvement in Vietnam, ultimately limited the number of church missionaries allowed to defer their military service using the religious exemption.

But as fighting in Vietnam raged, Romney spent two and a half years trying to win Mormon converts in France. About that same time, Romney's father would famously speak out against Vietnam, declaring that he had been "brainwashed" by military officials into supporting the conflict.

Young Romney's comments indicated his support had waned, too.

"If it wasn't a political blunder to move into Vietnam, I don't know what is," a 23-year-old Romney would tell The Boston Globe in 1970 during the fifth year of his deferment.

His 31-month religious deferment expired in early 1969. And Romney received an academic studies deferment for much of the next two years. He became available for military service at the end of 1970 when his deferments ran out and he could have been drafted. But by that time, America was beginning to slice its troop levels, and Romney's relatively high lottery number – 300 out of 365 – was not called.

Romney - the scary one.

TNSEVOL "Roy Wilson - Still spouting that Rassmussen nonsense?"

I've heard the complaints that 'Rasmussen is inaccurate' and 'Rasmussen is biased', so let's look at the REAL evidence from the last two Presidential campaigns (2004 & 2008), which fortunately is easy to verify. The source for the information was Realclearpolitics.com which is a summary of all of the major polls.

In 2004, Rasmussen's final poll showed Bush winning by 1.7%, and the actual margin of victory was 2.4%, so Rasmussen was only 0.7% off of perfection. Interestingly, Rasmussen's poll was 0.7% biased in favor of the Democrat when compared with the actual result.

In 2008, Rasmussen's final poll showed Obama winning by 6.0%, and the actual margin of victory was 7.3%, so Rasmussen was 1.3% off of perfection – This time, Rasmussen's poll was 1.3% biased in favor of the Republican when compared with the actual result. Rasmussen's average error in both elections was 1.0%, which was the best of all of the major pollsters (actually tied with Pew Research).

So Rasmussen and Pew had the best average of all of the major pollsters in the last two Presidential campaigns, and Rasmussen's average 'bias' was a miniscule 0.3%, compared with an average bias of 0.95% for Pew in favor of Democrats and a bias for the others of 1.6% in favor of the Democrats.

Overall, Rasmussen has the best record for accuracy AND the least amount of bias.

Now let's take a look at the OTHER major pollsters;

Gallup missed by a whopping 2.4% in 2004 and 3.7% in 2008, for an average error margin of 3.55% - both times biased in favor of the Democrats.

Marist missed by an almost equally large 3.4% in 2004 and 1.7% in 2008 for an average error of 2.55%, again biased in favor of the Democrats in both cases.

Reuters also missed by 3.4% in 2004 and 1.7% in 2008 for an average error of 2.55% – also biased in favor of the Democrats each time.

Interestingly, Fox (that supposed bastion of the right) missed by 4.4% in 2004 and 0.3% in 2008 – also biased in favor of the Democrats by an average of 2.05%.

In fact, of the 12 major pollsters included in Realclearpolitics averages for both 2004 and 2008, 10 of them were biased in favor of the Democrats when compared with actual results. Overall, Realclearpolitics.com's average of the polls was biased in favor of the Democrats by 1.4% in 2004 and 1.0% in 2008 compared with actual results.

One last point – All of the major pollsters switch to 'Likely Voters' just before the election because they are much more accurate than 'Registered Voter' polls, but Rasmussen is the only one that consistently polls 'Likely Voters' each time. Since Republicans consistently vote in greater percentages than Democrats, 'Registered Voter' polls seriously overstate the Democrat – typically by about 4%.

Gee Ol Doc you're so right those nasty Conservatives always call us righteous Liberals names something we never do to them, we're just the smartest people on the planet, if conservatives were any dumber they could be Liberals too...uh I mean we could be conservatives too...uh you know what I mean

Negative ads buy time, not votes. To paraphrase a prominent Liberal, "it's the economy stupid".

We will be okay as long as the very stupid, people on welfare, people who gave up looking for work and went on the total gov.support, all the ones looking for Obama stash of money if they all stay home we may have a chance.

First Thoughts: It's not an even race - Obama's ahead

The game is over even before it started. Amazing, Isn't it? I know a lot of Romney supporters and Teaparty folks would like to think otherwise. Four key polls (CNN, FoxNews, Gallup, and Reuters/Ipsos) in the last 10 days indicate a margin of +2 to +9 for Obama.

As one columnist put it:

The Killing: The battle to define Mitt Romney is over—and Romney lost. By Matthew Continetti

The Massachusetts multimillionaire who won his party's nomination largely on perceptions of "electability" had become the target of a ferocious blitz of negative advertising. Partisans and media decried many of the attacks as misleading or false. The nominee, busy raising money, had yet to respond with a commensurate ad buy that made the positive case for his candidacy. He relied instead on outside groups to pummel the incumbent's record. And though unaffiliated consultants worried that the challenger may have unilaterally disarmed in the contest to define his biography, personality, and policies, campaign operatives and their media allies said the race was more or less tied. The choice was made to stay the course, and to accumulate a war chest that could be spent in the fall.

"This decision may be remembered as the most brilliant move of the campaign," wrote Ryan Lizza, "or the one that cost" the nominee "the presidency. It is a large-scale version of rope-a-dope—allow your opponent to unload with his most powerful punches as you hunker down and bide your time, waiting to unload in the next round, once the other guy has spent himself."

But Alas!! Romney is so behind in the battle and he is yet to find his narrative as to what he stands for in order to be elected as the President. In my view, Romney is a nice guy and very intelligent, but the problem is that he wants to be the KING of the USA and we elect Presidents and not Kings. Plus he cannot relate to the common man on the street. He cannot even take credit for his past work (experience he has outlined in his resume) – work at Bain Capital, Salt Lake city Olympics, Governor of MA, Massachusetts healthcare bill, etc. Tea Party won't let him open his mouth to speak on any of these. How long can Romney keep repeating the same mantra, "Obama is no good and Obama is a foreigner", without spelling out what he stands for and as President what he would differently in order to make people's life better? Sorry Romney, 2012 is not your year. Game over.

But I don't want to be MIDDLE-CLASS....

We have worked our entire life to raise ourselves up and are on the brink of moving out of the middle-class. But thanks to Obama & Co, we keep getting pushed back down.

If you make the choice to STAY where you are in life, that's fine, but do not penalize those of us that have made the sacrifices, the small investments in both time & money over the past DECADES, to have more out of life.

How long can Romney keep repeating the same mantra, “Obama is no good and Obama is a foreigner”, without spelling what he stands for and as President what he would differently in order to make people’s life better? Sorry Romney, 2012 is not your year. Game over.

First: Romney has never said Obama was a foreigner. You people lie with such ease.

Second: It's August. Romney doesn't even have a running mate, the conventions are still a ways away and there hasn't even been a debate. Obama is getting a slight bump because of a slew of negative personal ads which have been proven to be false (Obama is racking up the pinocchios at politfacts) but negative ads can only take you so far. Eventually Obama is going to have to answer for his miserable handling of the economy, the croneyism of his green investments, fast and furious, the 20,000 people who lost their pensions when GM was bailed out and the classified leaks that came from the White House.

Obama will be looking for work next January.

AMy B Portland, ME

"likable, positive, inspiring"? Surely you jest. What is likable about someone who wants to destroy the healthcare of seniors in favor of illegals? What is positive about someone who holds a Muslim day of prayer on the Whitehouse lawn then cancels the National Day of Prayer for Christians? What is inspiring to anyone but those who depend on government money for the number of people surviving on food stamps to grow exponentially and the welfare rolls growing while working people are downgraded to dependency because of no jobs while Obama throws millions to his buddies who "invest" in his green dreams that end in bankruptcy. Give us a break already. Polls? Schmolls? Spin all you want we'll remember in November. ABO.

and Tea Sucks

You guys remind me of 7 years olds who mime what other people know they just said. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. You say Romney wants to be KING. HAH, he is not the one totally disregarding our constitution and issuing kingly decrees any time he doesn't get Congress to do what he wants. THAT is a guy who not only wants to be king, he wants to be the DICTATOR of a Socialist Nation. Sorry bud but we don't want to live in such a nation. OMG!

bayllie

You can google it yourself to prove that Bush only approved spending for 2009 at the same level as in 2008 - just put in 'Bush Continuing Resolution 2009' and you'll get plenty of other links - below are a few more. Virtually all of the huge spending increase for 2009 was Obama and his Democratic Congress from the 2009 Budget signed by Obama in March 2009 - after he passed the 'stimulus' - an undeniable FACT. By the way - you can confirm for yourself the 'Registered vs Likely Voter' bias by doing your own analysis - just compare the average of the Likely Voter polls with that of Registered Voter polls at Realclearpolitics - it's currently running at about 5.7% overall - skewed towards Obama largely because some pollsters are seriously over-sampling Democrats as much as 50% in their surveys to give misleading results - specifically NBC/WSJ, NPR and PEW.

www.chieftain.com/news/local/bush-signs-budget/article_0d64329f-0c6f

www.docstoc.com/docs/5109251/continuing-resolution

osr.rice.edu/forms/NIH/NIHAwardLimitsContinuingResolution.doc

So, Steve, it is Obama's fault that you keep failing at getting out of middle class? Hmmm...I think you might need to look at what YOU are doing wrong and stop blaming others for your own failures.

I love these people that say they never took anything from the government. I'm betting thier the first ones that take EVERY deduction they can get. They use our highways and bridges, they went to our schools , most of them . I could go on and on , not worth it. Our states are short on money , where do they think this comes from , with Mr. Romneys tax plans the states will have even less money , so where will the states get the money for schools , infastructure , etc. , I don't see any option but for them to raise taxes , read fees and levies. This is cutting taxes? what about the poor and under employed . And this is what the Republicans want? I'm sorry.

It’s another example of the base’s wariness of Romney and the gap of trust that exists. This is a problem for Romney. How will Romney lead his party if they don’t trust him?

C'mon, this is one of your own!! After all, he swore he was 'severely conservative'.

From the Wash Post:

Let us try to tell the story of Mitt Romney, “severely conservative” governor.

Perhaps it should start in 2002, when Romney was campaigning in Massachusetts. “I’m not a partisan Republican,” Romney said. “I’m someone who is moderate, and . . . my views are progressive.”

That was about the same time he swore he would never change his pro-abortion stance, and he did. Here it is from the horse's mouth: http://www.upworthy.com/wouldnt-it-be-crazy-if-we-had-footage-of-romney-denouncing-his-own-pro-life-agen?c=la1

He is a liar.

The only thing the Obama campaign really needs to do as far as campaigning goes, is put out videos of Romney stating clearly and sincerely his positions on the wide variety of issues he came up against while governor of Massachusetts, since those positions are pretty much all the exact opposite of what his stated positions are today. Who can really trust the man? I can't tell what on earth he stands for, other than saying whatever it takes to get elected.

The only thing the Obama campaign really needs to do as far as campaigning goes, is put out videos of Romney stating clearly and sincerely his positions on the wide variety of issues he came up against while governor of Massachusetts, since those positions are pretty much all the exact opposite of what his stated positions are today. Who can really trust the man? I can't tell what on earth he stands for, other than saying whatever it takes to get elected.

And all Romney needs to do is show the th deficit has soared under Obama while growth has stagnated and unemployment has ballooned.

Obama's record is one of abject failure which is why they are trying to divert attention to Romney. That might work in August but November is a ways away.

no joe, no bo, nj

Uh, Amy? You READ the Fox poll? If you did, you'd notice something pretty interesting- 45% democrats, 35% republicans.

Uh, nojonobo, the margin of error is the SAME for party preferences as it is for prefences in candidate. If 45% say they're Democrats and 35% say Repub and the margin of error is 3%, then within a 95% level of confidence, the range between 48% Dem and 32% Repub and 42% Dem and 38% Repub.

The extreme lower end of that range is in line with the estimates of party affiliation produced by the pro-Republican Gallup organization. But since it's not just one but several polls that indicate both big leads for Obama and leads of Dems over Repubs it's unlikely that ALL those polls are outriders that accidentally oversampled Democrats. There are two other possibilities:

1. People with no strong party affiliation who like Obama know he's a Democrat, and so are more likely to say they're Democrats, too, when asked for their party preferences. The same people might identify themselves as Repubs or independents if not asked in the same poll to indicate their preference for presidential candidate.

2. People are actually changing their party affiliation from the Repubs to the Dems. That wouldn't surprise me after people have gotten a belly-full of the tea bag lunatics running amok in Congress for two years and the repulsiveness of the GOP nominee for president.

Anyone who would vote for OBOZO would have NO problem voting for hugo chavez if he was running for office. They are pretty much one and the same if not for our laws. WHICH, I might add OBOZO is ignoring, along with OUR Constitution!! You libs are pathetic!!

steve-605134

Who SHOULD we trust?

Both men graduated Harvard.

One man chose to line his personal pockets from the moment his degree hit his hand.

The other man chose to hit the streets and work on behalf of his community and those that have less than you and I...foregoing the YEARS of high salary that would have been available to him immediately.

And..."but I don't want to be middle class" - seems you have conveniently forgotten (SURELY you're not trying to single-handedly rewrite history) that wages began stagnating IN THE 80's. As well, the previous administration turned a blind eye to the needs of our own country and chose to BLOW BILLIONS on nations other than ours.

Conservative friend in 2008: "We can't afford to have a Democrat in office! We need someone who is fiscally conservative, not a 'tax-and-spend' liberal!"

Me: "That would be better than a 'borrow and spend' conservative."

Conservative friend, with fear in her eyes: "Well, it's not supposed to be that way."

She could see the handwriting on the wall, and I guess she probably sees it this year, too. Republicans talk about being fiscally responsible, but when their guy was in power, he started two unnecessary wars and passed Medicare Part D without funding them. He gave us tax cuts that we didn't need so that he would be popular. He started wars so that he would have a legacy. Romney sounds like he wants to do the same with his support of the Ryan budget and his support of Israel's bombing Iran. If he has different ideas from Bush--if he doesn't want the same trickle-down tax policies, then he sure hasn't done a very good job of communicating it. Romney bashes Obama's policies but thinks he doesn't have to explain how he'd do things better--just not like Obama. That's just not good enough, especially when he seems to have so much baggage.

Vote for President Obama for a Better America !!!!!!!!!!!

She could see the handwriting on the wall, and I guess she probably sees it this year, too. Republicans talk about being fiscally responsible, but when their guy was in power, he started two unnecessary wars and passed Medicare Part D without funding them. He gave us tax cuts that we didn't need so that he would be popular. He started wars so that he would have a legacy. Romney sounds like he wants to do the same with his support of the Ryan budget and his support of Israel's bombing Iran. If he has different ideas from Bush--if he doesn't want the same trickle-down tax policies, then he sure hasn't done a very good job of communicating it. Romney bashes Obama's policies but thinks he doesn't have to explain how he'd do things better--just not like Obama. That's just not good enough, especially when he seems to have so much baggage.

And all Obama has done is run up 5 trillion in deficits without any way to pay for them while sinking the economy and making 8% unemployment the norm. You want 4 more years of THAT???

The other day on the news, they ran clip after clip of different speeches of Romney with his quotes of , "you didn't get there on your own" philosophy. I think this guy takes the prize of KING flip flopper of all the ages. Here is a person who is truly not comfortable in his own skin because he is trying to wear the skin of another person with each person he meets. Trouble is, wearing the skin of another person is not the same as having the same mindset. At the end of the day his skin crawls because he mingled with the masses. He sometimes can't keep his thoughts inside when meeting people and those thoughts come to the surface like a fart in the bath tub! Like his whine about stoe bought cookies....He could not sit and talk and eat a damn cookie with the underlings. He is that incapable of understanding or sharing a damn cookie in their world.

Obama/Biden real people for real people. Vote Team America and enjoy those store bought Oreo cookies. I like mine with coffee or milk! (subliminal message intended!)

Starsailing

Do you really want to go down the list of promises Obama made while campaigning last time that he has flipped on?

Bethie, Thaat wont wash. He has put out what his ideas are but the media wont cover it. You will have to do some research. The war issue is a bad one since he was GIVEN the athority to do what he did and the libs, when clinton was in there, said along with the rest of the world he had wmd's. He had already used them on hi OWN people. BOZOs policies are killing American jobs! He has ignoerd our laws AND OUR Constitution! I could go on but the subject just pisses me off to much! THE ENEMY OF THE STATE HOLDS THE HIGHEST OFFICE IN TE LAND!!!

Q22--no, the economy is not where it needs to be, but it is recovering, and I don't think changing Presidents will help the recovery go faster. We don't need austerity measures--look at Great Britain. As far as the deficit goes, I don't like that, obviously. However, I am aware that much of the spending was to keep our country from going over the cliff (bailouts, stimulus, tax cuts), and a lot of that debt is from previous administrations. Bush, for example, never included the exhorbitant cost of his two wars on the books.

You say that he ran up the deficits "without any way to pay for them", yet when he wanted to let the Bush tax cuts expire, the Republicans in Congress held unemployment benefits hostage. I feel that our recovery would indeed have been faster if they had not pledged to obstruct Obama from the very beginning and instead looked for ways to compromise and get things done for the benefit of our country. Again--how would Romney do things differently from Bush or better than Obama? Be specific, please.

You say that he ran up the deficits "without any way to pay for them", yet when he wanted to let the Bush tax cuts expire, the Republicans in Congress held unemployment benefits hostage. I feel that our recovery would indeed have been faster if they had not pledged to obstruct Obama from the very beginning and instead looked for ways to compromise and get things done for the benefit of our country. Again--how would Romney do things differently from Bush or better than Obama? Be specific, please.

Anyone would have done better than Obama. ANYONE!! That includes Bush (1 &2), Clinton (Bill or Hillary), McCain, Palin, a cardboard cutout of Dan Quail or Socks the cat. Obama has budget deficits of more than $1.3 trillion every year he has been in office and projected for the next 10 years! And what do we have for it? anemic growth and high unemployment.

Time for this experiment to end.

And all Obama has done is run up 5 trillion in deficits without any way to pay for them while sinking the economy and making 8% unemployment the norm. You want 4 more years of THAT???

Q22, I'll take THAT over $4 trillion in deficits, losing 750,00 jobs a MONTH, and handing over a financial collapse (and all his war costs, plus 10% unemployment) to the next President. THAT is the choice.

"True" Texan, you claim that the president's policies are killing jobs, even as we've had 30 straight months of jobs added to economy. Yes, people are also still losing jobs, too. Our own governor and Republican-led legislative body have killed how many teachers' jobs this past year?? Many jobs that have been lost are public-sector jobs, which are an important part of the economy. Teachers pay for houses, cars, food, etc. They send their kids to college (and they help prepare our kids for college and future jobs). They pay taxes and invest their time, energy, and talents in educating the future generation. Yet, Texas legislators could not see fit to use some of the "rainy day fund" to provide for teachers' salaries. Do not lie about Obama's policies. Just saying it doesn't make it so.

How many of those "jobs" were created by "stimulus" money? When the money ran out so did the jobs. I know because I have teachers in my family. Yes we need teachers but we DONT need a teachers union that is paid for by tax dollars. Gov. jobs are paid for by tax dollars. Private sector jobs PAY those taxes. We have more people on unemployment and food stamps now than any time in history. MANY under employed. The youth cant hardly find a summer job or any kind of a job for that matter! I DONT LIE!~ You can look up the facts for yourself, if you are able. He WILL destroy America if he is re-elected!!!

TT--Romney's put out his ideas but the media won't cover it? Excuse me, then Romney is a weak candidate for not knowing how to get his ideas across. He's out on the stump nearly every day. The problem is that he doesn't like to answer questions. He asks us to wait until after he's elected. When he does put out a plan, like his tax plan, we see that it is something that would benefit the rich at the expense of the middle class. Or he changes what he says, like when he mentioned the importance of culture in the development of a country's economy, then says he wasn't talking about that, and then finally writes an op-ed explaining that culture does have an impact on the health of a country's economy. (Well, duh. But so do other factors, like occupation.)

Romney hides his own tax returns, expecting us to just give him the benefit of the doubt. I don't know why he thinks we should give him special treatment--maybe it's that sense of entitlement that comes with always having been wealthy. He had financial records from the Olympics destroyed and got rid of all the digital records from his time as governor. You guys say that Obama can't run on his record, but Romney hides all of his records.

To Chris Dorr You have got to be @!$%#ting me. He authorized the government to give GM twenty some billion dollars to ship factories out of the US and the Cadillac factory went to China. What good has he done for anyone except the super wealthy? Wake up

Yes, TT--teachers' salaries are paid through taxes: PROPERTY taxes. So, as a homeowner, I contribute to teachers' wages. Many businesses do too, if they own property. And lots of people who own homes do not have kids, but they do not mind paying property taxes because they know that an educated populace is preferable to an uneducated one. They know we're all on the same boat, and that student down the street might become the doctor who saves their life some day. Teachers are not leeches, sir. If they didn't care about your kids, they would do something else and make a lot more money at it.

You obviously only listen to msnbc, nbc, cbs and other liberal "news". I HAVE heard some of the things he wants to do. I HAVE heard interviews with him. He has NOT said we have to wait to see what he is going to do! It was peeelosi that said we had to pass the "healt" bill to see what was in it! I, I heard her say that! I am NOT rich, not any where close to it. I am just lucky enough to have a job but I know I have NEVER got a job from a poor man. I have no problem with rich people. BTW, I dont even know any. I have a BIG problem with someone destroying jobs. Where is ANY, ANY of bozos records?? College? Anything! He has spent millions on lawyers hidding his records! The left slanders the women on the right and HE SAYS NOTHING! The left (him also) LIES and no one calles him out on it! He is the biggest joke of a pres. since jimmy carter. Reagan was handed a worse economy and we did great. Bozo has to go. He knows exactly what he is doing and its destroying U.S.

BTW, I said NOTHING about teachers. Dont twist my words the way you libs love to do. I said teachers UNIONS!! BIG difference!

QQQQQQ22222222.....Repubs hold nation hostage to give more tax breaks to the greedy rich when the majority of people said the rich need to pay more...., the repubs were holding students hostage when they were blocking to keep student loan interest rates at same level while giving special low and no interest loans to the rich....., the repubs are blocking bill to remove tax breaks for companies offshoring jobs....., and blocking the same bill to give tax credit to those companies that bring back jobs to America....., the repubs were blocking healthcare bill for 911 first responders after wrapping themselves in flags with photo ops of the sick and dying 911 responders...., they voted for the healthcare the next day after being exposedo national tv........repubs and record amount of filibusters to make Obama a one term president even when it means crashing the economy worse.......Romney...everyone should like him he has been on both sides of the issue one time or another.......

I am Starsailing, and I approve this message!

Folks, I am 81 years old and grew up during the Great Depression and I must say most of you have no clue what it can get like if we allow ourselves to believe money hogs like Romney should take charge. He simply does not have the experience and perspective to be one to lead this country. His ideas are full of crap.

During the Great depression the rich stepped up to a tax rate as high as 90% and everyone joined in the fight during WW2 and we all made it out of the dirt with great men like Eisenhower, a super soldier and later the greatest president in modern times, a Republican, following another great president, Roosevelt, a Democrat, both who had the survival of the nation on their minds and not the petty horsesh*t we are fed today by FAKE conservatives.

The differnce back then is what is today called The Great Society. All Americans except the few Fascists in our midst worked together without the endless and useless crap we see today which is mainly looking in the other guy's pocket.

The Far Right asking the middle class and poor to get us out of the mess that has favored only the rich is a long term loser.

I am ashamed to see our great nation even thinking the likes of Gingrich, Palin, Bush, Romney and the rest can possibly be considered people that will do anything but line their own pockets.

Did I forget the worst of the lot? Yes, Dick the pr*ck Cheney.

Obama may not be the greatest - YET - but he is the only chance we have.

Roy, of course your links do not add the appropriation bills that Pres. Bush signed during his term, after his budget was passed.......

http://archive.mises.org/16107/bushs-huge-budget-numbers-blamed-on-obama/

"

This is very clever of course, since few people out in the public understand how federal budgeting works, but the fact is that the spending that occurred during the 2009 fiscal year is almost totally the result of appropriations bills signed by George W. Bush during the 2008 calendar year. By shifting Bush’s 2009 spending to Obama, one can then understate the amount of federal spending authorized by Bush while inflating the spending authorized by Obama. This then helps perpetuate the myth that one party is more “responsible” with taxpayer funds than the other party.

The Budget Process and Presidential Terms

The federal fiscal year lasts from October 1 to September 30 (It ended on June 30 prior to 1976). So, the 2009 fiscal year ended in September of 2009, eight months after Bush left office. When Obama was sworn into office, Bush had already submitted his 3.1 trillion dollar 2009 budget almost a year earlier. He then signed the stack of resulting appropriations bills submitted to him by Congress throughout 2008 which authorized the federal spending that would take place once the 2009 FY actually began in October. Then, in the fall of 2008, Bush supported and signed additional spending bills providing for various bailouts and stimulus programs that marked the end of his presidency, and which would show up as spending in 2009. Needless to say, the already-enormous 2009 budget that Bush had submitted in early 2008 was not totally reflective of the full impact of the huge spending increases that would eventually be authorized by Bush. Bush’s original budget was $3.1 trillion, but once one adds in all the bailouts and stimulus spending also supported by Bush, the number is actually much larger, and this is the number that shows up in the spending figures now being attributed to Obama for FY2009.

Again Roy, you fail to support your assertions with all the history. Just pick out what is political hacking.

"You can google it yourself to prove that Bush only approved spending for 2009 at the same level as in 2008 - just put in 'Bush Continuing Resolution 2009' and you'll get plenty of other links - below are a few more. Virtually all of the huge spending increase for 2009 was Obama and his Democratic Congress from the 2009 Budget signed by Obama in March 2009 - after he passed the 'stimulus' - an undeniable FACT.", again what fact, only subjective figures not based on the total budget for 2009. Again Pres. Bush had the opportunity to veto any appropriation bill for 2009 during his term in 2008,,,,,,,and did he? Answer: NO.

Pippo....WELL SAID!!!!

Obam/Biden 2012

Why the polls are accurate and Romney will lose:

"The mobility effect refers to a basic asymmetry of globalization: the difference between internationally mobile capital and immobile labor.

When capital becomes internationally mobile, countries begin to compete for it. They do this by offering improved profitability compared with other countries, for example, by cutting corporate tax rates, easing regulations, tolerating pollution, or ignoring labor standards.

In the ensuing competition among governments, capital benefits from a "race to the bottom," in which governments engage in a downward spiral of taxation and regulation in order to try to keep one step ahead of other countries.

All countries lose in the end, since all end up losing the tax revenues and regulations needed to manage the economy.

The biggest loser ends up being internationally immobile labor, which is likely to face higher taxation to compensate for the loss of taxation on capital."

Jeffrey Sachs, The Price of Civilization, 2011.

As long as Romney represents internationally mobile capital and not labor, as long as he represents higher taxation on labor and lower taxation on capital, and as long as he is disingenuous about his positions on various issues, he cannot win.

Obama/Biden 2012

If thats the way you remember it, you are going senile. I wont even attempt to go thru all I would have to because you wouldnt listen anyway. A life long lib WONT ever change. Libs want the gov. to raise them. I am grown up and I WANT TO STAND ON MY OWN!

LogicReguired

Vote for President Obama! The survival of the middle class depends on it!

How's the "middle class" been doing so far under Obama? Oh that's right he has lead the worst recovery in history, with the majority of the pain being felt by the middle class.

And let me explain to you WHY the recovery has been so slow. Over the past 30 years, as unions have shriveled, outsourcing increased (some justified, some not), higher costs of living, and stagnate middle class wages, more and more people rely on debt instead of savings to make up the difference between income and consumption. Due to lax financial regulations, businesses also began relying on debt, and focused on short-term profit rather than long-term prosperity (see the late 90s-early 2000s corporate scandals). This massive buildup of private debt led to a bubble, which burst in 2008. The credit crunch soon happened, and now instead of spending money people are using extra income to pay off debts. In the long-term, this is good, but with less consumption, the recovery slows down in the short-term, leading to less investment. In fact, the past 3 recoveries have been slower than their predecessors.

If you want to go down the road of losing power, jobs, and sustainability like Europe then vote for Obama who will continue to lead us down a road that has already been traveled and is falling as we speak.

Technically, both jobs and our economy's sustainability are secured due to the end of the recession and the reduction in private debt. Our power, however, was dealt with a great blow with the decline of education, healthcare, and our standing around the world (thank you George Bush). However, many people across the world still view America favorably, in part because Obama seems much more friendly and open then the tough and aggressive Bush. However, Obama still shows America's prowess via his drone attacks on al Qaeda, which have severely crippled the organization's leadership structure.

High taxes, government ran health care, and every other progressive thought has already been tried in Europe and instead of bringing equality and some Utopian society you have debt problems, a shrinking middle class, and a line around the corner to see a doctor. Europe is a dead, they just don't know it yet.

Typical conservative; always blames the welfare state when the private sector fails. The REAL reason why Europe is weak right now is not due to large expenditures (except maybe Greece, but there are some other factors for them, like lax revenues), but because of the financial crisis. The financial crisis forced countries like Spain and Italy to bail out their banks (much like we did) and then service the needs of their unemployed citizens. That pushed deficits above 3% of GDP, forcing the nations to use austerity in return for bailouts from the Eurozone, leading them to go back into recession. That, and the fact that the Eurozone is not a fiscal union, has led Europe to become weak. However, even though their economy is slow, their citizens fare considerably better than ours. France has the world's best healthcare system, a government-run system. Over there they spend 10.5% of GDP on healthcare, compared to our 16%. France has some problems, but they are still comparatively better than us on cost, quality, and efficiency.

Personally, I wonder why conservative oppose the concept of universal healthcare. Is it because they think the poor don't deserve treatment, or because they think healthcare is a privilege??? Either way, they fail to see how our private healthcare system is flawed and unsustainable; costs are increasing faster than inflation, and yet quality is moderate at best. And why would anyone think that some should prosper from the physical agony and suffering of others??? If conservatives were as "pro-business" as they claim to be, they would know how our healthcare system is unsustainable and needs at least some government management.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

Some polls can be heavily skewed towards Democrats, but the ones that aren't show a much clearer picture; nothing can save Obama.

Optimism about economy down, poll shows

"The number of people who say the economy is starting to recover has dropped 5 points since April, from 24 percent to 19 percent, while the number who say that the economy remains in a downturn is up 6 points to 39 percent, a CNN/ORC International poll released Friday shows.

"That all seems bad news for President Barack Obama's re-election chances,..says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland."

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/optimism-economy-down-poll-shows-093440014.html

Starsailing my buddy where you been?

Bob-1920561 "Roy, of course your links do not add the appropriation bills that Pres. Bush signed during his term, after his budget was passed......."

You don't make it clear what fiscal year you're talking about, so I'll address both 2008 and 2009;

All of the spending for 2008, including any 'additional appropriations' signed by Bush, were included in the final accounting for 2008, which showed total Federal spending of $2.983 Trillion.

While Bush did propose a Budget for 2009 of $3.1 Trillion, it was ignored by the Democratic Congress, which decided to wait until after the 2008 elections, hoping Obama would win, and then they could spend as much as they wanted. Because the Democrats in Congress refused to negotiate a 2009 Budget with Bush, there was no 2009 Budget authorized by Bush, so Bush was forced to sign a Continuing Resolution on the last day of fiscal 2008, and Bush only authorized spending at the same level in 2009 as in 2008 - link below;

https://www.aamc.org/advocacy/washhigh/highlights2008/159056/president_signs_spending_bill.html

If you can find any reliable links where Bush signed any 'additional appropriations' for fiscal 2009, I would agree that Bush should be held accountable for them, but otherwise all of the $535 Billion in additional spending for 2009 that was not authorized by Bush has to be the responsibility of Obama and his Democratic controlled Congress.

Give me a list of 'additional appropriations' for fiscal 2009 signed by Bush, and I will adjust my figures, but if you can't, then the huge 18% increase in spending for fiscal 2008 has to be blamed on Obama and the Democrats in Congress.

Put up or, well, you know.

Roy, here are a few but not all the sites that discredit your political hacking,,,,,,, the first is from Cato Institute, a ultra-conservative think tank, as Republican/Conservative as you can get,,,http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/dont-blame-obama-for-bushs-2009-deficit/, "It should go without saying that this post is not an argument for Obama’s fiscal policy. The current President promised change, but he is continuing the wasteful and profligate policies of his big-spending predecessor. That is where critics should be focusing their attention."

Then we have a respected economic policy site ,,,http://archive.mises.org/16107/bushs-huge-budget-numbers-blamed-on-obama/,,,,,,,"One of the better resources for understanding how much the federal government has spent -and when it spent the money- is through the data on federal outlays provided by the Congressional Budget Office. The CBO provides easy-to-use data on federal outlays from 1971 to 2010. Outlays are federal moneys that have actually been spent. In the government budget process, moneys are budgeted, authorized and allocated, but they only become outlays once they’ve actually been used to pay government employees or contract services or buy things." and "Federal outlays increased 74.9 percent during Bush’s term. In inflation-adjusted dollars, they increased 46.6 percent. In both cases, these are the largest increases for any president in decades." and "Nevertheless, George W. Bush is among the worst offenders, and since Obama took office, conservatives and Republicans have clearly taken a strategy of rehabilitating Bush’s record on spending by attempting to foist Bush’s 2009 spending on Obama".

Than we have a reputable newspaper,,,http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/04/washington/04cnd-budget.html,,," And the White House’s plans for trimming Medicare and Medicaid have also been previewed." and "Mr. Bush’s proposed budget, the first in the nation’s history to exceed $3 trillion, foresees near-record deficits just ahead — $410 billion in the current fiscal year, on spending of $2.9 trillion, and $407 billion for the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1 — before the budget would come into balance in 2012." and "But the total federal debt held by the public — that is, the accumulated total of all federal borrowing — has grown substantially in recent years. It was $3.3 trillion in 2001, when President Bush took office, and is expected to climb to $5.4 trillion this year and $5.9 trillion in 2009, according to budget documents issued by the White House on Monday. As a share of the economy, federal debt held by the public is expected to reach 39 percent of the gross domestic product in 2009, up from 33 percent in 2001."

and this,,,,,,,,,,http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22981657/ns/politics/t/bushs-proposed-trillion-budget-biggest/,,,,"The 2009 spending plan sent to Congress on Monday will project huge budget deficits, around $400 billion for this year and next and more than double the 2007 deficit of $163 billion. But even those estimates could prove too low given the rapidly weakening economy and the total costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which Bush does not include in his request for the budget year beginning Oct." and "The $3 trillion Bush's proposes spending in 2009 would be the first time that milestone has been reached. Bush also presided over the first budget to hit $2 trillion, in 2002. It took the government nearly 200 years to reach the first $1 trillion budget, which occurred in 1987 during the Reagan administration.". Pres. Obama added the cost of the war in his budget,,,, stop trying to dummy us down to your level.

Now, you can stop the political hack job, but you won't as your memory is way to selective....

The Presidents, proposed budget has never been the final budget for the coming year, and you know that. Yet you claim "You can google it yourself to prove that Bush only approved spending for 2009 at the same level as in 2008" -, but what will "approve" mean to you? Did he sign bills that he did not approve of? Where is the prove in your political hack statement?

You continue to attempt to confuse the general public, here, with innuendo and your quotes that are not based on facts and have been shown to be illogical. Yet you continue to throw more rhetoric into your own demise.

Again, you are a political hack, are guilty of intellectual malpractice, and a history revisionist. For a man who claims a Master in Finance you have no integrity. Good Day.

Roy, more on subject..... another trait you do not want to abide by..... http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/archive/2012_electoral_college_scoreboard

Can you refute this from your supposed authority on political polls? The electoral poll #'s favor Pres. Obama, as of this week. Yet you only bring up "likely voters" and contrarian statements of your own.

Politics is supposed to be the second oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first.
Ronald Reagan

Yesterday, watching Newt Gingrich speaking with Chris Mathews proved this to be an absolute TRUTH.

New Gingrich now is on the side of Mitt Romney, and only has nice words for him. This old whore is paving his way to a job if Mitt Romney gets elected. Never mind that he was the one who opened our eyes to who Mitt Romney was.

Good morning Floyd, Another Great One!

As Alex Becker reported: (the first two paragraphs of the story

Mitt Romney Criticized By Franciscan Friars For Comments On The Poor

alex.becker@huffingtonpost.com

WASHINGTON-- "The Franciscan Action Network (FAN), a Catholic faith-based advocacy and civic engagement organization, is strongly criticizing Mitt Romney's recent ads and rhetoric regarding welfare programs and welfare recipients, urging him to spend some time in low-income communities."

"Our Christian tradition teaches that we are to treat the poor with dignity and to prioritize the poor in our policies as a society," the organization said in a press release on Thursday. "At a time when millions are struggling financially, it is degrading to talk about the 'dependency' of people hurting in this economy, as Gov. Romney did recently."

Remember when insensitive Romney makes a joke that he's also unemployed... this November, let's show him that the American people will not employ him as our commander in chief - that insensitive ninkomput.

A very fun post IR, but I think you are wrong about Romney, when you write:

"Every time he opens his mouth he manages to lie about and p!ss of either the opposition or his own constituency."

I truly don't believe Romney is lying. Bear with me on this. If there is a consistent thread in the Romney narrative and Republican/right-wing ideology it is that money is the measure of success. For Christ's sake, when Romney was in Israel, he compared Israeli and Palestinian per capita GDP as the indicator of cultural superiority.

For his supporters, Romney's wealth means he is intelligent. That's simply not true. Sure, plenty of intelligent folks are very wealthy. It is also true that many intelligent people are not wealthy when measured solely on their financial holdings. Wealth is measured in many ways that do not even remotely touch on money.

Now consider Romney's approach to this election. He has embraced one policy after another that essentially reduce a woman to the status of chattel. He equates human beings with paper creations - corporations. He promises to send thousands of Americans to their deaths by repealing "Obamacare". A first-order draft-dodger he thumps his chest, and is willing to send Americans to die on foreign soil, EXCEPT his own children who are on a mission from god to get their father elected.

No, Mitt Romney is not lying. Mitt Romney is not intelligent at all. He actually believes what he is saying. Mitt Romney is stupid, and no amount of money is going to change that.

IR, informative articles. Just proves that Romney's connection to the conservative base is so fragile that even one reference to his signature accomplishment as MA Governor set their hair on fire. Your last paragraph describing Romney is perfect! He may be smart at vulture capitalism but he lacks good, solid street smarts.

You think Newt would not support Romney? That is saying why did Clinton say yes to being in Obama's cabinet? She supports him now right and if I remember right that was an ugly battle between the two of them.

IR -

I was planning on responding to "Fairfax Bill's" well-researched but misleading GUTTING THE WELFARE LAW post with facts about the waiver requirements, but you did a damn good job of beating me to the punch.

It's a shame he claimed to spend so much time researching the law, but apparently spent little time investigating the details of the memo in questions or the truth behind it's intentions.

This mirrors the approach of mosts of the Republicans in Congress. They no longer work to find solutions, they only look for ways to discredit the President.

If President Obama found a way to cure cancer, the GOP would find a way to be against it - maybe they would claim it would "gut the medical profession".

David Maybe I should of put it something like Ol'Willard has told so many lies he can't help but p!ss somebody off when he tries to tell 'em without remembering where he is. I do agree that Ol' Willard is the most unintelligent Presidential Candidate that I've ever seen to get the Nomination. It don't take smarts to tell a lie but it does to keep those lies straight.

EVERYONE is dependent on the government. Including Mr Romney. Or does anyone seriously think he could have made his millions in a 3rd world country?

Even the people in Mr Romney's "We did it ourselves" ad were dependent on the US government; they took hundreds of thousands of dollars in loans from the US taxpayer.

This pretense that somehow the rich are not dependent on the government is pure BS. They are. And often much more so than the poor.

Bron - "This pretense that somehow the rich are not dependent on the government is pure BS. They are. And often much more so than the poor."

And yet you want to raise taxes on them? Why do you hate people who are so dependent on others so much? Why not tax the less dependent poor as you put it?

Pretending successful people are leeches on society in an attempt to make the real leeches look less greedy and lazy only highlights your own jealousy and hatred of people who accomplished more than you ever could.

You are 1 of the lost souls in the US for Obama will sink you to debt and allow you to die as a poor old person!!!

Wow steve, that's quite a load you pinched off.

Both Obama and his wife have been disbarred from ever practicing law ever again in this country

Don't you ever grow tires of making an ass out of yourself?

PROVE they were disbarred or STFU!

As for the rest of your comment, when you lead off with a WHOPPER like you did, no one bothers to read the rest of your BS!

Wow steve just wow. Son I do believe that if you hurry you can still catch the buy one get one free sale on industrial strength tin foil down at the Piggly Wiggly so you can replenish your head ware.

Quoting Judge Judy, "If you tell the truth, you don't have to try to keep your lies straight.".

He made his millions ripping off the american worker. And yes he is stupid if he thinks having to have someone say "what he meant to say was" after everything he says makes him look intelligent. It just makes him look as pathetic as he really is. He's nothing but a PUPPET for the RICH. He's their candidate only because they know they can manipulate him the most. He doesn't even look intelligent, he just looks FAKE.

steve - you're a damned liar. We've discussed this over and over again but once more for you since you insist on posting lies even while you KNOW they are lies.

The Obamas have put their law licenses on "inactive" status while he is President. Otherwise they would have to be doing continuing education each year and paying significant malpractice insurance - as all attorneys do. When they return to private life they can - if they choose - re-activate their licenses.

The rest of your post is such ignorant drivel it is not worth discussing. You really need some professional help.

Obama/Biden 2012

Since the big O is sooooo far ahead in the poles...all of you Obamanites...you can just stay home on election day...

The New York Times

The result was a rare Romney flop: The housing market soon collapsed, and he was stuck renting out the houses for years before unloading them, mostly at a loss, in the late 1990s, according to property records. The renters were offered the first chance to buy, but the Stampses could not qualify for a mortgage, recalled Mr. Stamps, who at the time had recently lost his job at an oil company.

“Then I got this phone call, personally, from Mr. Romney, asking if we really wanted to buy the house,” Mr. Stamps, 63, said in an interview the other day at the barbershop he now runs. “I said, yes we did. And he said he would loan us the money. He really helped us when we needed it.”

Wow, how evil!! Helping people own their home? What a monster. (enter sarcastic laugh here.)

You tools of the left just never open your eyes to the reality of the world and choose to be blinded by hate, envy, and the lies told to you by a fixed media machine, and government ran education

What's with the posting of long winded DNC talking point memo's? Seriously how many Obama campaign organizers are on here?

These retarted copy and paste campaign postings are boring and are no better then spam.

Rumors the GOP is going to dump Romney at the Convention !!!!!!!

juanita - we're not stupid like you. We'll all be voting.

Logic Required - do you EVER plan to get any logic? Really?

No one I know envies the Romneys. They have nothing I want. And, I don't hate them - I just have no use for useless people who lack integrity.

Obama/Biden 2012

Doctor Seuss for 2012: "I do not like Barack Obama, I do not like his health care scam. I do not like that sneaky crook, or how he lies and cooks the books. I do not like it when he steals, I do not like his secret deals. I do not like that metro man, I do not like his 'YES WE CAN.' I do not like his spending spree, does he not know that nothing's free? I do not like his smug replies, I do not like his constant lies. I do not like his kind of hope. I do not like it. Nope, nope, nope."

Dumbfux -- You've just been given a Harry and apparently you think it unfair. why not just STFU!

Thanks for playing

Logic Required - do you EVER plan to get any logic? Really?

LogicReguired, spelling of required wrong, is not me saying all I post is logic, it is pointing out how stupid people tend to post thing as facts and logic when really it's like reading the rants of a third grader.

No one I know envies the Romneys. They have nothing I want. And, I don't hate them - I just have no use for useless people who lack integrity.

I just have no use for useless people who lack integrity. Enter third grader logic.

David Walker

No, Mitt Romney is not lying. Mitt Romney is not intelligent at all. He actually believes what he is saying. Mitt Romney is stupid, and no amount of money is going to change that.

Thanks David, that post was really interesting. I had honestly never considered that Willard could actually be sincere, even when he flip-flops. After reading you post and some articles on "The Conservative Mind" ...it all makes sense. Don't get me wrong, it doesn't make me feel better, it just makes sense. It's actually a call to action simply recognizing that these people really believe themselves and each other. I'm even beginning to believe the right-wing pundits are starting to believe their own rhetoric.

Patriotic American U.S.A.

Rumors the GOP is going to dump Romney at the Convention !!!!!!!

In my humble opinion they'd do better to dump the Tea Party.

Interesting but all the articles I've read points to the Obama's as voluntarily giving up their licenses or face investigations for wrong doing, of course this is just a conservative trick, we Liberals are pure and to well educated to do such things golly gee now lets keep attention on anything but what will help the country

Why I think liberals are dumb.

Liberals are dumb because they talk about progressive ideas that will help create some great society. Yet these ideas (taxing the rich, government ran health care, big government, lots of regulations) are not new, or even that progressive. Governments have tried these same things they preach now for hundreds of years, socialism, communism, European style capitalism, and they never work. Your so called new progressive idea is to do what Europe does, yet I see no Utopia in Europe. Only one country tried it a different way and that country went from the newest and smallest to the largest and most powerful in a matter of decades. Only one system has ever brought so much wealth and prosperity to any nation in the world and you tools want to move in a direction of Spain who has 20+% unemployment and is on the edge of bankruptcy. Not smart, dumb.

Juanita Dominguez wrote:

"Since the big O is sooooo far ahead in the poles...all of you Obamanites...you can just stay home on election day.."

Auditioning for a job as a pinata, are you Juanita?

Old Doc -- You wrote:

Thanks David, that post was really interesting

Agreed. David is spot on here, as usual. ; )

Logic Required, us Liberals aren't dumb, you conservatives are dumb.We're college educated that makes us smarter, and we're much more offensive, look how Romney is always playing defense. I'll bet you don't even know how Obama is going to pull us out of this fiscal collapse,time to finish hanging my Obama posters up on my bedroom walls oh there goes that tingling again

Apparently Utopia exists for you under the conservative ideas, or lack of them?

IR & David Walker....great posts/conversation. Whenever I hear someone equating wealth with intelligence (ie Romney) I can only respond with the following:

We are a NATION, not a corporation. We are CITIZENS, not employees.

Apparently Utopia exists for you under the conservative ideas, or lack of them?

Conservatives are not dumb enough to think Utopia can be achieved.

oh I thought since you used the term Utopia that is was a conservative thing. I've never heard it coming from the left.

Harey Chic, loved your Dr. Seuss, can't wait for the sequel

pjam09

Bron - "This pretense that somehow the rich are not dependent on the government is pure BS. They are. And often much more so than the poor."

And yet you want to raise taxes on them? Why do you hate people who are so dependent on others so much? Why not tax the less dependent poor as you put it?

I think fail to realize that IR was talking about how rich people are dependent on the government, not that they were more dependent. And taxing the poor does nothing good; you don't get much revenue, and you push them further down the poverty level.

Pretending successful people are leeches on society in an attempt to make the real leeches look less greedy and lazy only highlights your own jealousy and hatred of people who accomplished more than you ever could.

Everyone is a leech on society. You use roads built by the government to get around; I take advantage of safety precautions in airports so my plane doesn't explode in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean. The wealthy take advantage of special loopholes and deductions, like we do, but they tend to exploit ones that we cannot. Poor people are not inherently lazy; it's not a choice. You seem to think that there are enough jobs for everyone to live happily ever after. There aren't. Some poor are parasites, taking food stamps and selling them to buy cigarettes and beer. I can accept that. And some rich people are parasites, using their power and influence to buy elections via Super PACs and lobbyists. If you can accept that, then you can finally understand the real world.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

In the end the only poll that counts is the one on Nov 6th.