Keep dreaming... the only reason Romney's winning is due to the fact he's the only one running.

Anyone who thinks Romney isn't going to win Nebraska is dreaming.

Romney is winning because all the other candidates dropped out because they are tired of fighting a losing battle, the Anti-American Obama is next to go down and he knows it, that is why he is screwing with as many policies as he can before he gets kicked out of the office he has single handedly disgraced.

Doubtful. Romney 2012 will be, for the Republicans, just as disappointing as Kerry 2004 was for the Democrats.

Didn't Hillary and Obama campaign till June...

Exactly right, Devdoc.

The rest of you who are disagreeing . . . wake up. If Keith Judd can come within 19 percentage points of Obama while sitting in a state pen, I'm willing to be Romney will do just fine.

Sheez, Rasmussen just came out a few days ago with the 50-43 percentage poll for Romney over Obama.

In November 2012, Romney will finally have something in common with Reagan...They will both be fond memories of the RNC and GOP

Flip Flop wind Nebraska - Who Cares

Rasmussen polls are not partisan.

Hey if you can say Mitt is winning I can make up my own fiction.

West Virginia, a blood red state, full of radical right conservatives, voted for a criminal instead of a democrat. Who'd of thunk it. Wonder why the left don't come up with these kind of propagandas?

Maybe they don't want to stoop that low. Although, finally, they've hit back with a few punches. "Grandma in a wheelchair going over a cliff", that was pretty low, lol. It wasn't as low as death panels though.

FOX in New York has a good article:

Fifty-six percent of Americans think Obama will win, compared with 36 percent who believe Romney, the presumptive GOP nominee, will.The latest poll was based on telephone interviews conducted May 10-13 with a random sample of 1,012 adults. It has a margin of error of four percentage points. http://www.myfoxny.com/story/18430354/obama-and-romney-locked-in-polls-but-president-seen-as-solid-favorite-to-win

I know, I'm linking a partisan website. Sorry. But what's that say if Romney is "winning". Even Obama adversaries are saying differently. Perhaps they're just easing the big let-down come Novemember.

Yadda, yadda, yadda. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. This country needs a VIABLE third or even fourth party. The further the special interest groups have to spread themselve out, the better for us. And in other news, Congress passed a resolution saying that they will start to listen to the people that they work for and that pay their salaries. Oh heck, I knew this was risky. They're coming to put me back in that room again! No, No, get away! I don't want to go back there!! The demons, the demons!! help meeeee, help meeeeee...................

Polls of individual states show President Obama still holds a commanding lead on the electoral map, and as the Electoral College is the only means by which we elect presidents, that's the only data that really matters.

Most pollsters show the electoral results will look like this:

Romney: 191

Obama: 347

Romney has no viable path to 270.

Bosslimo,

Rasmussen Reports is most certainly biased. They are now, and have always been, a right wing organization. Interestingly enough, however, even their individual state polls show President Obama winning the election.

Omaha and Lincoln make up about 80% of Nebraska's population, and they are predominately Democratic. Which means the rest of the state is worthless when it comes to doing things other than growing corn and raising AWESOME Nebraska Beef!!!

VirginiaDemocrat78

mussen Reports is most certainly biased

Really? I can't believe my conservative friends would bother to post such a partisan poll. CubsFan2012, Why are you posting misleading information?

Yes, I'm aware Rasmussen is right wing fodder.

Interestingly enough, however, even their individual state polls show President Obama winning the election.

Yes, and I believe it is the right wing media's attempt of letting their conservative followers down easy.

I did finally get to see G.W. Bush's endorsement for Romney. What a well thought out speech. We all know the importance of getting that coveted blessing.

With age comes wisdom and Bush is no exception. He was smart enough to thoughtfully submit his endorsement right in time for the elevator to close, rendering any chance of shoes flying his way mute.

Ha ha, Romney, as governer of mass. 1. generated no jobs. 2. raised state sales tax. 3. yaks about Keystone pipe line, but doesn't say one word about 2 pipeline projects that were started about a year ago. 4. as a CEO he is a failer. CEOs make more money in bonuses ( bout 3-5 mill over 3 yrs avg). I guess that's why he's running for president. Nobody works for a cut in pay.

So it looks like Romney has now successfully bought the Repugnican nomination for POTUS a la bush 2000. Whoever can raise enough money to drag the others reputation through the mud wins. And he did it without ever offering a plan for anything that he wants to do.

But I must admit my surprise...I thought Oregon was a well educated liberal state. I didn't know it had any repugnicans. They must have shipped a few in for the primary.

hey ya'll, Romney is getting these state votes not because he is the only one running, but because he is the most qualified.

Primaries mean nothing. It's all about the delegates. Delegates are elected and sent to the convention. why don't people understand this process?

And RON PAUL IS STILL RUNNING!

@SinisterPhnx: Couldn't resist commenting; Why then shouldn't they stop the primaries and just get on with the general election?

And RON PAUL IS STILL RUNNING!

Anyone who thinks there is a difference between Romney and Obama are going to be very disappointed...

Noone but Ron Paul 2012!

Who else was running

so...the guy with the most money to last the longest....the one who all the other candidates vilified (but now like him)....the candidate who just cant seem to get his party to join him....THAT GUY is winning? Wow, if repub's call that winning.....just, WOW!

Just a few points. No electoral map prediction has Obama at 347. There are too many states in play for that to happen. If you put each state in its last preference category, except for those that have likely switched, like Florida, then you might be able to get into the low 300s, but this assumes every other of those states ends up remaining static. I doubt it. This is still Obama's to lose, but that says more about the political/intellectual/economic inertness of voters than it does about Romney's capabilities.

Every political race among same-party candidates has them savage one another, only to have the winner supported by the losers when the opponent is from the opposite party. No surprise here. Obama-Clinton is just one recent example, but this always happens. Taking some sort of pleasure from it is self-delusion, not clear political analysis.

Lastly, polls today mean little, but they do show a hopeful trend away from Obama, who has truly been an epic faliure as president. But we haven't even begun to see the massive push by most in the media to rip the republican apart in order to help them save them save their savior, Mr. Obama. But to conclude Rassmussen is biased is just stupid. His polling is done almost always with likely voters, not adults and not registered voters. And his polls have consistently been among the few that have accurately predicted the contest winners prior to the election. I think he's a conservative, but you people who think pollsters seek to create biased outcomes know nothing about the business. You earn money based upon your accuracy, not your advocacy, since consumers of polls need the former, and not the latter.

But there are some polls which produce biased results, either with the sample selection or with the questions asked, either by mistake (didn't think about it enough), or economy (wanted to save money by not sifting or refining enough), or politics (push-polling). But the last of these is almost always done by political groups, not actual pollsters.

Hey, it's MEEEEEE: "That guy is winning". Yes he is "winning". Just like Charlie Sheen was winning.

Wake -UP America there is a true change offered: There are two canidits that MSNBC and Fox news refuse to tell us about and that is Ron Paul and Gary Johnson . It's most likely true Ron Paul will not win the Republicain nomanation but Gary Johson is running on the Libitarin ballot and he is alot like Ron Paul in his ideas of how to restore America and our Liberties if you really want change you need to listen to what he has to say. If YOU Love America you will vote for Gary Jonson if not then you will get what you deserve . This could be a turning point in our history were finally the peoples voices were heard or one of darkess hours were we just agree to allow the same terriany and loss of liberty to continue.....

I am pretty shocked at the anti-american's voting for Romney...and Obama!

Those who cant stand Obama, but then so ignorantly vote for the same guy...Mit Romney!?!

Or the ones who throw Mitt under a bus with all his flipfloppin and his voting record, but then claim to love the same guy...Obama

You people are so confused by all the spin you hear on the news. The political game played has gotten you so confused....Whether you vote for Obama or Romney...it doesnt matter....it is EXACTLY the same. There is no difference between Democrats and Republicans....its just a show.

Remember Bush? After him everyone wanted change....they voted Obama. He became Bush, extending the Patriot act...The NDAA, the Tresspass Bill (HR 347)...and now Romney, he is just like Obama!!!

Frankly, if there isnt a major change...we are ALL @!$%#ed. No OBAMA NO ROMNEY...there are other choices!

Wes, a vote for Ron Paul or Gary Johnson is a vote for Obama. So if you want Obama to be president for another 4 years, you have your choice of three people to vote to obtain that outcome. If you don't want Obama for another 4 years the only truly viable way for that to happen is voting for Romney and hope he puts Johnson or Paul in his Cabinet. Remember, a vote for anyone but Romney is a vote for Obama.

Wes...if you want to vote for Ron Paul.....VOTE for Ron Paul.

A vote for Romney IS a vote for Obama! In fact Romney is no different than Obama...so better to have a limit of 4 years. This way, both sides have to offer up new choices. Imagine the possibilites of someone like Kucinich on the Democratic side, and a Ron Paul on the Republican side. How awesome would that be!

I am voting for Ron Paul, because he is the best choice....PERIOD! The way politics is played, and the way the msm will play it is that one of these guys (romney or obama) will be different from one another....however that is they way they want you to think. They both serve the same corporations and will do nothing different that what has been going on!

And another thing we know is that Romney lost to Mccain....who lost to Obama!!!

I cand stand Obama, and really think he is one of the worst presidents who has not upheld his oath to uphold the constitutution....he has turned his back on the American people, catering to the big corporations, and basically says "Fcuk you regular people"....but then again Romney is EXACTLY the same!

Dont listen to people who tell you to vote for Romney....they are trolling, trying to switch your vote....In my honest opinion, in the worst possible scenario, if it is between Romney and Obama....better to limit it to 4 years, rather than 8 years!

Not so much anymore. The left has been dabbling in Marxism lately.

Marlen: If only more people understood this truth. The gov't is also bought and paid for by military and drug war profiteers, the insurance/pharmaceutical industries holding affordable health care hostage, big oil and gas and other corporatists bent on greed and control. Our democracy has been replaced by a corporate dictatorship.

Elliot: Educate yourself before it's too late. Stop letting the right wing propaganda machine do it for you; they make you look really stupid. If you doubt me you can start by educating yourself on the meaning of socialism/marxism and then come back and explain how O'Bomber has turned over ownership of the means of production (definition of socialism) of this country to the working class. You know, the working class that has seen their wages shrink, good paying jobs disappear overseas while inflating the poverty class to depression levels.

marlen101917:

The Republican and Democratic Parties are merely the conservative and liberal wing of the same party. Whichever party wins, wall street and the banks win. Sad but true.

No, not really. Each party has Liberals, Conservatives and Moderates.

Do you have a retirement program? If you do, you might want Wall Street, Big Finance, and Big Energy to do well, since your retirement is in their hands.

elliot,

You've been asked several times to cite examples of Marxist policies from President Obama or the Democratic Party on other vines. You've yet to provide any. You spout the Beck and Limbaugh talking points well, however, you do not back them up well.

Please tell us which policies are Marxist and what makes them so?

Oh Romney... I am sure you are basking in the glow of two more states... sadly, it still won't be enough to win the Presidency.

As for all you righties claiming this marxism thing..

the system of economic and political thought developed by Karl Marx, along with Friedrich Engels, especially the doctrine that the state throughout history has been a device for the exploitation of the masses by a dominant class, that class struggle has been the main agency of historical change, and that the capitalist system, containing from the first the seeds of its own decay, will inevitably, after the period of the dictatorship of the proletariat, be superseded by a socialist order and a classless society.

Looks like the first part of this definition DEFINES the GOP.... "device of exploitation of the masses by a dominantclass". I also fail to see how President Obama is a member of the dominant class or has the ability to 'create' a classless society. I think the PUBs combined with years of neglect from Congress are squeezing the middle class out.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/marxism

Virginia democrat, three policies come to mind....

1. Denigration of the right and the wealthy as being anti-working class.

2. Creating an overabundance of regulatory rules beyond what is required to look after the "general welfare" of Americans.

3. Promoting the concept that government needs to be bigger than it already is.

The premise is not outwardly promoting marxism/socialism directly, but rather subtly, trying to lead us down the path to it. Even hitler didn't use a direct approach, but first did it through a policy of disinformation against the german communist party to gain populist support followed up with the suppresion of the jews, gypsies and other groups.

You and others want to define the actions based on strict historical definitions, rather than looking at what the actions themselves portend.

Say whatever you want, but obama's policys wants us to believe that a bigger, more controlling government is what is needed. A czar for this, a czar for that. Really? Disagree at your peril, as then you have to explain coherently the dramatic rise in the number of federal regulations. Regulations aimed at defining the minutia of how each individual and business shall live under the sufference of government rather than simply following the constitutional "general welfare" clause as well as the bill of rights.

I say "minutia" as in going beyond what effective regulations can be. BTW, please be foolish enough to simply spout off on the common sense arguments of the basic health, safety and financial regs in place prior to obama and company. Really now, a 2000+ page treatise on how to control the banks and the financial markets even more? Is it really any wonder why the regs are still being written? Rahm emmanuel gave obama good advice on enacting health care. Advice obama chose not to follow. Trying to do everything at once is not a clear path to effectiveness. Politicians should be required to understand how much more effective the "KISS" principle is.

Its about time, your excerpt...

"device of exploitation of the masses by a dominant class"

Seems to be more in line with obama and companies intent for increasing regs to have government become the dominant class to exploit the masses. Probably explains why the 2009 stimulas was oriented more towards public employees and state/local governments than to the real drivers of the economy as in the private sector.

Then we have all of obamas rhetoric on fairness, balance and affordability. Yet he does nothing for pushing tax reform (FYI - the last major tax reform was done in 1986 between a republican WH and a democrat house). Interesting on how he suggests that raising taxes on the wealthy and business is all it will take. Yet even obamas big money supporter, buffet, says that it won't.

Yep, seems that obama and company are the real exploiters here with their rhetoric.

Nice for you to make the case that obama also does not deserve re-election. After all, you imply that the republican controlled house and party has more power than the POTUS obama. Heck of a deal when the POTUS abdicates power to the minority party. Seems that he should have maintained a focus on governing rather than campaigning.

Marlen - It's true. Financially the only real difference between the two parties is how they're going to screw you over for their corporate wall street masters. The only people who thinks there's a serious differences are the conservatives who keep hearing about "Evil Marxists" in the white house from Glenn Beck and company. I do believe the Stimulus did some good with the economy, but it also kissed a lot of corporate ass, as does the Affordable Care Act.

So what am I left to do? Well I've become what I hated - a values voter. Left with no substantial difference between the two parties, I have to decide based on the glaring differences in social issues, and there sure are a lot of them. So I vote Democratic, which is the only option for values that aren't stuck in the 1850s. It also bothers me that the supposed party of freedom is so concerned about what everyone is doing in their bedroom.

Friends on the right, before you attack me for this, consider...what should I do? Even if you're totally right on the economy, how could I vote for you considering I believe in a woman's right to choose, a social safety net for our most unfortunate citizens, marriage equality for gay people, a scaled back military, and a firm separation of church and state?

falconear...

Remember what Bill Clinton's advisers kept repeating..."It's the economy, stupid !!!"

That must be the only reason to vote...who's 'feel' for growing the economy must be the measure of the people's vote.

"Gay marriage" ??? Support it or not, as Mr. Obama himself stated "should be left up to the states".

It is "the economy" that matters...and you aren't "stupid".

Hey tony-26869:

Remember what Bill Clinton's advisers kept repeating..."It's the economy, stupid !!!"

That must be the only reason to vote.

It is completely incorrect to say that the economy is the only reason to vote. I just read that the economy in the extremely socialist country of Venezuela expanded by 5% in the first quarter and is expected to expand at 7% in the second quarter. Does that mean that you want to live in Venezuela? Nevertheless, my vote is going for Obama.

Rep. Ron Paul, the last of the remaining GOP candidates, said he wouldn't actively campaign in any remaining primaries.

What else is there to say?

He dropped out of the race....

Three percent of the vote should be rewarded with three percent of the story. I think he got equal due.

Suspension of a political campaign is not the same as quitting. It allows the person to keep raising money, pay staff, and they get to keep their delegates until the National Convention. Big difference.

They all suspend their campaigns. It takes years to legally end a campaign. Technically John Kerry, Hillary Clinton and many others are still running for presidential elections.

Surprised you didn't know that.

Ron who?

I find one thing intresting to note throughout this whole primary season. Come november, my vote is undoubtedly going for Obama, but the only person who had a grain of intelligence, and who I would not be terrified to see in the white house was John Huntsman. Every other radical idiot, who doesn't know anything about anything has had some type of surge, yet the only one who would probably do some good for the country, and not drive it into the ground, did not have a surge. I think that is a testament to the radicalism that has gripped the whole republican party.

And RON PAUL IS STILL RUNNING!

No matter how you look at it, Ron Paul still won. He has inspired tens of thousands of young Americans to get involved in politics, and these new faces will become the Republican Party of tomorrow. It will be a party of Liberty, truth and justice, carrying Ron Paul's message well into the next century, long after any of us have left this world! This is the r3VOLution!!!

Ron who ? ? ?

Ron who ? ? ?

Yes, and our illustrious white house can continue spending more than it takes in. Then, let's be sure we only tax those who the slimebag wants to tax - yes, of course the rich because after all they have all the money. Those mean and nasty rich people.

Dream on DB, it's time to bring back the US Constitution and and abide by it.

Roy, your teabaggin' HOR can fix that; just vote to end farm and energy subsidies to all the rich mean and nasty Nebraska farmers and agribusinesses like Con Agra. We'll save all kinds of money!!! Let's see how many jobs go down the drain and prices go up. But then they'll probably call Warren Buffett in Omaha to bail their anglo-centric, greedy @$$e$ out.

...as if the Republicans don't spend...

Clinton raised taxes and spent to increase investment in education and high tech, and the US got 'information superhighway' and the roaring '90s (prosperity).

But Reagan and Bushes also spent tons of money, producing useless WMDs and invading other countries, wasting all the money along the way, leading to recessions.

So I guess if Republicans want the money to spend, they better vote for Democrats whose policies have produced wealth the Republicans can waste on useless but expensive items, such as SDI ('star wars' of Reagan) and F-22 fighter jets.

Pigotry - of course polticians on both sides spend like a drunken sailor on leave.

However, after the advent of an effective tea party in 2009 it remains to be seen if the right will still be big spenders. We already know obama and company still embraces the old political (LorR) mantra of "deficits don't matter".

One thing for sure is that regardless of who is POTUS in 2013 there will be no drastic changes in spending.

So you made a comment to match it.

good one leroy. I can always count on you for a laugh:)

Yes! The last thing we need is another republican congress that believes their top priority is to sabotage the President's agenda to make him a one-term president. I'm not a fan of O'bomber, but that's treasonous behavior from our legislators.

We need to go back to the wild spending of bush, who took us from peacetime prosperity to the brink of the second great depression, as most of us thought we were headed in 08 when we were bleeding jobs like crazy and the stock market and housing market were crashing. Starting pointless wars and giving tax cuts to the rich is the perfect recipe for economic disaster - why didn't you learn this? It only happened a few years ago, before fox news and lush rimbaugh tried to rewrite history and the zombies who watch and listen buy into it.

Navy vet,....nor a repeat of the 8 years prior that drove the bus off the cliff

didn't rea;ize the navy produced dumb.

^says the guy who can't use a keyboard well enough to spell realize*

Don-3155982:

this idiot has just done a bad job twice as bad as Bush regarding the economy

Fox news, I realize, is a very manipulative, even, dare I say, evil, organization. I realize that they have some type of power of the minds of the zombies that watch them, but what they are doing to your head is something like magic. For you to be convinced that diving into a Great Depression is better than coming out of one is completely beyond me. Fox, you are a deceptive propaganda machine, however, I must say you are very good at it.

Mike X.: The sole reason that brought about the recession in 2008 was the predatory real estate loans that defaulted into reality. Thank the state of California and Orange County for spreading the disease worldwide.

God you dummies don't remember what bush and Geitner did with the bailouts and all the mess he caused? are you dim? you want more of that? good lord he had control of congress till 2006, and that is when everything went to hell. Who do you think caused that ? It is on paper , on video, have you not seen it? DO YOU NOT REMEMBER? God you people must hate America! and I hate you for that.

Polls of individual states show President Obama still holds a commanding lead on the electoral map, and as the Electoral College is the only means by which we elect presidents, that's the only data that really matters.

Most pollsters show the electoral results will look like this:

Romney: 191

Obama: 347

Romney has no viable path to 270.

VirginiaDemoncrat78

Just because you keep re-posting the same lame poll numbers, doesn't mean Obrainless is going to win. After the summer and fall campaign ads and debates this country will see what an absolute failure Obrainless has been.

And here's a poll for you...Romney is leading 55% to 44% on the issue of the ECONOMY...THE number #1 issue of the election.

Ticked, WHAT exactly, has Romney done as far as the issue of the economy? He espoused no taxes as Gov. of Mass., yet raised ALL State fees, mostly doubling, tripling, and more. Look towards a FEDERAL mandate on raising ALL State fees across the U.S. by a GOP President and GOP Congress coming to a town near you if he is elected. Oh wait, Romney is always saying that states are individually responsible for their own actions...he will change his mind the next day about that too.

Well Fantomdog,...Here is THE ONE AND ONLY MOST IMPORTANT FACTOR in this years election concerning the economy and what Romney is going to do....

On November 7th 2012, 1 day after the election and we have a new President "President Romney" EVERY business in America that has been sitting on their money, waiting for Obrainless to be ousted, will invest in their businesses, start hiring again, businesses will flourish once again and it will happen very quickly!

Oh yes, barry, obama has brought us out of the depression, has lowered the unemployment rate, has reduced the tax rate, and by God, he has shown us the way - to bankruptcy.

Gee, can you name one thing obama has made good on from all his promises?

Can you show me how many job bills the Republican controlled house have given him to sign? I realize in your world the President controls congress, but that's not how it happens in the really real world. By the way, unemployment numbers have gone down, and we do not seem to be going into another depression. But don't let those simple facts bother you.

We need to eliminate all the politicians who think they are elected to do as the corporations desire. Don't care which party they are from.

Nearly Militant:

How do you judge the performance of a USA Congress? Senate? House of Reps? Passing bills is perhaps the worse function the Congress can do. They do more harm that way.

I recall the Democrats from Y2001 to Y2009 did everything they could do to fight G W Bush because he was a Republican - not because he was correct or wrong.

Roy,

Just one thing? There are many, but here's your one:

He did promise to hunt down bin Laden. As Osama bin Laden now sleeps with the fishes, promise kept.

Homer, since the GOP had TOTAL control of Congress (House and Senate) from 2002-2007, just how in the world were the Democrats able to fight anything Bush did, again? Seems your recollection of history is a bit skewed, at best.

Roy, your fallacious banality is a beauty only a mother could love. You obviously weren't angry that the right-leaning SCOTUS stopped a LEGAL recount of votes to proclaim Bush President. Or over the U.S. illegally invading a country who posed NO threat to US. Or when $10 billion in cash being sent to Iraq just disappeared. Or Bush embracing trade and outsourcing policies that shipped 6 million jobs out of the U.S. Or the worst 8 years of job creations in decades. Or the lack of oversight and regulations by the Bush Administration that cost Americans a $12 trillion loss, of investments, retirements and home values. Or that 200,000 Americans died because they had no health insurance. Oh, and a good one, or when Bush acknowledged not knowing where Bin Laden was, and not caring about it. PUBLICLY. I know, none of that matters in your slurpee-induced brain freeze. Another good one; let's envision a Romney Presidency...to raise revenue the fastest way possible, look no further than Mass. State fees raised, sometimes quadruple, on everything, and make it a FEDERAL mandate signed sealed and deliviered by a GOP controlled Congress, after that, passing the Ryan Plan, which takes away Federal money to plans towards the health and welfare of children, the poor, the elderly, the middle-class, and REWARDS the rich by giving them even more tax money back than ever before. The deregulation of Companies so they can legally dump chemical toxins in the air and water (ala Love Canal) instead of using PREVENTATIVE maintenance, re-investing in better/cleaner equipment, and cleaning up after themselves, and continues tax-payer subsidies to corporations who DON'T need it, including mega-farms. Oh, and ship even more jobs out of the U.S. Yes, that IS the future, not much different than the (Bush) past.

Roy: I can name 50 things that Obama has done during his term......more than happy to do that if you wish. I've got all the time in the world.

That suggestion was already tried in both 2000 and 2004. We're all waiting.

Nothing is happening in Congress, because they insist their way or the highway. That may bode well for political reasons....but it certainly doesn't do this country any good. IMHO.

Yes, so did the "hope and change" montra. Goodbye barry

Joe-308721:

I have not seen or heard any Republican running for the Oval Office promise miracles. Please enlighten me on this issue. Solid and sound management practices are not miracles, but rather good leadership.

Presidents do NOT run or manage the USA economy. The Market Place does that. The policies of a president can and do impact the economy and the Market Place. If presidents had that kind of control, the USA would always have a robust economy, but they do not.

Homer: You are so right. There's an article in Investors.Com "President Obama is NO Bill Clinton" which is written by one of the co-founders of Home Depot. In it he states that over the last 3 years Washington has issued 10,000 rules that impose an estimated $16 bil in new costs to small business owners. Small businesses create two out of every three new jobs in America. The Obama administration has done everything possible to stifle the small business owner in America and the unemployment of millions continues and the food stamp lines are getting longer everyday.

Believe'nAmerica

Homer: You are so right. There's an article in Investors.Com "President Obama is NO Bill Clinton" which is written by one of the co-founders of Home Depot. In it he states that over the last 3 years Washington has issued 10,000 rules that impose an estimated $16 bil in new costs to small business owners. Small businesses create two out of every three new jobs in America. The Obama administration has done everything possible to stifle the small business owner in America and the unemployment of millions continues and the food stamp lines are getting longer everyday.

Hate to say it, but unless those 10,000 rules were all executive orders, then you can blame congress for passing those rules, and you can only blame the president for signing off on them, which makes the entire legislative and executive branches at fault. And since Republicans have been in control of the house, and able to filibuster anything they don't like in the Senate since 2010, that makes 2 of those 3 years fully bipartisan on all those new rules.

Believe'nAmerica, funny you name a GOP backer from Home Depot (a small business?) as your focal point towards 'rules.' BTW, EVERY job index shows jobs gained since Obama took office, as opposed to the 100's of 1,000's who were losing their jobs near the end of Bush's term in office. Even using a new microwave oven after using a stove that didn't work most of 8 years has it's drawbacks; the food STILL won't get done as fast as you WISH it would.

Dude, your syntax is . . . troublesome. Nearly as distracting as your odd trains of thought.

the word is "voila"...it's French.

Maxx, are you aware that a 2010 poll revealed that 66% of Americans said it's time for Obama to put the scapegoat Bush away and take some responsibility?

Of course CUBS has no facts to back up the claim.

Cubs, are you aware that an April 2012 poll showed that you are beating your wife, and like little boys?

What? You didn't get the email?

Go masturbate, and get back to us here in the vine who actually deal with FACTS.

Clueless loser.

CubsFan2012,

You seem to not be aware that several polls for the last couple years say more than 60% of Americans believe the Republicans caused the current economic crisis.

Obama lost 41% of Democrats to a convict in another state. With Zero campaigning. Top that.

leroy - let's be honest though, that was in West Virginia. I can seriously see Democrats there not voting for the black guy with the Islamic sounding name. Didn't their Democratic Senator get elected by commercials showing him shooting holes in the Affordable Care Act?

Jwright771984,

Puhleeeasee give up on the clueless Geezer Ron Paul.

You do your party (and the party is almost over...trust me) a big disservice.

Moonbats, Mormons, Fringe crazies and religious zealots are hopefully not going to be the next people to govern our great country.

Obama 2012.

In the name of all that is rational, please...

Dr. Paul has told everybody his campaign plans and has been following them. Come the convention we'll have to see what we see. I hope Dr. Paul gets a chance to run our countries finances as well as he has run his campaigns.

RON PAUL BABY! all who are for "status quo" arguing like stupid little school kids over ronmey and obama are the "clueless" as they are both already bought and paid for by the corporations. You heard it here, so I won't have to sadley say "I told you so " later......................sad and clueless ones you are.

Ron who?

Yes Checkered Demon because voting Obama would be rational. Lmao. Funny how Obama hasn't kept any of his election promises. If you want four more years of the same BS that we have had for the last several presidents than yes, by all means vote Obama, hell vote Romney even. But if you truly want a change for the better in this country vote Ron Paul. Voting Paul is the only rational choice, anyone who votes otherwise obviously loves having their freedoms stripped away while they are sexually assaulted by the the TSA.

When you speak in hyperbole,Jwright, it diminishes your post. Obama has kept many of his promises and would have kept many more had he not been dealing with a Repugnican party that has been conspiring treason since the day he was inaugurated.

I suspect that our grand experiment in democracy may be drawing to a close. As long as 30something % of the American voters can be deluded into voting against their own best wishes for 30+ years, we are in trouble. And as bad as the SCOTUS has been, especially with the Citizens United decision, this is largely because we have elected troglodytes like Ronnie Raygun who have proposed names for the SCOTUS like Bork, Aleta, Roberts, and Scalia. A lot of men with flagrant conflicts of interest who put politics and money ahead of the well being of the nation. We have developed the best govt money can buy, including the SCOTUS. Keep railing about Obama. The problem was very critical long, long, long before he ever took office. It's still amazing to me that a SCOTUS could decide that it's more important to hurry up and declare a winner in a election than to take the time to be sure we got it right. And while the jackboots keep railing about abortion, let's also point out that the Roe v. Wade decision was handed down by a GOP appointed court with the GOP appointed justices prevailing in that opinion. But hey...let's keep blaming the dems. Never let facts get in the way of your opinion. Facts are such stubborn, obnoxious things.

Jwright which election promises has Obama not fulfilled?

Good question Rod_Father, how about:

-Create a retirement savings tax credit for low incomes

-Allow Medicare to negotiate for cheaper drug prices

-Ensure 10% of our electricity comes from renewable energy sources by 2012

-Mandate all new vehicles to be Flexible Fuel or Biofuel Vehicles

-Cut taxes for 95% of workers and families and (quote:) "no family making less than $250,000 will see their taxes increase."

-Provide a $500 tax cut for workers and $1000 for working couples

-Pay a refundable $4,000 American Opportunity Tax Credit for college

-Lower health care costs by $2,500 for a typical family

-Shut down Gitmo within 1 year

: This list is of course only some of the failed promises. Lets also not forget how Obama likes to make decisions which violate the constitution:

-Obamacare

-Commiting US troops to military action without approval from congress

: In reality, Obama delivered the same type of presidency as George W. Bush. So why would you vote for him again? And of course Mitt Romney is doing everything in his power to make sure he wins, including cheating:

www.infowars.com/romney-operatives-caught-handing-out-fake-ballots-in-nevada-and-maine/

:So once again, if you want the same BS corrupt officials in office than by all means vote for Obama or even Romney, but if you want someone who will actually bring about a much needed change than vote Ron Paul.

Ron who ? ? ?

Obamacare passed, pukes are hell bent on trying to repeal it.

I have solar panels on my house now thank you President Obama. stimulus money was crossed out of the following budget by the tea party pukes.

Gitmo was kept open by the pukes.

Ron Paul is a whack hack job.

Anyone can get solar panels if they have the money. Obama had nothing to do with that. Obamacare should be repealed or at the very least changed as it violates the US constitution. Stimulus money was removed from the budget because we cannot afford it thanks to Obama's unchallenged spending habits. The decision, or lack of one, to keep Gitmo open came from Obama. As far as Ron Paul being a "whack hack job" I would like to know where you get this idea.

So, basically you are saying anyone who believes in the constitution, paying off the national debt and getting rid of corruption in this country is a "whack hack job"? I give you a 1/10 on the trolling meter. Sad to see yet another sheep with delusions of how the real world works.

Maxx you are correct about Bush, it's sad that so many republicans can't understand. Although frankly Obama is digging that hole better than Bush.

Equally interesting,Maxx, is why Cantor, Boehner, McConnell, Ryan, DeMint, and Issa can't or won't accept responsibility for this train wreck. They have been in place far longer than Mr. Obama and have contributed infinitely more to the mess than Obama. In fact, since Congress controls the purse strings and has consistently blocked funding and appointments that Mr. Obama wants, you could even argue that they are responsible for much , if not most, of the mess since 2008. Where is Cantor and Ryan's responsibility? Ryan crashes the plane and decides that America's seniors and poor need to pay for his incompetence.

LOL, You used a Fox poll and expect it to be anything other than saying that? I'm assuming you just ignore that it is a 24 hour Republican "news" network. But I'm also sure if I showed you one that said Bush was still to blame, and it was from say NBC, I'm sure you would just blame it on the "liberal"media.

well first of all, obama isn't blaming bush, everybody else is...

wow a fox "news" poll ...good holy mother you are dumb. glad you are back fromm the other thread though, hope you are spreading thr good word of illiterate fox "news" dummie crap to all the other dummies of the world. bye oh and the cubs suck! go tampa bay sun rays! hahahaha!

but thanks for helping screw our country up for corporate profits, by voting for acting conservatives.

Cubs, hotair is a Conservative blog site, which parrots Fox. nice try, but FAIL. Romney will win when the Cubs win the World Series, can you say 'choke?'

Why did he enter a contest to win one? He could just buy a white house or a blue house....

they won't the republican party has totally screwed themselves for good. It's over for them forever. Sad because a true conservative like Ron Paul could have saved us from these fake conservatives and liberal hacks.

Terry-2133156:

Why did he enter a contest to win one? He could just buy a white house or a blue house....

So could B H Obama.