Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I'd caution you to remember that it is July of 2015. In July of 2007, Hillary was the anticipated nominee for the Dems. A lot can change, and not just with respect to her, between now and Nov 2016.A new poll shows Hillary losing to three Republican candidates in the key swing states of Iowa, Virginia and Colorado. Her unfavorable ratings are under water in those states by 21, 23 and 9% respectively.
You should question the qunnipiac poll. That was the source.Colorado is a fairly liberal state. Virginia is on the fence. I really have suspicion about that poll to show numbers that big. I believe the number for Iowa. You should really question the impartiality of your source. And like mule said, the election is still 16 months away. I don't understand how "they" figure Iowa, Virginia and Colorado are three key "swing" states. I also question the impartiality of your source considering there were several polls done last week that showed Hillary winning by around 10% and the only thing that has happened in the last week is the Donald had a nice diet of shoe leather.
Well, I guess that's it. She should drop out now.A new poll shows Hillary losing to three Republican candidates in the key swing states of Iowa, Virginia and Colorado. Her favorable ratings are under water in those states by 21, 23 and 9% respectively.
You should question the qunnipiac poll. That was the source.
Yes, just saw the poll. I also just realized he mixed two different stats in one post. The larger numbers are the favorable/unfavorable rating and the actual polling numbers (who would you vote for) are closer, which is believable.
Being non-partisan, it's pretty sad when you take a poll and ask a simple question like "is your view of this candidate favorable or unfavorable" and the results are less than 50% favorable for every candidate, D or R, which includes a field of 16 Rs and 3 or 4 Ds from a population of approximately 300 million.
Nobody has given us a reason to vote for them yet.Yes, just saw the poll. I also just realized he mixed two different stats in one post. The larger numbers are the favorable/unfavorable rating and the actual polling numbers (who would you vote for) are closer, which is believable.
Being non-partisan, it's pretty sad when you take a poll and ask a simple question like "is your view of this candidate favorable or unfavorable" and the results are less than 50% favorable for every candidate, D or R, which includes a field of 16 Rs and 3 or 4 Ds from a population of approximately 300 million.
Based on what Perry, Kasich, and Walker have done in their respective terms as Gov has given me very much to take notice of. Hillary has also done plenty for me to take notice of albeit in the opposite direction.Nobody has given us a reason to vote for them yet.
Right now i like walker. I have alwas liked Kasich. I am not going to limit options this early but i agree with you on those two.Based on what Perry, Kasich, and Walker have done in their respective terms as Gov has given me very much to take notice of. Hillary has also done plenty for me to take notice of albeit in the opposite direction.
Don't think I would vote for Perry but as Gov. He did some pretty interesting things from a business jobs/economy perspective.Right now i like walker. I have alwas liked Kasich. I am not going to limit options this early but i agree with you on those two.
Back when Kasich was in the House in the early 90s, I thought he was a bit nutty. And I don't agree with his position on abortion and his stance on unions. But relative to the rest of the kooks in the GOP today, he's a sane, rationale person who is willing to work with the other side. He'll compromise to get things done. Politics is not a zero sum game to him-at least it appears that way. Wingnuts don't like him because of his position in helping the poor. Kasich doesn't wear his religion on his sleeve as much as he actually performs acts of compassion for the common good. He took a lot of flack from fellow repubs because of his Obamacare position in expanding Medicaid in Ohio and basically told those who criticized him that this is WWJD. He lives it. I respect that. Other than his appointments to the Supremes, I could live with him as Prez.Right now i like walker. I have alwas liked Kasich. I am not going to limit options this early but i agree with you on those two.
Back when Kasich was in the House in the early 90s, I thought he was a bit nutty. And I don't agree with his position on abortion and his stance on unions. But relative to the rest of the kooks in the GOP today, he's a sane, rationale person who is willing to work with the other side. He'll compromise to get things done. Politics is not a zero sum game to him-at least it appears that way. Wingnuts don't like him because of his position in helping the poor. Kasich doesn't wear his religion on his sleeve as much as he actually performs acts of compassion for the common good. He took a lot of flack from fellow repubs because of his Obamacare position in expanding Medicaid in Ohio and basically told those who criticized him that this is WWJD. He lives it. I respect that. Other than his appointments to the Supremes, I could live with him as Prez.
Kasich and Walker have been my 2 leading guys since Feb.Back when Kasich was in the House in the early 90s, I thought he was a bit nutty. And I don't agree with his position on abortion and his stance on unions. But relative to the rest of the kooks in the GOP today, he's a sane, rationale person who is willing to work with the other side. He'll compromise to get things done. Politics is not a zero sum game to him-at least it appears that way. Wingnuts don't like him because of his position in helping the poor. Kasich doesn't wear his religion on his sleeve as much as he actually performs acts of compassion for the common good. He took a lot of flack from fellow repubs because of his Obamacare position in expanding Medicaid in Ohio and basically told those who criticized him that this is WWJD. He lives it. I respect that. Other than his appointments to the Supremes, I could live with him as Prez.
Regarding religion, I don't have any issue whatsoever with anyone's beliefs. But I do take issue with pols who want to impose their beliefs on everyone else-like Santorum. A lot of these GOP candidates bend over backwards to show the kook base how god-fearing they are. In the grand scheme of things, who gives a shit how god fearing they are. Can you do the job.Kasich and Walker have been my 2 leading guys since Feb.
Not really concerned with their religious beliefs but I love what they've done in their respective states.
The GOP primary has become a most religious contest (including Biblical prophesy regarding Israel) especially in whacky Iowa where their straw poll is dominated by evangelicals.
Regarding religion, I don't have any issue whatsoever with anyone's beliefs. But I do take issue with pols who want to impose their beliefs on everyone else-like Santorum. A lot of these GOP candidates bend over backwards to show the kook base how god-fearing they are. In the grand scheme of things, who gives a shit how god fearing they are. Can you do the job.
The GOP primary has become a most religious contest (including Biblical prophesy regarding Israel) especially in whacky Iowa where their straw poll is dominated by evangelicals. It's crazy stuff. But the kooks have their religious litmus test....ergo, Huckabee won there last time. Probably will again. What a bunch of nuts.
Isn't ridiculous at all, just look at the primaries for the GOP the last two times and now. You have 16 or so people all trying to be the one who says the same thing the strongest whether it makes sense to anyone other than their base or not. But the monster Fox news created caught up with them this time! The Trumpenator to the GOP Base, Trumptastrophe to the GOP mainstream. Unfortunately, your mainstream became the minority and the rubes have taken over. But that's just mine and the Wall Street Journals opinion.
I told you the HC response to the question about renewable energy, and many who lean to the right said that it was a reasonable plan. Sanders is very far to the left, and there is some energy in his campaign, but he's still not the front runner by a long shot. His entry silenced the Warren crowd. Don't forget Jim Webb either. He's seeking the Dem nomination as well.Rubes? Sanders is an avowed socialist and has captured the energy in the Dem primary. Warren is anti capitalist and libs are begging her to run. The Dem party is so far left of Bill Clinton.
I told you the HC response to the question about renewable energy, and many who lean to the right said that it was a reasonable plan. Sanders is very far to the left, and there is some energy in his campaign, but he's still not the front runner by a long shot. His entry silenced the Warren crowd. Don't forget Jim Webb either. He's seeking the Dem nomination as well.
Sanders is very far left and also has no chance.Webb is a centrist with no chance. Hillary just announced support for a 40% capital gains tax rate. Moving far left very fast. Terrible policy.
Sanders is very far left and also has no chance.
Webb is a centrist with no chance. Hillary just announced support for a 40% capital gains tax rate. Moving far left very fast. Terrible policy.
Lol, freaking Reagan would be far left of the wingnut field.The far edges of both parties are running. Keyser claimed that only the right has such candidates.
CG Tax rate is one that I have struggled with on making a decision what my opinion is for years. It is not a simplistic topic as you and others will make it out to be. It has a huge economic impact. But the fact is she is proposing a 39.6% rate on CG held for less than two years. So, it is not a complete revamp of this part of the code and personally I would have to understand the economic modeling of the effect before I dare to comment on whether or not I would support it and a reasonable person should as well. But I expect you to continue posting right wing slanted half truths like you always do.
There is no debate of the fact that raising cap gains tax rates will reduce income to the treasury and stifle investment. bad economic policy.
Couple of things. It stifles investment and further locks you in on something you might be losing your ass on due to the taxes being more than the loss.CG Tax rate is one that I have struggled with on making a decision what my opinion is for years. It is not a simplistic topic as you and others will make it out to be. It has a huge economic impact. But the fact is she is proposing a 39.6% rate on CG held for less than two years. So, it is not a complete revamp of this part of the code and personally I would have to understand the economic modeling of the effect before I dare to comment on whether or not I would support it and a reasonable person should as well. But I expect you to continue posting right wing slanted half truths like you always do.
Did you really just say that? smh.
It's cool dude. He has a 401k and an etrade account. He's got it down!About 50% of cap gains are in stocks. Stocks are a critical means of capital formation for businesses who use the capital to grow and expand. Stocks are risky but you want and need investors. You are punishing them for risk taking and will therefore get less of it. Very bad policy.
There is no debate of the fact that raising cap gains tax rates will reduce income to the treasury and stifle investment. bad economic policy.
There is a debate. If you only look at things through one eye which you do, I can understand why you don't ever see other perspectives and conflicting conclusions.
I am as right as anyone. I majored in business. As I understand the purpose for offering Cap Gains Tax, was an incentive to invest in risky start-up companies and incentive to grow businesses to produce and employ more. Someway the law covers things that do not fit that criteria.Pot calling kettle black, lol. Raising this tax pleases the far left but is not sound economic policy especially with our very tepid economy.
A new poll shows Hillary losing to three Republican candidates in the key swing states of Iowa, Virginia and Colorado. Her favorable ratings are under water in those states by 21, 23 and 9% respectively.
Well, I guess that's it. She should drop out now.