In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 691
Online now 894 Record: 11761 (2/27/2012)
The Web's No. 1 forum for coverage and discussion of Terps sports
Visitor discussion of University of Maryland and college sports
A place for lively discussion for all other sports unrelated to Maryland athletics
Feedback for IMS and 247Sports
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
And most pollsters see the ABC/WP as a left leaning poll for that same reason. Not all polls are made equal. Gotta look into the numbers.
What is the difference between likely voters and registered voters?
Is RV > LV? Are they conisdered different in their candidate preferences?
That's why you gotta raise taxes and cut spending at the same time. It's not that hard.
Registered voters always outnumber likely.
Some people are "soft" voters, they are less likely to post at the polls if it rains, or if they are not zazzed up about a particular candidate.
Well, it depends. If the left is fired up (like in 2008), then LVs are more likely to be more Dem. If the right is more fired up (like in 2010), then the LVs are more likely to be Pub. My issue is that feelings now about who is fired up or not and making judgments on the electorate in November is not going to reflect reality this far out.
Yeah, increasing taxes in exchange for government promising to reduce spending is a great idea.
Republicans always do better in likely voter models. Even in 2008 when dems were fired up Obama's margin was higher in RV polls vs LV polls. The difference of course is that when dems are fired up many people who wouldn't be classified as likely voters by pollsters do actually make it to the polls.
Go away, KA!
And the last time the federal government cut spending was __________?
Yeah, because they need to make a deal. Dems won't budge on entitlements and Pubs won't budge on taxes, so nothing gets done. But the solution isn't hard, just the will to do it with a volatile electorate and partisan media hounding them and any mention of compromise.
We've actually changed the tax code on multiple occassions (both increasing and decreasing taxes on multiple occassions over the last few decades). But when was the last time the federal government actually cut spending? I don't even mean recently ... when was the last time ever?
This post was edited by terps99 2 years ago
I love charts that talk about spending cuts in the context of "non-defense" cuts or "non-discretionary" cuts or "on-budget" cuts as opposed to "off-budget" cuts. It's like when Bush didn't count the Iraq wars as part of various budgetary discussions.
I, too, have cut my personal spending dramatically in recent years [assuming you don't count my housing expenses or entertainment expenses.] I'm in great shape and living responsibly!
Allen West, creeping up the VP list...
When a questioner asked West about Marxists in “the American legislature,” some in the crowd jeered, but West took a different approach.
“No, it’s a good question,” he said, adding: “I believe there is about 78 to 81 members of the Democratic Party that are members of the Communist Party.”
well, to be fair, state-run economies really are more communist than the more popular socialist tag.
Stupid question....how bad was the unemployment in MA when they were 47th in job creation? My point being, this ranking needs context for it to have meaning. Perhaps MA did lose that many jobs, therefore, not needing to create, or more importantly, re-create jobs at the same clip as other states.
Yeah, that's a horrendously misleading statistic. Massachusetts has (and has had) a lower level of unemployment than the rest of the country for almost all of the past decade (and even before).
So is Obama calling the Buffett rule the "reagan rule" evidence of him parrotting left wing blogs, or left wing blogs getting talking points from his campaign in advance?
It's evidence of him being a great politician and great at trolling Republicans.
Mostly it's evidence of how stupid he thinks his voters are.
Well they did elect him president. Amirite?
If this means Obama is in favor of a flat tax, as Reagan was advocating for in the speech where he made those remarks, that should make this an interesting campaign.
Exactly...because he's taking Reagan's comments completely out of context. Apples and oranges, as far as the tax code goes.
I'll wait for the Dems in Congress to start proposing a serious income tax increase, before I start paying attention. That's the inconvenient truth for Obama...he can bitch about taxes all he wants, but it's Congressional Dems who will have to stick their necks out there to do it.
Interesting, and worth reading in full
The presidential campaigns have the technology to know more about voters than any other bids in history.
Check out the graphs here for the truth about the claim that millionaires aren't paying their fair share
That's a great link. Polite liberal society is gently telling the President that he really needs to come up with something a little more serious if he wants to count on their covering fire for the next seven months.
Basically. It's gonna be a long 7 months if we all get upset over stuff like this.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports