An aggregate of polls show Mitt trailing BHO by 1.9%, well within the margin of error ( tho, the most recent poll by conservative Rasmussen shows him trailing by 3% ).

IF the economy stalls or gets worse, I say Mitt still has near 50% chance of taking it-----otherwise, prognosis is starting to look dimmer----------

It's gotta be the way they ask the questions, because the attached reasons are just bullshit. I doubt 99% of the people truly understand the terms venture capitalism or private equity.

Am I one of the few that wants a leader that was wildly successful in the private sector? Hell yes! It would be nice that a basic requirement for working in the public sector is a minimum number of years in the private sector. Fuck, at least run a Subway shop.



-- Modified on 1/25/2012 10:48:34 AM

So, much depends on Thu's debate. Also, if Newt can get Santorum to drop out ( Rick is polling at 11% ) & support him, game over.

Keep in mind that Fla is winner take all; so, between Mitt & Newt, whoever takes Fla. takes the nomination.

I've seen something I haven't seen in a few years. It seems like everywhere I go, I see stores that have signs saying they're hiring.

but here's the catch. Those jobs require at least an undergraduate degree, and/or specific skills and competencies. The unemployment rate for those with at least an undergraduate degree is 4.5%. It's close to 2% in the fields of math, science, engineering, and technology. The unemployment rate for high school and no skills and competencies is double digit. So the question is what do you do with that segment of society?

for liberals to understand. Gingrich's tax return showed he paid 31%. That tells me most of his income was "earned" income. Romney's money came from dividends and long term capital gains. Now that money originally was "earned" at Bain, and he probably paid an effective tax rate of 30% or more. So Romney's money was already taxed at a higher rate. The govt is making money on money it already taxed. The govt should be thrilled that Romney invests that money vs taking the Terrell Owens approach and pissing it all away.

And oh by the way. Warren Buffett's secretary is probably sitting on a ton of Berkshire Hathaway options. Considering she has worked for Warren for some time, most have already vested. I wonder if she will be thrilled when she exercises those options to pay 30% or more, or 15% like her old senile boss, who doesn't seem to understand the difference between "earned" and "passive" income.

-- Modified on 1/25/2012 1:46:01 PM

Mitt's supposed strength vs. Obama (and the other REpublican nominees) is his extensive business experience, as evidenced by his great wealth and assets.

But Mitt made the vast majority of his fortune via investments and carried interest (as well as the low 15% capital gains tax rate which accompanies it), not by building and selling products.

While Mitt may have more business experience than Obama, the truth is the experience gap is much smaller than most Republicans realize or are willing to admit.

Quote:
With six days to go until Florida's Republican primary, a new poll indicates Mitt Romney remains on top of the field in the battle for the state's winner take all 50 delegates.

According to an American Research Group poll released Wednesday morning, 41 percent of likely Sunshine State GOP primary voters say they are backing the former Massachusetts governor as their party's nominee, with 34% supporting former House Speaker Newt Gingrich.

It will be close and Gingrich could win   . If Romney wins Florida Gingrich is done.

http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/fivethirtyeight/primaries/florida

Every legitimate polling service uses a random sampling method to ensure a statistically reliable result. Those that don't only introduce heavy bias into their results, as you've just noted.

Mitt made most of his money via investing, not production or selling. I wouldn't characterize him as a successful businessman, but a successful investor instead.

I have too. It's a start. But it will take more than an influx of part-time jobs to jump start the US economy. We need an influx of high-paying full-time jobs to really get the economy moving.

Make higher education free. Problem solved.

As it is, tuition fees are obnoxious. In the digital age, information is more readily available, and therefore should be cheaper, not more expensive.

A friend of mine is taking a few courses, and the 3/4 inch thick paperback book for the class cost $300. I have antiquity books hand pressed and published from the Revolutionary War period that cost me less money, and they're collector's items.

will prove much.

Only registered Republicans can vote in the primary. Indenpendants will decide the general.

It will keep Newt in the race if he plays well.

Newt is more appealing to Republicans than he is to independents and moderates.

If Newt can't even carry the Republican primaries, then he will face a steeper challenge in the general election.

Kids who have the grades and want to go to college find a way to go. Even if that means working, taking out ridiculous student loans, or taking longer than 4 years to complete. If you have the grades, you will go to college.

25% of those in America have an undergraduate degree. Our universities public and private are running close to 100% occupancy. The public universities, which are the only schools that could provide a free education are running at about 115% of occupancy, hence another reason why it takes 5 years or more to complete. So yes willy, I could actually see providing higher education for free at public universities. Let me re-phrase that, free for certain studies, i.e. science, tech, math, engineering, business. Those studies are in demand and where the jobs are. And will also provide an immediate return on investment. If someone wants a free education in art history, well let's just agree free ain't going to happen.

Willy, the segment of society we are talking about are not college material. They either drop out, or if they do graduate from high school with an average GPA, SAT or ACT, they won't be able to compete against the other students. Hint, I went to UCLA (University of Caucasians Lost among Asians). Willy, they can't compete against them and they are the highest percentage of students at all the best California public universities. I graduated a long time ago, but I seriously doubt I would be accepted today with my GPA and SAT. It's really tough, brutal and competitive today.

We probably need to revamp high schools where we put kids through multiple tracks. Maybe we push certain kids to trade schools.

Re your friend and the $300 book. I do blame the universities, the professors, and the publishing industry, but there are ways to get around it. Check out Chegg, they rent books.



-- Modified on 1/25/2012 9:28:06 PM

And this is why class warfare will eventually erupt in the US.

We need to keep the cap gains tax low to spur investment in US companies. Doing so will only make those who know how to play the game (i.e. the 1%) even more rich while the 99% wallow in their monetary misery and self pity.

The future does not look bright at all.

The underemployment rate (as opposed to the unemployment rate) for skilled persons is much higher than the unemployment rates. Companies are especially picky now, as its an employer's market, not an employee's market.

As for a solution to the unskilled segment of society, I have no idea. The USA has transitioned away from a manufacturing society to one of services, as evidenced by the large outsourcing of manufacturing jobs overseas. Even some service jobs (like customer service reps) are outsourced overseas as well. It doesn't look good for unskilled persons.

Even going to college doesn't necessarily cut it anymore. The simple fact is that there aren't enough high-paying full time jobs to go around at the moment, if at all.

As a result, you're at a disadvantage if you didn't go to a top tier school in your field (law, business, engineering, etc.). And if you didn't go to college at all, you're basically finished (unless you consider a life of crime, which has its financial rewards replete with great risk).

While I'm not advocating that people should give up, I wouldn't blame the for doing so in this current economic environment.

Like you, I'm glad I got my college degrees when I did. And I feel nothing but sympathy for those teenagers who are trying to find their way in the world at the moment.