Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

BzaDem

(11,142 posts)
108. That is nonsense. If they all expired, a family of 4 making 20k/year would lose a 3k/year tax credit
Sun Dec 11, 2011, 05:30 PM
Dec 2011

He didn't have the choice of only extending some of them. He could extend all or none. In the middle of a recession, it would have been disastrous to allow poor families to lose thousands of dollars per year.

I have heard from some people that this amounts to "crumbs" to the poor, compared to the wealthy. Well, 3000 is a small amount compared to the tax cuts for the wealthy. But 3000 is not a "crumb" to a family of 4 at the poverty line -- it is a lifeline. It is quite strange that people are saying they won't vote for Obama from the left because he decided he couldn't let 3k/year tax credits for poor families expire in the middle of the worst recession in 70 years.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

I share your concern--this needs to be flushed out. Bogart Dec 2011 #1
I SO agree. The solution is definitely to elect a Republican president! kestrel91316 Dec 2011 #66
Obama is too far to the RIGHT and you suggest we'll vote Repug ??? defendandprotect Dec 2011 #74
Hey there, stillwaiting Dec 2011 #123
I wish I could rec this intersectionality Dec 2011 #140
And I wish I could ho-hum it. Jakes Progress Dec 2011 #156
Me too! nt BlueMTexpat Dec 2011 #174
Yes, the "bully and blame the voters" is stale tblue Dec 2011 #165
+1 nt ooglymoogly Dec 2011 #210
+1 nt ooglymoogly Dec 2011 #217
+1 What you describe is something we saw conservatives do for years under GWB. DRoseDARs Dec 2011 #166
worthy of its own thread Skittles Dec 2011 #171
+1 .... Scuba Dec 2011 #178
+ a gazillion chervilant Dec 2011 #179
+1 nt ooglymoogly Dec 2011 #207
+1 n/t ejbr Dec 2011 #183
In agreement up to your last paragraph freedom fighter jh Dec 2011 #185
Not voting, is NOT an option. ooglymoogly Dec 2011 #206
Isn't it? freedom fighter jh Dec 2011 #238
If a tree falls in the forest and no one sees it....yada yada yada, signifying nothing. ooglymoogly Dec 2011 #243
So my one little vote counts but my tiny little abstention does not? freedom fighter jh Dec 2011 #274
You faith in corrupt elections is touching. The system is broken and can not be fixed by working Vincardog Dec 2011 #248
It is sad that this country has evolved into voting avebury Dec 2011 #209
+1 You must always vote. ooglymoogly Dec 2011 #213
If you are not allowed to enter a write in candidate avebury Dec 2011 #237
Totally in agreement. nt ooglymoogly Dec 2011 #245
I daresay you aren't demanding more that way. bigmonkey Dec 2011 #247
What about voting for a liberal 3rd party? Lunacee2012 Dec 2011 #282
It's not your fault, but it is your responsibillity to understand who you're voting for. Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2011 #187
True, Obama was never a liberal Maven Dec 2011 #250
You can criticize him, just as I have done. But I think that people were expecting far too much, and Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2011 #256
Naive? Oh No Honey HangOnKids Dec 2011 #295
Oh yes, HONEY!! Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2011 #297
LOL HangOnKids Dec 2011 #303
Actually, I'm from Georgia, so that works. LOL! Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2011 #307
One has to wonder ooglymoogly Dec 2011 #205
You're right, and yes it IS infuriating. NorthCarolina Dec 2011 #233
You need to repost this as an OP. cleanhippie Dec 2011 #318
By all Means. In fact, give up on the Democrats altogether. Ron Paul, third party, that makes sense. Capn Sunshine Dec 2011 #153
Ron Paul is NO liberal, my friend. Indeed, he is a bigot through and through. Talk about Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2011 #258
Manipulation? pmorlan1 Dec 2011 #284
OFFS Marrah_G Dec 2011 #311
Looks like that isn't necessary. Union Scribe Dec 2011 #167
right, because there's not a dimes worth of difference between Al Gore and George Bush greenman3610 Dec 2011 #186
that dog no longer hunts Marrah_G Dec 2011 #309
I agree with you, but this isn't the only reason. ThomWV Dec 2011 #2
yes, no doubt spooked911 Dec 2011 #29
There have been many 'final straws'. Does Obama care? SammyWinstonJack Dec 2011 #151
It is...if folks think this one through.... ooglymoogly Dec 2011 #220
You have to ask yourself why Carl L. would sponsor such a bill. ooglymoogly Dec 2011 #222
I see 20 percent fact, and 80 percent "spin" in your post emulatorloo Dec 2011 #59
Are you suggesting that he didn't extend the Bush tax cuts or that they are good for the country? ThomWV Dec 2011 #100
Disingenious and hollow argument. Sheepshank Dec 2011 #103
The cost of extending unemployment was way too high. He should have reject the "deal" and turned rhett o rick Dec 2011 #143
I can only imagine the tone of your posts had Obama done just that n/t Sheepshank Dec 2011 #155
No you cant. The cost was too high. nt rhett o rick Dec 2011 #160
Sure. Had he done exactly that, people would be screaming about why he made a deal that EXCLUDED Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2011 #188
It's the republicons moving the goal posts. rhett o rick Dec 2011 #251
hmm... chervilant Dec 2011 #180
And please explain to us polmaven Dec 2011 #191
That argument could be used to justify agreeing rhett o rick Dec 2011 #252
When the welfare polmaven Dec 2011 #268
The compromise was good for millions of unemployed granted, but the consequences probably will be rhett o rick Dec 2011 #272
Well, that is your opinion polmaven Dec 2011 #278
What are you willing to "compromise" for them this year? Don't even pretend the need is any less TheKentuckian Dec 2011 #304
You say that as if polmaven Dec 2011 #305
Actually, the Democrats DID have a stand alone unemployment extension bill. Indeed, they put at leas Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2011 #195
If I remember correctly those votes occurred before the vote on extending the Bush rhett o rick Dec 2011 #249
Yes, but to believe that after letting the tax cuts expire, the Repukes were suddenly going to go Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2011 #275
Yes I'm doing it on purpose - I said that in the first place ThomWV Dec 2011 #146
+1 just one of the many. ooglymoogly Dec 2011 #215
Republicans Only Respond to Pressure from People With Lots of Money AndyTiedye Dec 2011 #244
Actually, the problem wasn't a "weak-willed president." The problem was that there were Blue Dog Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2011 #276
There is ALWAYS a fig leaf of political cover placed on acts like that. Marr Dec 2011 #270
The part where you leave out the context of the 2010 election results. The parts of the deal that emulatorloo Dec 2011 #131
Well said! One of the 99 Dec 2011 #137
Exactly. The behavior lends credence to the claim that liberals are elitists. Really, it makes us no Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2011 #190
To tell you the truth One of the 99 Dec 2011 #208
+1 -- defendandprotect Dec 2011 #75
+1 nt ooglymoogly Dec 2011 #216
That is nonsense. If they all expired, a family of 4 making 20k/year would lose a 3k/year tax credit BzaDem Dec 2011 #108
+1 cutlassmama Dec 2011 #301
+100. robinlynne Dec 2011 #141
Extending the Bush tax cuts was only one of a multitude indepat Dec 2011 #228
"it (extending Bush tax cuts) would stop any chance of recovery the country stood" Martin Eden Dec 2011 #320
Thanks for the video on this. Hard to argue with that... KoKo Dec 2011 #3
Wow. earthside Dec 2011 #4
Pull the other leg, you weren't going to anyways, were you? Davis_X_Machina Dec 2011 #5
I have always voted Dem, but I can't see in good conscience how I can vote for Obama when he does spooked911 Dec 2011 #32
I'm voting for all the good things he HAS done. gateley Dec 2011 #105
It's funny that when it comes to Obama, it seems to be disappointment after disappointment, and Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2011 #192
So..go ahead and get a republican in the White House. shraby Dec 2011 #6
one is already there. keep up. roguevalley Dec 2011 #56
Haha. Obama has just launched his "WAR ON RELIGION" and he murdered Santa so that gays can serve in emulatorloo Dec 2011 #61
Actually, I think Obama's presidency was the last straw which defendandprotect Dec 2011 #79
O, but chervilant Dec 2011 #182
Agreed Sherman A1 Dec 2011 #169
If we vote for candidates who trample on our core beliefs styersc Dec 2011 #57
Maybe we can get Obama to agree not to run. JDPriestly Dec 2011 #92
The truth is, it woud be hard to find an American politician in either party EFerrari Dec 2011 #7
+1000 sce56 Dec 2011 #9
Huh? nt 99th_Monkey Oct 2014 #323
+2000 GeorgeGist Oct 2014 #324
again i ask... Huh? 99th_Monkey Oct 2014 #325
Where is the post? mahina Oct 2014 #327
sad but true fishwax Dec 2011 #13
BOTH sides are for this Aerows Dec 2011 #16
+100 Xicano Dec 2011 #104
This. CrispyQ Dec 2011 #119
So the snark is to encourage people to vote for the greater of two evils? n/t Sheepshank Dec 2011 #164
+1 ooglymoogly Dec 2011 #212
They had better build a lot more prison then. I do think you are correct! btw. And can we please SammyWinstonJack Dec 2011 #152
I sadly agree, Aerows. dotymed Dec 2011 #204
+1 nt ooglymoogly Dec 2011 #218
100% correct malaise Dec 2011 #67
Entire national security state -- MIC -- has to be dismantled -- including the defendandprotect Dec 2011 #80
FDR did just that, but we liberals love and worship him! Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2011 #198
what is going on here? Enrique Dec 2011 #8
If Obama vetoes it Aerows Dec 2011 #21
That clip ProSense Dec 2011 #10
poutrage party pooper bigtree Dec 2011 #11
I propose a new DU feature, an POUTRAGE-O-METER. Kahuna Dec 2011 #232
I was wondering where you were. Wait Wut Dec 2011 #14
The Constitution may be clear Aerows Dec 2011 #19
Wait, ProSense Dec 2011 #25
If it's BS spin Aerows Dec 2011 #39
I agree one shouldnt be able to "make up stuff", so show us where the administration says rhett o rick Dec 2011 #273
+1 however the constitution is clear and can be misconstrued only by a crooks and slick lawyers; ooglymoogly Dec 2011 #223
Great post! JoePhilly Dec 2011 #22
in that very long post, you don't explain why Levin said what he said Enrique Dec 2011 #35
Of ProSense Dec 2011 #46
Thanks for the post. It is clear that Obama wants the language strenghten to permit the indefinate rhett o rick Dec 2011 #148
Well, ProSense Dec 2011 #154
His threatened veto is because the bill limits his power to fight terrorism. Show me where it says rhett o rick Dec 2011 #162
It's also 'definite'. The Doctor. Dec 2011 #260
I agree that the President wants the language "fixed" rhett o rick Dec 2011 #259
Excellent post. emulatorloo Dec 2011 #48
ProSense. JDPriestly Dec 2011 #95
Why ProSense Dec 2011 #101
Because, your long defense of Obama is extremely unclear. JDPriestly Dec 2011 #106
Wait ProSense Dec 2011 #112
What I understood from the clip is that the Obama administration requested the language JDPriestly Dec 2011 #142
What ProSense Dec 2011 #150
It's clear that the administration only objects to this bill because they THINK it restricts spooked911 Dec 2011 #181
You know ProSense Dec 2011 #199
This entire administration is an exercise in the absurd. Fuddnik Dec 2011 #227
Hmmm? ProSense Dec 2011 #253
If this is not true, why not alert on it. Rex Dec 2011 #255
Prosense. Occulus Dec 2011 #242
That ProSense Dec 2011 #254
THANK YOU. nt woo me with science Dec 2011 #107
Still pushing that blatantly dishonest spin? Easy to do WHEN YOU SELECTIVELY BOLD... Zhade Dec 2011 #99
Ah ProSense Dec 2011 #102
Good to see you on this side! ellisonz Dec 2011 #109
Amazingly insightful response...as always! tallahasseedem Dec 2011 #116
Thanks ProSense! One of the 99 Dec 2011 #138
So glad you're here, Prosense Number23 Dec 2011 #139
Glad you're still around... redqueen Dec 2011 #291
"When the NDAA passes and is vetoed by President Obama..." Ignis Dec 2011 #316
All well and good, but Owlet Dec 2011 #12
I love that DURecs are completely transparent now...nt SidDithers Dec 2011 #15
yep. It'll be the same 20 haters every time. MjolnirTime Dec 2011 #18
This message was self-deleted by its author Tesha Dec 2011 #26
"Obama cheerleader" was allowed to stand. LoZoccolo Dec 2011 #30
This message was self-deleted by its author Tesha Dec 2011 #33
Ditto K&R unapatriciated Dec 2011 #170
Are you assuming people only "rec" topics they agree with? jtrockville Dec 2011 #65
"20 haters" of what? AnotherMcIntosh Dec 2011 #70
"20 haters" .... ???? hmmm.... defendandprotect Dec 2011 #83
looks like there is way more than 20 Skittles Dec 2011 #172
so there's one hundred. it's the same names again and again. MjolnirTime Dec 2011 #308
aw, poor baby Skittles Dec 2011 #310
seeing who recs is a good thing MjolnirTime Dec 2011 #312
Monday morning it is at 74 recs Bluenorthwest Dec 2011 #189
You got that right. It will soon become even more apparent who is working overtime Number23 Dec 2011 #269
Why would you be so interested in that? boston bean Dec 2011 #36
It really tells me who DUrecs threads like this... SidDithers Dec 2011 #37
And does that give you some sort of insight into individual posters? boston bean Dec 2011 #38
I don't have political enemies... SidDithers Dec 2011 #42
And will you use that information boston bean Dec 2011 #45
No I won't... SidDithers Dec 2011 #49
Well, you were quite off topic for the thread in your reply. boston bean Dec 2011 #52
"Off-Topic" is only germane to the Original Post of the thread, not posts within the thread...nt SidDithers Dec 2011 #54
Well, it made me wonder why you wrote what you wrote, that is all. boston bean Dec 2011 #55
Interesting discussion. nt Skip Intro Dec 2011 #122
Very Interesting Post indeed! mrdmk Dec 2011 #158
I agree with you Bluenorthwest Dec 2011 #193
I look at it differently. unapatriciated Dec 2011 #176
OMG!!! chervilant Dec 2011 #184
If you're keeping a list, add me to it. AnotherMcIntosh Dec 2011 #98
He can add me as well. unapatriciated Dec 2011 #173
I'm loving the new transparency. Grateful for Hope Dec 2011 #53
yup. lol dionysus Dec 2011 #64
lol LoZoccolo Dec 2011 #78
Why? The same mentality as those supporting this bill, eh? Send them to Gitmo, ask questions later.. sadge goddess Dec 2011 #115
that is disturbing and I could think of more. But the thought of President Gingrich would convince Douglas Carpenter Dec 2011 #17
The devil would probably be a better leader than Gingrich. Aerows Dec 2011 #23
Same here Doctor_J Dec 2011 #34
Stop and think where that has taken the party and the Congress defendandprotect Dec 2011 #87
but there is no choice - there is not going to be a true liberal as a viable candidate in 2012 Douglas Carpenter Dec 2011 #96
Then mission accomplished! OMG! sadge goddess Dec 2011 #117
if we are going to make Nazi comparisons - then those who didn't unite around the strongest candidat Douglas Carpenter Dec 2011 #118
I won't make that comparison but as for it defying reason, not so fast there... sadge goddess Dec 2011 #120
and the election of Newt Gingrich would be an enormous step in that direction Douglas Carpenter Dec 2011 #130
Hell to the no! I am OVER sadge goddess Dec 2011 #132
I felt that way in 1980 and voted for Barry Commoner of the Citizens Party rather than Jimmy Carter Douglas Carpenter Dec 2011 #134
I don't know what we are now allowed to say here so I am very wary of asking you more info sadge goddess Dec 2011 #136
Exactly! I made this mistake twice, voting for Nader in 1996 and 2000. It didn't matter that I live Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2011 #201
Hold your nose. wtmusic Dec 2011 #20
I don't think the Constitution can be overridden by legislation. MH1 Dec 2011 #24
Good post, thank you emulatorloo Dec 2011 #60
some years ago living in Moab UT newspeak Dec 2011 #234
'if' ??? spanone Dec 2011 #27
I used to take your position up until about two days ago. Then, as it coalition_unwilling Dec 2011 #28
Is it just me Aerows Dec 2011 #40
I echo what ProSense has said. boxman15 Dec 2011 #31
Maybe but it misses the offered point that the President like other before him may be TheKentuckian Dec 2011 #280
This message was self-deleted by its author maximusveritas Dec 2011 #41
so vote for newt-romney demtenjeep Dec 2011 #43
I look for Newt to pick Dan Burton B Calm Dec 2011 #47
Nation is crying out for a democratic liberal NOT a move to the RIGHT defendandprotect Dec 2011 #89
Sigh. New site. Same tired deflections. nt Union Scribe Dec 2011 #168
Why should U.S. citizens be exempt? Capitalocracy Dec 2011 #44
Good question. Kaleko Dec 2011 #110
The devil's advocate part was saying why should U.S. citizens be exempt Capitalocracy Dec 2011 #114
Just out of curiosity bondwooley Oct 2014 #322
So, after the inevitable "compromise" will the govenment have the power to indefinitely detain? Tierra_y_Libertad Dec 2011 #50
It's looking that way. Occulus Dec 2011 #51
The food fight about who to blame is not very critical TheKentuckian Dec 2011 #62
Well said. The real issue is whether our government can exert tyrannical power of it's people. Tierra_y_Libertad Dec 2011 #63
Message auto-removed Name removed Dec 2011 #72
Message auto-removed Name removed Dec 2011 #77
I acknowledge your capitulation to my argument Anatos Dec 2011 #229
Life sucks, for sure. Anatos Dec 2011 #71
Are they "accountable" after the fact? Tierra_y_Libertad Dec 2011 #82
We are discussing Obama, not Bush. Anatos Dec 2011 #226
W are discussing accountability. Tierra_y_Libertad Dec 2011 #236
Exactly Anatos Dec 2011 #266
That snark 'life sucks'? Bluenorthwest Dec 2011 #197
My response Anatos Dec 2011 #230
Bravo. nm rhett o rick Dec 2011 #144
This message was self-deleted by its author mvd Dec 2011 #58
This message was self-deleted by its author pa28 Oct 2014 #321
If you can't vote for Obama Anatos Dec 2011 #68
I can't vote for Obama in 2012. Occulus Dec 2011 #161
Thank you. unapatriciated Dec 2011 #177
In the past Anatos Dec 2011 #231
Well I'm not ready to turn my card in and will leave you with this link. unapatriciated Dec 2011 #240
I have no problem with the ACLU Anatos Dec 2011 #262
I've written my congressman... unapatriciated Dec 2011 #279
As well you should Anatos Dec 2011 #285
I don't think it is I who is doing the "sloppy thinking". unapatriciated Dec 2011 #289
Of course you don't Anatos Dec 2011 #298
again with the name calling. unapatriciated Dec 2011 #302
again with the weak response Anatos Dec 2011 #314
lol Love your new math. unapatriciated Dec 2011 #315
There was no math. D'oh! Anatos Dec 2011 #319
Oh my Anatos Dec 2011 #224
I suggest you read more. Occulus Dec 2011 #239
feel free Anatos Dec 2011 #263
Wow indepat Dec 2011 #235
I'm not sure Anatos Dec 2011 #287
It is not terrorism that is "cockamamie bullshit," it is the erosion of constitutional protections indepat Dec 2011 #290
I understand Anatos Dec 2011 #299
It is NOT good sense to not vote at all. That is a shocking thing to say. Demit Dec 2011 #214
Many true things are shocking Anatos Dec 2011 #288
It is *precisely* in the act of voting that I exercise my responsibility as a citizen, Demit Dec 2011 #300
In a purely imaginary way, perhaps Anatos Dec 2011 #313
who else are you going to vote for? Gingrich? Liberal_in_LA Dec 2011 #69
I think it's a pretty safe assumtion that no one is voting for Gingrich. Fearless Dec 2011 #73
Btw, THANK YOU ... didn't know about this -- sad -- !! defendandprotect Dec 2011 #76
"If this is true, won't support"->"bad judgment" gulliver Dec 2011 #81
Sorry, but Im pretty sure this has to do with NDAA 1031 not election suppression. n/t teddy51 Dec 2011 #84
It doesn't matter. Presidential elections are not decided by who votes for whom. Beam Me Up Dec 2011 #85
You.. sendero Dec 2011 #121
Way too much misinformation on this bill... bhikkhu Dec 2011 #86
Glenn Greenwald is a Constitutional Lawyer and he read it.... Said it was "more of the same" as KoKo Dec 2011 #125
Do you have something on this bill that proves that it isn't as bad as it appears? I would like to teddy51 Dec 2011 #88
Why not? They voted for war in Iraq - Patriot Act - Homeland Security! defendandprotect Dec 2011 #91
Thats true, but I sure hope they are smarter than voting on a bill with the ability teddy51 Dec 2011 #93
"teddy 51" most of them are KoKo Dec 2011 #128
so that's enough for you to prefer a Republican in the White House? hfojvt Dec 2011 #90
That's messed up! Odin2005 Dec 2011 #94
So, if the President vetos the legislation, he has your mzmolly Dec 2011 #97
If he doesn't, as promised, he won't have mine. joshcryer Dec 2011 #127
My question was if he does, mzmolly Dec 2011 #157
I've defended him pretty strongly, but this would be a very strong flip. joshcryer Dec 2011 #163
I ran into to the same wall in 2008 when he said he'd escalate the lost war in Afghanistan. Tierra_y_Libertad Dec 2011 #111
The Obameter: Tracking Obama's Campaign Promises emulatorloo Dec 2011 #135
Are you for real? The president has kept a long list of promises. Your disdain for him will Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2011 #202
I still think Obama ... GeorgeGist Dec 2011 #113
Sheesh....some of the replies seem like KoKo Dec 2011 #124
No, the President thinks he already has non-citizen detention ability. joshcryer Dec 2011 #126
Josh...the President should be in control of our Military. (Commander in Chief) KoKo Dec 2011 #129
Right, because any Republican has to be better than Obama. pnwmom Dec 2011 #133
Obviously you should vote for a Republican instead. n/t Lil Missy Dec 2011 #145
I still can. bonzotex Dec 2011 #147
Democratic President and a Democratically controlled Senate TheKentuckian Dec 2011 #281
What choice do I have? Texasgal Dec 2011 #149
Let us know when you find out that it IS true. CakeGrrl Dec 2011 #159
Overreaction. We don't need people out helping the Republicans. RBInMaine Dec 2011 #175
Why are you afraid to suport a fair trial using centuries old constitutional safeguards? scentopine Dec 2011 #196
Obama thinks he has this one in the bag, so he'll continue to pander to his republican base... scentopine Dec 2011 #194
Really? You've been able to see what's going on in his mind? That's mighty arrogant Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2011 #203
I woke up late...is this another one of those "cut off your nose to spite your face" threads? Walk away Dec 2011 #200
Obama is scuttling constitutional safeguards that separate us from 3rd world despot oligarchy scentopine Dec 2011 #283
Indeed, if this is true and this becomes law ooglymoogly Dec 2011 #211
I really wish you would have given more information about this clip so that we could easily find Bolo Boffin Dec 2011 #219
I don't know yet what is going on here. Vattel Dec 2011 #221
i'm mixed on this one, it has the potential to be abused. okieinpain Dec 2011 #225
Day One OVERPAID01 Dec 2011 #241
If a Rethug becomes our next president as a result of the left splitting its vote ... Martin Eden Dec 2011 #246
Perhaps Obama should seek the votes of the left instead of pandering to the "middle". Tierra_y_Libertad Dec 2011 #257
Still out of joint, I see. Martin Eden Dec 2011 #264
Really? My single vote will swing the election? Tierra_y_Libertad Dec 2011 #265
Sorry, I didn't realize you were the only one on the left ... Martin Eden Dec 2011 #267
What... you think seeing what almost happened in France, and what is happening in Canada redqueen Dec 2011 #292
Making good decisions comes from experience ... Martin Eden Dec 2011 #296
How would a republican president be worse? bowens43 Dec 2011 #306
You're kidding, right? Martin Eden Dec 2011 #317
Now can you see how you'd vote for him? ClassWarrior Dec 2011 #261
that's fucked up but i'll still vote for him because arely staircase Dec 2011 #271
I wish I could vote none of the above .... littlewolf Dec 2011 #277
So don't then. yellowcanine Dec 2011 #286
Well, ProSense Dec 2011 #293
OK, you convinced me. Old and In the Way Dec 2011 #294
I don't see how I could vote for him in November 2012 Jamastiene Oct 2014 #326
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Don't care what Rahm thin...»Reply #108