Pollster.com

Articles and Analysis

 

CO: 2010 Gov (Rasmussen 2/4)


Rasmussen
2/4/10; 500 likely voters, 4.5% margin of error
Mode: Automated phone
(Rasmussen release)

Colorado

2010 Governor (trends)
49% Hickenlooper (D), 45% McInnis (R)

Favorable / Unfavorable
Scott McInnis: 52 / 29
John Hickenlooper: 56 / 36

 

Comments
Farleftandproud:

Hopefully Colorado will return to where they were back in the summer of 2008 as trending more left of ctr. They have not always followed national patterns. Democrats have won in bad Democratic years, and Republicans have won in bad Republican years. In some ways it is like NH.

____________________

Field Marshal:

Hick is getting his post-announcement bounce. Once the people outside of the metro area become aware of him, it will be interesting to see where the poll goes.

McInnis is a weak candidate but the GOP in Colorado has been weak for a decade now.

Its interesting to note that Hick has never run as a Dem before running as an indy in both mayoral elections. He does have significant private business experience and was actually an entrepreneur, a rarity for a dem.

This race will be about turnout in the end depending on the political environment in Nov. Bennet is highly unpopular so that may drive down some Dem voters from heading out then.

____________________

Farleftandproud:

To Field Marshall, I think just about all Democrats are weak candidates.

____________________

Williame123:

"[P]rivate business experience" is an overrated asset in a governor or president beyond the executive experience that may come with it.

Intelligence, charisma, political courage, sense of timing, quality of advisors etc are more important.

____________________

Farleftandproud:

Bennet at least has a primary challenger, so if he is a weak candidate, he won't win. If he wins, at least people will know more about him, since he hasn't been elected to office. Just to be fair, I think for the GOP that Norton would be the weaker candidate. She comes across as abrasive. Hopefully she isn't related to Gail Norton who had that atrocious environmental policy under Bush.

____________________

Xenobion:

CO is about the new youth and hispanic vote that is prevalent in that state. They came out for obama will they come out for mid-terms?

____________________

Farleftandproud:

They better come out for the mid-terms if they care about their country. That is why the Dems can't disappoint in the house by trying to negotiate with Republicans. I think states where you have younger demographics, it is especially important that Dems don't pull the Blanche Lincoln and Evan Bayh nonsense of putting health care, lower college costs as a bottom priority. So far, all the Dems who have been weak on health care have dropped considerably in their approval.

____________________

Stillow:

I dunno, I am not sure even the youth are thrilled with O anymore. Its just not cool anymore to be on his bandwagon. I saw that even Obama Girl is starting to question her support for Da O meister.

The younglings probably ar enot that thrilled to be finding out O has spent all there money befor ethey have even earned it....and the prospects of Social Security being around even in the next 10 years or so seems to be a diminsihign prospect.

Even the youth and naive as they are at there young foolish ages know the danger in what O is doing. O has spent money my daughter won't earn for the next 35 years.

History will judge Bush as the man who started this spending frenzy whcih brought this country down....and O as the one who gave it the final push...............

Thank you President Bush and thank you President Obama for spending us into financial ruin.

____________________

Aaron_in_TX:

"[P]rivate business experience" is an overrated asset in a governor or president"

I agree. I can't think of any recent presidents besides George H.W. Bush that had significant business experience where the business did not fail. If someone is successful in business, it seems stupid for them to go into politics. Most governors or presidents get where they are because they moved up in the political, not business, realm.

____________________

Aaron_in_TX:

"The younglings probably ar enot that thrilled to be finding out O has spent all there money befor ethey have even earned it"

Somehow I doubt this since it's the exact same thing John McCain was saying throughout the 2008 campaign. What exit and crosstab data we have show that younger voters are still some of Obama's strongest supporters. If anything they are disappointed that he has not been more forceful in enacting his agenda.

____________________

Field Marshal:

I disagree. Experience in private business is a necessity in my opinion for higher office. How can a rep, governor, sen or prez know anything about creating jobs, balancing a budget, foreign trade, diplomacy, etc. I dont think it matters if the business is successful like Romney's or GWB or unsuccessful like GHWB.

____________________

ChicagoKid:

As a "young person" on a liberal campus, I can tell you guys the enthusiasm for Obama has slowed down. During the '08 campaign season you couldn't walk a step without hearing something about Obama. If you didn't pay close attention to politics you would have no clue that there were just midterm competitive primaries for governor and senate in Illinois. The young enthusiasm for Obama is dying down, people who bought into the hype are questioning.

____________________

Stillow:

Perhaps its a lack of business expereince by our top leadership which has caused much of our current financial huardships. Anyone with even a very basic understanding of business knows that you cannot spend without end...nor can you constantly increase the debt you hold year after year. It does not work that way.

I say its about tiem we get someone to sit in hte big chair who actually understands business and how it works. Someone who actually understands job creation, expenses and profit and how to manage all of it.

____________________

Stillow:

aaron - You could be right, maybe the younglings are blindly following him still. My son a few months ago at dinner told me, Dad, your gonna be ticked off, but I think I am a liberal. He's in his mid teens. Maybe later tonight i'll post my response to him, but I have a staff meeting to go address....funny enough ,one of the topics is how to address health care costs for the coming fiscal year.

____________________

Field Marshal:

"Dad, your gonna be ticked off, but I think I am a liberal."

I'm sorry.

____________________

Aaron_in_TX:

"Romney's or GWB or unsuccessful like GHWB."

I think you've got your Bushes mixed up. George the elder ran a successful oil firm; George the younger ran his oil business efforts into the ground. Personally I think the elder Bush was a good president that deserved re-election.

But the larger point was that businessmen generally don't make good politicians and vice versa - there's different skill sets involved. The presidents I can think of off the top of my head that had any business experience to speak of were Herbert Hoover, Harry Truman, and Jimmy Carter. On the other hand, Franklin Roosevelt, Ronald Reagan, Dwight Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy, Richard Nixon, Lyndon Johnson, Bill Clinton, and Barack Obama never had any experience in private business practice, other than maybe as a partner in a law firm.

It'll take me a while but I'll try to think of the 19th century presidents.

____________________

Farleftandproud:

I think every president in modern times was a big spender. I would have to say the exception was Bill Clinton.

____________________

Farleftandproud:

I can relate to Chicago kid because when I was 20 or so I was living on a liberal campus in Mass. Bill Clinton was all about Change as well and finally there was the promise of national healthcare, and a chance to change the courts from constitutional conservativism to more progressive legal ideas too. Bill tried to fight for these issues, but than after the losses in 1994 and his cheating, didn't impress young women who tended to be strong femminists. Of course Clinton was better liked than Republicans on my campus, but once reality sunk in, and we had GOP in charge of the house and senate, the excitement went out the window. By the time 2000 came along, Al Gore seemed to more my classmates, and many supported Ralph Nader. The rest is history.

____________________

Field Marshal:

"I think you've got your Bushes mixed up. George the elder ran a successful oil firm; George the younger ran his oil business efforts into the ground. Personally I think the elder Bush was a good president that deserved re-election."

Actually, i dont. George the elder ran a successful business, Zapata Oil Corp. for a long period of time. However, the oil company declined considerably shortly after Bush left the company and was near bankruptcy when it was folded into Arethusa Offshore Drilling Corp. I would give the company a mixed grade though Bush was successful as a business owner.

George the younger did have several failed oil venture attempts. However, he did run the Texas Rangers successfully, making considerably more money than his father did even adjusted for inflation. The net worth of the Texas Rangers increased substantially over GWB's time as managing partner.

____________________

Aaron_in_TX:

"You could be right, maybe the younglings are blindly following him still."

I don't think it's blind faith in Obama that makes the young generation more liberal. There are more structural reasons behind their liberalism, and it's far different than what drove the young liberals of the 1960s, who really weren't that liberal.

Here are my theories:
1) They don't have the massive distrust of government that came about due to the Vietnam War and then Nixon & Carter.

2) They are more comfortable diversity, including homosexuals, a pretty massive change from decades past.

3) A realization that our political and economic system fundamentally favors older people. This, after being fed their entire childhood and adolescence the message that "you can do anything if you work hard and put your mind to it," only to find they don't get as good benefits or opportunities as previous generations did. It's no wonder they are anti-status quo.

4) A discredited republican mantra, mostly due to having came of age during the Bush years. This is similar to the generation that came of age during the late 70s, early 80s under Carter. They were Reagan's biggest supporters; something the media narrative has forgotten.

There are other things too, but I think the people born between 1978-1991 will remain somewhat liberally biased from here on out. However, their cynicism makes them very susceptible to capitulation and apathy, a big downside politically.

I don't think it was naive adulation for Obama; many people could have tapped in to what he did, Obama was just the one to do it.

____________________

Aaron_in_TX:

"he did run the Texas Rangers successfully,"

Didn't he only own 10% or less? I don't think you can attribute their success to him alone. It was probably more luck than business acumen.

____________________

Farleftandproud:

Bush the elder I think was a pretty good president too. Bi partisanship was alive and well during the 12 years of Reagan and Bush 1.It wasn't a bad time because you had Democrats doing well at the gubernatorial level, moderate populist Democrats in the south, and centrist Republicans in the northeast. I think after 1994 and the Gingrich revolution, quality of life went down, crime went up and it just seemed like everything went out of control. The GOP moved so far to the right and the party got hijacked my the religious right. Democrats have had little choice than to be peaceful, analytical, great book writers, journalists; the GOP has become emotional, and used terror threats and theacratic topics to seduce voters.

____________________

Field Marshal:

Yes, he did only own a fraction of the team but he was the managing partner, a.k.a. the head honcho. He had the same position as Steinbrenner for the Yankees.

His business acumen turned $800k into $15 million mostly through working with the city of Arlington into building a new stadium and increasing the average attendance of the games by over a quarter.

But again, business experience is business experience whether its a successful business or not. Actually, most people learn better from unsuccessful businesses. Warren Buffet always says that he has learned much more from his mistakes then in all his successes combined; and he has few mistakes...

____________________

Farleftandproud:

If George W. Bush had not become president, who knows? He may have actually produced a couple of world series winners!

____________________

Aaron_in_TX:

"Yes, he did only own a fraction of the team but he was the managing partner, a.k.a. the head honcho. He had the same position as Steinbrenner for the Yankees."

Well, he did always love baseball, and maybe he did have ideas on how to make his team more popular. Iirc, about the time Bush was brought in is when the Rangers got Nolan Ryan. Although the sports business is very different from an entrepreneurial concern; it's pretty similar to the entertainment business, which is something conservatives don't like. Do you consider hollywood producers good businesspeople?

However, Bush was not a very good president despite that business experience.

____________________

Stillow:

aaron - Let me tell you what I did with my son....who by the way is still angry at me for doing it.

He told me he thought he was a liberal, then went on to tell me all about the things his teachers teach him....probably a good 45 minutes of your basic liberal mumbo jumbo about helping people in need. About how the right only cares about money, etc. Typical misleading left wing stuff that they feed kids on a daily basis in school.

Anyway, i told him stragiht up, I said son, your old enough to make your own deicsions and as a result your old enough to live with your own decisions....I went on to comment that if he felt he identitied more with that line of thinking, then I would treat him that way.

I pay him $150 a month in allowance...he's a good kids, works hard, good grades, he's respectful to his mother and me. I have no complaints other than he spends to much time playing video games withhis freinds when he isn't at one of his sports practices.

That being said, I give him his allowance on the last day of every month, the last day of that month I gave him only $75 and gave the rest to his much younger sister. He's saving up to buy his car, because I told him I would only pay 25 percent, he must work to buy the rest. He asked me where the toher half was and I told him I gave it to his sister....who does maybe 1/10 the chores he does simply cus she is so young.

He asked the obvious question of why....and I told him that he told me he thought he was a liberal....and wante do be treated as such. So I took half the money he earned and gave it to someone else who did not earn it. I told that is the very essence of liberalism, a higher power such a sg'ment, or in this case myself, tkaing money from those who have/earn it and redistribute it to those they feel need it more.

Then I told him to look around at the big house we have, go look in his room, his video game systems...all his sports gear, his clothes and shoes. i told him all that stuff has to be paid for by me. I worked for the money to buy those things for him...and as a result he has things maybe other kids don't have because there parents don't earn enough or have made certain cchoices in life that didn't allow them to have the nice things we have.

I went on to tell him that his mother and i pay over half our income to the g'ment every single year...and that next year it will go up even more. I listed several of the taxes we pay....and explained g'ment takes that money and it gives it to those it fels would benefit from it wheather it be in the form of direct cash payments such as a welfare check or in the form of an entitlement program.

Needless to say he was not happy about it all. He told me it was totally unfair that i would just give half his money that he earned to his sister. I told him to get used to it cus thats how it was going to be, not only that I gave him a couple extra chores to do....and told him thats what i have to do...I have to work harder and harder year after year to maintain our lifestyle so that others don't have to work.

He ran off ranting to his room and didn't speak to me for a few days. Wouldn't even look at me. Finall maybe a week or so later he said ok dad, I geet your point. He said he even told his history teacher about it who lcaimed I was being unreasonable....which of course I am not. That is exactly hwat liberalsim is, take from one person and give to another....does not matter if the money was eanred or not. liberals have no regard for the fact that it was earned....they place the public good as they view it above the work of the individual.

He told me he got my point and tried talking me into getting his money back. I told him no. He made a decision and he needs to live with it. His sister I think used her new found wealth to buy every my little pony on the planet and some little hamster things that run around the kitchen. He is quite upset at watching her spend his money.

Now I am actually going to give him his full allowance back starting i nthe summer, but i want to make sure this lesson sticks with him. Liberals take for granted the work of others. I hope he is understanding this lesson. I think he is. He now comes into the room and watches shows like Oreilly with me.

I know you libs will jump all over this life lesson, but I think its teaching him the value of money and the value of working to earn that money. And the inherant unfairness of someone coming along to seize half of it to simply give away to people being less productive wheather by choice, circumstance of lifestyle. Being a kid of mixed race, he will already have a slight disadvantage probably, but my goal is to teach him what hard work means....and that part of being a man isnot only to do what is required of you but to spend the fruits of that labor wisely.

Every year I pay a huge tax bill to the g'ment....and every day on this site for example I am told I don't pay enough....and how I need to give my money over to g'ment so it can pay for whatever enetitlement program it has in fashion that day. I am constantly paying for other peoples bad choices in life or there failures.

If a bumb like me can be successful anyone can do it. It takes time and a lot of work. Success does not happen overnight. I wish all parents would teach a similar lesson to there kids. Kids these days are fom the me generations...everything si gimme gimme gimme. No one wants to work for anything, everyone has a sense of entitlement....that something is somehow owed to them...and that people like me who have reached a certain level of success are to be lothed and hated. And that its perfectly just to seize my earnings in the name of the public good.

So if young people are following this president and his big g'ment ways, then I think its a failure in society to teach kids what it means to be an American. Society has failed to teach kids the value of work and such has denied them the taste of enjoying there earnings. A dollar earned is spent more wisely than a dollar given.

I hope at the end of this, my son understand what I am doing for him and not to him. I don't want him caught up in this me generation....or to enter his working years thinking he is owed something or that society is somehow to blame for any level of success or failure he may have.

Despite what aaron says, our system is not geared or slnted to favor older americans. Its geared and slanted to favor those willing to commit themsleves to what they want.......and no, our system is not freindly to those who simply wish to be given what they need in life.

Go to any local mall and look at the kids walking around in there $200 shoes with there shorts around there knees. Most of these kids have no idea about the value of a dollar.

____________________

Aaron_in_TX:

"Despite what aaron says, our system is not geared or slnted to favor older americans."

Spoken like someone who has no clue.

Sure it's not. It's not like the elderly get social security and medicare, which the youth of today will likely not get to enjoy. And these people are not willing to cut one dime so that future generations might get it. It's not like employers now don't want experience that's impossible for a person under 35 to have. Yeah, it's great for young people out there.

Politicians don't give a damn about young people. They took notice of Obama because he was one of the first since I can remember to not condescend to them or completely ignore them. But you treat this as some sort of sense of entitlement!

I see politicians get up in arms about medicare cuts, but there's no mention of the increasing difficulty of getting entry level positions, and even when there are those positions, health insurance is less likely to be part of the package anymore. Every private sector job interview I've ever been to has told me I won't get insurance, at least not for a few years And you wonder why I don't think the private sector is the greatest ever? Government jobs offer insurance.

When has a politician ever cared about issues that affect the young? I see them make a big deal about medicare advantage but not a peep about college tuition and the resulting debt burden.

I want to work hard and have a family just like you. I'm getting married this summer. But the difference between me and my parents is that I'm way in the hole beyond what they were and there are far fewer opportunities than they had. We have to compete in a global marketplace. If something can be manufactured, it's cheaper to do it in another country. If something can be done over a fiber-optic cable, it's cheaper to do it in another country. We have to get more and more education, the price of which keeps going up, just to keep up with where you were at this point. The prospects for owning a house, having a family, etc... are not near as good as they were 20 or 30 years ago and you know it. Proportionally it requires more than before and I see the unfairness in that. But you think this is entitlement thinking.

Health insurance when I get married is going to nearly equal our rent payment. I think that is unreasonable. Such prohibitive costs are going to prevent us from contributing to the economy in more constructive ways. But perhaps you think I have too much of a sense of entitlement because of that opinion?

Somehow you think that everyone who is liberal is trying to take from you and it's not the case. You think people like me want something for nothing and that's not the case. It's that kind of stereotyping and condescension that turned young people off of conservative ideas.

I hope your son is intelligent enough to know that the caricature you present to him as "liberalism" is just that. Perhaps when he gets older he'll realize that he was being whiny and you were being vapid. But who knows.

____________________

Field Marshal:

Good post Stillow. Most people start out as liberals and then grow up and enter reality. It would be great for everyone to have a big house, lots of consumer goods, free education, free health care, free whatever... but SOMEONE has to pay for those things and THAT'S what liberals fail to perceive.

Aaron,

I agree with you on the older generation thing. I do think our system is geared slightly to them. And i agree with you on the medicare cuts and the outrage that follows. But that is what happens when you create an entitlement system that is essentially a ponzi scheme.

The older generations paid into medicare and SS for their entire working lives and then when its 'their turn' they are being told their benefits are being cut. How would you feel? This is why Medicare and SS should be abolished altogether. They are two of the primary reasons why this country is in the mess that its in.

In addition, you cite the "benefits" of government jobs. Yet, the problem are those very people. Last year, the Transportation Admin had one person making over $170k. This year, they have nearly 1700 people making over that much. Unbelievable. California is broke from government workers. Public pensions will break the back of many state governments in the near future.

Liberalism only works if there are enough people to take wealth from. But, as Margaret Thatcher once said, "The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money."

____________________

Field Marshal:

"However, Bush was not a very good president despite that business experience."

Yeah, he was mediocre at best. Up there with Clinton in my book. But both Bush and Clinton were markedly better than Obama has been in his first year.

____________________

Xenobion:

Its sort of sad Stillow that you directly manipulate your child to think that only liberals would tax and use that money to redistribute. You should of on the flip side taxed him and given half of the money back to yourself to create more jobs for him in the form of a tax break. I'm sure he'd be thrilled about that.

____________________

Stillow:

FM - That is right, older americans have been paying for SS and medicare all there working lives. Its in a way theft to ask them to take benefit cuts so that younger americans can benefit. This type of thing exposes the fundamental flaw i nthe entitlement mentality. They are ponzi schemes....and like all ponzi schemes eventually be proven not to be sustainable.

Instead of a g'ment run retirment program such as SS, your funds and a portion of your remployers matching payroll taxes should have been placed into your own private account, such as a 401k type plan. This allows people to keep there own earnings and the need for younger americans to pay for older americans is not there.

Libs today, espeically younger ones bitch and moan all the time about hwo hard it is. My first job was $6 an hour doing phone customer service. Its not like one day I got out of school and went and got a job earning 200k. It took my years to get where I am....lot of late nights working.

aaron - You must just not be that good a shopper. You can get private health care plans, very good ones for about $200 a month.

My definition to my so nwhat liberalism is is not a myth, that is exactly what it is. It is take from those who have and give to those who do not have. Even in our the HCR debate, you want me to buy you insurance. Or at least pay a good portion of it. If yur young, and it sounds like you are, then you need to realize its tough. Its not easy. Money is tight when your in your 20's. I lived for years in a tiny one bedroom 538 aq foot apartment.

Its supposed to be hard when your younger, so that you have a greater appreication for the things you accomplish later in life. Opportunity does exist and there is plenty of it.

You seem to have a lot of anger for those who have more than you, rather than being angry at them, you need to focus your energy o nthe obstacles which are preventing you form reaching that success. And those obstacles are usually g'ment based.

____________________

Field Marshal:

"Its sort of sad Stillow that you directly manipulate your child to think that only liberals would tax and use that money to redistribute"

Yeah, where we he ever get THAT idea.... *as i roll my eyes.

____________________

Field Marshal:

That should read "Where would he ever get THAT idea...."

____________________

Xenobion:

yeah "only" was the keyword. You think conservatives don't do the same thing then you have no real grasp on reality. Liberatarians are the only ones that are in favor of non-distribution. Conservatives distribute tax money for their own base, constituents, and agenda in the exact same way liberals do. You're a fool to think otherwise. You couldn't even get beyond Huckabee for a flat-tax.

Lets face it Conservatives demonize Liberals but dont' back themselves up. They are the most ideal hypocrite. If you all want to go vote for the Libertarians we'll have that debate but if you think that Conservatives represent this "small government, no taxes" type of government well you're being sold bad cheese.

Modern Conservatism is agenda based and socially based. The economic fiscal conservatives have migrated to the center as liberal-republicans and blue-dog democrats. Modern conservatives are social hawks. Espousing more about immigration, gay marriage, and war than about if any of the programs that they support would be fiscally sound in response. I mean Bush was the compassionate conservative. Conservatives, I'm sorry, but you own him. He represents your movement and what you stand for. So before you start telling everyone else about the grand Conservative plan about no-redistribution, ect. et. al. I suggest you get your own message on base because you're lying through your teeth right now.

____________________

Stillow:

X - No matter how much you say it, Bush was not a fiscally conservative guy. You can say it every day all day, it won't matter because its not true. He and O are two huge fiscally liberal people. Neocons are not the same as true fiscal conservatives. True fiscal conservatives left W years ago.

There are true fiscal conservatives in congress, yes there are some phony ones too, but there are genuine conservatives.

Again, the very essence of true liberalism is exactly what I said it was, take from one to give to antoher.

____________________

Xenobion:

Fiscal Conservatives will never own the Republican Party. You buy 1 get 1 free. Until they divorce the social conservatives their fiscal message will always die. Its a pipe dream and you're not getting what you're buying.

____________________

Aaron_in_TX:

Stillow, you must have barely read anything I said. My primary point was that young people today have a higher personal debt burden than previous generations and more competition for jobs. You did not address this, instead resorting to platitudes based on your experience.

"You must just not be that good a shopper. You can get private health care plans, very good ones for about $200 a month."

For a single person. For a couple it's more. What makes you think I haven't looked into it? Texas does not require insurers to cover maternity, so if you want that, which we do, there's only one company in Texas that offers health insurance with maternity on the private individual market. It's minimum $324 a month, the good plan is $500. The only way it's less than $300 is for insanely high annual out of pocket limits - anywhere from $9,000-$20,000. You can search ehealthinsurance or the various companys' websites to confirm all this.

" My first job was $6 an hour doing phone customer service"

You are so out of touch. My first job was fast food making $6.20 an hour when minimum wage was $5.15. When was this when you were making $6.00 an hour? The 80s? Early 90s? If it was before 1990 back when minimum wage was $3.35, you were making 80% more than the minimum wage, which would be the equivalent of $13/hr today, or $25K a year for full time hours, which is more than I currently make.

Maybe it was in the 90s when minimum wage was over $4 an hour; still it'd be the equivalent of $10-11/hr today, considerably better than the $8 or $9 they start out h.s. graduates at many jobs, and they rarely get full time. I highly doubt you know what true hardship is if that is what you're citing as a struggle. Seriously, you had a 1 bedroom apt with over 500 square feet? Unless you had to share that space with more than 2 people, you had it good; that's luxury, my friend.

And just in case you didn't notice...phone customer service jobs now exist in the Philippines or India for the most part. The best chance of getting one here is if you're bilingual --- See? We need more education than you did to get the same job.

I don't resent you for doing well, nor do I want to take from you. I simply want to have the same opportunities you had, which were obviously very good. But you're determined to hang on to what you have at any cost and expect those coming up to do more with less. Again, this generation has more personal debt and more competition than yours had, and they pay taxes for benefits they'll never receive unless there are significant reforms. Social Security and Medicare did not become "Ponzi schemes" until demographics changed, resulting in too many elderly receiving benefits and too few younger workers to replace and support them, and politicians failed to make needed changes. Instead, politicians focus more on pleasing the beneficiaries while ignoring the payees. They focus on the present at the expense of the future and you are so short sighted as to blame those who have less for their situation. You are really a piece of work.

____________________

Stillow:

It just sounds like your doing a whole lot of whining. This isn't fair or that isn't fair. You will never get anywhere with that attitude....and its that whiny attitude that has given us the ME generation with the gimme gimme gimme mentality.

If your income is that low then perhaps you should not be having kids right now. i waited well into my 30's before having kids....because they are very expensive. You should not have them until you are financially able to support them.

You need to knock off the wnining and do what you ned to do. No one handed me anything....like I said, its supposed to be tough when your young. My wife's parents who were mexican immigrants came here with virutally nothing, no money and no skills. Her dad started and ran a successful mexican food restaraunt for years until he sold it and now they enjoy a good retirmeent. No one gave him anything, he did not spend his time whining about how hard things were, he did what he needed to do.

I've been turned down for more jobs than I can count over the years until I finally found the perfect match.

We all have our hard luck stories, but whining about it won't just make it go away. No one owes you anything....its your job to do what you need to do. this me generation you come from with the gimme gimme gimme stuff will disappoint you in the long run.

So stop feeling sorry for yourself and whining about how hard it is and how you want me to pay for things you feel you need like insurance with matenrity care.....when your clearly not ready to have kids yet if $300 is this big a issue for you.

____________________

saywhat90:

Okay then you stop whining about taxes and whining about spending. Funny how if someone petitions the government for help they are whining, but when they whine about taxes being too high(and they aren't)then they have legitimate complaint.

____________________

Stillow:

saywhat90

Ya cus its my damn money your taking. What part of that don't you libs understand? Try taking care of yourselfves for once......I might not always be there to do it for you. Get off your knees and learn to stand on your own two feet...instead of whining about how hard and unfair life is.

To steal a phrease from your generation.....man up!

____________________

saywhat90:

It's not just your money. I pay taxes just like you do. And you have never took care of me. Last time I checked I pay my own bills when they are due.Never once did I see a check from you.

____________________

Stillow:

I am in the highest bracket so I am paying a larger percentage of my money to taxes than you are.....then you tell me its not enough.

Why you guys are busy whining and complaining about how hard life is, younger people in other countries like china and passing you guys right by in skills and education. they are busy working while you ugys are busy whining about everything.....its to hard, this is to expensive.

Spoiled children.

____________________

Aaron_in_TX:

Stillow, I didn't think you could come across as more of a jerk, but you have impressed me yet again.

First, I don't know what you're talking about with this "me generation" stuff. They called the kids growing up in the 70s & 80s the me generation. In fact, I can find evidence of EVERY generation in the 20th century accusing the subsequent generations of being too self-centered. This has been the case for thousands of years, Socrates said the same thing about young people in ancient Greece, so it doesn't mean anything to me.

Second, wtf is this? "You should not have them until you are financially able to support them."

Are you saying low income people shouldn't reproduce? You really are channeling your inner Ebenezer Scrooge today. We should reduce the surplus population. Way to be pro-life.

"i waited well into my 30's before having kids"

Men can, but women can't, or are you unaware of the complications involved in pregnancy for women in their 30s? It's much safer to have them before age 30, and a bad idea to have children over age 35. God forbid I find the love of my life and want to have a family within a few years instead of waiting until we're both pushing 40 and it's much harder. Isn't that what conservatives what you to do? Isn't that family values? Furthermore, I couldn't say I wasn't going to pay for the insurance, I said that having to pay it is going to keep me from contributing to the economy in more constructive ways. Specifically, I mean buying a house. That may indeed have to wait until I'm 40 or older. Best case scenario at this point is a manufactured home. I don't have a problem with this, but it's not whining to point out that my parents and their parents had better opportunities at this point in their lives, and it's not because I don't work as hard. It's because I'm already saddled with debt and there is global competition.

"No one owes you anything....its your job to do what you need to do."

Where did I say anything about being owed? What I want to know is how do you expect us to do more with less? You still did not read or don't want to acknowledge what I said about debt and competition, not to mention far higher percentages of income needed for education and health care.

If anyone is spoiled, it is you, and your son who gets a whopping $150/month allowance! I was lucky if I got $150 worth of allowance + birthday/ christmas presents in a year, and I was not poor growing up.

You think you had to struggle, but from what you described to me, it was far from a struggle. You started out much better than most but you seem not to realize it and instead think everyone else should be able to do what you did.

Oh, people don't start restaurants if they have no assets whatsoever, so forgive me if I suspect your wife's family came with a little more than "virtually nothing." By your standards that means it was quite a bit.

It doesn't bother me that you're well off; it bothers me that you seem to not realize how well off you were and currently are.

____________________

saywhat90:

You don't know what bracket of tax I pay? And where did I say that the current tax level is not enough? And where did I complain about life being too hard? Stop trying to put words in my mouth. And, stop trying to place me in a category when you know nothing about me.

____________________



Post a comment




Please be patient while your comment posts - sometimes it takes a minute or two. To check your comment, please wait 60 seconds and click your browser's refresh button. Note that comments with three or more hyperlinks will be held for approval.

MAP - US, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY, PR