The Republican Utopia

[NM11046]

1 hour ago, Ric Flair said:

 

Clinton is a pretty liberal Democrat. Sanders is a nutjob socialist. Aligning more with Clinton than our own version of Hugo Chavez doesn’t make a network center-left. Your sense of where people fit on the political spectrum is really warped. 

 

And the notion that MSNBC is or could be center-right is completely nuts.

See, this is where you lose me immediately Ric, and why I think you turn so many people on this board off.  

 

There's a way to express your feelings and thoughts about someone or a topic without being condescending with the elementary school bully act and calling people names.  As an example, the comments above would have been seemingly open to discussion and debate if you simply opted not to put "nutjob" in it.    

 

I think it's really incredible that people continue to engage with you at all.  Your smugness and self-rightous attitude seems to either be a huge bluff meant to troll or you're overcompensating for something.  

[Danny Bateman]

2 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

 

The implications are enormous. There are multiple times more stories happening each day than can be covered. So decisions have to be made about what to cover. Those are based on what you think is important, a matter of public concern, will drive ratings, etc. Then you have to decide how to cover those stories. That’s similarly driven by what you perceive to be the public interest, what will drive ratings, etc.

 

The newsrooms of most news shows (other than Fox) are overwhelmingly liberal. The reporters, editors, news staffs, etc. are far more likely to be liberal and to vote for and support Democrats. 

 

That has a huge influence on what they see as news and how they choose to cover it and present those stories.

 

I reject the notion that personal politics drives mainstream news coverage. If anything they're biased in favor of sensationalism to get ratings, as you've stated.

 

This is outside of orgs with explicitly partisan agendas, like Fox News or The Young Turks.

Edited April 15, 2018 by Clifford Franklin

[RedDenver]

2 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

 

Clinton is a pretty liberal Democrat. Sanders is a nutjob socialist. Aligning more with Clinton than our own version of Hugo Chavez doesn’t make a network center-left. Your sense of where people fit on the political spectrum is really warped. 

 

And the notion that MSNBC is or could be center-right is completely nuts.

Under what notion is Clinton "a pretty liberal Democrat"?!?! Have some sense of history and look back all the Presidents and Congresses from 1930 to now. (Or even across all times and all nations, which @Nebfanatic posted a graph for visualizing.) Bernie might not even be the most liberal of those Presidents - it's probably Truman. In fact, if you were to look through Bernie's policy proposals, they're mostly rehashes of what previous Presidents have suggested, mostly Theodore and Franklin Roosevelt.

 

Calling Bernie "our own version of Hugo Chavez" is far more warped than anything I've done. But that's completely beside the point. Regardless of what you think of Bernie and his supporters, they do actually exist in America, and they are left of what you're claiming is the left-wing/liberal media. You apparently can't accept that and it's implications for your claims, so you've gone to the time honored tradition of losing an argument known as name-calling.

Edited April 15, 2018 by RedDenver

[Landlord]

2 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

The newsrooms of most news shows (other than Fox) are overwhelmingly liberal. The reporters, editors, news staffs, etc. are far more likely to be liberal and to vote for and support Democrats. 

 

Prove it, Ric.

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Ric Flair said:

It’s been awhile since I saw anything so completely ridiculous posted online.

 

Do you type and post with your eyes closed?

[mrandyk]

90% of all Republicans are Russian puppets. It is now everyone else's burden to prove my claim wrong. Gonna need hard evidence, people.

[Ric Flair]

5 hours ago, Nebfanatic said:

Or you just have a ridiculous idea of where the center really is

 

Posting that Bernie Sanders is the real moderate is the most hilarious trolling I’ve seen in some time.

 

Well played. 

[Ric Flair]

3 hours ago, RedDenver said:

Under what notion is Clinton "a pretty liberal Democrat"?!?! Have some sense of history and look back all the Presidents and Congresses from 1930 to now. (Or even across all times and all nations, which @Nebfanatic posted a graph for visualizing.) Bernie might not even be the most liberal of those Presidents - it's probably Truman. In fact, if you were to look through Bernie's policy proposals, they're mostly rehashes of what previous Presidents have suggested, mostly Theodore and Franklin Roosevelt.

 

Calling Bernie "our own version of Hugo Chavez" is far more warped than anything I've done. But that's completely beside the point. Regardless of what you think of Bernie and his supporters, they do actually exist in America, and they are left of what you're claiming is the left-wing/liberal media. You apparently can't accept that and it's implications for your claims, so you've gone to the time honored tradition of losing an argument known as name-calling.

 

I’ve never disputed that Bernie and his supporters exist, nor that they are left of the left-wing/liberal media. He’s a socialist. I think that’s self-evident.

 

Bill Clinton is a moderate Democrat. Hillary is further left on the political spectrum, especially after having been forced there by Obama and then by Sanders. Her positions and those of the Democratic Party in 2008 and 2016 were pretty extreme.

[Nebfanatic]

35 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

 

Posting that Bernie Sanders is the real moderate is the most hilarious trolling I’ve seen in some time.

 

Well played. 

Its not trolling, that chart is real and accurate. The fact is American politics is inherently conservative, so even some moderately progressive ideas seem wildly liberal. Just because Bernie is far left to you doesn't mean he is far left in comparison to all political ideologies.

[Nebfanatic]

35 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

 

I’ve never disputed that Bernie and his supporters exist, nor that they are left of the left-wing/liberal media. He’s a socialist. I think that’s self-evident.

 

Bill Clinton is a moderate Democrat. Hillary is further left on the political spectrum, especially after having been forced there by Obama and then by Sanders. Her positions and those of the Democratic Party in 2008 and 2016 were pretty extreme.

Obama was incredibly moderate and probably a little too far right for some in his party.

[RedDenver]

4 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

 

I’ve never disputed that Bernie and his supporters exist, nor that they are left of the left-wing/liberal media. He’s a socialist. I think that’s self-evident.

 

Bill Clinton is a moderate Democrat. Hillary is further left on the political spectrum, especially after having been forced there by Obama and then by Sanders. Her positions and those of the Democratic Party in 2008 and 2016 were pretty extreme.

But doesn't Bernie and his supporters tell you that even the "left" media you've mentioned can't be that far left if there's a large political group to the left of them?

 

What positions do you find "further left" and "pretty extreme" about Hillary, 2008, or 2016 Democratic Party that weren't part of what Bill Clinton was doing? I find it very strange that you think Bill is a moderate while Hillary is extreme when the political differences between them are tiny.

[Danny Bateman]

This has really been bugging me since Paul Ryan announced he was stepping down at the end of this term. He's been a complete and utter fraud his entire time as Speaker of the House. Completely abdicated his moral obligation to stand up to the monster that heads his own party because he so badly wanted a tax cut.

 

Well, he got it. But just don't buy his BS about fiscal responsibility and the deficit.

 

Paul Ryan has no good answers for the ballooning deficits that happened under his watch.

 

Quote

He seems to have abandoned the principles he championed during his time in Congress — fiscal responsibility and budget austerity — leaving ballooning deficitsand Republican infighting. (For reference, the Congressional Budget Office this week estimated that deficits are going to be about $1.85 trillion bigger over the net 10 years, primarily because of the $1.5 trillion tax cut passed by Republicans in December.) 

 

On Sunday, NBC’s Chuck Todd asked Ryan about those deficits that happened under his watch; Ryan didn’t do much else but shrug and blame entitlements and baby boomers. “That was going to happen,” he told Todd, before continuing: 

"The baby boomers’ retiring was going to do that. These deficit trillion dollar projections have been out there for a long, long time. Why? Because of mandatory spending which we call entitlements. Discretionary spending under the CBO baseline is going up about $300 billion over the next ten years. Tax revenues are still rising. Income tax revenues are still rising. Corporate income tax revenues. Corporate rate got dropped 40 percent, still rising. Mandatory spending which is entitlements, that goes to $2 trillion over the next decade. Why does it go to $2 trillion? Because the boomer generation is retiring. And we have not prepared these —these programs. So really, that’s where the rubber hits the road. I think the most irresponsible Congress is the one that created brand a new entitlement. That to me is, is the big mistake. And we can fix these programs and still meet the mission for them. But the way they’ve been designed in the 20th century doesn’t work."
 

 

TL;DR: He blamed deficits on entitlement programs (or the social safety net, depending on how you view the world) - explicitly thrusting responsibility onto someone else - and peaced out.

But it's not just him. It's him AND the entire GOP, almost without exception, running this same scam:

 

On The Deficit, GOP Has Been Playing Us All For Suckers

 

Quote

The Congressional Budget Office last Monday released a report that for the first time officially projected the federal deficit rising to almost $1 trillion in 2019 and then staying at or well above that previously unfathomable level every year through 2028.

 

As I first pointed out in this post, these projections almost certainly underestimate the actual deficit that will occur because CBO assumes that current law will be followed. In this case, that means assuming that the individual cuts put in place by last year's tax bill that are set to phase out will, in fact, expire as scheduled. As Catherine Rampell noted in the Washington Post last Friday, if, as seems likely, the cuts are extended, the budget deficit will be an additional $2.6 trillion higher than what CBO estimated.

Just a few months after the tax bill was signed, the GOP-controlled Congress agreed to increase federal spending and the budget deficit by another $130 billion or so.

 

Think about this. The same congressional Republicans who over the previous eight years wanted everyone to believe they were fiscal conservatives hell-bent on balancing the budget and not increasing the national debt, sponsored, passed and then danced around the fire because of legislation that will result in a permanent $1 trillion deficit and a debt that will soar to close to 100 percent of GDP by 2028.

 

And...House and Senate Republicans were enabled by a GOP president who during his campaign said he would eliminate the deficit and completely pay off the debt.

 

But it's not just that congressional Republicans and Trump faked far right and then actually went far left with these two bills that makes what they're doing a federal budget confidence game. They also:

1. Hid the real cost of the tax cut with the phaseouts so they could claim they were being fiscally judicious while they were actually being economically reckless.

 

2. First insisted the tax cuts would pay for themselves and then admitted in the president's fiscal 2019 budget released several months later that they would actually increase the deficit, big-time.

 

3. Viciously attacked the nonpartisan and very credible Congressional Budget Office for not producing cost estimates that made it easier for them to do what they wanted.

 

4. Enacted a huge tax cut that skyrocketed the deficit and a $1.3 trillion fiscal 2019 omnibus appropriation that increased it further and then insisted that the real problem is Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

 

5. Continually complained about mandatory spending but, even though they had the majority in both houses of Congress and control of the White House, didn't seriously try to do anything about it.

 

6. Refused to do a fiscal 2019 budget resolution because, after first enacting the tax and spending legislation that blasted the annual federal budget deficit to over $1 trillion, didn't want GOP members to have go on record in favor of those same deficits.

 

7. Kept saying that the deficit problem was because the congressional budget process is broken when, in fact, the process has actually enabled the GOP House and Senate Republican majorities to do exactly what they've wanted to do and hasn't forced them to do anything they've wanted to avoid.

 

8. First enacted legislation that created the permanent trillion-dollar deficits and then had the unmitigated temerity to demand that the House vote on an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would make it illegal for the federal government to run deficits.

 

9. Implied that the tax cuts and military spending increases they support (and the growing interest payments on the debt caused by those tax cuts and military spending increases) don't have an impact on the deficit.

 

10. Made it clear that, at the same time they want to reduce revenues and increase funds for the Pentagon, only the domestic part of the budget should be cut.

 

Just like winning a game of three-card monte played on a cardboard box on a street corner, none of what we're being told about the budget by congressional Republicans and the Trump White House is real. But based on how they've operated so far, they obviously think they can keep running this game successfully.

 

TL;DR: The fiscal conservatism rhetoric we've heard from the GOP for 8 years under Obama (and before that under Clinton, and so on) is a bunch of dishonest dreck they have no intention of actually enacting.

 

If you support these people because you're a fiscal conservative, just stop. If you believe what they say, you're the mark. If you truly care about fiscal responsibility, controlling spending and improving the federal debt, don't give these liars your vote. 

 

Here is what the federal deficit looks like. Notice what color tends to decrease the debt and which one tends to balloon it. 

 

(It continued going down in 2015 as well before rebounding in 2016 and in 2017 under Trump)

 

 

Heck, even Forbes says don't blame Obama for doubling the debt. He had to, as a function of the economy he inherited and how we combatted the recession. His debt growth was lower as a percentage than W, HW or Reagan. 

 

A bit long winded. But my point is - if you truly desire fiscal conservatism, you have no business supporting this iteration of the GOP, with very few exceptions. They blow up deficits because they so badly desire tax cuts, lie about the effects of the tax cuts then blame-shift to someone or something else, typically Democrats. Democrats are actually the more responsible stewards of the federal budget and the deficit.

Don't vote for them. If you support responsible fiscal policy, vote them out.

 

/end rant

Edited April 17, 2018 by Clifford Franklin
Words

[Danny Bateman]

Missouri governor gets more bad news.

 

 

[BigRedBuster]

Hadn't looked at this for quite a while.

 

LINK

 

The number of Americans that affiliate with the Republican party keeps going down with Independents growing.  The Republicans continue to be the smallest group.  The Democrats have dipped down a little.  But, not as much as Republicans.

 

Back in 2004 when Gallop started this, it was pretty much broken up with all three groups being 1/3 of respondents.  Now, Republicans only have 23%.  To put that in perspective, the percentage of people who claim to be Republican is 28% lower than in 2004.

 

They really are out of touch with America.

 

 

In politics, as of today, do you consider yourself a Republican, a Democrat or an independent?

Trend since 2004

	Republicans	Independents	Democrats
	%	%	%
GALLUP
2018 Mar 1-8	23	45	29
2018 Feb 1-10	28	42	27
2018 Jan 2-7	22	44	32
2017 Dec 4-11	25	46	27
2017 Nov 2-8	25	42	30
2017 Oct 5-11	24	42	31
2017 Sep 6-10	29	40	30
2017 Aug 2-6	28	41	28
2017 Jul 5-9	25	45	28
2017 Jun 7-11	26	42	30
2017 May 3-7	29	40	28
2017 Apr 5-9	25	44	28
2017 Mar 1-5	26	42	30
2017 Feb 1-5	31	37	31
2017 Jan 4-8	28	44	25
2016 Dec 7-11	28	39	29
2016 Nov 9-13	27	40	30
2016 Nov 1-6	27	36	31
2016 Oct 5-9	27	36	32
2016 Sep 14-18	27	40	32
2016 Sep 7-11	29	38	31
2016 Aug 3-7	27	38	31
2016 Jul 13-17	28	42	28
2016 Jun 14-23	28	39	31
2016 Jun 1-5	27	41	30
2016 May 18-22	27	45	28
2016 May 4-8	31	37	30
2016 Apr 6-10	25	44	31
2016 Mar 2-6	26	38	32
2016 Feb 3-7	30	37	30
2016 Jan 21-25	29	39	31
2016 Jan 6-10	26	44	29
2015 Dec 2-6	27	40	30
2015 Nov 4-8	28	39	30
2015 Oct 7-11	25	42	29
2015 Sep 9-13	27	43	27
2015 Aug 5-9	27	41	31
2015 Jul 8-12	23	46	28
2015 Jun 2-7	25	41	31
2015 May 6-10	26	41	30
2015 Apr 9-12	24	42	31
2015 Mar 6-9	27	44	28
2015 Feb 8-11	25	43	29
2015 Jan 5-8	29	42	28
2014 Dec 8-11	27	40	31
2014 Nov 6-9	28	41	28
2014 Oct 29-Nov 2	26	39	32
2014 Oct 12-15	33	35	29
2014 Sep 25-30	26	42	30
2014 Sep 4-7	25	47	26
2014 Aug 7-10	26	40	31
2014 Jul 7-10	23	45	29
2014 Jun 5-8	24	46	28
2014 May 8-11	24	43	31
2014 Apr 24-30	23	43	32
2014 Apr 3-6	25	42	29
2014 Mar 6-9	25	42	30
2014 Feb 6-9	23	45	30
2014 Jan 5-8	24	45	29
2013 Dec 5-8	24	44	30
2013 Nov 7-10	23	46	28
2013 Oct 3-6	20	47	30
2013 Sep 5-8	22	45	31
2013 Aug 7-11	24	43	31
2013 Jul 10-14	25	42	31
2013 Jun 20-24	26	41	31
2013 Jun 1-4	26	41	31
2013 May 2-7	28	39	32
2013 Apr 4-14	26	40	33
2013 Mar 7-10	27	36	35
2013 Feb 7-10	28	38	32
2013 Jan 7-10	27	38	33
2012 Dec 27-30	27	36	34
2012 Dec 19-22	25	35	38
2012 Dec 14-17	25	39	34
2012 Nov 26-29	29	37	31
2012 Nov 15-18	27	38	32
2012 Nov 9-12	28	38	33
2012 Nov 1-4	30	33	35
2012 Sep 24-27	28	38	32
2012 Sep 6-9	27	36	35
2012 Aug 20-22	28	41	31
2012 Aug 9-12	26	42	29
2012 Jul 19-22	28	41	30
2012 Jul 9-12	27	41	30
2012 Jun 7-10	30	39	30
2012 May 10-13	27	44	29
2012 May 3-5	28	38	32
2012 Apr 9-12	29	41	29
2012 Mar 8-11	27	42	30
2012 Feb 16-19	27	43	29
2012 Feb 2-5	27	43	29
2012 Jan 5-8	27	42	30
2011 Dec 15-18	30	42	27
2011 Nov 28-Dec 1	25	45	28
2011 Nov 3-6	27	35	36
2011 Oct 6-9	26	41	31
2011 Sep 15-18	21	46	32
2011 Sep 8-11	25	44	30
2011 Aug 11-14	28	44	26
2011 Aug 4-7	24	42	34
2011 Jul 12-15	25	42	30
2011 Jul 7-10	29	39	30
2011 Jun 9-12	30	38	29
2011 May 5-8	29	37	32
2011 Apr 20-23	31	36	32
2011 Apr 7-11	26	42	30
2011 Mar 25-27	25	40	32
2011 Mar 3-6	29	39	29
2011 Feb 2-5	28	40	31
2011 Jan 14-16	28	42	28
2011 Jan 7-9	29	37	31
2010 Dec 10-12	33	34	32
2010 Nov 19-21	29	40	29
2010 Nov 4-7	26	41	31
2010 Oct 28-31	29	36	32
2010 Oct 21-24	29	34	33
2010 Oct 14-17	30	36	30
2010 Oct 7-10	30	34	33
2010 Sep 30-Oct 3	29	37	30
2010 Sep 23-26	30	34	32
2010 Sep 13-16	30	41	28
2010 Aug 27-30	28	41	30
2010 Aug 5-8	29	40	30
2010 Jul 27-Aug 1	30	37	31
2010 Jul 8-11	26	40	30
2010 Jun 11-13	28	33	36
2010 May 24-25	28	40	30
2010 May 3-6	30	36	32
2010 Apr 8-11	26	42	29
2010 Mar 26-28	28	40	31
2010 Mar 4-7	29	39	30
2010 Feb 1-3	27	40	33
2010 Jan 8-10	28	36	34
2009 Dec 11-13	29	36	33
2009 Oct 16-19	25	41	32
2009 Oct 1-4	27	38	33
2009 Sep 11-13	26	40	33
2009 Aug 31-Sep 2	28	36	35
2009 Aug 6-9	28	35	35
2009 Jul 17-19	26	39	33
2009 Jul 10-12	29	33	37
2009 Jun 14-17	29	37	32
2009 May 29-31	26	37	35
2009 May 7-10	32	34	32
2009 Apr 20-21	27	36	36
2009 Apr 6-9	24	40	35
2009 Mar 27-29	28	35	35
2009 Mar 5-8	25	35	38
2009 Feb 20-22	27	36	34
2009 Feb 9-12	29	36	33
2009 Jan 30-Feb 1	27	35	36
2009 Jan 9-11	30	33	36
2008 Dec 12-14	26	35	37
2008 Dec 4-7	27	33	37
2008 Nov 13-16	26	35	39
2008 Nov 7-9	28	37	33
2008 Oct 23-26	33	32	34
2008 Oct 10-12	30	33	35
2008 Oct 3-5	27	38	33
2008 Sep 26-27	28	35	35
2008 Sep 8-11	32	31	35
2008 Sep 5-7	30	34	35
2008 Aug 21-23	27	37	36
2008 Aug 7-10	31	32	35
2008 Jul 25-27	29	33	36
2008 Jul 10-13	27	35	35
2008 Jun 15-19	30	35	34
2008 Jun 9-12	29	36	33
2008 May 30-Jun1	26	36	37
2008 May 8-11	27	35	37
2008 May 1-3	27	37	36
2008 Apr 18-20	25	38	36
2008 Apr 6-9	26	35	37
2008 Mar 14-16	29	33	38
2008 Mar 6-9	28	37	34
2008 Feb 21-24	29	34	36
2008 Feb 11-14	26	34	40
2008 Feb 8-10	28	34	37
2008 Jan 30-Feb 2	29	36	35
2008 Jan 10-13	28	38	34
2008 Jan 4-6	30	35	34
2007 Dec 14-16	27	39	33
2007 Dec 6-9	30	36	32
2007 Nov 30-Dec 2	28	41	31
2007 Nov 11-14	27	38	33
2007 Nov 2-4	25	41	34
2007 Oct 12-14	24	43	31
2007 Oct 4-7	28	38	32
2007 Sep 14-16	28	38	33
2007 Sep 7-8	26	41	32
2007 Aug 13-16	28	40	30
2007 Aug 3-5	27	43	30
2007 Jul 12-15	29	37	32
2007 Jul 6-8	25	43	31
2007 Jun 11-14	27	38	34
2007 Jun 1-3	31	36	31
2007 May 10-13	27	38	34
2007 May 4-6	27	40	33
2007 Apr 13-15	29	36	34
2007 Apr 2-5	30	36	34
2007 Mar 23-25	29	36	33
2007 Mar 11-14	31	35	32
2007 Mar 2-4	27	37	35
2007 Feb 9-11	26	41	32
2007 Feb 1-4	26	37	35
2007 Jan 15-18	30	32	36
2007 Jan 12-14	28	40	32
2007 Jan 5-7	27	42	31
2006 Dec 11-14	30	34	35
2006 Dec 8-10	29	36	34
2006 Nov 9-12	24	40	35
2006 Nov 2-5	31	32	34
2006 Oct 20-22	29	34	35
2006 Oct 9-12	28	35	34
2006 Oct 6-8	29	31	38
2006 Sep 15-17	31	34	34
2006 Sep 7-10	30	33	35
2006 Aug 18-20	33	32	34
2006 Aug 7-10	31	31	36
2006 Jul 28-30	32	29	38
2006 Jul 21-23	29	37	33
2006 Jul 6-9	31	33	34
2006 Jun 23-26	26	36	37
2006 Jun 9-11	35	27	37
2006 Jun 1-4	30	35	34
2006 May 12-13	30	36	34
2006 May 8-11	29	35	34
2006 May 5-7	29	37	32
2006 Apr 28-30	30	35	34
2006 Apr 10-13	31	33	35
2006 Apr 7-9	31	33	35
2006 Mar 13-16	28	36	33
2006 Mar 10-12	32	33	34
2006 Feb 28-Mar 1	32	31	35
2006 Feb 9-12	30	39	31
2006 Feb 6-9	33	34	30
2006 Jan 20-22	32	32	34
2006 Jan 9-12	34	34	31
2006 Jan 6-8	34	33	32
2005 Dec 19-22	29	36	32
2005 Dec 16-18	31	36	32
2005 Dec 9-11	30	38	31
2005 Dec 5-8	36	31	31
2005 Nov 17-20	33	30	34
2005 Nov 11-13	31	34	34
2005 Nov 7-10	32	33	33
2005 Oct 28-30	32	37	30
2005 Oct 24-26	33	30	35
2005 Oct 21-23	34	33	33
2005 Oct 13-16	30	33	36
2005 Sep 26-28	32	34	33
2005 Sep 16-18	30	33	36
2005 Sep 12-15	30	37	31
2005 Sep 8-11	33	34	32
2005 Aug 28-30	32	32	35
2005 Aug 22-25	29	34	35
2005 Aug 8-11	33	30	35
2005 Aug 5-7	33	35	31
2005 Jul 25-28	28	37	33
2005 Jul 22-24	32	31	36
2005 Jul 7-10	30	33	35
2005 Jun 29-30	29	31	38
2005 Jun 24-26	33	32	34
2005 Jun 16-19	33	31	34
2005 Jun 6-8	33	34	31
2005 May 23-26	33	34	31
2005 May 20-22	29	33	36
2005 May 2-5	35	30	34
2005 Apr 29-May 1	34	34	31
2005 Apr 18-21	35	29	35
2005 Apr 1-2	35	33	31
2005 Mar 21-23	32	29	37
2005 Mar 18-20	35	31	32
2005 Mar 7-10	35	31	32
2005 Feb 25-27	38	27	34
2005 Feb 21-24	37	31	29
2005 Feb 7-10	34	30	35
2005 Feb 4-6	37	35	28
2005 Jan 14-16	33	36	30
2005 Jan 7-9	35	29	36
2005 Jan 3-5	37	27	35
2004 Dec 17-19	33	30	35
2004 Dec 5-8	37	29	32
2004 Nov 19-21	38	31	30
2004 Nov 7-10	38	27	35
2004 Oct 29-31	34	27	37
2004 Oct 22-24	35	29	36
2004 Oct 14-16	38	29	33
2004 Oct 11-14	33	32	35
2004 Oct 9-10	35	30	34
2004 Oct 1-3	36	27	37
2004 Sep 24-26	39	28	31
2004 Sep 13-15	37	29	33
2004 Sep 3-5	37	29	34
2004 Aug 23-25	35	32	32
2004 Aug 9-11	36	29	34
2004 Jul 30-Aug 1	35	28	36
2004 Jul 19-21	37	28	34
2004 Jul 8-11	35	27	36
2004 Jun 21-23	32	33	34
2004 Jun 3-6	33	31	35
2004 May 21-23	33	31	34
2004 May 7-9	32	32	33
2004 May 2-4	32	31	36
2004 Apr 16-18	32	32	34
2004 Apr 5-8	34	30	34
2004 Mar 26-28	36	30	32
2004 Mar 8-11	31	35	33
2004 Mar 5-7	33	31	35
2004 Feb 16-17	30	39	31
2004 Feb 9-12	32	35	32
2004 Feb 6-8	33	36	30
2004 Jan 29-Feb 1	31	35	33
2004 Jan 12-15	32	33	34
2004 Jan 9-11	33	35	31
2004 Jan 2-5	32	40	28

Edited April 17, 2018 by BigRedBuster

[mrandyk]

Both parties are out of touch. Yes, the Republicans have completely lost their minds, but the general public would be wise to disown both parties. The American public needs to begin looking at alternatives who aren't on a corporate payroll.

[Big Red 40]

12 hours ago, mrandyk said:

Both parties are out of touch. Yes, the Republicans have completely lost their minds, but the general public would be wise to disown both parties. The American public needs to begin looking at alternatives who aren't on a corporate payroll.

I really don't think this will ever be happen. Corporations, and the Ultra wealthy wont allow it.