HomeNewsSportsMoreWeatherAnnouncementsClassifiedsMy Trib.ComMy CityJobsHomesCars
Advanced Search
 

Voters peg economy as No. 1 issue


Story Tools

Print this story

E-mail this story

Rate this story

Text Size

Share This Story:
del.icio.usdiggNewsVine




trib.popular


In August, Wyoming voters named the economy, the war in Iraq, national security and high fuel prices as their top concerns.

Then September happened.

"This has turned the election into a one-issue election," pollster Brad Coker said.

Sixty-five percent of Wyoming voters -- without prompting -- named the economy as the top national issue, according to a poll commissioned by the Casper Star-Tribune.

Two months ago, 36 percent of local voters cited the economy, followed by Iraq at 17 percent, national security at 15 percent, and high fuel prices at 14 percent, said Coker of the Washington, D.C.-based Mason-Dixon Polling & Research.

No more.

The mortgage crisis and the Wall Street meltdown pushed all other issues into single digits, according to the poll conducted Oct. 13-14. A total of 625 registered Wyoming voters likely to vote on Nov. 4 were interviewed statewide. The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.

Wyoming voters' concerns mirror those nationwide, Coker said.

Yet Wyoming isn't a center of finance, a hub of foreclosures, or an axis of unemployment, declining income and personal worth.

In fact, the state government -- with another projected budget surplus on the way -- and most of citizens continue to enjoy an economic boom.

So why the gloom?

"Even if it's not hurting people, it's in their heads," Coker said.

Wyomingites still have retirement funds, pensions, college funds and other investments shredded by events in Washington, New York and global marketplaces, he said.

So they have a stake in the fix and saying who's at fault.

Bailout blues

That could work in favor of Republicans, Coker said.

In September, the Bush administration asked for and received from Congress -- with Republican U.S. Sens. Mike Enzi and John Barrasso opposing the majority of their colleagues -- a $700 billion bailout for the Treasury Department to buy troubled assets from financial institutions. Republican U.S. Rep. Barbara Cubin voted with the Bush administration.

Wyoming is among a handful of states that opposed the bailout, Coker said.

Forty-three percent of voters opposed the bailout, 33 percent supported it, and 24 percent were undecided.

Of those opposed, 51 percent were Republicans, 25 percent were Democrats, and 44 percent were independents.

Of those supporting the bailout, 46 percent were Democrats, 27 percent were Republicans, and 37 percent were independents.

A slim majority -- 52 percent -- were either very or somewhat confident about the long-term benefit of the intervention, and 42 percent were either not too confident or not confident, with 6 percent not sure.

The somewhat confident voters split sharply along political lines: 66 percent of Democrats, 36 percent of Republicans, and 51 percent of independents.

Likewise, 27 percent of Democrats were either not confident or not too confident about the bailout, compared with 49 percent of Republicans, and 23 percent of independents.

Blame game

While the financial anguish is shared, the blame is not.

Voters diverged on party lines about what system was at fault:

* The lending practices at the government-backed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

* Or the business practices of banks and brokerages on Wall Street.

Statewide, 38 percent of voters blamed Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac, 22 percent blamed Wall Street, and 30 percent weren't sure.

Among themselves, 43 percent of Republicans blamed Fannie Mae; 16 percent blamed Wall Street; and 29 percent blamed both.

Among themselves, Democrats were split with 29 percent blaming Fannie Mae, 32 percent blaming Wall Street, and 31 percent blaming both. Independents were similarly split.

Taking the blame game a step further, voters identified which party was at fault:

* The Bush administration and Republicans who supported deregulation in the financial industries.

* Or the Democrats in Congress who opposed increased regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Statewide, 43 percent blamed Congress and the Democrats, 32 percent blamed Bush and the GOP, and 19 percent blamed both.

Party-line differences were even sharper.

Ten percent of Democrats blamed Congress, 71 percent blamed Bush, and 17 percent blamed both.

Sixty-two percent of Republicans blamed Congress, 12 percent blamed Bush, and 18 percent blamed both.

The question of blame seems simplistic, said University of Wyoming political science professor Jim King.

But the question isn't about the technical aspects of regulation or high finance, but rather which party is at fault because policies follow from whichever party is in charge, King said.

Both ... and

There's plenty of blame to go around, said Betty Christie of Diamondville.

"They were all asleep at the switch," Christie said.

Wyoming is doing better than other states, but she's not holding her breath about the boom-bust cycle, she said. "We just get hit a little later."

While she will change party registration to vote in primaries, she's leaning Democratic and favoring a house-cleaning, she said. "I'm just anti-incumbent."

The economy is a concern, but voters need to look beyond that to who can best deal with foreign policy, Collins said.

Likewise, Republican Mike Collins of Casper blamed both the Congress and the Bush administration for the financial crisis, he said.

However, Collins believes the Democratic-controlled Congress deserves more attention because Democrats pushed for the lenient regulations allowing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to issue more risky loans, he said.

He's one of the voters who listed national security, and not the economy, as the top concern, he said.

The two issues are connected, though, Collins said. "Part of the problem with the economy is we have no control over our borders."

Whether dealing with national security or an economic recovery, Collins said the nation needs more integrity.

"Nothing happens in a vacuum," he said. "Nobody has the guts to stand up for what's right."

Tom Morton at (307) 266-0592, or at Tom.Morton@trib.com.


Previous   Next
Trauner touts stance on guns   Company will fix voter registration slowdown

Article Rating

Current Rating: 4 of 1 votes!Rate File:

Reader Comments

There are 43 comment(s)

Comments to this story.

Rance wrote on Oct 21, 2008 5:35 AM:

" Incredible. These oh-so-savvy voters can identify the major problems facing this nation, but come November 4th they'll vote for more of the same. Just incredible. "

BULL wrote on Oct 21, 2008 8:30 AM:

" One reason Wyoming is not experiencing so many foreclosures is the fact that over inflated real estate , which only a select group of transplants can afford anymore, is out of reach of most Wyoming working folks. Since we can not afford property anymore , thanks to these greedy people , we are stuck in old housing or renting from landlords who will not spend any money on their dilapidated rentals. This is another result of the GOP mentality in Wyoming. I have mine and to **** with you is the norm in this state anymore. "

Realist wrote on Oct 21, 2008 9:11 AM:

" Well, let's see; the republicans have been in control of the whitehouse for the last eight years and congress for six of the last eight years; I guess that explains who is to blame for the economic crisis we face. For decades the republicans have been pushing for deregulation; over the last eight years they have deregulated the financial and energy markets to the point that they are pretty much doing whatever they want. We found out what they do when there are no regulations; they run a muck and take advantage of any possible way that they can make more money for the fat cats at the top. Funny how the Wyoming republicans can see the problems but turn a blind eye to the fact that their party has been at the helm and guided us into an iceberg. If you are honestly concerned about the issues that you say you are yet are unwilling to face up to the fact that the republican party is responsible, you are on the wrong track for doing anything to correct the problems. If you run off the road into a ditch because the driver is driving drunk, putting another drunk driver behind the wheel will only run you into another ditch. McCain, while a good guy and an American hero, has subscribed to the exact same policies that have been pursued for the last eight years.

If you believe that doing all the same things that have led us to this crisis will get us out of it then you should vote for republicans again; if you believe that we need to do something different then you need to vote differently. We cannot continue to do the same things over and over again expecting to get a different result; that is the definition of insanity. If I know the blindly following republican lemmings in Wyoming like I think I do, I'm sure that Wyoming will make the same old mistake of voting for all republicans even though they are not doing anything to help our state. We need a new state motto...instead of the equality state, we should be known as the insanity state. "

Sandy wrote on Oct 21, 2008 9:43 AM:

" If that is the case, why in God's name are so many idiots supporting our next Herbert Hoover, Barak "tax and spend," Obama?

Do these neophytes want to be in poverty?

McCain's plan supports and bolsters small businesses. Obama's attacks small businesses. "

Hyden wrote on Oct 21, 2008 9:53 AM:

" Our economy is tied to all of the major issues of the day. Social spending, war on terror, fuel crisis, housing crisis, credit crisis, global climate change (or not), etc.

The reason that it is a central issue for the non-thinkers is only because both Obama and McCain are promising all kinds of new spending to bribe the unwashed, ignorant masses for their uninformed votes. It is a revolting situation, and we as a nation should collectively be ashamed.

We should all have our hands in the air volunteering to work to solve the problems. Instead we all have our hands out looking for a hand-out.

We've all become Katrina "victims" waiting for the government to do something for us instead of doing for ourselves. But, this is what 50 years of socialist policies have done to our work ethic; we're now an entitlement mentality society. "

Casper Resident wrote on Oct 21, 2008 10:09 AM:

" The republicans just proved that they are bigger spenders than anyone; the difference is that they expect our children and grandchildren to pay for their spending. If we're going to spend then we need to pay for it. The republicans decided to spend more than any in history and to give away tax breaks to those who do not need them simultaneously, thus not paying for their spending and sending us to record deficits. Any self-respecting conservative would be fed up with the republican party. McCain's plan supports BIG business, same as Bush's plan, which does nothing for small business or the average American. Small businesses that are creating jobs and helping the economy would be better off under Obama's plan. I guess it comes down to what your definition of a small business is...multi-million dollar companies are NOT small businesses. 90+% of small businesses make less than $250K per year and would benefit more from Obama's plan. Obama wants to give tax breaks to businesses who create American jobs; the difference is that McCain and Bush want to give the tax breaks in advance and hope that they will create jobs (even though we have been doing that for the last eight years and we are losing jobs instead of gaining them), and Obama wants to put the top tax brackets back where they were when the economy used to function well and things were good then will give the tax breaks for those companies who actually do create jobs. Sounds like a more realistic approach to me. "

La Shanna wrote on Oct 21, 2008 10:39 AM:

" I still do not see any bread lines. I still see a great range and depth of all products in the stores. Fuel is at higher, but acceptable prices for most all folks (you know this by the number of single occupant 4 X 4's roaming the streets running daily errands). I do not see ever growing herds of hobos and bums on the street corners (aka in PC terms; the homeless). I am yet to see any bankers throwing themselves off of buildings. Where is this crisis? Markets go up and markets go down. Corrections are a normal, natural and required aspect of economics. Expansions and contractions must happen to keep markets in balance and allow for continued growth over time. It is not always either a buyers, or a sellers market. Show me the crisis please. I cannot see it, but I hear all of the constant whinning about it. Let's take a deep breath and really evaluate what is happening in our neighborhoods people before we get pulled into the media and political hype. "

Facts are a troubling thing wrote on Oct 21, 2008 10:42 AM:

" Realist, Congress assmbles the budget. Presidents only sign of veto the budget. We've had growth for 6 of the last 8 years. At times massive growth and the lowest unemployment and interest rates on loans in decades. Please assess the facts before your next poorly informed politically spun spew or nonsense. "

BULL wrote on Oct 21, 2008 10:45 AM:

" Sandy , McCain and the Repubs wont do a thing to help the common working folks , look at how they handled Katrina. America cant afford any more of these pro-business , anti-labor biggots. Even Palin is a phony , she says she supports shipping LNG to Japan. So much for her line of horseflop. "

Scott wrote on Oct 21, 2008 10:47 AM:

" iPods are flying off the shelves. The new Elmo doll is already in a back order status and it has not even hit the stores yet. We are eating out more than ever before in history. Travel planners have vacations booked years in advance due to volumn of demand. Star Bucks sales have sky rocketed. Crisis? Did someone change the meaning of that word? Sorta like war, only our military is feeling any pinch while we're fighting two at once, the rest of America is doing its onw thing every day. We have become some real weaklings now haven't we. It is easy to talk tough, but hard to back it. "

Hector wrote on Oct 21, 2008 12:32 PM:

" BULL, I think that you have missed a crucial connection.

Business and labor are directly linked.

So is business and the collection of taxes.

What is good for business, is also good for labor, and the public coffers.

Growing businesses mean a growing job market.

Growing businesses means a higher rate of corporate and personal income taxes collected.

The corporate tax rate in America is 35%, second highest in the world today in fact.

Check it out, last year Wal-Mart paid and effective tax rate of 34.7%. The big boys are not getting away scot-free while you and I are getting shafted.

What was your effective tax rate last year, maybe 17% at best?

Isn't 10% on a zillion dollars effectively that same as 10% on $50K to the two tax payers?

Yet we do not even have anywhere near that level of equality in the tax code.

If you punish business, you punish labor and you also punish those not working that receive government allowances which all come from the tax dollars collected.

Increased taxation of businesses, the big boys, will hurt the over-all economy, all government provided services and mostly, the little people.

It is all connected BULL, fiddle with one and the effects will hit all.

Using the governments ineffectiveness in responding to a natural disaster is a very inappropriate comparison by the way. The two have nothing to do with one another and the circumstances fail to compare in any way shape or form.

By the way, the government is not our parents. It was never designed to "take care of us." The government must provide a secure environment where life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are possible.

It is up to each of us to be self-reliant enough to find our own happiness. "

Hector wrote on Oct 21, 2008 12:39 PM:

" BULL this may help you.

U.S. Tax System explained in Beer:

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100.

If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.

The fifth would pay $1
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that's what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement.

That is, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. 'Since you are all such good customers,' he said, 'I'm going
to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20.

'Drinks for the ten now cost just $80. The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But, what about the other six men - the paying customers?

How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair
share?' They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from every body's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.

So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).

The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).

The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).

The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).

The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 ( 22% savings).

The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to
drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare
their savings.

"I only got a dollar out of the $20," declared the sixth man.

He pointed to the tenth man, "but he got $10!"

"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man.

"I only saved a dollar, too.. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I"!

"That's true!!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back
when I got only two?"

"The wealthy get all the breaks!"

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!"

"The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up. The next night the tenth man (the richest) didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him.

But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.Professor of Economics University of Georgia

For those who understand, no explanation is needed.

For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible. "

Rufus wrote on Oct 21, 2008 12:50 PM:

" BULL, Global companies ship commodities of all sorts around the world daily. The prices are all set on the global market. If the US carved out a percentage of US produced NG only for sale in the US we would be "fixing" the market and would then come under counter attack by our suppliers of other commodities that we need but do not produce here in America. It is truly all connected in today's global market place and global economy. By the way, we have lots and lots of NG, it is not as though we are going to run out of that anytime soon. But we do depend on many, many others things from abroad in an aray that is hard to comprehend, starting with oil. "

Clymer wrote on Oct 21, 2008 12:59 PM:

" Once the rich have nothing left, or have all escaped the US, who will the poor then spong off of?

This is the short sighted Obama economic plan people. Get a clue.

Healthy businesses mean a healthy economy and healthy taxes collected for social redistribution. "

Mindy wrote on Oct 21, 2008 1:12 PM:

" Obama's promise of higher taxes and more hand outs = votes.

This is called bribery for some and a threat to others.

Do we want a guy playing a carrot and stick routine running the country?

Food for thought:

Parts of Florida are wiped out by hurricanes every few years. Why do you think it is that we do not see video of them sitting on the street corners with their hands out demanding FEMA trailers, food, money, etc? In contrast when New Orleans is hit once in 50 years the citizens of that city do nothing to help themselves and whine to anyone that may care to listen to them?

Its called the welfare mentality and it is contagious. "

A Gore wrote on Oct 21, 2008 1:19 PM:

" So if they're going to take my money anyway, why should I work harder to make more?

My neighbor doesn't work, and he gets everything he needs from the government.

Maybe I should just quite work too and get everything that I need from the government too?

Maybe all of us should just choose to stop working, and let the government provide us everything that we need.

This plan only makes sense and I'll have a lot more time to work for Acorn registering dead voters, pets and illegal aliens. "

Juan wrote on Oct 21, 2008 1:42 PM:

" The economy is bad?

I guess that all of those Gringo greenbacks that I am earning under the table and sending home to safe, stable Mexican banks are a figment of my fertile immagination? "

TuBorg wrote on Oct 21, 2008 2:50 PM:

" It ain't a redistrabution of wealth, it's paying for services you've already received. The rich had the most to lose if Al Qaeda over ran the country as Bush scared you all into thinking would happen. Therefore, they should shoulder most of the burden of having to protect their hummingbird butts. But the Republicans had you all so scared that a bunch of rag-tag militants 12 thousand miles away would get you, that you allowed the Republicans to do as they pleased for 6 of the last seven years. Well now it's time to pay the bills and you crybabies don't think it's right that you pay your fair share? If you're making more than $250K a year, you ain't small business, not where I come from. You're not small anything. Well, maybe one thing, but there are VERY, VERY few people in Wyoming who make more than $250K a year. Mark my words, there is going to come a day when you will need the government's help. If it's McCain/Palin, sorry pal, you're on your own. On your own only because you're small. "

Sylvia wrote on Oct 21, 2008 3:33 PM:

" TuBorg, You are mixing apples and dump trucks in your argument. By the way, isn't national security and personal safety of the same theoretical value to a rich man and to a poor man? Quality of life is not based solely on material wealth. Were that the case, no "poor person" could ever claim any happiness in life ever. You sound like a bitter old failure that wants someone else to pay for your poor choices in life. Having the government steal someone else's money is not going to make you, or anyone else a success in life. You have to do that on your own. "

Kelli wrote on Oct 21, 2008 3:43 PM:

" I'm not rich. My neighbor is rich. Another rich guy running for public office promises me some of my rich neighbor's money. Who do you think that I will vote for because I am ignorant and lazy? "

Blitz Beer wrote on Oct 21, 2008 3:52 PM:

" TuBorg, What a brilliant, and well thought out closing to your post sealing the capstone on your fine argument. I hope that your meth supply is holding out. Seems you used a bunch of it today. Please do not father any children. "

Carla wrote on Oct 21, 2008 4:10 PM:

" Yup the economy is in the dumper, or so we are all told 24/7 on 1000 networks. So the giant geniuses in DC (the crooks we hired) are now working up a second bail-out package using money that the government does not yet have (it is still in our wallets). Obama is even telling us that he will put a $1000 tax rebate into 95% of American's pockets. How does that work when about 40% of Americans now pay no income taxes at all? Did any of these idiots ever take elementary school math? Did any of them pass that bothered to take math? "

Rounds wrote on Oct 21, 2008 4:42 PM:

" I have some simple economic questions for the candidates.

How will they balance the budget?

How long will it take?

How will they increase private sector employment?

How will they help US business?

What wasteful government programs will they cut?

What will each of them do to stop pork?

If they cannot or will not directly answer those questions, we should not hire either of them. "

Ellen wrote on Oct 21, 2008 4:45 PM:

" BULL your sorry _ss has been handed to you in the finest of traditions! Put that tail between your legs and scurry back to the single wide with your tin-foil hat low over your brow to hide the shame on your face! "

BULL wrote on Oct 22, 2008 8:24 AM:

" Ellen , buzz off moron. Oh , and Hector , thank you for the long drawn out story about the beer drinkers. I rather enjoyed it. Did you stay up long to dream that up , or did you just paste it ? "

Cher wrote on Oct 22, 2008 2:54 PM:

" BULL you need to change your screen name, you've been outted in public as the moron we've all known you to be from outset! LOL! "

ManFu wrote on Oct 22, 2008 3:10 PM:

" We need a good up-set in this complacent country of lazy white people. We need another great depression to humble all and put us in out place in the world. Obama will teach us all just that great lesson. Gird your loin, because our great teacher is going to be holding class early next year. "

Hector wrote on Oct 22, 2008 5:25 PM:

" BULL, the ratios use in the beer example above are exactly how income taxes in America break down today. $59 of every $100 dollars collected come from the very top and the bottom 35-40% pay in nothing at all. "

TuBorg wrote on Oct 23, 2008 6:31 AM:

" Looks like sylvia and BlitzBeer have the Joe-The-Plumber mentality wherein they think they're rich, but in reality they don't pay their taxes and can't rub two pennies together. Ain't nothing but a greed dream.

That's the problem with you guys, like your preferred candidates, you're way out of touch with reality-especially your own.

It's time to pay the bills run up by Bush Cheney in the war for oil and to take the tax burden off of the people who pay a disproportionate share - that's sylvia, BlitzBeer and me. A real progressive tax charges each of us on the basis of our ability to pay. That's called fundamental fairness.

Why you dopes don't get that is beyond me, but it's exactly the way of thinking the real rich want you serfs to have. You're being kept down because the rich don't want you to have more money. The real rich want all the money. That's called the greed reality. That's why they made it so you pay more in taxes, proportionatly to how much you earn, than they do. How in the world is that fair?

Trickle Down has NEVER worked and even though you might be fat and sassy right now because you have a job while the rest of the country is hurting, the day is coming when Wyoming is going to get hit by this financial crisis and we'll see what you say then. Quit being stooges for the rich and stand up for fairness in the tax system.

Doesn't matter any way. Obama and the Democrat majority in Congresswill be making things right on January 21, 2009 and making your lives better even if you don't want them to. "

BULL wrote on Oct 23, 2008 8:43 AM:

" Cher , on the contrary , I am not afraid to post my handle to a comment on these blogs , unlike so many spineless weenies who change thier name like people change their socks. If people dont like it , well thats tough ****. I earned my right to speak freely in the hot jungles of Vietnam 40 years ago , yourself ? "

Actually wrote on Oct 23, 2008 9:15 AM:

" I keep seeing this little amusing story about the U.S. Tax System explained in Beer; while it's a cute little story, it is an inacurate portrayal of how the story has worked over the last eight years. Here's the problem with that story; the cost of the beer has gotten more expensive rather than less expensive; we lowered the share that the wealthiest one paid for his beer and gave the poorest his beer for free; we raised the amount that the rest in the middle had to pay for their beer; we don't have enough to pay for all the beer after lowering the cost for the wealthiest ones, yet we keep on drinking it and expecting our grandchildren to come in at some point after they are old enough to enter the establishment and pick up the bill for the beer that we are drinking now; unfortunately, by the time our grandchildren are old enough to come in and pick up the bill, the establishment will have gone out of business because noone could afford to pay for the beer and our grandchildren will prbably not have any money anyway since their grandparents were sitting around drinking beer that they couldn't afford to pay for while the wealthiest one continued to get drunk on the backs of those in the middle who could not afford to pay for his drinks. "

Keller wrote on Oct 24, 2008 1:37 PM:

" Bring on Obama's bread lines and the next great depression. We need change. "

Rose wrote on Oct 24, 2008 5:11 PM:

" We cannot let the democrats have total, unchecked control of the federal government. Our self rule as a people depends on balance and fairness. This radical shift would have no balance. We cannot let this happen. "

Line-up wrote on Oct 27, 2008 4:37 AM:

" Didn't Congress recently vote to "adjust" the minerals "inheritance" tax from a 50/50 split to a 51/49 in favor of the Federal government? A 1% increase in royalties equals how much revenue lost to the Feds? Be real careful on November $th! "

Actually wrote on Oct 27, 2008 8:48 AM:

" With all the problems that we have to solve, a divided government in gridlock is exactly the wrong prescription for our country. Every time in our history when we faced great crisis we have turned to a single party to solve the problems. When we have a divided government in gridlock we cannot accomplish anything; we have much that needs to be accomplished over the next eight years. The republican party had control the whitehouse for the last eight years and both houses of congress for six of eight and squandered their chance; now the democrats will have their chance; we'll see if they overreach the other direction or if they govern from the center. If they screw up their chance, we will have to vote them out next. I don't see how the democrats could do too much worse than the republicans have just done, as they screwed up everything that they have touched. "

Oh Boy wrote on Oct 27, 2008 12:21 PM:

" I can't wait for Obama's communism!

I can stop working 12 hours a day, 6 days a week, and I will get everything that I need and want directly from the central government!

Maybe we'll all be issued Chairman Mao pantsuites just like Hillary's so we can all be equal in fashion too? "

Actually wrote on Oct 27, 2008 2:01 PM:

" Oh Boy are you an idiot. Obama has never once advocated anything like what you are talking about. The only thing Obama is trying to do is to even the playing field for the middle class to make sure that we are all getting our fair share for our efforts. You make it sound like he wants to take all the money from the rich and pass out welfare checks to everyone else; that's not the case; the rich have been too greedy and they have now soaked the middle class for almost all they had and now their greed is starting to come back down on them. The middle class citizens that Obama wants to give tax cuts to are hard working Americans too, but they are being taken advantage of and are not being rewarded for their efforts. I don't know where you hacks get that communism crap from, but it's just wrong. You will find out. President Obama will be looking out for you too even though you are such an idiot that you can't even see that the republican policies are not even in your own best interest. "

Red wrote on Oct 27, 2008 4:13 PM:

" Actually, Actually,

Barack Obama talking about his support of "redistributive change" (read Marxist confiscation of personal wealth to give to others) in 2001 Radio interview with WBEZ FM public radio in Chicago.

www.liveleak.com/view?i=f96_1225091746&p=1 "

Hmmmmm wrote on Oct 28, 2008 8:25 AM:

" Under Obama

How are you feeling today comrad.

I do not know the party has not told me yet "

Actually wrote on Oct 28, 2008 8:54 AM:

" We have been re-distributing wealth for a long time; we have been re-distributing it from the middle class to the wealthy. The middle class has run out of money to distribute upward to the wealthy, thus we are at a point where we need to re-distribute some back down to the middle class or we will not be able to continue to function as a society. The wealthy could have done the right thing on their own and contributed back to the society that made it possible for them to make all that money, but chose to hoard up all the cash on the backs of the middle class. Little did they realize that there would be a breaking point where the middle class would begin to hurt so badly that they would tank the economy for all including the wealthy.

Rolling back the Bush tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans to what they were pre-Bush will not be confiscating personal wealth to give to others. It was irresponsible for Bush and the republicans to give these tax breaks to those who did not need them, were not asking for them, and that the country could not afford to give. I guess that Bush and the republicans believe that we should increase spending by hundreds of billions of dollars a year and decrease revenues by giving tax breaks to those who need them the least at the same time; that doesn't sound very conservative to me, but rather is totally irresponsible. The middle class is desperately in need of some relief before the entire economy comes to a grinding hault; if we are going to stimulate the economy, work toward getting back to a balanced budget (like we had pre-Bush), and begin to pay down the massive national debt that has tripled under Bush, we are going to have to raise revenues (obviously, the revenues will have to come from somewhere that actually has the resources). We will also need to reduce unnecessary expenditures like the $10 billion a month that we are spending to occupy Iraq. "

Actually wrote on Oct 28, 2008 2:00 PM:

" Hmmmmm, that communism talk is just wrong and you know it. If you don't have any actual intelligent input to the conversation, you should just stay out of it and let the adults handle this. There are no communists nor socialists running for president. Noone is going to take away anyone's guns. The choices are very simple; if you honestly believe that the country is heading in the right direction, you should vote for McCain, as he is offering the same policies that we have been pursuing for the last eight years that are heavily weighted toward the rich. If you think we are on the wrong track, you should vote for Obama, as he will take us in a different direction and look out for the middle class instead of the wealthiest 1%. "

Open your Eyes wrote on Oct 28, 2008 10:18 PM:

" Our economy was booming until the Democrats gained control of Congress in 2006. We have been circling the drain ever since. Life has been MUCH worse for everyone since the Democrats took over, and now you morons want a Democrat president too?!

I can't believe voters can't see how bad the Democrat majority has been for the economy! VOTE REPUBLICAN across the ballot and be prosperous again!! "

Realist wrote on Oct 30, 2008 8:38 AM:

" Well, let's see; the republicans have been in control of the whitehouse for the last eight years and congress for six of the last eight years; I guess that explains who is to blame for the economic crisis we face. For decades the republicans have been pushing for deregulation; over the last eight years they have deregulated the financial and energy markets to the point that they are pretty much doing whatever they want. We found out what they do when there are no regulations; they run a muck and take advantage of any possible way that they can make more money for the fat cats at the top. Funny how the Wyoming republicans can see the problems but turn a blind eye to the fact that their party has been at the helm and guided us into an iceberg. If you are honestly concerned about the issues that you say you are yet are unwilling to face up to the fact that the republican party is responsible, you are on the wrong track for doing anything to correct the problems. If you run off the road into a ditch because the driver is driving drunk, putting another drunk driver behind the wheel will only run you into another ditch. McCain, while a good guy and an American hero, has subscribed to the exact same policies that have been pursued for the last eight years.

If you believe that doing all the same things that have led us to this crisis will get us out of it then you should vote for republicans again; if you believe that we need to do something different then you need to vote differently. We cannot continue to do the same things over and over again expecting to get a different result; that is the definition of insanity. If I know the blindly following republican lemmings in Wyoming like I think I do, I'm sure that Wyoming will make the same old mistake of voting for all republicans even though they are not doing anything to help our state. We need a new state motto...instead of the equality state, we should be known as the insanity state. "

Submit a Comment

We encourage your feedback and dialog, all comments will be reviewed by our Web staff before appearing on the Web site.
(optional)
   
Please note: We provide our story commenting feature in order to solicit feedback, debate and discussion on topics of local interest. Please keep in mind that civility is a necessary component of productive conversation. All blatantly inflammatory or otherwise inappropriate comments (i.e. vulgarity, marketing, etc.) are subject to rejection and/or removal. Comments will appear if and when they are approved. Thanks for reading, and thanks for participating.