Usa Thread

[Steve]

Romney, Obama in Tight Race as Gallup Daily Tracking Begins

 

 

PRINCETON, NJ -- Mitt Romney is supported by 47% of national registered voters and Barack Obama by 45% in the inaugural Gallup Daily tracking results from April 11-15. Both Obama and Romney are supported by 90% of their respective partisans.

 

These results are the first from Gallup Daily tracking of registered voters' general election preferences, which began on April 11 and will be reported daily on Gallup.com on the basis of continuous five-day rolling averages. This initial report is based on interviews with 2,265 registered voters, and highlights the potential closeness of this year's race, with Romney and Obama essentially in a statistical tie. Gallup's previous general election trial heat, from a national poll conducted March 25-26, showed Obama with a slight 49% to 45% lead over Romney.

 

Gallup began tracking the general election on Wednesday, April 11, after Rick Santorum suspended his campaign for the Republican nomination, making Romney the all-but-assured GOP nominee.

 

The race breaks down into the expected patterns by party, with 90% of Democrats supporting Obama, and 90% of Republicans supporting Romney. The Republican results show that despite the rancor and divisiveness of the Republican campaign, the vast majority of Republicans are backing Romney in the head-to-head battle with Obama, as they have in ballot tests earlier this year.

 

The crucial voting bloc of independents breaks toward Romney by 45% to 39%, giving the GOP challenger his slight overall edge.

 

...

 

Bottom Line

 

History shows that the candidates' positioning in the spring of an election year is not necessarily good at forecasting the election outcomes. For example, in an April 20-22, 1992, Gallup poll, incumbent President George H.W. Bush was ahead with 41% of the vote, compared with 26% for Bill Clinton and 25% for Ross Perot. And in an April 11-14, 1980, poll, incumbent President Jimmy Carter led Ronald Reagan by 42% to 34%, with John Anderson receiving 18% support. Both Bush and Carter, of course, ultimately lost their re-election bids.

 

Still, the current results, and the results that will follow as Gallup tracks the race on a daily basis, provide an excellent, scientific way to understand the dynamics of the election campaign, and the impact of foreseen and unforeseen events in the weeks and months ahead. And, at this point, the results show that the 2012 presidential election is shaping up to be a close race.

 

Galumpf Poll

 

As I said, national polls mean nothing except to sway undecideds who don't know what's going on. How Obama and Romney do in the swing states is all that matters.

[Steve]

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/tax-time-pushes-americans-hike-204320491.html

Tax time pushes some Americans to take a hikeThe United States is one of the only countries to tax its citizens on income earned while they're living abroad. And just as Americans stateside must file tax returns each April - this year, the deadline is Tuesday - an estimated 6.3 million U.S. citizens living abroad brace for what they describe as an even tougher process of reporting their income and foreign accounts to the IRS. For them, the deadline is June.

The National Taxpayer Advocate's Office, part of the IRS, released a report in December that details the difficulties of filing taxes from overseas. It cites heavy paperwork, a lack of online filing options and a dearth of local and foreign-language resources.

For those wishing to legally escape the filing requirements, the only way is to formally renounce their U.S. citizenship. Last year, IRS records show that at least 1,788 people did, and that's likely an underestimate. The IRS publishes in the Federal Register the names of those who give up their citizenship, and some who renounced say they haven't seen their name on the list yet.

The State Department said records it keeps differ from those published by the IRS. They indicate that renunciations have remained steady, at about 1,100 each year, said an official.

The decision by the IRS to publish the names is referred to by lawyers as "name and shame." That's because those who renounce are seen as willing to give up their citizenship primarily for financial reasons.

There's also an "exit tax" for the very rich who choose to leave. During the last 25 years, a number of millionaires and billionaires have renounced their citizenship. Among them: Ted Arison, the late founder of Carnival Cruises, and Michael Dingman, a former Ford Motor Co. director.

But those of more modest means renounce, too. They say leaving America is about more than money; it's about privacy and red tape.

[dean]

Isn't that primarily what being an ex-pat is all about? I'd guess that at least 90% of those Americans that work or live abroad do so because of dissatisfaction with living in the U.S. If it wasn't for putting 4 kids through school, I wouldn't be here. I don't have any family obligations, as both my parents are dead. Since Thailand makes it near impossible to become a citizen, it wouldn't be a final destination for ex-pats wishing to give up their U.S. citizenship.

[Flashermac]

Bill Heinecke did, apparently because he got tired of paying US taxes on his fantastic business empire in Thailand. But his home had really been here for decades.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Flashermac]

Remember Zimmerman?

 

 

 

 

 

Latest news

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Steve]

I had a discussion in another forum about Zimmerman. My view is Zimmerman's wounds are important IF he did not start the fight. What I think may happen is he confronted someone who ended up kicking his ass and he shot the guy because he was losing a fight he started. If that's the case, I'd still find him guilty of something.

I'd also like to know if Martin suffered any non gun shot injuries. I've heard it said that Martin went after Zimmerman, although I can't think of any reason he would arbitrarily attack someone. We have a witnes who said Martin was speaking to her on the phone about some guy following him at the time.

 

So, the injuries in of itself aren't significant until we find out WHY he got those injuries.

[Steve]

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/romney-ll-build-keystone-pipeline-even-myself-205917498.html

Romney: I’ll build Keystone pipeline even ‘if I have to do it myself

 

What is NOT being said about this is that the oil industry has the RNC in its pocket. I wouldn't be opposed to building if two things were to be part of it. First, that the oil be used domestically only and we know the oil companies won't go for that. The big lie that Republicans and the proponents of this are saying is that America needs the oil, blah, blah, blah. What they dont say is that most of it won't end up in America. It will be sold to someone else. The oil companies want an oil pipeline for nothing and so they can have the oil for others. The second thing I would agree to is if there are any spills, breakage, etc. that the oil industry pony up the money for it.

 

but haven no ideas in lieu of candidates that have some pretty good ideas but they can't control, they'd have a chance. If Paul or Gary Johnson ran I'd vote Republican in a heartbeat.

[Flashermac]

I am puzzled by the 2nd degree murder charge. It would be very hard to make that one stick. They could probably nail him with manslaughter - but murder?

 

The sequence of events is what it will come down to. Zimmerman says he followed Martin to try to get an address to give to the police. (He says Zimmerman was walking between houses, not down the street - which is what made him suspicious.) He then turned and started to walk back to his car. Martin had no idea who Zimmerman was, so he turned and followed him. He accosted him and started swinging. (That in itself would show he was not the sweet young kid in the photo they like to use. Instead of walking away from trouble, he walked into it.) That would mean Martin had started the fight. The prosecution has to show that some how Zimmerman was to blame.

 

What this does show is that having non-uniformed watch volunteers is probably not such a good idea! Suppose a stranger follows you at night or even stops you. He is dressed like anyone else and you have no idea who he is. You might think that he is a robber or at least someone looking for trouble. This is not an easy case to decide, but murder? I don't see it. Manslaughter ... maybe. Still, if someone is on top of you pounding your head on the concrete pavement, you don't tend to think too well. Would a policeman have used his weapon in such a situation? I'd say definitely. I know of an incident where a uniformed policeman did. (I know the officer's family.) But if Zimmerman had worn some sort of a uniform, the fight wouldn't have happened.

 

This reminds me of the recent "drug war" shooting in Thailand, where a police team in civilian clothes tried to stop a man and his wife driving at night. The man feared the police were robbers and sped away. The police shot. Had they been in uniform as they should have been, the man would not have tried to flee from them.

 

 

 

End of ramble ...

[Flashermac]

Dershowitz Blasts Zimmerman Prosecution: 'Not Only Immoral, But Stupid'

 

 

With ABC News’ release of the George Zimmerman photo showing blood flowing freely from his head, the question becomes whether Angela Corey, the prosecutor in the case, had access to the photo before charging Zimmerman with second-degree murder.

 

The arrest affidavit did not mention the photograph, or the bleeding, gashes, and bruises on Zimmermans’ head. Professor Alan Dershowitz of Harvard Law School stated upon release of the arrest affidavit that it was “so thin that it won’t make it past a judge on a second degree murder charge … everything in the affidavit is completely consistent with a defense of self-defense.â€

After the release of the photo, however, Dershowitz went much further, telling Breitbart News that if the prosecutors did have the photo and didn’t mention it in the affidavit, that would constitute a “grave ethical violation,†since affidavits are supposed to contain “all relevant information.â€

 

Dershowitz continued, “An affidavit that willfully misstates undisputed evidence known to the prosecution is not only unethical but borders on perjury because an affiant swears to tell not only the truth, but the whole truth, and suppressing an important part of the whole truth is a lie."

 

When asked if it made a difference whether the prosecution had the bloody photograph at the time they charged Zimmerman, Dershowitz responded, “We do know that there were earlier photographs before the affidavit was done that strongly suggested blood on the back of the head, and we know the police had first access to him, so if there was blood they [the prosecution] would know about it …

 

"I've had cases in Florida against prosecutors,†Dershowitz said, “and this is not the first time they have willfully omitted exculpatory evidence. It's a continuing problem. Here, it’s not only immoral, but stupid. The whole country is watching. What do they benefit from having half-truths in an affidavit?"

 

Dershowitz added, "I'm not taking sides, but I'm insisting that both sides play by the rules, and so far the prosecution is not playing by the rules."

 

My link

[Steve]

 

 

The sequence of events is what it will come down to. Zimmerman says he followed Martin to try to get an address to give to the police. (He says Zimmerman was walking between houses, not down the street - which is what made him suspicious.) He then turned and started to walk back to his car. Martin had no idea who Zimmerman was, so he turned and followed him. He accosted him and started swinging. (That in itself would show he was not the sweet young kid in the photo they like to use. Instead of walking away from trouble, he walked into it.) That would mean Martin had started the fight.

Is this sequence of events the fact or Zimmerman's story? Its convenient but doesn't make sense. Matin has no history of this stuff. Second, he's got to be worried or scared of someone following you. Just doesn't make sense to turn and fight someone who is following you. You're scared, you get home as soon as possible. Martin was on the phone at the same time and his witness says a different type of conversation happened. I hear another witness tell CNN that it was Zimmerman doing the harsh quesstioning. Zimmerman's tone on the 911 call indicates anger. He wants to confront Martin. His opinion is that Martin is a possible drug addict or criminal. That's a fact. So, just logically, I see some holes in his view.

 

My guess and this seems a logical and reasonable set of events, he followed Martin, confronted Martin, asked him questions harshly, possibly insulted Martin in his view. Basically asking him him things he has no right to and possibly Martin reacted to it physically when he realized Zimmerman was profiing him asking him what he's doing in his own Dad's neighborhood. Zimmerman lost the fight or was losing and shot him.

Involuntary manslaughter IF that's the order of events.

I'm finding it hard to believe this 'Martin arbitrarily attacks Zimmmerman' scenario. Doesn't make sense. It couldve happened but a) Martin has no history of it and the only one of the two that we know was angry at the other was Zimmerman.