Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: locogringo who wrote (131147)	4/25/2012 11:26:23 AM
From: TideGlider	3 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224749

Daily Presidential Tracking Poll in Politics Email thisShareThis Related Articles Radio Update: 70 percent Say Working Through College Better Than Student Loans 50% Think More Government Regulation Means Less Fairness 66% Think Most Government Contracts Go To Those With Political Connections Most Prefer Cutting Mail Delivery to More Subsidies for the Postal Service 44% Blame Government Regulations for Higher Gas Prices Voters See Free Market, Not Government, As What Made America Great 62% Favor Government Loans for Good Students From Poor Households Virginia Senate: Allen (R) 46%, Kaine (D) 45% Wednesday, April 25, 2012 The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows Mitt Romney earning 49% of the vote, while President Obama attracts support from 44%. Three percent (3%) would vote for a third party candidate, while another four percent (4%) are undecided. Matchup results are updated daily at 9:30 a.m. Eastern (sign up for free daily e-mail update). See tracking history. New polling from Virginia shows that the Senate race between George Allen (R) and Tim Kaine (D) remains a toss-up. As the campaign unfolds, the role of government in American society will again be debated. Just 22% of voters believe more government leads to more fairness. Fifty percent (50%) believe increased government regulation leads to less fairness. Two-out-of-three (66%) believe that most government contracts are awarded to those with political connections rather than to those who provide the best service at the best price. The president and Romney have both spoken on the topic of student loans recently, but most Americans think other options should be on the table. Scott Rasmussen’s radio update notes that 70% think it’s better for a student to work through college and take six to eight years to graduate rather than taking student loans. Half (48%) believe student loans drive up the cost of tuition. A president’s Job Approval rating is one of the best indicators for assessing his chances of reelection. Typically, the president’s Job Approval rating on Election Day will be close to the share of the vote he receives. Currently, 46% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the president's job performance. Fifty-three percent (53%) at least somewhat disapprove. As the U.S. Supreme Court prepares to hear the federal government’s challenge to Arizona’s immigration law, 59% of voters believe police officers should check the immigration status of those they stop for traffic violations. However, as Scott Rasmussen notes in a radio commentary, voter anger is not directed at the immigrants. It is directed at the federal government, employers and others who enable illegal immigration. Most Americans believe the price of gas could reach $5 a gallon in the next few months. Forty-four percent (44%) believe government regulations are primarily to blame, while 32% point to speculators. Three-out-of-four Americans (75%) would prefer the U.S. Postal Service cut mail delivery to five days a week rather than receive government subsidies to cover ongoing losses. Scott Rasmussen’s radio update for the WOR Radio Network earlier this week noted that just 27% think government investments made America great. A much larger number give credit to the free enterprise system. If you’d like Scott Rasmussen to speak to your organization, meeting, or conference, please contact Premiere Speakers. The Wall Street Journal has called him “America’s leading insurgent pollster” and The Washington Post says Scott is a “driving force in American politics.” (More Below) To get a sense of longer-term Job Approval trends for the president, check out our month-by-month review of the president's numbers. Intensity of support or opposition can have an impact on campaigns. Currently, 24% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as president. Forty-one percent (41%) Strongly Disapprove, giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -17 ( see trends). (More Below) During midterm elections, intensity of support can have a tremendous impact on turnout. That was demonstrated in 2010 when Republicans and unaffiliated voters turned out in large numbers to express opposition to the Obama administration’s policies. However, in presidential election years, there is a smaller impact on turnout. (More Below)

To: locogringo who wrote (131147)	4/25/2012 1:48:06 PM
From: FJB	3 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224749

Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli having another terrible day in the Supreme Court. Supreme Court casts doubt on Obama’s immigration law claim By Stephen Dinan - The Washington Times Updated: 1:08 p.m. on Wednesday, April 25, 2012 Supreme Court justices took a dim view of the Obama administration’s claim that it can stop Arizona from enforcing immigration laws, telling government lawyers during oral argument Wednesday that the state appears to want to push federal officials, not conflict with them. The court was hearing arguments on Arizona’s immigration crackdown law, which requires police to check the immigration status of those they suspect are in the country illegally, and would also write new state penalties for illegal immigrants who try to apply for jobs. The Obama administration has sued, arguing that those provisions conflict with the federal government’s role in setting immigration policy, but justices on both sides of the aisle struggled to understand that argument. “It seems to me the federal government just doesn’t want to know who’s here illegally,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. said at one point. The Arizona law requires all police to check with federal officials if they suspect someone is in the country illegally. The government argues that is OK when it’s on a limited basis, but said having a state mandate for all of its law enforcement is essentially a method of trying to force the federal government to change its priorities. Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli Jr. said the federal government has limited resources and should have the right to determine the extent of calls it gets about possible illegal immigrants. “These decisions have to be made at the national level,” he said. But even Democratic-appointed justices were uncertain of that. “I’m terribly confused by your answer,” said Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who went on to say that the federal government can always decline to pick up illegal immigrants when Arizona officials call. The Obama administration was on its firmest ground when it argued Arizona should not be allowed to impose state penalties such as jail time against illegal immigrants who try to seek jobs. Federal law chiefly targets employers, not employees, and Mr. Verrilli said adding stiffer penalties at the state level is not coordination. He said Congress’s 1986 immigration law laying out legal penalties was meant to be a comprehensive scheme, and Congress left employees untouched — and Justice Sotomayor seemed to agree. “It seems odd to think the federal government is deciding on employer sanctions and has unconsciously decided not to punish employees,” she told Paul D. Clement, who argued the case on behalf of Arizona. A decision is expected before the end of the court’s term this summer. Only eight justices were present for the arguments. Justice Elana Kagan recused herself from the case, presumably because she was the Obama administration’s solicitor general in 2010, when the law was being debated in Arizona. Gov. Jan Brewer, who signed the measure into law, was present for the arguments, as were members of Congress who follow the immigration issue: Rep. Zoe Lofgren of California, the top Democrat on the House immigration subcommittee, and Rep. Steve King, an Iowa Republican who has fought for an immigration crackdown. Story Continues ? washingtontimes.com