Warren Harding

I am on an iPad and I am not able to copy and paste what is in the box. So, is there a way to get the money I invested in the stadium and seating back, since I cannot participate in this?

I oppose gun bans. I am a farmer in rural Ohio. Many years ago, we had an incident. In the middle of the night, nature called. As I passed by the window, I saw a flashlight out in one of the barns. I woke up my wife, told her what I saw, and had her round up the kids and get them to the attic to hide. I grabbed my pistol and headed downstairs to call the sheriff. Then I sat on the stairs for what seemed like an eternity. About 5 minutes later, the deputies arrived. The two people in the barn ran but were caught. One was carrying a loaded pistol. In that 5 minute wait, so much could have happened. Luckily, no shots were fired. The two claimed that they were after farm equipment and parts. But, what if they had entered the house?

I don't care about Facebook or any other social media outlets. It is totally irrelevant. I will admit that I have liked every candidate and every likely candidate, whether or not I would support them. I am sure that i am not alone in doing that. I even "like" Barack Obama, but i would never cast a vote for him. A Facebook like doesn't always translate into votes. Did you even read the link to the poll? It says that 62% will not support Donald Trump. That is largely before the McCain comments were made. The poll also shows that 31% of Republican and Republican leaning independents would not support him if Trump were the nominee. Again, no one can put a positive spin on those numbers. His numbers really suck. The only good number is 24% support (again, largely before the McCain comments). But let's look at that number a little closer....1 out of 4 support him.....76% favor someone else. Now, what happens to Bush's supporters if he drops out tomorrow? They are not going to flock to Trump. Same is true for Walker, Paul, and most of the others. Trump would only benefit (if he lasts that long) if Cruz or maybe Carson drops out. I never really saw a path to victory for Trump...even before the McCain comments. He is just a "fad" candidate....here today and gone tomorrow.

That poll was conducted between Thursday and Sunday, so it largely does not reflect the remarks Trump made against McCain....as pointed out in the poll. The poll also mentions that "Trump's support was conspicuously lower Sunday than in the previous three days". There is no positive spin for the timing of the drop in support on Sunday. The poll caught the fallout from his comments.

Polls are meaningless at this point. History shows us this time and time again.

I don't agree with Bernie Saunders on the issues. But, I do see him as the only honest candidate. He won't lie about his position on the issues to gain votes. But back in Eisenhower's times, no one paid the maximum tax rate or anywhere near it. There were a lot more write-offs and deductions available back then. Many of those were eliminated as the tax rate fell.

Unless Walker gets hit by a major scandal, I think that he will be the GOP nominee. Even his foes say that he is a good campaigner, is good with speeches and debates, and really connects with the voters. Whether or not you like his agenda, look at what he has done....won two terms and survived a recall election in a bluish-purple state as well as getting his agenda through despite some concerns by state GOP members. Hillary will get the Dem nomination, but in the process may push the party too far to the left. Politically, she is not like Bill (who was more a centrist) and that will be an issue....Hillary does not equal Bill. I also question her campaign skills. Of course she won in New York, which isn't hard if you have a "D" next to your name. But look at her performance in 2008...it was pretty poor. It was way too easy for Barrack Obama to catch her off-guard. His campaign caught on to that early and capitalized on it. Now, we are seeing much of the same. She hit a couple of snags and they caught her off-guard.

The more that I look at that chart, the more troubling it is. Those provisions cost megabucks. Where is that money coming from? However, contrary to popular belief, the GOP does not oppose all of the provisions listed in that chart. They are on the record with "let's scrap it and start over with a program that keeps the good parts". Right now, SCOTUS could shut it down but pieces of Obamacare will continue on in some form for years to come. That is another troubling thing because the GOP also supports some of the provisions that cost megabucks, while acknowledging that consumer spending is still soft and tax revenues aren't exactly strong. Another problems is that the cost of being hospitalized, operations, tests, etc. are still increasing. Where is that money coming from? Obamacare is like social security in the 1930's. Back then, one paid into the system until age 65 and then collected off of it until death. It was a gamble considering the life expectancy was less than 60. More people were going to pay into it than benefit from it. A lot has changed since then. People are living longer as the expectancy is now in the late-70's range. That sort of leads us into future problems with Obamacare. The population is getting older. Unfortunately age has it's downsides when it comes to health problems....increased risks of cancer, heart problems, Alzheimer's (which is expected to hit 1 out of 4 in the next 50 years). Where is the money going to come from to combat that?

Really, public opinion doesn't matter when it comes to Obamacare anymore. It Is a court matter now and the article below explains a slight problem with Obamacare. http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/will-textualism-kill-obamacare If that case makes it to SCOTUS, I have a feeling that Obamacare is screwed. It is no secret that SCOTUS has not been friendly to President Obama when it comes to textualism.

An increase in minimum wages leads to an increase in the costs of goods and services because the cost of running a business increases. Increasing minimum wage would give those workers more money to spend BUT costs of the goods and services they purchase have also increased. Thus, the amount of the increase is eaten up by taxes and increased costs in goods and services. Over a short span of time (a year or two), it catches up and the $7.25 of today equals the $10.10 of tomorrow. Then, certain people want to raise it again and the cycle repeats itself. All of this is going on while many businesses are having to contend with increased costs of running a business due to Obamacare. That is also getting passed off to the consumer. So, now we have two causes for increases in the costs of goods and services. About 70% of all economic activity is consumer spending. When the cost of goods and services increase, consumer spending slows. When consumer spending slows, recessions happen. With a recession we see some businesses close. When businesses close, unemployment results. There would be an increase in tax revenues from a minimum wage increase, but what happens when costs increase and consumer spending slows? There is a drop in revenue due to the unemployment caused by the recession that would be looming around the corner.

Nation name: Logan Nation link: http://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=4946

Our foreign policy is too short term.

Could I please get my nation reset? Better yet, just delete my nation since it won't let me. I am done with the game.