Barack Obama won Minnesota’s 10 electoral votes on Tuesday, defeating Republican Mitt Romney.
CBS News has called the Minnesota race for the President shortly after 9:30 p.m., about the same time ABC News projected Minnesota for Obama, after Obama took a more than 40,000 vote lead with about 10 percent of precincts reporting. The Associated Press also called the Minnesota race for Obama before 10 p.m., according to the Pioneer Press.
Obama's 12 percent lead would match his margin over John McCain in 2008.
In the 2008 presidential election, the state voted for the Democratic candidate, and since the 1990s has voted for the overall winner of the presidential race 3 out of 5 times.
It has voted Republican only once in the last 50 years.
Romney and Obama did not campaign aggressively in Minnesota. The state has typically been a Democratic stronghold in recent presidential elections.
The economy was a key issue for many voters in the state, as was the two amendment issues–Voter I.D. and Marriage–on the Minnesota ballot this election.
Neither is "separation of Church and State".
As I stated earlier this is the Obama plan for socializes health care. Start by making it cheaper for the people to get into a government health plan them a private plan. Then when there are more people in the government plan then not in a government plan eliminate the non-government plan. What I’m saying is that when you combine the number people on Medicare, Medicaid, Federal Government employees and the 50 million people who don’t have insurance you will have over half the people in the country. Again as stated earlier the government will claim it will save the people money if all the programs are combined into one Federal program and it will be funded through the Medicare fund and a tax on the wealthy. I know there are people out there that don’t believe this but give it 20 years and see where we’re at. The Ted Kennedy national health plan would be a good name.
I just ordered it. One of the reviews stated it was written by an "old school Keynesian". I expect to bristle a little when I read it, (kinda like when I read Joyce's articulate but decidedly egalitarian nonsense) but it sounds entertaining at the very least.
Are you not familiar with the concept of marginal tax rates, Jim? http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/07/when-250000-isnt-actually-250000-2/
http://stillwater.patch.com/articles/newtown-school-shooting-mccollum-urges-immediate-congressional-action-to-end-epidemic-of-gun-violence#
What government plan? There is no "public option" in the ACA, and there is no option to buy into Medicare before you are old enough. That leaves Medicare for the elderly, Medicaid for the indigent and disabled (and you have to be truly indigent to qualify) plus the VA and the military health care system, both of which restrict access. Even health insurance for members of Congress and other federal employees is covered by private companies.
It's not may fault you haven't been paying attention, Jim.
"I think wealth is in the eye of the beholder," said Tricia Neuman, a Medicare expert with the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation. "This premium affects people with incomes starting at $85,000, but in the discussion over taxes $85,000 is not generally considered high income."
The relevant part is on page 201: Reinstate the 36-percent and 39.6-percent rates for upper-income taxpayers.—EGTRRA split the 15-percent statutory individual income tax rate bracket of prior law into two tax rate brackets of 10 and 15 percent, and replaced the four remaining statutory individual income tax rate brackets of 28, 31, 36 and 39.6 percent with statutory tax rate brackets of 25, 28, 33, and 35 percent. These tax rate brackets provided in EGTRRA, which were scheduled to expire on December 31, 2010, were extended through December 31, 2012, under the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010. The Administration’s adjusted baseline assumes that these tax rate changes are made permanent. The Administration proposes to replace part of the 33-percent tax rate bracket and all of the 35-percent tax rate bracket with the prior law tax rate brackets of 36 and 39.6 percent. These rate increases would apply to married taxpayers filing a joint return with income over $250,000 (at 2009 levels) and to single taxpayers with income over $200,000 (at 2009 levels).
If our local police force in conjunction with the Sherrif's Department, the State Patrol, the Park Police, the DNR, the Metro Transit Police, and the FBI believe there to be a reason for an armed guard at a school it would be under their purview to staff that position. Your figure may be a bit high as some schools already have done this, and it's not a full-time positon. District 196 already has policemen in the high schools, although I'd suspect that's more to keep order than to guard against outside threats. After seeing the disaster that the TSA has evolved into there's no way we want yet another agency involved.
I do think that right now everyone needs to feel protected. If we spend a little more on some security at our schools right now, under the circumstances, that is reasonably justified. Having every school armed as suggested, and long term b/c of this isn't reasonable - not the way NRA says so either. I am still very annoyed about how they responded. Pretty arrogant in my opinion. I don't want to take everyone's right away to have guns for hunting, or for protection. I am getting a little tired of the crazy "right to bear arms" arguments - that goes overboard too. That discussion I encountered with the Vets the other day, really put more light to the thoughts on this as well. They were talking abt some of these people who have those type of weapons, and hyper romatic attitudes about them, have no idea of what could go wrong. In the end, my mind and heart are with those who lost their children and loved ones.