Nevada caucuses: Romney trounces rivals but Gingrich vows to fight on:

Nevada caucuses: Mitt Romney, the Republican presidential candidate and former Massachusetts governor, greets supporters in Las Vegas. Photograph: AP

Neither and both. Caucus states like Iowa don't hand out their delegates based on the vote, that's just the first stage, and there's all sorts of crazy voting and stuff that goes on, which takes months. The numbers are just different estimates by different firms based on how well they think the rest of the caucus will go.

There are other issues, too. Florida is a winner-takes-all state, however, the national GOP are trying to get them to hand out the delegates proportionally at the convention, I don't know how that will turn out... based on what's going on, though, I'm going to assume that Fla remains WTA.

We're still waiting on Clark County to hand in all of their votes in the Nevada caucus. Paul is currently a strong second in Clark, and it could be enough to push him into second overall for the Nev. caucus initial votes.

http://www.google.com/elections/ed/us/results

The last two years were coincidentally the two years Obama lost some control over the government.

Though the economic reovery has largely been unrelated to government, only to be somewhat held up because people are worried about higher tax rates, compliance costs with the new Obama healthcare plan and other different regulatory issues like Dodd Frank.

I mean heck, the economy would be doing better except...

1) Corporations are holding on to more money then they've held on to every in recent history.  Why?  Worry about tax raises and healthcare compliance costs.

2) Banks aren't loaning out nearly as much money as they used to.  Why?  Dodd-Frank for one, which puts in some pretty tough money on hold guidelines,  which will insure nobody but those "Two big to fail" banks will be able to make loans.

Which is what we want... the two big to fail banks getting bigger.  Of course what can you expect when your Bank reform bill is written by two people who have gotten more money from banks then anyone and have had actual investigations about being bribed by banks.

Well that and the fact that the interst rates are so low at the fed, it doesn't really make anyone any money to lend to people, even if your sure of the investment!

What can a President do for the economy?  Not too much by himself.  First he would need both Congress and Senate to pass any legislation that he supports that supposedly helps the economy.  With party line voting I am sure the Republicans would stall any bill that would be good for the country just to make him look bad.  If you know me then you know I hate both major parties.  I am just trying to point out that it is pretty pointless that everyone always points fingers at the President.  Something you can point a finger at President for?  How about the use of our military troops.  I can point the finger at every President that served after WW2 for starting pointless wars and conflicts.  Also, you can talk as much trash as possible to those that lie on campaign trail (here is hint: they all do that).  Like when Obama said he wouldn't resign the Bush tax cuts or that he would abolish the Patriot Act.  He obviously didn't do either.

After thinking about my last post it made me almost want to make a thread about why do people blame the President for certain things when they should be pointing the finger at Congress. It is the House and Senate's job to make the budget. Sure the President proposes a budget but that doesn't really mean shit. It is up to the House and Senate to approve a budget. I believe most Americans are just too uneducated to even realize what the three branches roles are. Pretty obvious when you have idiots reelecting idiots over and over again. When someone keeps getting their job back after a less than 30% job approval rating then you know something is fucked up.

Maybe the way was lost when it was decided that any branch of Government had a role in regulating the economy.

Its pretty said when its been over 1000 days since the U.S. Senate has even passed a budget. pretty lame.

But also in fairness while not everything is the president's fault he still has allowed the U.S. national debt to increase by around 5 trillion since he took office. Its around 15 trillion now. He was quoted as saying that "Bush increased our national debt by 4 trillion in his 8 year administration and thats unpatriotic." Well I'd say 5 trillion debt increase in just over 3 years is pretty piss poor as well. He has the power of veto so he could have chosen to limit the debt increase if he wanted to. All to say yes both House and Senate are to blame but blame also has to reside at the feet of the president for allowing 5 trillion to be added to the U.S debt.

Anybody that argues that there's a difference between the parties are just blinded by partisanship. Republicans are supposed to be fiscally Conservative, and Bush increased the debt massively. Democrats are supposed to care about civil liberties and peace (hell, Obama won a nobel peace prize), and yet he's building more bases, entering more countries, assassinating citizens, signing legislation that allow for military arrests of citizens, and indefinite detention without trial at President's discretion.

Both parties have become a cancer on the USA. What worries me is that the Libertarians/original Tea Partiers WILL get what they want eventually... but only after the parties have destroyed the dollar.

EDIT: It's not just the USA. Politicians are killing Europe, too. Unfortunately, Europeans are even more blind to what's coming than Americans.

there is no recovery. Interest rates are at zero and there is a 15 trillion dollar deficit increasing 1.5 trillion per year. Trying to either raise interest rates or trying to bring the yearly deficit to 0 will implode the economy instantly. if you take 1.5 trillion dollars out of the economy that is 10% of the GDP, it will instantly implode. The economy is only being propped up by the fed and foreign governments stupid enough to loan us money. Obama refuses to decrease the deficit because the illusion of the recovering economy would be gone in an instant. If there was a true free market interest rates would have risen ages ago and nobody would have borrowed us any money because we can't pay it back.