Jack, mark my words, this country is not ready for a Mormon in the White House. Many years ago, when I was still in college, I had a friend visit during summer break. And I suggested we go see the Hill Cumorah Pageant (a Mormon spectacular near the site where Joseph Smith allegedly found the tablets). I just saw it as theater on a grand scale and thought their version of history was pretty goofy. However, my friend who was a very serious Protestant was offended and appalled by the whole thing. Shocking for someone who was at a elite private college where open minds and critical thinking are the norm. But in retrospect, I think anyone with strong Christian values (which I never had) would likely have been offended. And my friend wasn't even offended by the whole racist Hammite piece of their theology (they've backed off some of that since then because I've heard they could only get an NBA team in Salt Lake if they dropped the exclusion of blacks from their cult).

I have to say that I am in agreement with LucsAvado on this.
And Perry won't make it to the White House either. Megan McCain describes Perry as "Bush 2.0" which I thought was pretty accurate.

When I see the "high speed rail" boondoggles (like, "high speed rail" funds that are re-roofing Union Station but not doing a damn thing to speed up trains) completely zeroed out, AND add to that the elimination of much of Amtrak (those trains that pass by once a day through the night, providing such "essential transportation" as sleeping cars and "free" dining car meals to people who aren't living in Cut Bank, Montana and aren't struggling college students (who put up in the coach cars and bring their own snacks onboard), AND zeroing out most of the boondoggle transit projects that brought to Portland light rail, the Streetcar and WES...then I'll listen.

The only difference between the (R)s and the (D)s are the special interests that they will work hard to make sure the money troughs keep flowing to. The (R)s favor big business in general; the (D) favor anyone that's union, rail, "green"...even if it's big business. Like Siemens - Europe's equivalent to General Electric (who likes the (R)s.) and is quite heavily invested in our light rail system and a major player in local politics.

Obama only cares if he's against it. Just like the Repubs will only cut if they're against it. If they're for it, no way will it get cut. Like the F-22 or F-35 projects.

The evangelical community is scared to death of the possibility of a Mormon in the White House (their biggest concern is LDS missionaries all over the world being able to say to prospective converts, "Let me tell you about the American president ..."). Add to that the Tea Party aversion to his signature achievement as governor and Romney doesn't have a prayer. Perry would do even worse, as he would get ~only~ those two largely overlapping groups and no one else. Republicans won't vote for Obama, of course, but millions of them will skip the presidential ballot line if Romney is on it, and vote down-ticket only. Barring some major unforeseen development (such as another 9/11), the 2012 election will be all about control of Congress, not the presidency.

Hmmm....trimming two of the largest entitlement programs in order to pay for some additional stimulus? I got no problem with that. Cutting $500b from those programs over 10 years is kind of the equivalent of getting rid of your land line and going totally mobile. You might miss it every once in awhile, but mostly you won't notice.

...The proposal does call for increasing premiums for some Medicare beneficiaries, which is a form of means-testing. The president (will) not do those unless the Republicans are willing to ask wealthy Americans and big corporations pay their fair share,” the senior administration official warned. “These are things we’re willing to do if they’re willing to get revenue from corporations and the wealthiest Americans.”...

They are doing their best to keep Obama in. Good PR message for voters that Obama asked to get revenue from corporations and the wealthiest Americans.

The trick is to chip away at as Jack mentioned above, the elderly and the poor by "giving" a carrot to get revenue from wealthy now.

In my opinion, this would be a temporary measure set up to begin taking from those who can least afford it. Later (after the elections) they will "change" directions and say we did get revenue from corporations and wealthy but must now stop doing so, but they would not stop chipping away from the middle class and those who have less.

The operative logic behind the posting of this link seems to be that unless Obama lives up to the liberal standards of his committed base many Democrats--and perhaps a considerable number of left-leaning Independents--will sit out 2012 and pave the way for Romney.

I don't believe that will happen anymore than I believe that pluralities on the right will sit things out if Romney gets the GOP nod.

It has become a cliche to say that a given election is the "most important in our lifetimes." I won't go there, but in my opinion there's a lot of marbles on the table this time, and I don't see anybody sitting anything out.

It will boil down to the lesser of two evils. Even the our friends in Italy have that concept deeply etched in their political landscape.