Democrats fear another Bush. Should they? Do you?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Less than four years after George W. Bush left Washington, Democrats are afraid of another Bush.
If Jeb Bush were to become Mitt Romney's running mate, the former Florida governor would likely deliver his home state. Plus, he would likely attract more Hispanics, Catholics, conservatives and independents.
That's exactly what Democrats fear, and why they're likely relieved to hear Jeb Bush isn't interested.
People close to Bush tell Politico he means it, too. They say Jeb truly doesn't want to be on the ticket, that it's just not his time.
It could mean 2012 is just too close to the eight years of his brother's presidency and that the country couldn't stomach another President Bush. Just think: Having a Bush in the race would immediately put the focus back on the Iraq war, torture, spying on Americans, etc.
However, Bush loyalists insist his family's privacy is a major reason why Jeb didn't want to run for president this year and won't want to be the No. 2 either.
They say he's happy giving speeches, doing consulting and policy work through education and literacy foundations.
Plus as the son and brother of former presidents, Jeb Bush on a presidential ticket raises the political dynasty question. As George Will points out, if Bush ran as vice president that would mean a Bush on the GOP ticket in seven of the past nine presidential elections.
Still, not everyone is giving up hope on Jeb Bush running with Romney.
His eldest son, George P. Bush, tells Politico "it would be a phenomenal ticket."
Here’s my question to you: Democrats fear another Bush. Should they? Do you?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Should President Obama use Osama bin Laden's death in his campaign?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
President Obama is sounding more like the hypocrite-in-chief.
Contrary to statements he's made in the past, he's using the one year anniversary of the raid that killed Osama bin Laden in his re-election campaign.
A web video narrated by former President Bill Clinton praises Mr. Obama's decision to order the killing of the Al Qaeda leader.
Vice President Joe Biden used a bumper sticker slogan that thanks President Obama, "bin Laden is dead and General Motors is alive." Biden suggests it might have been the other way around were Romney president.
So much for what the Obama White House was saying when bin Laden was killed.
In the days following the bin Laden raid, President Obama said he decided not to release photos of the terrorist's corpse, saying "We don't trot out this stuff as trophies" and "we don't need to spike the football."
What's more - four years ago, then-candidate Obama slammed his opponent Hillary Clinton for using bin Laden in a political ad. He accused Clinton of playing "the politics of fear" like George W. Bush.
None of this is lost on the president's critics. Republicans are blasting him for turning a unifying event into another way to divide the country. They call it desperate and cheap.
The real tragedy here is that President Obama, by politicizing the raid that got bin Laden, is upstaging the Navy Seals who are the real heroes who conducted the mission.
Here’s my question to you: Should President Obama use Osama bin Laden's death in his campaign?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
What role might the Supreme Court play in the next presidential election?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Suddenly the Supreme Court is looming large in yet another presidential election.
In the 2000 contest between George W. Bush and Al Gore, the High Court ruled the recounting of votes in Florida - remember those hanging chads - must stop.
Al Gore got about 500,000 more popular votes. But the Supreme Court gave Bush the edge in Florida - and he went on to win the election.
That decision effectively handed the presidency of the United States to George W. Bush.
Flash ahead to 2012. Twice within the last four weeks, the Supreme Court has agreed to hear cases - health care and immigration - that could have huge implications for the outcome of another presidential election.
Start with Obamacare.
Court watchers say the justices seem to be leaning toward rolling back part - or all - of President Obama's hallmark legislation of his first term. The individual mandate appears to be in serious jeopardy - and with it, the whole law might go.
Then, almost without missing a beat, the Supreme Court decided to hear arguments on Arizona's tough new immigration law.
It's no secret the federal government under Presidents Obama, Bush - go back as far as you like - has made virtually no serious effort at securing our nation's borders – especially with Mexico.
Finally being fed up, Arizona took matters into its own hands.
Interestingly it looks like the Supreme Court may side with Arizona. And again the implications could be huge.
Both rulings are expected in June - just a few months before America elects its next president.
Republicans will use any decision against President Obama as ammunition.
However if the president loses either of these cases it could become a perfect way to mobilize the Democratic base, including Hispanic voters.
Here’s my question to you: What role might the Supreme Court play in the next presidential election?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
What's the most useless college major?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
With college graduation season just around the corner, a lot of young people are already underwater.
Student loan debt tops a staggering $1 trillion, more than car loans or credit card debt.
It's estimated the average kid graduating from college owes more than $27,000, up 54% from a decade ago.
As a result, many students and recent graduates want their student loans partially, or fully, forgiven.
But that could open the door to the taxpayers getting stuck with yet another huge bailout.
In Washington, student loans have been a hot topic of debate this week, with President Obama pushing hard for Congress to prevent student loan interest rates from doubling to 6.8% as they're scheduled to on July 1.
House Speaker John Boehner says the House will vote on Friday to extend current rates for a year.
All this should make college students think long and hard about choosing what to study. With unemployment above 8%, if graduates can't find a job, they might very well have trouble paying off these loans.
A new study suggests students who major in subjects like health care, education, psychology, social work and business have a better shot at getting a job.
On the flip side, The Daily Beast reports the most useless college majors out there include fine arts, drama, architecture, graphic design, philosophy, religion, English, journalism, archaeology, music, history and political science.
Here’s my question to you: What's the most useless college major?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Which V.P. candidate would benefit Mitt Romney more: a woman or a Hispanic?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
While Mitt Romney is now cruising toward the Republican nomination, he's a long way from cruising into the White House. And the two biggest reasons might be women and Hispanics.
During the primaries he was forced to the right on issues concerning both women and immigration - and he now emerges as damaged goods among those groups.
But the damage may not be permanent. One of the ways he can recover is by selecting either a woman or a Hispanic as a running mate.
Polls suggest President Obama holds a 20-point lead among women. Many women were turned off by Romney's comments about birth control and getting "rid of Planned Parenthood."
There is speculation women like New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez - also a Hispanic - and South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley could be on Romney's short list. There is a limit though. It's a safe bet Sarah Palin probably isn't on that list.
As for the Hispanic vote, Romney is in even worse shape. One poll says he trails President Obama by 40 points.
Experts say Romney needs to win at least 40% of the Latino vote to win the election.
Enter Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, who has suddenly been campaigning with Romney. A lot of people think Rubio would make the perfect running mate.
On the other hand, it's possible Romney's VP pick will be neither a woman nor a Hispanic.
A Politico piece titled "Vice President Vanilla" suggests Romney's best bet may be a safe and uncontroversial one. Someone like Rob Portman, Republican senator from Ohio and former Bush budget director.
He's described as "vanilla, wonky and unflappable" and the "safety school the GOP needs after the Sarah Palin experiment in 2008."
Here’s my question to you: Which V.P. candidate would benefit Mitt Romney more: a woman or a Hispanic?
Tune in to the Situation Room at 4pm to see if Jack reads your answer on air.
And, we love to know where you’re writing from, so please include your city and state with your comment.
Home prices are the lowest in a decade. How can the economy recover?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Home prices are at their lowest in a decade.
The S&P/Case-Shiller home price index of 20 cities shows an average decline of 3.5% from a year ago. That puts home prices at the lowest since November 2002. Experts say foreclosures and other distressed property sales are the main challenge.
Some of the hardest hit housing markets include Atlanta, Charlotte, North Carolina, Chicago, Las Vegas and New York.
The worst is Atlanta, where prices fell more than 17% year-over-year. Home prices in Atlanta haven't been this low in 16 years.
These numbers are scary:
For many Americans, their homes are their biggest asset. It's hard to imagine how the nation can manage an economic recovery with the housing market still hurting so badly.
And things might not improve for a long time. A very long time.
Yale University Economics Professor Robert Shiller says a total recovery of the housing market may take a generation. Shiller says he worries "that we might not see a major turnaround in our lifetimes."
And it's not just home prices that are suffering. A new government report shows new home sales dropped 7.1% in March to the lowest level since last November.
There's just no rush to buy. Mortgage rates might be at record lows, but if people don't have the money to buy it doesn't matter. Add in high unemployment along with high gas prices and uncertainty about the health of the economy and the future of housing looks pretty grim.
Here’s my question to you: Home prices are the lowest in a decade. How can the economy recover?
Tune in to the Situation Room at 5pm to see if Jack reads your answer on air.
And, we love to know where you’re writing from, so please include your city and state with your comment.
How likely is it that you will be laid off or lose your job in the next six months?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Unemployment is hitting home. Big time.
Nearly 7 in 10 Americans say they know someone who has either been laid off or lost their job in the last six months, according to a new Gallup Poll. And that's the highest in Gallup's history of asking this question.
Numbers like these could have huge political implications for President Obama come Election Day in November.
More bad news. Only 21% of those surveyed say it's a "good time to find a quality job," while 77% say it's a bad time.
This is actually an improvement from last year, when 90% of Americans said it was a bad time to find a job.
This is interesting. Even though most Americans know someone who has lost a job, only 15% say it is "very or fairly likely" that they personally will lose their job or get laid off in the next year.
The national unemployment rate is at 8.2%.
Hiring slowed dramatically in March, with employers adding only 120,000 jobs, down from 240,000 jobs in February.
While the unemployment rate declined a little last month, it's because people dropped out of the labor force.
Economists surveyed by CNN Money predict the unemployment rate will slip to 8% by the end of the year.
But 8% unemployment could still present a huge challenge for President Obama. Eight percent is a far cry from the 4.4% unemployment rate before the recession.
President Obama might want to take note. Since 1948, only one incumbent president has won re-election with unemployment at more than 7%. That was Ronald Reagan in 1984.
Here’s my question to you: How likely is it that you will be laid off or lose your job in the next six months?
Tune in to the Situation Room at 4pm to see if Jack reads your answer on air.
And, we love to know where you’re writing from, so please include your city and state with your comment.
Should states have more to say about their own border security?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
The immigration wars will heat up once again tomorrow.
When the Supreme Court hears oral arguments on the constitutionality of Arizona's controversial law.
It requires Arizona officials to check the immigration status of anyone stopped or arrested who they suspect is an illegal alien. But the Obama Administration sued to prevent it from going into effect.
Supporters say it's necessary because of the federal government's failure to secure the nation's borders. States like Arizona have had to deal with serious security issues along with the steep cost of education and health care for illegal aliens.
Critics say the law encourages racial profiling and forces state law enforcement to interfere with federal immigration policy.
The Supreme Court ruling is expected in June, which means like health care, it's sure to be a political hot potato headed into the election.
If the Supreme Court upholds the law, Senate Democrats are reportedly planning to force a vote on legislation that would invalidate Arizona's law.
Of course this has little chance of passing a divided Congress, but it's a way for Democrats to appeal to Hispanic voters before November.
Senate Democrats might be interested to learn most Americans agree with Arizona's approach. A new Quinnipiac Poll shows 68% approve of the Arizona law. Only 27% don't. And 62% say the Supreme Court should uphold the law.
Here’s my question to you: Should states have more to say about their own border security?
Tune in to the Situation Room at 5pm to see if Jack reads your answer on air.
And, we love to know where you’re writing from, so please include your city and state with your comment.
What does it mean when one in seven people in the U.S. gets food stamps?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Forty-five million people – that's one in seven living in the United States – received food stamps last year.
That's a 70% increase from 2007, according to a shocking new report by the Congressional Budget Office.
It shows that in 2010, about three out of four food stamp households included a child, a person older than 60 or someone who is disabled.
Most households getting food stamps were very low income, only about $8,800 per year.
The average food stamp benefit per household was about $290 a month, which comes out to $4.30 per person per day.
The worst part is food stamp use is only expected to grow.
The CBO projects the number of people getting food stamps will rise slightly for the next two years, at which point it will start to drop, as long as the economy improves.
But we're still talking historic highs here. In 2022, it's estimated spending on food stamps will be among the highest of all nonhealth related federal programs for the poor.
Speaking of spending, it follows that the cost of the food stamp program has skyrocketed along with the growing number of participants.
The cost rose from $30 billion in 2007 to $72 billion last year.
The CBO says about two-thirds of the cost increase is due to more people getting food stamps. But spending is also going up due to temporarily higher benefits from the stimulus law.
Tune in to the Situation Room at 4pm to see if Jack reads your answer on air.
And, we love to know where you’re writing from, so please include your city and state with your comment.
Is the Tea Party over?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
The party might be over - the Tea Party that is.
The movement that took the country - and Washington - by storm two years ago appears to be fading.
In the early days of the Obama Administration, the Tea Party seemed to spring up almost overnight nationwide.
With thousands of dissatisfied Americans attending town hall meetings and protesting an outsized federal government, higher taxes, skyrocketing federal spending and Obamacare.
In the 2010 mid-term elections, candidates connected to the Tea Party helped the Republicans wrestle back control of the House of Representatives. They were a force to be reckoned with.
But fast forward two years and what's left?
For starters, the Republican Party is on the verge of nominating Mitt Romney. Not exactly a right wing zealot.
Politico reports that a meeting of the Republican National Command this past weekend shows just how little has actually changed within the GOP.
Few Tea Party activists have won slots on the Republican Party's governing committee, even though some have won county chairmanships or state positions.
And, although the Republican establishment sympathizes with the Tea Party's ideas and wants to channel their energy, they see the movement as just one more constituency in the Republican coalition.
Some Republicans describe the Tea Party activists as inexperienced, and the movement as not as well organized as 2010.
Nonetheless, even if the Tea Party is losing power, it's still seen as a boost for Republicans. One state party chairman says the Tea Party has "put a spring in the step of the old lumbering elephant."
Here’s my question to you: Is the Tea Party over?
Tune in to the Situation Room at 5pm to see if Jack reads your answer on air.
And, we love to know where you’re writing from, so please include your city and state with your comment.
@jackcafferty on Twitter
Recent Comments