Showing posts with label GOP. Show all posts
Showing posts with label GOP. Show all posts

Monday, August 10, 2015

[VIDEO] Carly Fiorina, Fox News Sunday August 8, 2015

Carly Fiorina generated a lot of critical buzz in the first GOP debates by coming out swinging against her Republican rivals and Democratic front runner Hillary Clinton. We’ll sit down with the former Hewlett Packard CEO to discuss how her performance will shape her campaign strategy.



Sunday, August 9, 2015

2016 race takes us toward banana republic status

Which of these Republicans can win swing states like Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin? 
John Minchillo AP

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/op-ed/article30436227.html#storylink=cpy

The GOP has won the popular vote only once in the six presidential elections since 1992. That occurred in 2004 when President George W. Bush was reelected with a scant 51 percent of the vote over Democrat, John Kerry. Yes, Bush also won in 2000, but he lost the popular vote in an election that was decided by the Supreme Court. Other than 2004, the Republican nominee has not won more than 47 percent of the popular vote. Nothing suggests 2016 will be any different.
The Democrats have a significant structural advantage in amassing the 270 electoral votes it takes to win. Over the past six elections the Democrats have won 18 states and the District of Columbia every time, netting them 240 electoral votes. The Republicans have been able to carry only 13 states every time. Those states netted them a paltry 102 electoral votes.
In order to break this pattern the Republicans must nominate a candidate who can carry some of the states that routinely vote Democratic, and they need to be states with more than a trivial number of electoral votes. The obvious targets are in the Rust Belt – Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin, which together have 46 electoral votes. That’s more than enough to change the outcome of the presidential election. A Republican who can’t win in one or more of these states will be another loser. And that rules out virtually all of the occupants in the current GOP Presidential Clown Car.

GOP thriving

However, in May Sean Trende and David Byler published an excellent analysis of party strength in Real Clear Politics, and it shows that the GOP is the strongest it has been in decades in Congress and at the state level. Let’s examine this strange, but real, disconnect between a party that can’t win the White House, while reigning supreme everywhere else.
Trende and Byler’s analysis shows the 54 Senate seats the Republicans now control is their second-best showing since 1928. Their 247 House seats is the best since 1928. There are 31 Republican governors, and the GOP controls both houses of the legislature in 30 states.
From 1954 until 1994 the GOP was a permanent minority in the House of Representatives. The picture was almost as bleak in the Senate. During most of that time a Republican was president. And the government worked. The American people wanted the two parties to negotiate with one another to reach compromises, which is exactly what they did.

Health care revolt

In 1994 everything changed. The Republicans came out of the wilderness. They gained 54 House seats and eight Senate seats. And in 2010 and 2014 they struck again, first retaking the House and then the Senate. Why? Hillarycare and Obamacare. Virulent opposition to Hillarycare triggered the Gingrich Revolution in 1994, and Obamacare reignited intense voter opposition to the president’s health program and the partisan manner by which the Democrats rammed it through.
Many of these newly elected Republicans are radicals, unwilling to compromise. Both sides bear major responsibility for paralyzing the federal government. Neither side will back down. Trading in Hillary for Obama next year is a certain recipe for more of the same.
Both parties deserve the public’s contempt. Yet voters continue to perpetuate the impasse. Banana republic, here we come.
Goldman worked on Capitol Hill and at the National Institutes of Health. He has retired to Flat Rock and can be reached at tks12no12@gmail.com.

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/op-ed/article30436227.html#storylink=cpy





Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/op-ed/article30436227.html#storylink=cpy

The Republican-Democrat Switcheroo

It’s now official. When it comes to choosing presidential nominees, the Republican Party has become the Democratic Party—and Democrats have turned into Republicans. Cleveland, Ohio, was the place and August 6, 2015 was the date. The unruly Republican field was so multitudinous it had to be broken into double sessions. Meanwhile, the Democratic field essentially consists of one person, a candidate so confident that she spent GOP debate night in Hollywood posing for selfies with Kim Kardashian.
If Will Rogers were still alive, he’d have to reverse his famous quip about not belonging to an organized political party because he was a Democrat. Heading into 2016, Democrats are so squared away they have a nominee-in-waiting whom no prominent Democrat will lay a glove on. The Clintons are headlining the age of Learjet liberalism while Republicans mud-wrestle with The Donald.
Democrats have stopped defending Bill and Hillary Clinton. They just point to her poll numbers, and shrug. Mock federal law by establishing a secret email system? So what? Make Richard Nixon look like a piker by shredding 30,000 of those emails instead of erasing 18 minutes of tape? Who cares? Rake in $100 million in speaking fees from corporate interests and sketchy foreign donors? It’s for a good cause!
Sure, Sen. Bernie Sanders is drawing crowds, but the old Vermont socialist doesn’t dare criticize the front-runner. Neither will former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley, another declared Democratic presidential “candidate.” It evokes the GOP’s “11th commandment” popularized by Ronald Reagan: “Though shalt speak no ill of a fellow Republican.” Only this time, it’s Democrats.
The maxim was coined five decades ago by former California Republican Party chairman Gaylord Parkinson, mainly as a way of assisting Reagan’s nascent gubernatorial campaign. Over the years it was honored mostly in the breach by Republicans. Adhering to it in a crowd of 17 candidates is impossible.
Most of them did their best, however. Donald Trump refrained, by and large, from calling his colleagues “stupid” or “losers” Thursday night—although Fox News anchorwoman Megyn Kelly was more than happy to fill the void.
“You've called women fat pigs, dogs, slobs, disgusting animals,” Kelly said to Trump. “Your Twitter account has several…” Trump then interrupted her to ad-lib, “Only Rosie O'Donnell.” It was a quip that made some in the crowd laugh and others squirm nervously, which nicely sums up the main reaction to the loose-lipped billionaire.
He’s still leading the Republican field in the polls, but with 16 other candidates and Trump’s celebrity status, that’s not quite the achievement gleeful Democrats make it out to be. Whatever his ceiling of support might be, Trump is getting close to it. Speaking of which, it shouldn’t have been that easy to get The Donald to admit he’s not really a Republican, which Fox co-host Brett Baier did with the very first debate question.
Who there on the stage, Baier asked, would not agree to support the eventual Republican nominee? What he was getting at was the possibility of a third party campaign by Trump, a gambit that presumably would ensure a Hillary Clinton victory. Trump promptly raised his hand. Give him points for candor, but this is not what a Republican usually says in that situation. It so irritated Sen. Rand Paul—a man who actually would belong to a third party if the Libertarians were a viable national political entity—that he blurted out that Trump epitomized what’s wrong with American politics: “He buys and sells politicians of all stripes.”
When the question of such double dealing arose later, Trump’s answer was intellectually incoherent, if revealing. Health care is a mess because the politicians are bought and paid for by lobbyists, said the populist Donald Trump. A sentence or two later, Trump the oligarch was boasting about buying those same politicians.
But if Trump has peaked—and that’s a big “if”—who came out of Cleveland stronger than they entered? And what’s next for the other candidates? The most immediate worry for the men who participated in main debate is that Carly Fiorina, who starred in the “kids’ table” debate earlier in the day, seems poised to take somebody’s place in the Top 10. It might be Rand Paul’s; it could be Chris Christie’s or John Kasich’s.
Although she has little political experience outside her losing 2010 Senate campaign to Barbara Boxer, Fiorina was simultaneously the toughest on Trump while making the most articulate and direct appeal to his supporters. “Whatever the issue, whatever the cause, whatever festering problem you hoped would be resolved, the political class has failed you,” she said.
With nearly as many contestants as in “The Hunger Games,” certain pairings are inevitable, along with private feuds and side rivalries. Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker has already ruminated aloud about a Walker-Rubio ticket (or a Rubio-Walker ticket), but a discerning Thursday viewer also might imagine a Jeb Bush-John Kasich pairing, an alliance that would elevate within conservatism concern for the poor. The other possibility is an exacta ticket that you’d announce at the racetrack betting window this way: “All with Fiorina.”  
The takeaway is that 17 is too large a number. There weren’t this many people deciding presidential nominations in the old smoke-filled rooms of lore, let alone that many contenders. Literally.
Heading into the 1920 Republican convention in Chicago, the GOP nomination was wide open. On the first ballot 12 Republicans attracted support, the top three being Gen. Leonard Wood, Illinois Gov. Frank O. Lowden and California Sen. Hiram Johnson.
Ohio party boss Harry Daugherty confided to reporters that it would be a deadlocked convention between the top two, and that he planned to break the impasse by offering home state favorite Warren G. Harding as the compromise candidate. “After the other candidates have gone their limit, some 12 or 15 men, worn out and bleary-eyed for lack of sleep, will sit down about two o'clock in the morning, around a table in a smoke-filled room in some hotel and decide the nomination,” he said. “When that time comes, Harding will be selected.”
It happened just as Daugherty predicted. For Republicans, this meant good news and bad. The good news was that they won in November. The bad news was that, in turning to someone they didn’t really know well, GOP bosses ended up choosing a guy who was a scandal machine once in the White House. It’s not a stretch to say, with the release of Warren Harding’s recent love letters to a mistress, that he’s still generating scandals a century later.
What I’m suggesting is that the voters will eventually sort this out, and that their track record is at least as good as that of the wise guys. Also that a political party, Republican or Democrat, which ignores the whiff of scandal may come eventually to regret it, even if they win the next election.
Carl M. Cannon is the Washington Bureau Chief for RealClearPolitics. Reach him on Twitter @CarlCannon.


Via: Real Clear Politics

GOP leaders say erratic attacks hurt Trump, but he vows to fight and win

Republican leaders who have watched Donald Trump’s summer surge with alarm now believe that his presidential candidacy has been contained and may begin to collapse because of his repeated attacks on a Fox News Channel star and his refusal to pledge his loyalty to the eventual GOP nominee.
Fearful that the billionaire’s inflammatory rhetoric has inflicted serious damage to the GOP brand, party leaders hope to pivot away from the Trump sideshow and toward a more serious discussion among a deep field of governors, senators and other candidates.
They acknowledge that Trump’s unique megaphone and the passion of his supporters make any calculation about his candidacy risky. After all, he has been presumed dead before: Three weeks ago, he prompted establishment outrage by belittling the Vietnam war service of Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), only to prove, by climbing higher in the polls, that the laws of political gravity did not apply to him.
Still, Trump’s erratic performance during and after the first Republican presidential debate last week sparked a backlash throughout the party Saturday and a reassessment of his front-running bid. The final straw for many was Trump’s comment on CNN late Friday that Fox moderator Megyn Kelly had “blood coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her wherever.”
Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (S.C.), a fellow candidate, said Trump was jeopardizing the GOP’s chances of winning back the White House and urged party leaders to stop “tiptoeing” around him.
“I think we’ve crossed that Rubicon where his behavior becomes about us, not just him,” Graham said in an interview.
“Donald Trump is an out-of-control car driving through a crowd of Republicans, and somebody needs to get him out of the car,” Graham said. “I just don’t see a pathway forward for us in 2016 to win the White House if we don’t decisively deal with this.”
Trump — whose strident opposition to illegal immigration helped him amass a 2-to-1 polling lead over his nearest GOP rivals — was characteristically defiant and confident in a series of phone calls Saturday with The Washington Post. He vowed to reboot his campaign amid a staff shake-up and said he could capture the White House because “millions of people everywhere” who feel alienated by the political class are standing by him.

Saturday, August 8, 2015

IRS's Lois Lerner called conservatives 'a--holes' in emails

IRS's Lois Lerner called conservatives 'a--holes' in emails | Washington Examiner

Lois Lerner emails obtained from the House Ways and Means Committee are displayed in Washington, Wednesday, July 30, 2014. (AP Photo) 

A trove of IRS emails show top official Lois Lerner had a deep commitment to the Democratic Party and a significant dislike for the new conservative grassroots groups that formed under the Tea Party banner and sought tax-exempt status from the agency.
"Crazies" and "a--holes," were the blunt terms Lerner used to describe conservatives, who, with a Supreme Court decision striking down the campaign finance reform law, were bringing about "an end to America," she wrote.
The emails are included in a bipartisan report issued Wednesday by the Senate Finance Committee, which cited "gross mismanagement" and also "personal politics" as the root cause of the IRS mishandling of tax-exempt applications from Tea Party organizations.
Democrats on the panel emphasized the mismanagement, declaring there was no evidence the groups were singled out because they were conservative. They cited lack of training, lack of oversight and ineptitude as the main culprits in the mishandling of hundreds of tax-exempt applicants that were subjected to extra scrutiny and delays.
"The results of this in-depth, bipartisan investigation showcase pure bureaucratic mismanagement without any evidence of political interference," said Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon, the top Democrat on the finance panel.
But Lerner, the former top official who oversaw tax-exempt groups, showed a true dislike for conservative-leaning organizations, according to her email conversations with her husband and associates.
"Well, you should hear the whacko wing of the GOP," her husband, Michael Miles, wrote to Lerner in November 2012.
"The US is through; too many foreigners sucking the teat; time to hunker down, buy ammo and food, and prepare for the end. The right wing radio shows are scary to listen to."
Lerner responds, "Great. Maybe we are through if there are that many a--holes."

GOP debate contenders give Democrats reason to worry

 Donald Trump may top the polls in the contest for the Republican presidential nomination, but this week’s debate was a reminder that the party has able rivals who eventually could take him down — and who also could mount a stiff challenge to Hillary Rodham Clinton in the general election.
Trump performed in typical style Thursday in the two-hour debate — the same style that has helped him blow past the other candidates. But as the campaigns broke camp here Friday morning, the smiles on the faces of other candidates’ advisers told the fuller story of what happened on the stage at the Quicken Loans Arena.
Everyone came out a winner — or so the rivals’ advisers proclaimed. Some of that bravado was typical post-debate hype, but some of it was grounded in reality. Trump may have been the center of attention, but others performed more effectively overall.
For months, Republican leaders have talked about the breadth, depth and potential strength of their candidates. As a group, the aspiring nominees are certainly more experienced and seemingly more ready for a national campaign than the collection of politicians who sought to deny Mitt Romney the GOP nomination in 2012.
In a field of 17 candidates, Trump’s poll numbers are impressive. He’s getting a fifth to a quarter of the GOP vote in national polls. In those polls, his nearest rivals are drawing half or less of his support.
To Trump, that already makes him a winner. But the Republican race will not remain a 17-candidate scrum indefinitely. When the field shrinks, Trump will find himself in a different battle, and it will probably not be as favorable to him as this summer’s contest has been.
Trump complained after the debate that the Fox News moderators — Megyn Kelly, Bret Baier and Chris Wallace — had treated him badly, with unfair questions designed to embarrass him and ultimately bring him down. The judgment from many others was that the three did an exceptional job, with probing questions not only for Trump but also for others on the stage.
Trump set the tone early in a combative exchange with Kelly over some of the derogatory words he has used to describe women. He got a big laugh when, as Kelly quoted his words, he interjected, “Only Rosie O’Donnell.” It seemed like classic Trump — delivering a quick, sharp riposte in the face of a potentially damaging accusation — although he then went too far and attacked Kelly, continuing to do so on Twitter after the debate.

Democrats: They're All Socialists Now by LARRY ELDER

democrats, socialists, - Google Search

Socialism, according to Dictionary.com, is defined as: "A theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole."
Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, recently appeared on MSNBC's "Hardball with Chris Matthews." Matthews asked, "What is the difference between a Democrat and a socialist?"
Wasserman Schultz laughed, looked stunned, and began hemming and hawing. Matthews helpfully interjected, "I used to think there was a big difference. What do you think it is?" Still, Wasserman Schultz refused to give him a straight answer. "The difference between -- the real question," she said, "is what's the difference between being a Democrat and being a Republican."
Matthews tried again: "Yeah, but what's the big difference between being a Democrat and being a socialist? You're the chairwoman of the Democratic Party. Tell me the difference between you and a socialist."
Still, Wasserman Schultz wouldn't answer the question .
A few days ago Chuck Todd of NBC's "Meet the Press" offered her a chance for a do-over. He replayed the exchange with Matthews, then asked: "Given that (Democratic presidential candidate) Bernie Sanders is an unabashed socialist and believes in social democratic governments -- (he) likes the ones in Europe -- what is the difference? Can you explain the difference?"
And again she either could not or would not answer, and wanted to discuss the difference between Republicans and Democrats.
On the one hand, Wasserman Schultz might have refused to answer because she did not want to put her thumb on the scale of the self-described socialist candidate Bernie Sanders or the likely nominee, Hillary Rodham Clinton. No matter what Wasserman Schultz would've said, it would injure one while helping the other.
That's one explanation. But the more likely explanation is simple. There is no real distinction between today's Democrats and socialists. A few years ago Congresswoman Maxine Waters, D-Calif., conducted hearings in which she grilled oil executives for alleged price fixing. She threatened to nationalize their business. Did (SET ITAL) any (END ITAL) Democrat speak out against her threat? No.
Newsweek, in 2009, ran a cover story with the headline: "We Are All Socialists Now." Jon Meacham wrote:
"The U.S. government has already -- under a conservative Republican administration -- effectively nationalized the banking and mortgage industries. That seems a stronger sign of socialism than $50 million for art. Whether we want to admit it or not -- and many, especially Congressman (Mike) Pence and (Sean) Hannity, do not -- the America of 2009 is moving toward a modern European state. ...
"... If we fail to acknowledge the reality of the growing role of government in the economy, insisting instead on fighting 21st-century wars with 20th-century terms and tactics, then we are doomed to a fractious and unedifying debate. The sooner we understand where we truly stand, the sooner we can think more clearly about how to use government in today's world. ...
"... This is not to say that berets will be all the rage this spring, or that Obama has promised a croissant in every toaster oven. But the simple fact of the matter is that the political conversation, which shifts from time to time, has shifted anew, and for the foreseeable future Americans will be more engaged with questions about how to manage a mixed economy than about whether we should have one."
Polls, too, show that most Democrats are quite comfortable with socialism. A recent poll found 52 percent of Democrats had a favorable opinion about socialism.
Bernie Sanders has always caucused with Democrats, and they are perfectly comfortable with him. He's still a long shot for the Democratic nomination, but he is rising in the polls. If there is a distinction between him and President Barack Obama on anything major, what is it? Both pushed "universal health care." Both oppose the Keystone pipeline. Both believe taxes should be raised on "rich" people. Both believe in the redistribution of income. Obama wants two years of "free" community college. Sanders wants to make college "free" altogether. Both attack "corporate greed" and both belong to the school of economics that says, "you didn't build that."
Andy Stern, then the head of the Democratic Party-supporting Service Employees International Union, said, "I think Western Europe, as much as we used to make fun of it, has made different trade-offs which may have ended up with a little more unemployment but a lot more equality."
That's an acceptable trade-off in today's Democratic Party.
Jack Kennedy, a tax cutter, defended his plan by arguing it would invigorate the economy. He wanted growth and said, "A rising tide lifts all boats." Today's Democrat, like Wasserman Schultz, would deride Kennedy as a greedy Republican advocate of "trickle down."
Larry Elder is a best-selling author and radio talk-show host. To find out more about Larry Elder, or become an "Elderado," visit www.LarryElder.com. Follow Larry on Twitter @larryelder. To read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.
COPYRIGHT 2015 LAURENCE A. ELDER
DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM
Via: GOPUSA
Continue Reading....

Friday, August 7, 2015

GOP Candidates Bash Tax Code, ObamaCare, Dodd-Frank

RTX1NE9Y.gif
Reforming the tax code and repealing two of President Obama’s signature pieces of legislation – ObamaCare and the Dodd-Frank banking reform bill – would promote economic growth and are key priorities for the top Republican candidates for president.
In a wide-ranging debate in Cleveland sponsored by Fox News, several of the ten candidates who participated said repealing ObamaCare and Dodd-Frank would benefit U.S. businesses by lowering expenses and easing regulations that have created costly obstacles for business owners.
Florida Senator Marco Rubio said the U.S. economy has “radically transformed” in the last five years and that many categories of good paying jobs “are gone.”
“The economy we live in today is dramatically different than it was five years ago,” Rubio said, and small businesses in particular are struggling under the regulatory burdens of ObamaCare, Obama’s signature health care reform legislation, and the Dodd-Frank banking legislation passed in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis.
Both pieces of legislation need to be repealed, Rubio said. In addition, the tax code needs to be reformed such that the tax rates for small business is lowered to 25%. “We need to make America fair for all businesses but especially for small biz,” he said.
Former Florida Governor Jeb Bush has said he would promote policies that would lift economic growth to a 4% growth rate (or GDP), well above the current 2% to 3% range anticipated for 2015.
Bush said that a higher growth rate is possible if better quality jobs are created and the U.S. fixes a “convoluted tax code.” He also called for repealing ObamaCare, saying it raises costs for business owners.
Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee said the IRS should be eliminated.
Ohio Governor John Kasich was asked how Republicans can differentiate themselves from a Democratic challenger who argued Republicans are only out to help the rich. Kasich said Republican policies promote economic growth and “economic growth is the key to everything.”
Businessman Donald Trump, speaking broadly on the U.S. economy, said, “We don’t win any more, we lose to China, we lose to Mexico. We need to turn it around.” Trump also said he would repeal ObamaCare.
Responding to a question targeting the four times Trump companies filed for bankruptcy protection, Trump said he only availed himself of U.S. law as any good businessman would.
Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker defended his record of job creation in his state, saying he dramatically lowered the state’s unemployment rate. He also called for reforming the tax code and easing regulations on businesses.
“I think most of us understand that people, not the government creates jobs,” Walker said.
On the hot button issue of immigration, Walker said the issue impacted the broader economy and that the U.S. needs an immigration policy that “gives priority to American working families” and keeps wages high.
New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, facing a question about his handling of the struggling New Jersey economy, said the state is now creating jobs under his administration, a dramatic turnaround from his predecessor.
Neurosurgeon Ben Carson said he would scrap the current tax system and replace it with a system of tithing, the religious practice of donating a percentage of a household’s earnings. “We need a significantly changed tax system,” he said.

24 Million Watch GOP Debate on Fox News; Most-Watched Cable News Program Ever

bret-kelly-chris-gopdebate-hed-2015
In the estimation of many reporters who cover the political and media beats, Fox News was the winner of the first GOP debate. And with the just-released ratings we can confirm that.
A whopping 24 million watched the debate from 9 p.m. ET to just past 11 p.m. ET. FNC drew 7.9 million in the A25-54 demo.
This is poised to be the highest non-sports cable program of all time. It’s already the highest-rated cable news program of all time and Fox News’s most-watched program ever.
The 5 p.m. ET debate, withe the 7 lower-tier candidates did very well for Fox News too, drawing 6.1 million total viewers and 1.2 million in the demo, making it the third-highest primary debate ever on cable.
In the 2012 cycle, the first GOP debate, also on Fox News, and airing much earlier — on May 5, 2011 — was watched by 3.258 million viewers. The most-watched primary debate drew 7.630 million on ABC on the night of Dec. 10, 2011.
Going back to the 2008 cycle, when, like this go-round, there were open Democratic and Republican tickets,  the first GOP debate on Oct. 9, 2007, simulcast on MSNBC and CNBC, drew a combined 2.141 million. The most-watched GOP debate of that cycle was on ABC, when 7.350 million watched the Jan. 5, 2008 face-off.
Nielsen Social TV ratings ranked last night’s debate as the number one event on Twitter with 3.3 million tweets and 393 million impressions, beating Jon Stewart’s farewell episode. The debate, which was co-sponsored by Facebook, increased interactions on FNC’s Facebook page by +74 percent from a typical day in July. The 10 million Facebook video views were up +190 percent compared to the daily July 2015 average.


Huge: Fox Debate Pulls In 10 Million Viewers, Doubles Previous Record

Whether it was the presence of Donald Trump or interest in other candidates, the first GOP presidential primary debate was a huge success in the ratings.
Neilson overnight ratings indicate 16 percent of households who had their TV on Thursday night were tuned in to Fox News to watch the GOP top 10 scrap.
Overnight #'s: had a 16.0 household rating. The biggest GOP debates in 2011/12 had 5.3 ratings *May change

Overnight estimates can be adjusted as the calculations are completed by Neilson, but preliminary reports indicate 10 million Americans watched.

Popular Posts