showing that gingrich should have been dead this summer. in june, he was at 6.7% in the polls. went down to 4.9% in july. august, went up to 5.5%. september, up to 6.8%. october, 9.3%. now he s at 23.8%. what happened, bob? i think there s a big hair thing going on here. we have mitt romney, we have newt gingrich, rick perry, michele bachmann, the only one without big hair who has been up there for a little while was herman cain. but with the rest of them, it was hair today and gone tomorrow. but the problem here is that they re running out of alternatives to mitt romney. you ve got this large number of republicans who just don t like the man because they view him as a it s the hated word, a moderate. now, dana, when you look at four not one, not two, but four national polls has newt
Detailed text transcripts for TV channel - MSNBC - 20111128:23:57:15 comparemela.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from comparemela.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
full participation. and that s a way in which labor, i think, can help the president win reelection. let me ask you about this vote. it seems to me that the voters like to vote. i think we learned that in the state of maine yesterday, which was a very crusty independent-minded state. they voted down they voted to reject a law which would ve ended same-day voter registration. seems to me voters don t like being told you can t vote, you can t register the same day you want to vote. they like them. everywhere we ve ever tried to limit or restrict your access to the polls, it has proven to be a loser of enormous proportions. republicans traditionally want to establish all those things similar to what was done with all of the business of that that was in the south for years where you had to preregister, you have to do a whole series of things to be eligible of both. voters don t want to do that. they want to show up on election day with no preference
social security. working americans pay the same social security that you do up to that $108,000 or so limit. that is not a particularly new phenomenon. it s been this way for a long time. and the view is that people at the top should simply pay more. what do you use the word fairness earlier. that s been troubling to a lot of republicans and conservatives. the president keeps saying they need to pay their fair share, their fair share. the argument is the top 5% of americans paid something like 60% of the taxes in the country. as a raging capitalist but also someone who supported president obama what do you make he s a capitalist. you are too because you and i agree on about 90% the issues. he is actually small government conservative but go ahead. what do you make of the concept of fair share? is that a legitimate way to frame this? fairness is to some degree in the eye of the beholder. you tell me what s fair.