Comments about ‘Rep. Jim Matheson leads all comers in Utah's new 4th Congressional District, poll shows’

Return to article »

Incumbency has its early privileges in new district

Published: Sunday, Dec. 25 2011 10:00 p.m. MST

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Salt Lake City, UT

Too bad a vote for Matheson is a vote for Pelosi, Reid and Obama.....

I'll vote for anyone but Matheson.......

New to Utah

This is bogus hyperbole and almost an endorsement of Jim Matheson. I am new so my thoughts may be off but I think the absolute failure of Barack Obama will have such a motivated electorate that Jim Matheson will be voted out of office on the coattails of Barack Obama. Whoever the Republican candiate is will win decisively. It is dumb to have polls where only one side has a candidate.

Kaysville, UT

As voter voting absentee for 1/3 of my life while in the military, I am grateful for the political system that provides diversity for voters. After living in countries that have dictators, presidents that are like dictators, and others that act like kings, we are blessed to have a system that is pretty solid. Utah Republicans have the market on so many of the districts and counties that it can almost be as if the people in office are similar to the countries discussed above. They wrangle the districts to keep even one of the best Democrats on the move as he serves the people of the state. He is a very good person and they can't keep a good person down.

It is sort of sad to see but that is the benefit of an open society where good wins out even though political leaders of one party try to suppress the opponent's efforts.

Keep up the work Congressman Matheson to provide for a more balanced Utah.

Salt Lake City, UT

Peter, did you address my questioning of Anonymous attacks on Matheson, or CJs claim of Democrats running this country for the last four years? No, of course not.

You did, though, attempt to give a history lesson.

The 110th Congress (seated Jan 3, 2007) was the first time Democrats had controlled a majority in both chambers since 1995 (they held 49 seats in the Senate, but the two independent Senators caucused with them, an operational majority). The president was, of course, a Republican.

The recession began in December 2007; eleven months later, not fifteen.

The complex factors leading to the financial crisis hardly was created in eleven months.

For example, one of the main causes of the recession, the collapse of the housing bubble in 2006 and the creation of the subprime mortgage crisis, had occurred by the time the 110th Congress was seated. The economic meltdown was already underway by the time Frank and Dodd took over the committees you mention. The junior Senator from Illinois, Barack Obama, would not become president for another two years.

Trying to teach history using a highly selective memory and partisan talking points is an exercise in futility, Peter.

Murray, UT


Whatever the Republicans did or didn't do before him is totally irrelevant as Obama has made it worse by a factor of about 10. Four billion a day is what he has spent as President, that is more than ALL of the Presidents before him put together!! Stop whining about Bush, he hasn't been in office for over three years now, and anything he did is completely dwarfed by the community organizer who thinks money grows on trees.
You guys don't seem to understand that by himself, without any help, he has spent your kids' and grandkids' entire lifetime income and is now working on your great grandkids' income. He has done this without the help of the Republicans who have been trying to stop him, but it is like trying to turn the tide of the ocean. If you want four more years of this then you need to buy yourself a new calculator with higher digits so you can start calculating the cost of all this to you and your future descendants. Leave them a diary explaining your logic in supporting all this so they will know why they are homeless.

Murray, UT


Do you realize that it doesn't matter how long the Democrats have controlled anything? In three years the Democrat in the White House has spent 4 billion a day, more than all of the others before him put together. The rest is irrelevant!!! Wake up!!

Salt Lake City, UT

CJ, you claim, Four billion a day is what [President Obama] has spent as President, that is more than ALL of the Presidents before him put together!!

The national debt stood at $10.626 trillion the day President Obama was inaugurated. Today the national debt is 15.161 trillion. President Obama has added 4.535 trillion to the debt as of today.

As you can see, that is less then the accumulated debt of all previous presidents.

Regarding your belief that we should not discuss the damage done to this country by President Bush and the Republicans:

When George W. Bush took office, the national debt was $5.73 trillion. When he left, it was $10.7 trillion. That's a difference of $4.97 trillion.

The difference between Bushs and Obamas debt? President Bush had a surplus the day he took office. If President Bush and the Republicans had been responsible fiscal stewards the national debt would be paid off by now.

Nevertheless, the deficit is clearly too high. I was outraged when Republican Presidents Reagan, Bush Sr., and Bush Jr. ran up the debt on their watch. Were you?

Alpine, UT

mark, don't get caught up in the numbers or the spelling. The point I'm making is simply ALL incumbents need to go. You can't solve problems with the same minds that created them.

Murray, UT


I am not interested in your voodoo math, it is a verifiable fact that he has added more than all the previous Presidents combined, it has been on every news channel out there, even the liberal ones admit it, then they try to shift part of the blame to Republicans but they can't, he has done in three years,its an indisputable fact and even Democrats are not denying it. Why do you think he can't run on his record? Why do you think there is a draft Hillary movement afoot in the party? I don't know where you come up with your "facts" and numbers, they are not correct. With all due respect, you are simply wrong about it. Please see numbers from the Congressional Budget Office, they don't lie and you can't make the shoe fit.

Salt Lake City, UT

"Voodoo math", oh dear.

How sad. That really made me sad when I read that.

CJ, the "voodoo math" I am using is simple subtraction and comparison. I believe they teach subtraction in kindergarten, for goodness sakes. Many kids can easily perform basic subtraction (which is all I used) before they even enter school.

And you call it "voodoo math". That really is sad.

My numbers are correct.

"When former president Bill Clinton left office in 2000 there was a $86.4 billion surplus. When former president George W. Bush left office in 2008 there was a $1.5 TRILLION BUDGET DEFICIT. Because Sen. Menendez was correct in stating that there was a $1.5 trillion budget deficit when George W. Bush left office and the budget surplus that Bill Clinton left from his presidency had turned into a deficit, we rate Sen. Menendezs statement TRUE."-Meet The Facts, FACT-CHECK: Sen. Bob Menendez National debt increased 72% during the Bush admin, there was a 1.5 trillion budget deficit at the end of his term, 7-18-10

Peter tells me don't get caught up in the numbers, CJ calls subtraction "voodoo math".


Provo, UT

I like Matheson. I am a lifelong registered Republican. The Utah GOP has been hijacked by extremists, radicals, and bullies. This happened many years ago, and Matheson recognized it. That is why he ran as a Democrat. He is a "moderate" Democrat, and is level-headed in considering ALL his constituents, not just partisan politics. And he has the courage to fight the gerrymandering games played by the Utah Republicans. His voting record reflects this. He is NOT the stool pigeon of Obama and Palosi. He is wisely independent and thoughtful.

I like Matheson. He would have my vote.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments