Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney stayed within striking distance of President Barack Obama in a Reuters/Ipsos poll on Sunday, two-points behind the Democrat for the third straight day after winning last week's debate in Denver.
While the presidential candidates are the main event, they are often not as interesting as their running mates. With less of a need to cater to the center, vice presidential candidates can have more fun, be a bit more outrageous, occasionally make some waves financially.
As Barack Obama and Mitt Romney await tonight's debate, we examine one more key topic they'll go toe-to-toe over: budget cuts. Will they cut Medicare, defense, or the many smaller programs that effect us every day? And how will they spin those budgetary choices? Here's what we may hear.
This fall, as Americans prepare to mark their ballots, Republicans are hoping that voters' minds will be focused on one (and only one) simple question: Are you better off today than you were four years ago? Unfortunately for the GOP, the answer isn't quite as clear as they'd like.
Obama made his money from a few sources, and has it invested and stored in a few surprising -- but also easy to track -- ways.
Twice as many business executives around the world say the global economy will prosper better if incumbent President Barack Obama wins the next election than if his Republican challenger Mitt Romney does, a poll showed on Friday.
Republicans in Congress already love Paul Ryan's budget proposals, and now that he's on the presidential ticket, we can expect his fiscal ideas to hold even more sway in a Romney administration. So how would his proposals affect the average U.S. family? Would you be better off in a Romney-Ryan America?
Even before Mitt Romney picked him as his running mate, Paul Ryan was a Tea Party star, a fiscal-policy super-wonk and author of the GOP House's budget proposal. Here's a look at some of the ways Ryan's fiscal ideas contrast with President Obama's:
Republican Paul Ryan's blueprint for Medicare could prove one of the most polarizing policies of the election. While it's short on details, one thing is clear: It would shift thousands of dollars a year in health care costs back to individual retirees.
Earlier this week, Rep. John Fleming (R-La.) complained that he only netted $600,000 in 2010, and thus couldn't afford to pay higher taxes: "Class warfare never created a job," said Fleming. Former Obama administration official Elizabeth Warren, now running for the Senate, is ready with the counter-argument.
Before President Obama outlined his strategy Monday for America's millionaires to shoulder more of the tax burden, The Price of Fame asked show business types at the recent Toronto International Film Festival this burning question: Should celebrities and other wealthy people pay more in taxes?
As the federal super committee looks for $1.5 trillion in cuts, it's clear that fixing the federal budget will mean tackling big items -- including Medicare, America's most popular social program and one of its most expensive.
More than 1 million of America's poorest college students may have to take out bigger loans, find another way to pay tuition, or drop out in 2012, if Republican budget cuts are passed that shrink the government's Pell grant program. But supporters are mobilizing in an online rally Monday for "Save Pell Day."
With proposals from both President Obama and GOP leaders to broaden the tax base, it seems likely that some cherished income tax deductions may be reduced or even eliminated, and one leading candidate for the chopping block is the deduction for mortgage interest.
U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan promises his proposed 2012 federal budget is the solution to America's money woes. But is the Tea Party favorite's plan based in reality, or does it rely on impossible numbers and fairy tales?