And the fallout continues.
Learn more at KWWL

KWWL.com – News

Iowa Secretary of State spokesman Chad Olsen told Conservative Daily News that 531,996 of the 1,936,901 actively registered voters have voted as of Tuesday. With 27.5% of the registered vote having been pulled in already and early voting going until November 5th, it is conceivable that upwards of 35% could vote before election day.

In 2004, 460,059 Iowa voters chose to vote prior to election day. In 2008 that number rose to 545,739 – less than four thousand more than have voted so far in that state. By any measure, Iowa is on-pace for record early voting.

Registered Democrats took the lead in requesting absentee ballots and getting them turned in. Democrats had requested 44.4% of all ballots and had turned in 46.3% of the total ballots received as of October 23rd. Republicans accounted for 31% of the ballots requested and had turned in 32.6% of all received ballots. Independents have turned in 21.8% of the total ballots received.

Fast forward to this week and as of October 30th,  Democrats equal 43.7% of all early votes while Republicans account for 32.2% and Independents are 24%. Democrats are strongly participating in early voting – a strong result for a heavy Democrat get out the vote effort that has focused on getting the base to vote early.

81.3% of all absentee ballots requested by Democrats have now been turned in while 84.1% of Republican ballots and 75% of Independent ballots have been turned in. That leaves 53,390 Democrat ballots, 32,409 Republican ballots and 42,650 Independent ballots yet to be returned. Mitt Romney leads Obama by 16-20 points among Independents in recent polls which could indicate a large contingent of early ballots out for Romney coming from unaffiliated voters.

37.4% of registered Democrats have voted as of October 30th. 27.3% of Republicans have voted and 18.6% of Independents. There is a flood of Independent voters that are waiting until the last minute to vote and will make a huge impact on the results in Iowa.

By the time early/absentee voting is completed in Iowa next Monday, it is likely that 65-70% of Iowa voters will be left to cast ballots. Considering who has already voted, that remaining 65% will likely be heavily leaning Romney.

In relation to the early vote, Mr. Olsen also told CDN that the Secretary’s office was not aware of any legal challenges and that no major issues were being experienced. Mr. Olsen also confirmed that the United Nations had election observers in the state. Olsen said that the U.N. has “two election observers in Iowa, with 2 more due to arrive. We have met with the 2 representatives and informed them that they are not allowed to observe activity at polling locations in Iowa and they have stated that they will respect Iowa law.” Poll workers have been instructed to “order the arrest” of any persons present at the polling place that are not specifically permitted to be there by Iowa law.

Iowa voters can vote in person this Saturday at any county courthouse/auditor’s office during normal business hours Mon-Fri including Monday November 5th and Satuday, November 3rd from 9am-5pm due to extended hours.

If anyone observes illegal activity at in-person, satellite or polling locations they are instructed to call the Election Hotline at 1-888-SOS-VOTE.

We invested heavily in hope back in 2008.

Our 2012 endorsement of Mitt Romney comes with an imperative for change.

The change that we’d hoped would elevate our economy wound up woefully short. The presidential gambit to place health-care reform ahead of economic recovery jeopardized both. President Barack Obama expended all of the presidential leadership on muscling through health care reform, leaving little for implementation and none for significant economic recovery. . .

The president’s green energy initiatives were intended to launch a U.S. alternative energy boom. Earlier this month, A123 Systems joined the succession of green energy firms that failed after being selected by the Obama administration for preferential grants. Beacon Power. Abound Solar. EnerDel. Solyndra. All stumbled despite receiving hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer-funded grants.

The president laments congressional gridlock that fomented under the inflammatory leadership of Rep. Nancy Pelosi and Sen. Harry Reid. The president’s deference to their reckless rhetoric further deepened congressional divide. Obama doesn’t deserve all of the blame. But he merits little credit for any meaningful attempt to bridge the gap. . .

Our hopeful 2008 endorsement went to a promising up ’n comer over a lackluster challenger who botched his first big presidential decision by picking an unqualified running mate. Sen. John McCain’s choice of Sarah Palin struck us, and apparently millions of undecided voters, as a calculated political ploy, not a credible presidential successor.

This year, the Republican ticket is led by a candidate with a proven record of moderate governance, legislative leadership and compromise. Mitt Romney arrives at the presidency with global leadership experience and a track record of turnarounds. . .

Today, we endorse a successful leader focused on economic recovery and growth and deficit reduction. We endorse a proven manager who won’t need on-the-job training. We endorse a compromiser who offers the best hope of breaking congressional gridlock.

Most of all, we endorse change.

We endorse Mitt Romney for president.

This combined with the endorsment from the most influencial newspaper in the country, The Des Moines Register, has some wondering if the swing state will swing red this go time around. You can find the entire article concerning The Des Moines Register switch on their site.

Follow Chris On Twitter

Mitt Romney is campaigning in Florida with Governor Jeb Bush while Vice Presidential candidate Paul Ryan is campaigning in Wisconsin. Romney and Ryan are hoping to capitalize on their accelerating momentum evident in recent battleground and independent voter polls.

Former President Bill Clinton is stumping for Obama in Iowa and Joe Biden is holding events in Florida hoping to stem the tide of likely voters moving towards Romney in the final days of the campaign.

The Obama campaign has spent tremendous amounts of time and money to get the Democratic base to the polls early while the Romney camp has focused on getting not-so-committed voters to vote in early polls. The effect these two different techniques has on the election may be critical.

By pulling in his most-committed voters for the early vote, Obama is front-loading his base to pad his early vote numbers. While this will pad early voter totals, it leaves the campaign hoping that less-motivated voters turn out for long lines on election day. The tactic is likely an attempt to create a false wave for bandwagon voters to jump into. Obama hasn’t seen any positive momentum in months and may be working to create the appearance of a turn-around in the week before the election.

Mitt Romney’s campaign has been working to get under-motivated voters to the polls for early voting. Shorter lines and the choice of several days to avoid inclimate weather give those voters fewer reasons to avoid the polls. Romney’s approach seems to be hinging on the idea that his base will turn out on election day no matter what, but others may not.

So far, Obama’s strategy is scoring him some numbers in Iowa – but, that’s it. Nationwide, Romney has a 51% to 46% likely voter advantage vs. Obama according to Gallup. In Ohio, the early voting numbers are about even between Republicans and Democrats and recent polls show Romney taking a slight lead in the Buckeye state by a 50% to 48% margin.

According to the Iowa Secretary of State’s office, voter registration totals as of October 22nd were 626,508 Republican, 621,401 Democrat and 686,649 unaffiliated. The largest voting block in the Hawkeye state is independents among whom Romney leads Obama by 16-20 points in recent polls. The Iowa Secretary of State’s office is also reporting that 531,996 people had voted through October 30th with Democrats casting 43.7% of the ballots vs. 32.2% by Republicans and 24% Independents.  The totals show that  232,462 Democrats, 171,272 and 127,620 Independents have voted so far. That leaves a much larger contingent of likely Romney voters yet to vote in the 2012 election. With up to 20% of independents leaning to Romney, the race in Iowa is still quite close and tipping towards Romney as election day approaches.

Romney’s momentum is carrying into early voting and voter enthusiasm is clearly in his favor, but the election will only go his way if all of the likely voters show up to vote.

Former Obama staffer arrested for identity theft

Until recently, Edwards was employed by Link Strategies, a Democrat campaign consulting firm credited by Senator Tom Harkin for his success, as the Director of New Media. Employed, that is, until his arrest for identity theft!

Iowa Secretary of State Matt Schultz has been under fire since his win over Democrat Michael Mauro in 2010. The Iowa Democratic Party launched a series of attacks on Schultz beginning in June through false claims, blog sites and this scheme involving a former Obama campaign staffer.

According to the Des Moines Register, “Edwards was arrested on charges alleging he fraudulently used or attempted to use the identity of Schultz, a Republican, or Schultz’s brother, Thomas, with the intent to obtain benefit.”

Edwards allegedly attempted to smear Schultz’s name by participating in unethical behavior while using Schultz’s identity.

The Iowa Republican reports that Edwards’ identity theft/reputation smear was part of a larger plan orchestrated by Democrats to bring down the newly elected Republican Secretary of State.

Since his surprise victory over incumbent Michael Mauro in November 2010, Secretary of State Schultz has been a target of the Iowa Democratic Party. Interestingly, on June 24, the same day as Zach Edwards alleged crime, Under the Golden Dome, a blog connected to Iowa Democrats, launched a three-part series of articles critical of Matt Schultz. They were based on documents obtained through an open records request from “a tipster.” The blog alleged that a batch of emails from Schultz’s office “raise some serious questions about his ability to remain independent and ensure election integrity”.

“Just 15 days earlier, on June 9, the Iowa Democratic Party filed an ethics complaint against Schultz, claiming the Secretary of State of used public resources to campaign against presidential hopeful Jon Huntsman. The Iowa Ethics and Campaign Disclosure Board dismissed the complaint on July 19.”

Link Strategies president Jeff Link shared a statement with news media. “… I met with Zach and notified him he was no longer employed… [I]t is clear the incident involved in the allegation was related to a personal action taken by Zach and unrelated to his work with Link Strategies.”

Secretary of State Schultz’s office became aware of Edwards’ attempts in June and alerted authorities. If convicted, Edwards could spend up to 2 years in prison and a fine of up to $6,250.

When:

Where:Streaming Internet Radio

What: Join independent political commentators Michelle Ray and Rich Mitchell as they discuss the issues impacting Americans.

Tonight: Stupid news, Iowa, Obama’s recce appointments and where the hell is the Tea Party?

Show Recording: 

[mp3player width=300 height=75 config=fmp_jw_widget_config.xml file=http://media2.conservativedailynews.com/shows/mitchell-and-ray/Show_1-5-12.mp3]

and .. the non-flash, iGadget-friendly version:

<a href=”http://media2.conservativedailynews.com/shows/mitchell-and-ray/Show_1-5-12.mp3″>Stupid News, Iowa, Recess Appointments</a>

With wall-to-wall press coverage as if it were a real Presidential contest it was hard not to be sucked into the buzz.  Perhaps it was the idea that the field would be thinning a bit with the Iowa results, or the curiosity as to whether or not Ron Paul crowd could propel him to victory there that created such an atmosphere.  Maybe it was all the weirdness surrounding Newt’s surge and fall; whatever it was, Iowa was where all eyes were focused on Tuesday night.

What was widely expected was that Romney would win the caucuses, and Ron Paul might surprise with a win or close finish.   What was certainly not expected was the Rick Santorum -the generic Republican who has seemingly been blending into the background of every GOP debate thus far – would nearly win the caucuses (heehee) and suddenly become a national sensation.

In a race that counted tens of thousands of votes, the winner came down to a difference of merely 8 votes.  Suddenly Rick Santorum went from being a punchline to a real challenger.  Although Mitt Romney eventually came out on top, there is not doubt the real winner was Rick Santorum, who now has a spot in the national limelight for the time being, at least.

But what does all this mean for the months ahead in this primary battle?  Santorum has been branded the “social conservative candidate” and with Bachmann’s exit and Perry’s struggle in the polls, many are wondering if this Iowa “win” will siphon off some of those Bachmann/Perry voters.  I hate to make predictions.  Goodness knows this primary race has already held many more surprises than any of us anticipated.  However it can’t be ignored that Santorum’s Iowa surprise will have consequences for the rest of the race.  Will Santorum suddenly become a Ronald Reagan-type candidate that Republicans across America will suddenly begin to rally around? I doubt that.  Santorum isn’t so much the issue here, but what he represents is the message that conservatives aren’t ready to hand over the nomination to Mitt Romney just yet.  This presidential season is all about the “Not Obama” campaign, and in our own party we are dealing with a “Not Romney” faction that is truly digging their feet in and refusing to concede to the media’s pick for us.

Santorum bet big on Iowa.  He has visited all 99 counties over the last year, repeatedly.  He bet his campaign on the idea that if people could get to know him personally, they would vote for him.  His bet paid off, but can it translate to votes outside of Iowa?  After all, he hasn’t the time or ability to visit every county in America in the next 10 months.  Santorum has received a huge media bump from this win, and that will most certainly translate into dollars, although to what extent remains to be seen.  Also, millions of Americans who had no idea who Rick Santorum was before Tuesday night are now able to associate the face with the name and will be more likely to follow his progress as the primaries move along.  That is publicity that you just can’t buy.  All that bodes well for Santorum to continue his momentum moving into the other primary states.  What won’t be to his advantage is the shelacking he is about to receive from the mainstream media.  Even those on our side have not always been kind to the former PA senator.  At best he has been described by his detractors as a mediocre senator who eventually lost by 18 points to a very liberal Democrat.  He has also supported earmarks and other questionable spending plans and he will most certainly be held to account for those things.  Also, Santorum will most definitely be painted with the same homophobic, racist, sexist brush the media uses to portray all of us conservatives.  He may be riding high today after his almost-victory, but Santorum shouldn’t get too happy. We’ll be hearing the Hitler metaphors inside of a week, bet on that.  How he handles the criticism will be very telling as to whether or not he can turn the Iowa caucuses (snicker) into a victory on a national level.

For Romney, Santorum’s surge means he still has a lot of work to do to win over the Republican base.  Far from being the “lock” he was once predicted to be, Romney can’t seem to poll over 30% and each challenge to his front-runner status has only served to highlight the fact that he is far from wrapping up this nomination, despite the best efforts of the media.

If anything, this Santorum victory serves to remind Republicans that this race is nowhere near over; and while the primary process may be bloody and tiresome at times it is absolutely vital in selecting a credible candidate.  When the process is tampered and toyed with by 3rd party haters and establishment tricks we end up with a John McCain…but when the process is allowed to unfold spontaneously we end up with what we have now – an unpredictable roller coaster.  I wouldn’t have it any other way.

http://youtu.be/-FZBD5-k8zI

While Republicans battle it out for the nomination, President Obama’s campaign is developing a coalition across the state.

Read the full research briefing

Kentucky Senator Rand Paul talks with Shepard Smith about his dad’s presidential bid.

Meanwhile, FoxNews contributing leftist Allen Colmes made some very disturbing comments about GOP Presidential candidate Rock Santorum and yet not one single person at CBS seemed to find that disgusting example of nasty rhetoric worthy of mentioning. Please see, Allen Colmes Mocks Mocks the Way Santorum Family Grieves Dead Child.

O’Donnell, while playing the part of the shocked innocent, repeatedly asked Newt Gingrich if he was calling Mitt Romney a liar, even though the actual ad-script was sitting right in front of her and she was reading from it. “Why are you saying he’s a liar?” O’Donnell asked. To which Gingrich replied, “Because this is a man whose staff created the PAC, his millionaire friends fund the PAC, he pretends he has nothing to do with the PAC –it’s baloney. He’s not telling the American people the truth.” Meanwhile most of the media misfits seem content to parrot the Romney talking points that he is somehow completely disconnected from the attack ads being run by by the PAC that his very own staff created, just to give Romney the ability to distance himself from the attack ads they are running against Newt Gingrich.

Gingrich came out with the following blazing but factual statement, which he explained to the oh-so-shell-shocked O’Donnell: “It’s just like this pretense that he’s a conservative. Here’s a Massachusetts moderate who has tax-paid abortions in ‘Romneycare,’ puts Planned Parenthood in ‘Romneycare,’ raises hundreds of millions of dollars of taxes on businesses, appoints liberal judges to appease Democrats, and wants the rest of us to believe somehow he’s magically a conservative.” There is a lot of truth in that statement, much to the dismay of Romney supporters. Instead of focusing on, or rebutting any part of that statement, O’Donnell puts the emphasis on Gingrich calling Romney a liar, which is a disgusting disservice to the American people. As O’Donnell continues to act as if Gingrich’s statement is incomprehensible, he sums it up for her as follows:

“I just think he ought to be honest with the American people and try to win as the real Mitt Romney, not try to invent a poll-driven, consultant-guided version that goes around with talking points, and I think he ought to be candid. I don’t think he’s being candid and that will be a major issue. From here on out from the rest of this campaign, the country has to decide: Do you really want a Massachusetts moderate who won’t level with you to run against Barack Obama who, frankly, will just tear him apart? He will not survive against the Obama machine.”

Romney was asked about Newt’s statements later on in an appearance on Fox and Friends, and he responded by reiterating that he has no control over PACs that have endorsed him. Right, just like Barack Obama has no control over the leftist smear campaigns, parroted by the very same political operatives that were recently invited to the White House to “discuss their talking points’ as they head towards to the 2012 election year, as Jake Tapper reported here.

These are the famous lyrics from the first ensemble tune of the classic “The Music Man”, set in 1912.  The con-artist Harold Hill strolls into a rural Iowa town ready to spring his latest gimmick on an unsuspecting people.  It’s almost a challenge from his fellow matchstick men to try to conquer the folks of River City who, being forewarned by his colleagues may be simple, but not stupid.  This is not going to be an easy con.

Yet the words in this little ditty are quite revealing in their contradictory message – you’re always welcome here, but we’ll basically keep you at arms length.  What worked for Meredith Willson’s plot setting also seems to be the backdrop for the “first in the Union” Iowa Caucuses.  So, if we were to combine the two, we can indeed celebrate the Centennial of Iowa Stubborn.

As one experiences Willson’s great musical, one will realize that the term “Iowa Stubborn” is eventually one of endearment.  As unusual as the townsfolk seem to be to outsiders, they also eventually approve to be genuine.  At the same time, however, they also prove to have a gullible side, at least temporarily.  Such can also be said of the very long processes of the Iowa Caucus.

For years (not quite a hundred), Iowa has been at the epicenter of the presidential primary universe because of its placement among the respective caucuses and primaries.  Candidates who are truly serious about their party’s nomination will not just visit, but virtually inhabit the small, rural state in the heartland – shaking hands, kissing babies and consuming all manner of fried foods (hopefully not getting the three confused – shaking babies and kissing food is frowned upon in these parts).  Yet despite the pre-season polls and the self-anointed talking heads making grandiose predictions, Iowa often seems to flash that “stubborn” to the rest of the nation at the last minute.

Perhaps it is not as random or naïve as one may think either.  These are down to earth folks who know all too well that come January 4^th, the political spring will dry up and the state will be hard pressed to see hide nor hair of a candidate except on television.  As ingratiating (ok, brown-nosing) as the candidates have been and will be for the next several days, Iowans know that their small but significant mark on the political stage has an expiration date and they have perfected the art of keeping the candidate’s attention for as long as they can.

At the same time, the people of Iowa can allow the occasional “Harold Hill” to stir them up.  All too often has the political snake-oil salesman been successful in convincing Iowans to buy their elixir in bulk.  Sometimes, this boost out of the gate will propel these folks to eventual victory by way of their party’s nomination, but more often than not, it only results in a pop-shot that ends with a quiet thud out in the desert.

Still, the caucuses have yielded the intended fruit in times past.  For the Democrats, the last three caucuses have produced nominees, dating back to the last century (if that doesn’t make you feel old..) and for the GOP, it goes back to 1992, with the exception of Mike Huckabee’s seeing-eye single that stranded him on first in 2008.

However, the question is, now that the GOP has moved to a more proportional system of appointing delegates, similar to that of the Democrats (I think I just tasted my lunch again), can Iowa stay the power player it has been in past election cycles or will the caucuses wonder into a far less relevant role?  With our Centennial celebration of Iowa Stubborn, does this also mark the end of the reign of said stubbornness?  What will the face of Iowa politics look like in 2016?

Unorthodox, stubborn, salt-of-the-earth or just downright quirky – this could possibly be the end of the Iowa heyday when it comes to the primary politics.  But while the folks of the Hawkeye state have been a combination of inviting, yet standoffish, wise, yet gullible, there are one thing – enduring.

Still, you know, you ought to give Iowa, a try!